27 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996.2 vs. 996tt
Reported or suspected cause
very solid
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that report identifying a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Reported cause
It does have a different engine design compared to the normally aspirated cars that has proven to be very solid.
Leading evidence: 'very solid' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'very solid' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check tt' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
With that said, I replaced my c2 with a TT for daily use.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
People either make good financial decisions, or they don't - oddly, I haven't noticed many people crowing about the amazing financial advice some dude on a car forum gave them and how it changed their life forever.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
People either make good financial decisions, or they don't - oddly, I haven't noticed many people crowing about the amazing financial advice some dude on a car forum gave them and how it changed their life forever.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
I do like the idea of an LS powered c4 and think that I would enjoy the project of building one but not sure that I want to wait for an entire summer of assembly time to get it running before I can enjoy it.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
27 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T082735Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Price aside, is there any reason to take the 3.6L NA car instead of a twin turbo?
The Metzger engine is well regarded as being a far superior design without the numerous ticking time-bombs of the M96.
Thoughts?
If you don't get a turbo you will have nightmares of what could have been. Spend some time researching here and the 996 Tt forum. I spent the better part of year researching before I purchased one. Drive a couple of na cars then drive a turbo. Don't let maintenance costs scare you. These are 13+ year old cars that like any will have wear and tear. Find a well maintained stock car and buy it.
Either one is a good choice. You have to decide what you want. The turbo is more expensive to buy and more expensive to maintain. It does have a different engine design compared to the normally aspirated cars that has proven to be very solid. That being said, some people prefer the simplicity and the smoother lines of the normally aspirated cars. Personally, I love the 996 C4S (Mk II car) and I love the 996 C2 aero (Mk I car). Decide what you like and buy that.
Everyone is right in that you need to drive both. I chose an NA C2 over a Turbo due to a couple of factors, one of which included price. Other factors included the cost of consumables (tires and brakes when tracking), and surprisingly, performance.
The C2 provides accessible, reasonable performance. The Turbos I've driven are just insanely fast. When you're doing 100 mph on a 40 mph back road, and feel like there's plenty of room for error, it's just nuts. My license could not afford that amount of temptation.
The limits of the C2 are lower, and for daily (and even track use), I'm actually happier with them where they are.
Turbo on every count except initial price. they may hold value better though. Maintenance items may cost slightly more but there are no real additional items to maintain. I went from a N/A to a TT and would never go back. Although the n/a was fine before I had the tt as appoint of reference. They are usually better equipped as well. Things like all leather interior, power seats, etc. check my tt for sale in classifieds. Just don't use it enough.
This is my thinking on cost. Money (financing) is cheap right now. So for the cost of keeping my money in my accounts it will cost me only $2800 for 5 years for a turbo compared to $1900 for a NA Mk2 car.
If my assumption that depreciation is about the same between the two cars at this point in time than the cost of ownership is only about $900 + increased maintenance + increased insurance.
Now comes the tricky part. I need to convince my wife that we need to buy a 12-14 year old car that cost more than my last 2 daily drivers combined.
I think the Turbos will not only hold their value better over he long haul, but you may see them appreciate at some point, although probably 5-10 years down the line.
I agree that turbos will hold their value better than normally aspirated cars. Many people feel that the 6MT turbo in particular will hold value because the current turbos can only be had with PDK.
As far as maintenance, the turbo will cost you more. The spark plug change and major service intervals are more frequent. There are also know issues with the engine, including the coolant pipe issue. Additionally, parts seem to cost more for turbos. For example, the plastic front spoiler lip for a normally aspirated 996 is about $150, as I recall. For the turbo, the plastic lip is about $400.
I love my 997 turbo and I'm very happy with the choice, but I was also very happy with my normally aspirated 996.
One nice thing about the C2 is it is easy to push to 100% since there isn't a whole lot of power and the rear tire contact patch and weight distribution lets you put down power more quickly coming out of turns. The Turbo, while AWD, doesn't have that same characteristic.
With that said, I replaced my c2 with a TT for daily use.
Power wise, TT hands down. Unless you are planning an LS swap.
those are both excellent points. I used to ride motorcycles and remember the old saying, its more fun to go fast in a slow car than it is to go slow in a fast one. Given the capabilities of these cars both are likely to exceed the practical limits of roads. I would love to say that I will track a car but realistically it would probably be an occasional HDE and occasional autocross day.
p.s. I do like the idea of an LS powered c4 and think that I would enjoy the project of building one but not sure that I want to wait for an entire summer of assembly time to get it running before I can enjoy it.
I wonder if the wife will let me buy a used boxster to putt around in while I build a LS powered 996.
The LS sounds like the worst idea of all. Spend thousands creating a car that no one will really want if you try to sell it...certainly not for the money you put in it.
Going into debt on a 12 year old car (even with free QE dollars) is also a bad idea. If you had a major engine/drive train failure you could instantly owe twice what the car is worth and it would cost you even more to get it back on the road.
Any 12 year old car should be bought for cash...plus having a little on the side for all the deferred maintanence you will discover. The turbo cost a lot more than a NA when new and that is because it cost more to build. Nothing changes twelve years later. It will cost more to maintain and more to repair.
Forget resale value...that will depend on many factors that cannot be predicted or counted on.
So first drive both cars...and then decide how much cash your can comfortably afford. And don't leave out a NA 997 as an option. But do not go into debt just to have a Porsche...unless you have serious wealth...in which case you wouldn't need to anyway.
I would rather keep the cash that I could put towards the car so that I can remain liquid and am willing to pay the cost of interest to do so. Even in an Ally CD I am getting 2% compared to only 3% to borrow the money from a credit union.
I think about it this way. To borrow $35k over 5 years it would cost approx. $2800 in interest and around $630 a month. If I take that $35k put it into an Ally bank 5 year CD with compounding interest I will make $3800.
If I were to pay cash for the car, take the same $630 and put it into a savings account at 1% for 5 years I would have earned approx. $945 in interest over that same 5 year period.
So depending on which numbers you look at, I believe that I am better off taking the money that I have leaving it in a low to no risk fund that gives me access to the money in an emergency.
If someone's already accustomed to making monthly payments, and their interest rate is negligible, buying the car using installments and keeping the bulk of their cash in the bank can be just as prudent as paying the car off in cash and depleting savings by tens of thousands.
People either make good financial decisions, or they don't - oddly, I haven't noticed many people crowing about the amazing financial advice some dude on a car forum gave them and how it changed their life forever.
But then, I bristle every time someone tells me what I "should do."
Incidentally, if you do not consider financing EVERY time you buy a car, you may be leaving cash on the table. If you're buying a manufacturer-financed vehicle or a car from a used-car dealership with its own financing, intentionally accepting a 60-month term with a crappy interest rate can net you a lower purchase price and/or extras (parts, coverage) you'd be paying for otherwise. Agreeing to a 60-month term and higher interest rate via Porsche financing was the ONLY way I walked out of the Porsche dealership with a CPO Boxster for a laughably low price a few years ago.
As long as you can prepay the loan with no penalty, not exploring how financing can affect the net cost is what people with just a bit too much money tend to do.
This is exactly what I did with one of my previous BMW's. I let them take advantage of me and still make money off me from the crappy financing(really high interest rate) while giving me a smoking purchase price. Little did they know that I would be paying it off in full a couple months later.
You guys are missing the point. If you are going to agree to a loan and turn around and pay it off, you are not really financing the vehicle.
I too have done this on a new vehicle purchase, but I didn't consider it to truly be financing of a vehicle as I had no intention of making years worth of payments plus interest.
John's point is that it is not wise to finance a 10+ year old car, especially considering it may need a couple grand a year in maintenance and repairs, and I agree wholeheartedly with that advice.
Everybody is free to spend their money as they please, but it is usually better to wait until you truly have enough to buy a car with cash than to go into debt for a depreciating asset.
Having no monthly payments is truly a liberating feeling......and it's easier to justify mods and upgrades!
I bought a new Ford pick up a few years ago. I negotiated back and forth for four hours. The dealer was ready to close for the night when they finally gave me a great price but only if I used FORD MOTOR COMPANY fInancing. There was no pay off penalty so I did it. I went back the following morning and paid it off. I still have the tuck and love it.
Spokayman - I think the new guy is saying that he has the funds to pay cash upfront but that the miniscule difference between what he can earn in on it and what it will cost him to borrow it means that it is financially more prudent to get a car loan than to tie up his cash in the car. Put another way, would you tie up your money in an annuity with a 5 year payout that pays only 1% interest (the difference between what the new guy can earn and the loan interest he will pay)?
Hey, I think I like the way the new guy thinks.
