91 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHTurboTwist hollow-spoke wheels
Leading reported evidence
Install on the boxster “s”
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
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 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
What @dporto refers to are the solid spoke twists fitted on the Boxster “S” which are indeed 9” rear, but weigh about 7LB more each than the true #408 996 Hollow Spoke version.
Leading evidence: 'Install on the boxster “s”' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'mismatch of 993 turbo fronts and 993 #408 rears' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check x' (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
There was nothing special or “weird” (??) about the 9”width; as stated the 996 C2 already came fitted with 9” rear Twists standard from the Factory.
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 suspect 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.
Suspected cause
Probably a mismatch of 993 Turbo fronts and 993 #408 rears
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 suspect 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.
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.
Suggestion
Check for an X near the wheel center hole to determine if A or B rear offset.
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
What @dporto refers to are the solid spoke twists fitted on the Boxster “S” which are indeed 9” rear, but weigh about 7LB more each than the true #408 996 Hollow Spoke version.
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
Historically #408 was a Porsche “superlative” wheel; IE it is the lightest 18” wheel set ever offered by Porsche on any road-legal car; before or since!
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
People hear these wheels were offered by Porsche and figure they’re for sale somewhere, but I have never seen even one authentic (correct part numbered) set except for a Seller once in Germany who wanted $5K
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.
91 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 · 1 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T052503Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
A friend (who owes me a few favors) has a set of the above he'd like to sell. They are in very nice condition and have markings as follows:
Front wheels:
GK - Al Si 12Mg wa
FR=4400N
993.362.134.05
7.5Jx18-ET50
98 ... K1
Rear wheels:
GK - AlSi 12Mg wa
FR=4800 N “B” / FR=5750 N “A”
993.362.138.00 “B” / 993.362.140.01 “A”
9Jx18-ET52 “B” / 10Jx18-ET65 “A”
98 .. K1
(In the "98 .." text, the dots represent round bumps that appear in a matrix of 12 boxes - they thus look like months in the year 1998.)
Questions:
What's the significance of "A" vs "B" on the rear wheels?
Will these wheels fit my 996 (a 2004 C2 6-speed)?
What is the approximate value of these?
The hollow wheels I bought are 8" and 11" hollow spoke. I guess thats a turbo fitment which is a direct fit on our cars, no spacers needed. I didn't know they made smaller sizes.
Turbo offsets dont work that well on c2 cars. Some have got them to work but it takes some effort and camber.
Op, those sizes u posted will fit fine. If the fronts r too tucked in just get some spacers
Crap. It’s been powder coated and the 45 I thought was a 65 mm
looking into refund now. Newer to Porsche wheels and learning fast. I know my offsets thanks to calculators and apex wheels
thanks guys
7.5� wide fronts are 996 wheels, 8� are 993 wheels.
Check for an X near the wheel center hole to determine if A or B rear offset. You�ll want ET65 for a 996/911.
This below. Also those part numbers correspond to 996 option code #408 "18" Technology Wheels Hollow Spoke" (made for Porsche by BBS in early 1998-1999).
These are net the lightest 18" wheels ever offered by Porsche
(probably the rarest too). Value should be around $4K in OEM condition, or close to that if refinished OEM quality. These do pop up for sale from time to time on Rennlist & eBay however always confirm the part numbers are correct because unscrupulous sellers will substitute 993 Turbo wheels for the fronts, and then sell the 7.5"s separately; sticking you with the heavier 8" variants.
Uh, the value is that high if you�ll pay that much for them. The MY02�s are just as light. I sure as hell wouldn�t pay $4k for the hollow spokes and I�m firmly in the belief that they�re not worth more than half that.
there are a bunch of threads on this many have the link with all the 996/993 weights, the solid spokes are roughly 5lbs heavier. The hollows are roughly 20/25 lbs front/rear.
The #408 hollows are narrower than the Turbo’s and lighter. They are also several OZ ea lighter than the ‘02 MKII Carrera Lightweights; a net difference that adds up to a 1.78 LB’s less.
Official #408 narrow fitment hollow spoke weights from 944racing.de
Front: 7.5” = 18.9LBs
Rear: 9” = 22.4LBs
http://www.944racing.de/wheelweights.php
As for price, as you mention only the absurdly rare owner with the #408 option code AND somehow missing the wheels would be sufficiently motivated to pay the premium for these astronomically rare wheels over the MKII Carrera Lightweights; which are literally for sale everywhere dirt cheap.
IE 2 LB’s isn’t worth a 4K+ premium on the track, but it certainly is on the lawn at Pebble Beach.
Remember, the only cars potentially optioned with #408 in the first place were “early-build” 1999’s that were in production only for a few months between 97-98. These unicorns are not exactly plenteous to begin with. So this hypothetical dilemma is not “existential”
You noted the 996 rear wheels as 9� wide in your post. Actually they are 10� wide, the same rear hollow spoke wheel that the 993 NB had. That difference in width may reduce the weight difference vs. the MY02 wheel set.
No, the 996 #408 option code specified 9” rear wheels part number
993.362.138.00
There was a 993.362.140.01 hollow spoke wheel in 10” that weighs 0.4 kg more, but that was not offered with 996 option #408. Remember the 993 had narrow fitment hollow spoke options as well.
996 was much lighter than 993, right down to the wheels
Ferry shaved weight off every atom of early-996
Weighing in actually UNDER 2,900lbs the early-build #408 1999's are literally defacto RS lightweight cars. You see Rennlsit doesn't even know these things yet. Much less the market.
But only a matter of time
Look closely at all the amber-lenses examples on display at Porsche Museum, or it's social media: the tell-tale stainless valve stems are visible on every single one of them.
They knew all along
so narrow wheels are more desirable? Huh.
9� wheels on a 996. Huh. Sounds like 993 or boxster spec to me�
whatever dude, go ahead and pay imaginary value for wheels.
�Ferry shaved weight off every atom of early-996�
How do you even come up with this s*it ? Ferry died in �98 and although I�m sure he had final say on a lot of things, he didn�t design the 996 (as you well know)... So, in response to your silly quote above I�d have to say; No, he didn�t...!
Ferry Porsche was President of the Supervisory Board at Porsche at the time of his death. He created the first 911. His late father created Porsche. I'd say he was in "charge"
Of course he was technically �in charge�, as he was the Owner/CEO/Figurehead (and father of the 911) of the company...All this being said, by this point in his life, he had nothing to do with the overall design or day to day operations at the company... He certainly wasn�t worrying about �shaving ounces� off of the 996...
It�s widely known that Harm Laggay (sp?) was in charge of the design group and Pinky Lai was the lead designer of the 996...
Those are the 993 #408 option with the less rare (and heavier) 10" rear wheel; this was for the 993 (but will fit 996 as well)
Also the ad is wrong as it lists "wide body" which is not the case; those are "narrow body" fitment
Price is about right though; as for refinishing wow that is pretty stringent! I've never put a paint meter on wheels
I bought a 3rd rear that has one so now I’ll have a spare rear wheel. Here is the spare without a valve stem. At basically what amounts to $400 a wheel you can’t go wrong
There is a guy on PCA.org. selling a set of 8" front hollow and 10" rear hollow. Original condition 993 Turbo Twist Wheels.
Saying #408's came with 10" rears. He has owned many and knows for a fact.
Says there is a lot of BS on the forums. Says I shouldn't research because "life is too short" lol.
You see where his facts are headed?
So to the forum, what is proof the Early 98 builds with #408's came with 9" rears?
Mainly for my knowledge so I can share at the local cars and coffee with the "experts"
Mike
The proof is the part number stamped into the back of every 996 with option code #408 shown on the build sticker indicating narrow body fitment BBS "Technology" hollow spoke rear wheel which is 9" wide:
993.362.138.00
Any
10" wide narrow fitment rear BBS "Technology" hollow spoke wheel is from the 993, and weighs a few pounds more than the 996 version indicated above. Confusing matters is the fact that both versions have "993" part numbers; which is irrelevant to this dichotomy between their width (and weight).
I cancelled that specific wheel since it didn't have a valve stem. I thought it could add to trouble down the road. Seems simple but could be trouble finding one. Still have the 4 coming all with valve stems.
I would verify these part numbers which are specific to the 996 version of the #408 option:
993.362.134.05-
Front: 7.5�
993.362.138.00-
Rear: 9�
Any other part numbers are for the 993 version, which are heavier, and much less rare
Where is the "proof" documented that the 18 x 9" wide 993.362.138.00 wheel was the factory correct, option code 408 rear wheel on the narrow body 996?
What source are you using to make that assertion?
Every owner of a 996 optioned with #408 that has posted on Rennlist to date, has this 993.362.138.00 part number stamped on the back of the rear wheel spoke. All we have is empirical evidence; even that you yourself exist
Many were stamped this way for efficiency: the wheel part number is whichever "A" or "B" is also stamped "X" in the accompanying box beside these numbers. Weiderking implemented processes like this as early as 964 based on the Japanese JIT "Kanban" or "just in time" warehousing methodology.
The wheel centers/spokes units that were shared between parts bore multiple part numbers; and then were stamped accordingly by BBS based on which width wheel was welded on accordingly based on Porsche's JIT order.
It was a media lie that these modern (Japanese) manufacturing processes were implemented during Type 996 "to save money". This had all taken place decades prior; as the "993" part number well proves!!
Interesting. The part number 993.362.138.00 does not appear anywhere on the 996 factory parts schematic.
This post on the 993 forum states what I believe to be true, that the 9� wide rear wheel is a Boxster wheel and the early 996 had 7.5� wide front wheels and 10� wide rear wheels, regardless of whether they are solid spoke or hollow spoke turbo twists.
https://rennlist.com/forums/993-forum/1279738-help-w-rim-id-fitment-18-twists-2.html
And what are we discussing here, a 14 ounce weight difference from 9��wide to 10� wide? I�d prefer to have the additional 1� (approximately) of contact patch with the 10� wide wheels.
�This had all taken place decades prior; as the "993" part number well proves!!
�
Uh....The 993 was not decades before the 996. In fact you make a point of stating (several times) that the first 996�s were �hand built alongside the 993 on the same assembly line�... Your conspiracy theories are starting to unravel...
The JIT was implemented by Weiderking during 964, �decades� before 996. The 993 part number proves it was simply �before� 996; not decades before. The proof is �before� and the fact is that it was �decades before�.
Sorry but the 993 forum is wrong, I have the option sticker and the wheels to prove it. And so do about twenty other Rennlisters if you spend two thousand hours researching instead of two minutes.
Pretty easy to figure out what’s factual.
Find the early 996’s cars owners with option code #408 and ask them
No one upgrades to a smaller wheel. Absurd. If they have 9” that’s how they came from Stuttgart.
Only a hand full exist, just another reason the early build 98’s are indeed special.
I get questions all the time about leads on
so-called
#408’s from owners looking to switch out to the lighter wheels.
Losing 23LB+ unsprung is a significant “upgrade” even at 1” narrower rear; especially as all #408's do appear identical to the standard 18" Turbolook Twists (C&C, concours, etc)
.
No one will ever notice the 1" narrower rear width,
but shaving 23LB+ unsprung is definitely
very
noticeable
. People hear these wheels were offered by Porsche and figure they’re for sale somewhere, but I have never seen even one authentic (correct part numbered) set except for a Seller once in Germany who wanted $5K
(to his credit he was offering free shipping worldwide)
And of course fitting true 996 #408's gets you the practical equivalent of a set of lightweight racing wheels for the track, while retaining the 100% OEM look for the judges.
996 #408 is a massive PCA coup if done properly!
However what typically happens is people get duped into buying the 993 #408's on fleabay with the 10" rear wheels; these are
much more common
as they were offered multiple years. They do fit the 996 perfectly, however
they weigh over five pounds more
total (rear) than the narrower (authentic) 996 #408 version. And of course 993 #408's don't qualify as "OEM" on the #408 optioned 996's!
Truth is
the 996 #408's are the lightest 18" wheels ever offered by Porsche; ever
. So really, the “absurd” part isn’t wanting 996 #408’s, it’s finding them
My complete set coming. Found from a seller in California. Bought 1 at a time off of fLeBay. Not sure he knew what he had
I sure do. If FedEx does their job I'll get them by mid next week.
What's with your Avatar pic? Is it a current for sale car? Asking for a friend
And are those #408's? I'm going to ask Mr. Miller to get down on his hands and knees and measure those sumbitches
I bought it from Joe Isringhausen, Joe kept it in the showroom next to a matching Vesuvio 992 GT2RS that was for sale forever (before the Covid GT runup). Once the 992 finally sold he let the 1999 go to me. IMHO it's the most collectible 996 Carrera in the U.S. but I'm biased
Sure its for sale I will list it here any day now. BaT has accepted it but won't resort to that until after the holidays. PM me if interested
Sorry, yes of course those are original 996 #408's that match the original option sticker build. Almost every atom of the car is flawless; 100% original paint (with meter readings) and perfect Carfax. PM me this isn't the for sale section
It was actually 168glhs that made the reference... I was referring to his reference as an �inconvenient fact� (ie: doesn�t fit the narrative)... I�m not going down the rabbit hole of all the various wheel sizes offered by Porsche on different models of cars, but I will say that it doesn�t seem to make sense that they�d offer a 9� rear wheel for the 911 (if so, it seems to be the only one)... Doesn�t mean it couldn�t/didn�t happen, just weird...
Historically #408 was a Porsche “superlative” wheel; IE it is the lightest 18” wheel set ever offered by Porsche on any road-legal car; before or since!
Seeing then how the wheel is fabricated from the identical BBS hub-spoke unit as the heavier 993 #408 wheel that preceded it, the only way to lighten the wheel was to reduce rim width (without redesigning the entire wheel from scratch)
A significant and primary component of Type 996’s mission was to reduce weight over 993. Porsche made much about this both in early internal design communication & launch marketing. That this mission extended even to the premium lightweight wheel options is wholly rational IMO
Regardless, the 9” wide #408’s look (and perform) perfectly “fat” on the rear of my 1999. You’d never know they were the “ultra” lightweight version of the BBS hollow spokes without either decoding the part numbers, or parking directly adjacent to a (
much heavier
) 993
If your new performance / sports car 911 came with 10” wheels from the factory you aren’t swapping to 9” rears. Period end of story.
or maybe when you are spec’ing out a car with your salesman. Give me CF interior, give me an aero kit. And oh yeah. 10” wheels are too wide I’ll upgrade to the 9” wheels. Oh the humanity.
I need to setup a table at a university asking people to prove me wrong
Actually the standard 996 Factory C2 wheel was already 7.5”/9” wide: the 17” Twist (9” rear)
So the optional #408 BBS Hollow Spokes “upgrade” were the exact same widths, with lower profile / higher speed rating tires
The fact that they were also the lightest 18” wheels ever made by Porsche was the “historic” part.
There was nothing special or “weird” (??) about the 9”width; as stated the 996 C2 already came fitted with 9” rear Twists standard from the Factory.
The #408 “upgrade” was the lighter weight combined with the higher performance tires. The upgrade had nothing to do with the wheel width. Nothing
Progression makes sense to me:
My 1999 came with 17" chrome twist wheels.
Then apparently 18" wheels in same widths.
Then apparently 18" in wider rears.
And the GT3 got the 8" front's I believe while the regular 911's stayed with the 7.5" fronts.
When did 10" rears become standard on the 18" 911 wheels? After the early build cars? Which was Sept 1998?
Did they go to 11" for the 996.2 or not until the 997"?
While your “progression” theory is logical, in actual fact the BBS narrow fitment hollow spokes were only offered MY1999 (and only in 9” rear width)
Later narrow body cars were never offered any BBS Hollow Spoke wheel option from Porsche; in any width or any weight.
The only 18” Turbo” twist wheels offered to the MY2000 & later cars were the much heavier solid spoke “Turbolook” wheels; and yes those wheels were 10” rear.
996 Option #408 is exclusive to MY1999. And I personally have never seen evidence of their being originally fitted to any 1999 later than the 993 assembly line “early-build” date cars from 11/97 - 08/98 (amber lenses)
I have 03/98 coupe manual US
WP0AA2990XS621106
Artic Silver / Black CO2 234 408 437 438 446 490 537 692 939 981 982, however it hasn�t got the 408 wheels on it, does anyone know where I can get a set.
Since your car had them I'm going to give you the golden goose of ebay search words. Google BOXSTER TURBO TWIST WHEELS and look for the right part numbers of 05 for front and 00 for rears. . Don't google using 996. This is how I found my set on eBay for cheap.
Nope fronts are both wrong width and offset; no way those are 996 #408's
Probably a mismatch of 993 Turbo fronts and 993 #408 rears
Don't buy or believe anything until you physically see the part numbers:
Front: 993.362.138.00 7.5" ET 50
Rear: 993.362.134.05 9" ET 52
There are no pictures showing the actual offsets or P/N's...not everyone listing parts for sale is diligent with providing correct information. For anyone looking, it's certainly worth contacting them for verification. That's how many of my coveted finds are discovered...always be curious!
True the rear of the wheels aren't even photographed. These could very well be the relatively worthless solid spokes! Definitely worth it to be "curious"!!
There are sellers of solid spoke wheels advertising them as Hollow Spoke and charging hollow spoke prices. I informed the seller twice of his error. He didn't do anything so I sent a fraud listing to eBay.
Be careful.
Nowhere in that ad does it state these are hollow spokes. And the price is only $800 which is the going rate for solid spoke.
The only authenticated used set of #408 I have ever seen online was $5K and that was eBay Germany. Free shipping though!
I got a phenomional deal locally on a set of real TT hollow spokes. They're in amazing shape though the centers were professionally painted satin black (tires are finished, I have new tires ready to install for spring) with a red pinstripe around the edge. They look...interesting. I'll see if I can live wutrh them as-is though I'm sure there is some
silver paint in my future.
Folks doggedly determined Tom Loder has discovered there is no 9" rear wheel (as many of you suspected [and I ardently resisted based on the 993 forum's apparently incorrect information])
I am not ambitious enough to dismount my own rear wheel to verify, but Tom has sent actual pictures of #408's directly taken off a 1999 996 #408 car (with photo of option sticker) and the "B" option is clearly marked beneath the hub (not on the spokes where it could be photographed while mounted), indicating 10" rear width.
So I stand corrected (yet again
Here now are the exact #408 option wheel numbers and weights:
Official #408 996 narrow fitment hollow spoke weights:
993.362.134.05
-
Front: 7.5” = 18.9LBs
993.362.140.01
-
Rear: 10” = 23.3LBs
Source:
http://www.944racing.de/wheelweights.php
As you can see, these wheels are still almost 2 LBs lighter than the Carrera Lightweights, so nothing changes technically with this revelation. Only the width of the rears is now confirmed 10"
I've updated the 1999 Rennlist page accordingly, and THANKS TOM
@Tom Loder
!!
@Tom Loder
just confirms �A� option is 10� rear offset, and �B� option is 9� front offset
Correct us if we�re wrong Tom. He has these wheels unmounted in front of him
@Tom Loder
evidence is irrefutable IMO, coming straight from a 996 #408 car
The 9” rear confusion all stems from 993 owners; who MUST be using spacers, how else can they possibly run ET52 wheels on the rear?? ET52 is patently a FRONT offset per every other 993/996 wheel offered
IMO eBay scammers have been packaging (2) 8” Turbo front wheels, combined with (2) 9” Turbo front wheels (w/spacers) masquerading as the #408 rears, as #408 “takeoffs” for years
You can buy all these standard 8”/9” Turbo front wheels for very little, but the uber rare #408 “takeoff” package can be sold for many thousands; Tom just sent a link to a fake (9” rears) #408 set on eBay right now for $4,500!
Thus
there are enough scammed 993 NB owners driving around like this to make a ludicrous case it’s correct. It’s a
GOOD SCAM
and it fooled me for years!
Geez ok so now the 9” are fake because Tom has a set of 10”?
Seriously don’t get mad at me. What happened to your hours and hours of research and 20 guys with the #408 code that had 9” rears?
If you would be able to take 5 min to take off your own wheels to verify his that would be great. And everyone else with a set of 408’s. We might owe Steve an apology.
What’s it matter to me? It doesn’t at the moment but it might in the near future if my next car has the option and I need to source the wheels.
But one thing for sure is there is a zero -% change the 996 narrow body came with a 9” rear front
I hate to dispute this any further, but now I'm really confused. Someone just posted what looks to be an order guide for the 996 in the marketplace, and it shows option 408 as 8" F and 10" R. The wheels I have that came from a 408 optioned car are 7.5" and 10", I think
@bdronsick
you had the same sizes on your Vesuvio.
The 996 parts catalogue specifies the 408 option as a 7.5" front. Additionally, the Tequipment catalogue lists the 7.5" front as applicable to 98-04 Boxster/911 and the 8" front as applicable to 94-98 C2/C4 & Turbo. Based on this data, I believe the 7.5" is correct for the 996 series. I would suggest this order guide was a cut & paste of the 993 version and some of the details during editing were missed.
I�m 99.6% sure that the 408s are original to my early build (2/98) 996
Took a few pictures recently when I pulled them off to clean and ceramic coat.
A mix of before and after
Wow this has been a rollercoaster of a thread! All the highs and lows of a best selling thriller-drama film! So to recap, if I want to get my newly required 1999 early model 911, with 408 option wheels, back to having 408 wheels, (currently has 997 wheels on it), I need to get 7.5" and 10"x18 and NOT 8x18" (front) and not 9x10" (rear). Likely won't be able to afford a set of hollow spokes if I ever find one, but good to know what the part numbers are!
Are these still correct, or has something changed in past year or so?
993.362.134.05
-
Front: 7.5”
993.362.140.01
-
Rear: 10”
So if you have 9" does that mean someone swapped the 10" down to 9"s?
And if I can't afford Hollow spoke, are there similar 9.5x18 and 10x18 turbo "look" solids that will also fit as stock sizing on a 1999 C2?
Here is the parts listing for the BBS Hollow Spoke wheels... looks like the last time they were available they were cheaper than the solid spoke Turbo "Look" wheels...
Anyone try to order them lately?? With the Classic status they may make another batch of them......
Hi, I have a 03/98 996 with 408’s that aren’t there however I have found 18x8 52mm & 18x10 65mm, would that satisfy the 408 sticker instead of the 18x7.5 50mm fronts.
