98 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHMKI 996 Compared to MKII
Reported or suspected cause
arctic silver color
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.
Leading evidence: 'arctic silver color' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'arctic silver color' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Fill tires' (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 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 was the Markeeting team that introduced the Boxster first (to shake out the flaws of the upcoming 911)....
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.
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
to correct that problem on my MKI I installed ROW 030 and that fixed any lifting issues....
Outcome qualification: Negation, uncertainty or missing explicit repair resolution overrides the raw extraction signal.
Replace doesnt make it better
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
Again, just because its changed doesnt make it better....
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
For me when I replaced my first MK I, I had the option for a MK II Aero with X74 (or X71 Can't remember) suspension and other goodies but I passed on it based on how it felt on the Autocross course.
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
spend some time at your local independant Porsche repair shop, dont be scared of all the "exploding" storied (they are wildlky out of proportion to reality) protect yourself be changing the IMS bearing asap after getting it and get out to the track and learn to drive it
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
As they are unlikely to significantly change the outward appearance of the 911 from the current 997 look, it's probably the safest bet long term if you like the look and want to have a car which will with paint care continue to appear pretty new for many years.
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.
98 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 · 1 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
Hoping for a horsepower gain once I get it resolved.
I'm currently looking for a 996 and looking for a few opinions on if I should be concerned between getting a MKI or MKII. I know they stiffened up the chassis in 2002 but does this translate to a better mannered car on the street or occassional track use? Does the extra power make a noticable seat of pants difference?
Hi Jay, Welcome to Rennlist!
Plenty of info on the site regarding the Mk/Mk2 if you do a search.
Really not a huge power difference but the stiffer chassis is nice...and a glovebox!
I would not turn down a nice Mk1
also, it's seems that owning Mk1 turns you into some kind of out of control parts hoarder!
Mk II: stiffer chasis; more hp; vario-cam plus....more. (including a stereo that is harder to work on because of fiberoptic connections)
When I bought mine, I figured that the Mk II would represent fixes/refinements, based on real world experience with the Mk I.
Both are good cars. Your times on the track with either one will be influenced more by your skill than Mk I or Mk II differences.
Some people claim fewer problems with the Mk II's -- but they are typically newer with fewer miles. I don't think there's been good enough data collection from proper samples to come to any conclusion.
Probably the most important factor is to have a significant reserve in case a major component needs work. The people who scream the loudest put all their cash into the car and had nothing left when the engine or transmission (which they may have thrashed) needed work. You'll have a hard time finding anyting cheap on a cart that sold close to $100k.
It will all come down to personal preference. Both are great cars.
The Mk1 has the same fenders hood bumpers etc as the boxster of that vintage. The Mk2 has the 996 turbo headlights and different fenders etc.
The MK2 has a glovebox and cup holders, slightly larger displacement engine, slightly more HP which you can't feel, fewer drive chains in the motor with Variocam plus, revised spark plug tubes etc etc..
A well cared for car of either version is a hell of alot of fun!
What is a "glovebox"? It must be something like the mythical "cupholder".
Seriously, the best advice I heard was buy the newest car you can afford, but keep a cash reserve for repairs. Take your time and do research to find the right car. There is a lot of information right here.
ALL of them are better than 95% of the owners can drive them.... dont be too worried about a couple of these, or a couple of those.... get one that fits your taste, passes a PPI and leaves you some room to make it your own thru mods and maintenance
spend some time at your local independant Porsche repair shop, dont be scared of all the "exploding" storied (they are wildlky out of proportion to reality) protect yourself be changing the IMS bearing asap after getting it and get out to the track and learn to drive it
post potential cars and get feedback from the group - if no cars are available, post pictures of women (safe for work ones
)
stay clear of anything with a ........ glovebox
In the 996/7 era, get the newest version you can afford. Period.
In this instance, there's no way I would ever recommend getting an MK1 over the MK2; same with the 997s.
really?
I would rather have an MKI for several reasons
then again, the MKII has some appeal too....if I were in the market right now for a 996/7 I would be looking at MKI Aero's hands down
Thanks for the quick replies. I'm a maintenance freak so I know what to expect with costs. The first thing I'll do is upgrade the IMS bearing and replace the rear seal while it's apart. Maybe clutch depending on the condition.
I already have a local Porsche specialty shop that's going to do a PPI with leakdown test for me.
The MK II came out after the MK I and both the MK I and MK II cars are 911 cars. Does that clear it up?
For starters, take the heavy wrap off your car!
I hate to be Captain Obvious, but you probably should try to get some wheel time in each of them. Aside from the newer vs. older, more vs. less power and comforts, I think the two cars have different characters. In strictly rational economic terms, I think that it's a wash, and much more about what makes you grin more.
Personally, I like the relative simplicity of my Mk. 1, and I like the way the earlier 996s tried to pay some homage to the 911's past without too much influence from the stink of focus groups. Honestly, the only thing I would wish for would be better interior trim materials. You are never quite allowed to forget that Porsche was on the financial ropes when they designed this car.
Mk1 Aero looks better..........
Let the war begin......LOL A glove box would be nice though.
Btw...I allways back the car into the garage...so i can look at the spoiler....for some reason I am constantly craving taco Bell.
I think a major factor in the decision is the options on a given car, regardless of Mk I/II. Unless you are concerned about overall weight for track use, I say the more options the better. I wanted a car with full leather, Litronics or Bi-Zenons, PSM, and whatever other goodies I could get and at a good price.
Owners of MK1s like their 911 better, and conversely MK2 owners like their...drinkholders and glovebox. They aren't very different actually, go drive one or two of each and see if you like one over the other. Most on this forum have had good ownership luck with their Porsches, however, no doubt you are aware of some potential issues both models have. Buy the one with all records, a good PPI and that has the options you want.
actually the Mk1 C4 is the same as the Gt3 chassis... Mk1 and Mk2 c2 are similar but the Mk2 is stiffened up quite a bit. Where the Mk2 is faster is the top end.... 0-60 both cars are similar, but the Mk2 from 90+ is a couple sec faster because of the vario plus....
But the Mk1 has more room for mods.... and like I said before, your car pulls really strong, they did a great job modding it.
I f you can afford it, I would strongly recommend a MKII or a MKI for a number of reasons. First, you have the larger engine with more displacement and variocam plus. The 3.6l is a lot stronger in the mid range. A stock 3.6 6-sp is a high 12 second car. A 3.4 is not. The 3.6l has other improvements like a much better MAF, where as the earlier MAF is very prone to problems.
Weight is really a myth. Believe it or not, a loaded stock MKI can be heavier than a similarly optioned MKII. There was more standard equipment on the MKII that is the reason for a great deal of the weight difference. The 18" Turbo look wheels on the MKI for one we extremely heavy versus the MKII Carrera wheels. The only real additional weight on the MKII is the addtional braces for the strut towers and the additional bracing for the roof structure.
Suspension is better in the MKII. It is completely returned with different spring and shock dampening rates. There are other minor suspension changes like stiffer/re-inforced lower control arms.
There are a lot of exterior improves. They dropped 40% of the lift on the front and 25% the lift off the back on the MKII. It was not just bumpers that changed, but also the shape of the fenders and quarter panels. With the MKII you can get bi-xenon headlights, which privide a signicantly larger beam pattern (about 25%) over the previous litronics. You even get painted bumperettes, versus those black ugly things on the MKI. Keep in mind there are lots of places where you can get your bumperettes painted body color. With a MKII you can also always tell it is a 911. With a MKI since it uses the Boxster front end, it is easily is mistaken to be a Boxster.
Interior is also a lot better. The gauge cluster and dash are revised. You can get the Bose system which is one of the best factory radios (very well balanced) versus the previous hi-fi sound that lacked bass and was disappointing at best. You get an actual glove compartment and even cup holders that work surprisingly well. I actually prefer the cup holders in my 996 to my 997.
Finally, every year they made minor improvements in the cars fixing issues. The launch model, 99', was a very long model year; almost a year an a half. There was the greatest # of issues with the 99'. The typical rule with these cars is you buy the newest one you can afford. Don't get me wrong, the early cars are still great cars; just the MKII is better in every way.
Not true! MK2 C2 does not have the front structure of a MKI C4. Just look at the trunk area. MKI C4 has a front firewall that is further forward for the front diff and axles, hence why the trunk room is smaller. What is different in the front on the MKII C2 is each front strut tower has a new brace that goes to the firewall. C4 chassis is significantly different and about 50 lbs heaving than a C2, which is about twice the weight different of the base curb weight of a MKII over a MKI. This was the key reason why a GT3 is so much heaiver than a Carrera.
Since we're comparing..........
99 3.4 0-60 4.9, 1km 23.9 sec
02 3.6 0-60 4.7 1km 23.2 sec
Not much difference there: but different enough.
top speed... 3.6 is 185, 5 more than the 3.4
These #'s were taken out of Porsche 911 Story Paul Frere'
The MAF issue is on both cars... and it isnt really an issue.
3.4 1320kg, 3.6 1345.... the wheels are heavier in the 3.6 from the bigger tires.... we are talking apples to apples here. Lighter but not by much
.
Stock suspension are compromised by our gov regulations... aftermarket or EU suspension is the way to go....
Each year Porsche is taking the rawness out of the driving experience.... is this progress in suspension design, technically maybe... Ive driven a 997, its def not as "raw" as the 6Mk1/6Mk2 cars... makes me want to buy an aircooled car for that rawness... to each his own on this one.
Just because you change the shape doesnt make it better, they are just simply different.... the coeffiecient drag on both cars are the same Cd=0.30.
As for the Mk1 has the boxster front end.... you have it backwards. The front end of the Boxster was built from Porsche flagship 911. The Boxster scavenged the 911 front end.... it was the Markeeting team that introduced the Boxster first (to shake out the flaws of the upcoming 911).... but everyone assumed that the 911 came out of the the Boxster cause it came out first. The 911 was always the Porsche design focus from the beginning.
Again, just because its changed doesnt make it better.... the Mk1 didgital speedo is under the tach.... The Mk2 digital speed is under the..... analog speedo.... now that is dumb!.... I can look at the tach and the speedo in 1 gauge... in the mk2 you need to look at 2 gauges.
uhmmmm, all Porsche radios suck!
How much compartment do you need, the Mk1 already has 3.... plus we have that cool rack to put our manual under the steering wheel. Seriuosly... the interior is a mute point... but I think the Mk1 wins in this category, cable front/ rear hood release.... priceless!
Cup holders? Ok Im not even goona touch this one. If you want cupholders.... afermarket beats any stock ones.
the MY99 is an endless debate, noone has the true facts on failure rates on the 99.... compared to 98 in EU, the 99 were solid cars. Yes the Mk2 are excellent cars.... better in every way. NO, Just like some things are better on the 996 compared to the 997. They are just different... that is all.
Ok... lets talk weight again.
3.4 C2 1320kg
3.4 C4 1375kg
99 Gt3 1370kg
3.6 C2 1345kg
3.6 C4 1405kg
03 Gt3 1380kg
Thats quite a big spread on weight, intersting is the the Mk2 gt3 is lighter than the C4, even though it shares the same frame.
My .02 cents.
Since no one's mentioned it before, some Mk I's have cable throttles and no PSM and there is a difference to the way the cars behave/react when driven hard. 1 year of the MK I's had LSDs so that is worth some consideration as well. PSM with the E diff (ABD) doesn't work and you can open up the inside wheel on tighter corners.
I've driven both MK I and MK II back to back on the same autocross course and they have subtle but distinctly different personalities and reactions/feedback to the same input.
For me, I like the more raw feeling of the earlier cars. Yes you can feel the weight difference but the power of the MK II makes up for it. For me when I replaced my first MK I, I had the option for a MK II Aero with X74 (or X71 Can't remember) suspension and other goodies but I passed on it based on how it felt on the Autocross course. It was a bit heavier, the E-Gas was slow to react and the car didn't want to rotate. I ended up getting another 99 with cable throttle, LSD, no PSM (just traction control which can be completely disabled unlike PSM).
My advice, depending on your experience level and priorities on what you want in a car, drive both and see what you like more. For me older was better, it may not be for you.
Tomatoe Tomato.
What i can say is that regardless of Mk1 or Mk2, all of the stereo systems suck, and suck hard.
The advantage goes to the Mk1 in this regard. Why? because you can rip it out without the hassle of the fiber optic MOST system.
The cupholders in the Mk2 are substandard at best. I can never get a cup of coffee (in a cardboard cup) to sit straight up and not spill out of the lid.
The interior is bearable (kind of like darth vaders bathroom, only in dark blue).
I much prefer the interior of the 997.
I think I'm going to get some artic silver painted dash pieces from Bumperplugs to break up the river of Metropol blue.
The 2002 MK II models don't have the MOST system. It is in 2003+ cars.
I certainly don't find the OEM Bose system to be wonderful, but it's adquate. The car makes enough other noises to drown out the stereo most of the time anyway (especially the exhaust and intake noises, which can be quite loud).
Awesome post.
It's clear the MK2 is the superior car.
Looks are debatable, but the MK1 looks a lot more dated than the Mk2 in and out. Check out the headlights. the MK2 996 can stand on its own set against the 997 because the headlights are more radical/bigger/more modern looking.
And the thing is it's not even that much more expensive. No brainer.
I SOOOOO love the fact that I cannot (or could not) hear the radio very well in the P-Cars
I have said many times, I waited 28 years to hear this exhaust... I have heard the songs before.......
you wont convince me of that - there are MANY reasons I like the MKI over the MKII and some of those make it the clearly superior car TO ME - sorry, thats just how I feel....and dont go down the headlight road
Ha, good thing because I'm going to look at a 2002 C4S with 13k miles tomorrow. Has full leather, ATP, lots of carbon/leather factory upgrades, and a few other convenience things I'm not concerned about.
Lot's of glovebox comments but only a passing comment about the cup holder. I'm old (43) so learned to drive in the pre-cup holder era where if you didn't feel that cold sensation of a 12oz between your legs you couldn't drive straight. Now I don't have a cup holder in my MK I and drink red instead of beer. The stain difference is HUGE and there is no cup holder. What's the value of that? It's huge! Love my 996 MK I but respect those of you that have the II. Have tried the "ultimate" holder, fabricated my own (lost a 16oz. Iced Tea, unsweet no lemon) and have purchased an after market holder I am considering drilling into the tunnel somewhere. Hoping for a horsepower gain once I get it resolved.
There is a simplicity and understatement to the MKI design, I think. They spent a lot of time designing the 993's replacement. Not sure how much time they spent scrambling to make the headlights more unique for the MKII?
I think they got it right on the 997's. I am just not a fan of the 997 interiors. But I digress....
That's a true statement. Without prejudice to which is 'better', the Mk. 1 cars were Porsche's vision, while the Mk. 2 cars were a product of marketing.
And, frankly, the 997 is even more so. I think it's a lovely car. But, even speaking as a marketing guy, I can't help but look at those headlights and think, "Porsche did this because people whined about it, as opposed to because it's what Porsche damn well wanted to do." The latter is the reason the marque has some mystique. Every time a car company loses its sense of itself and builds a focus group-mobile, I think it's a loss.
As I said, no reflection on how nice each respective car is. More of an authenticity thing.
Not that there's anything wrong with a nice MKII (or new 997). I just think the engineers tested the "new" MKI 996 in a wind tunnel, and put out an aero dynamic beauty (with Boxster front end). Compare that to a 997, with the flatter (less aero) single headlight, and I have to think the marketing department overrode the engineers/designers to satisfy the purists.
I could be way wrong, and the 997 might be more aero? I doubt it though.
Also a true statement, refreshingly so. The last original chassis, handbuilt car was indeed the 964. The 993 was a transition car whose image is bigger than the car itself, mostly because it is gorgeous to look at and happens to be the last Porsche to lack a radiator.
Ok so I test drove the 02 C4S with 13k miles today. Wow, what a beautiful car. Showroom condition. This was the first 996.2 and C4 I have driven and I was very impressed. The suspension seemed much better than the MKI C2's I've driven. Of course part of it could be the low miles and it was just tighter.
My only issue is the Arctic Silver color. Not on my short list of color choices.
I was curious on the bumperettes. I thought they were body colored on the MKIIs and not black?? They were black on this C4S. Did they not start this until a later year?
an MKI with US stock suspenssion is pretty bad... but for $1-2k you can make it really come alive. The C2 is much lighter than the C4S so with it set up right it will be much more enjoyable in the twisties... IMO
that's funny cause a bunch of us like the MK1 headlights... nobody I know likes the MKII headlights... something wierd about how they look.... the MK1 headlights are the same shape as the GT1 race car.... I don't think they look more dated at all.... the MKI lights have a nicer shape... but I'll give the nod the MKII bi-xenon lights for a nicer beam and overall better looking light that is emitted...
I agree, I like the early MkI, '96 GT1 style headlights much better. The Porsche stylists spent a lot of time to get it all right before releasing the 996.
Straight out of the book, an 02' C4S has a 276 lb higher curb weight than an 02' C2.
996 Carrera has a drag coefficient of .30, 997 Carrera is .29. Keep in mind that the 997 is wider and has a larger frontal area, hence why the 997 Carrera had the same top speed as the 996 MKII. Both have a 3 mph higher top speed than a 996 MKI (MKI was only 3 mph faster than the 993 Varioram).
Those headlights appeared on the Boxster all they way back in 1996 (97' model year). The 96' GT1 had 993 style headlights. They switched to the Boxster headlights for the 97' GT1, just as the first official pics of the 996 were being released. Porsche never designed those headlights for a 911. After bringing in the former Toyota execs into the factory to improve factory operations in the early 90's, making more commonality between models was one of the recommendations. The re-used the Boxster front end as a cost savings to get the 996 to market quicker. Remember that Porsche almost went bankrupt in the early 90's. Had the 996 been before the Boxster, it would have been known as the 996 front end. Instead, it is the Boxster front end on a 911.
I always like the 996 MKII front end better than the MKI. It has larger front openings and a deeper front lip that looks more aggressive than the Boxster front end. They did a lot to flatten the appearance, versus the more egg looking shaped MKI. The front bumper is flatter, but a lot thinner at the tip. The "fried egg headlights" are larger with a flatter profile. The fenders have interesting 45 degree angles at the arches shaped into them. The front on the MKII is also far better functionally: better cooling and 40% less front end lift. Same thing goes for the rear ends. I like the MKII rear end a lot more for the same reasons: lower with more lip and going away from the round egg shape of the earlier MKI rear bumper. It also reduced rear end lift by 25%.
When the 997 came out, I really liked the front end. They kept the low lip appearance from the 996 MKII with a lower profile and went back to the more traditional round headlights. The front end just looked right the first time you saw it. The one disappointment I had with the 997 was the back end. They went to a more rounded bumper and with the taillights no longer lined up with the trunk and bumper lines, it just didn't look as integrated.
that's right the 97 GT1 had the upgraded lights cause they look better... (IMHO)...
Can you explain to me how you think it looks like a fried egg? lol... I 've heard this reference many times and I don't get it... espcially since they look better than MKII lights...
the body kit on a MKII 996 does have sharper lines and 40% less front end lift... to correct that problem on my MKI I installed ROW 030 and that fixed any lifting issues.... its also a better suspension than what comes stock on the MKII;
porsche had updates to their front end 2004 boxster that look really good on a MKI 996; wider slits at the bottom and an overall better look...
overall to stick to the discussion of this post... I don't think the MKII cars are better than the MKI; they both had similar amount of issues with the MKII cars showing more IMS failures than the MKI cars... also as a previous poster suggested the MKI cars had a better rawer "feel" to them than the MKII cars...
10 GT3, your history isn't quite right, AFAIK. The two cars were developed on very close to parallel tracks. In fact, there are supposedly even a few 996s registered as 97's somewhere in the world. Since both cars would be water cooled and use the same basic engine, it only makes sense and I doubt Toyota had much to do with it. My understanding of Toyota's role is that they advised on production engineering (which is their superpower). Porsche had never dealt with so much automation before, and Toyota was paid to shorten the learning curve.
The fact that the 996 and 986 shared front suspensions isn't that strange, either. The same was true of the 914 and its contemporary 911. It's always been a core attribute of Porsche's corporate culture that "nothing goes to waste."
yes the 996 is narrower, it dates back to the original 911 design. Porsche wanted to bring back some of that earlier design focus.... remember when the 911 WB came out.... purist claimed that it was all for show and the NB is better aerodynamic wise. It seems that the 997 was all about what the people wanted (for show) headlights, wider, interior... etc.
dont know how the 993 subject came about, but the 996 performance to a 993 was all around better than a 993
you make it sound like the reason for the change in the gt1 headlights (from 993 to 996) was purely for marketing.... remember, the 1st gen gt1 was aerodynamicly flawed... and didnt do well. They revamped the gt1 from square one and dominated the scene back in the day.... hence the new headlights. According to the 911 Story.... those headlights (and the whole front end, at that) were designed for a 911. If what you say is true.... then the Mk1 and the Mk2 cars were designed from a Boxster since all 3 front end are similar... this is simply false... I am gathering my information based on a the 911 Story written by a test driver from Porsche with close relationship with Porsche.... these are not my opinion.
Again, the Mk1/Mk2 and the Boxster front end are almost identical. The mk1 front bumpers are rounder because Porsche designed them to cut tighter in corners, if you need to pull in to tight spaces (garage, parking etc)... these designe are brilliant, the Mk2 cars are more square... hence they look bulkier. If you look at the Mk1/Mk2 aerokits side by side.... the Mk1 just looks smaller because of its rounded shape vs the square shape.
The fried egg headlights are not flat at all... if you look closely, from the side, it has the same profile as the 993, really!. Its an illusion that it looks flat cause of the one piece design.
As for the rear bumper... you are right on this, the mk1 has a weaker design.... that is why the designers came out with the gt trim.... this makes the rear more square, wider agressive.... they are from the 951 design.
Btw... the Mk2 headlights was taken from the turbo, it was an after thought. Because of the people who cried foul play... buying a boxster design at the price of a 911.... back then, people had no idea... sadly, even today.
As for the 997 tailights no longer lined up to the trunk.... Porsche engineers had no choice. If you look at the 996T... the wing covered part of the tailights. If you want to put on a wing back there and see all of the tail lights on a WB... you need to offset the lights... offsetting the wing would be a no no from an aero stand point of view. Another focused group dilemma work around the Porsche engineer had to face.... Porsche has been trying to make everyone happy, that their designed concept has turned to a cash cow... so sad.
996 guys always wondered if Porsche just designed something in their eyes (like the 996).... they are more becoming focused group orientated.... hence the round headlights, fluffy interior, bland exhaust note, soft suspension. It almost seems that they are now stuck with round headlights forever.... thats to bad. Imagine Porsche if they would of kept the focus of the 996 design. IMHO... I think they would of made one bad *** cars like their race cars back at their prime...so radicaly different.... dont get me wrong, I love what they do today, but I think their engineers have a lot to face in the future.
Phew! What a lot of chatter.
My first 996 was a seal grey 2002 with full leather, Bose, no PSM. Great car but I had to sell it because I was leaving town.
Then I came back and I was determined to get a 1999 car for the light weight, the throttle cable, the LSD, the better looking headlights and the smoother bodywork. I even had an arctic silver one with a brand new motor lined up for $21K...no LSD mind you.
In the end an arctic silver 2002 with a new-ish motor and PSM dropped in my lap for $26.5 and I couldn't say no because the MkII cars are just better.
I installed PSS9 and removed the centre console and only *sometimes* regret not buying the 1999..because the headlights look better.
there are lots of good deals out there right now... personally I'd pay extra for something with a new motor whether its a 99 or an 02... new motor goes a long way in my books given the history of 996 motors (3.4 and 3.6)
I think GIAC has an upgrade for the 2002+ cars that greatly increases throttle response and makes it feel like a throttle cable car.... a worthwhile upgrade...
You think?
I was more worried that they'd get their frilly knickers in knots about the whole "997 is a focus group car" thing. I thought maybe it would be their therapists that had the field day...
hahaha I like this Bruce
That video from best motoring Ferd posted was great though, I didn't realize that aside from the cup style wheel carrier, the suspension components are common. That video makes me want a 997S again, but I am resisting temptation.
- Hans
I remember the first time I ever saw a 996 MK II in my rearview mirror, before I knew some people had an issue with 996 headlights. It was actually in Indianapolis leaving an F1 race. I saw the turn signal come on underneath the headlight and I thought to myself: "wow... that looks cool".
"People" don't have issues with headlights, older self described Purists and the magazine/bench racing nerds who aspire to said purity have issues. If surveyed, average sports car guy and gal can't tell the difference between any Porsche 911 made since about 1990, the same way average rich guy can't tell the difference between any standard Rolex model made since 1970. The commercial success of the 986 & 996 is hardly debatable. The success on the track of the 996 is hardly debatable, and many 996 cup cars are still doing pretty nicely out there.
The debate really breaks along three lines, styling, performance, and quality/reliability.
Styling is wholly subjective, but as mentioned, only Porsche nerds can spot the differences. The endless oh I love the 996 oh the 993, 6C4S / anniversary insert-your-favorite stuff is pure Porsche nerdery, which we love to split hairs on here but is just that, hairsplitting. As they are unlikely to significantly change the outward appearance of the 911 from the current 997 look, it's probably the safest bet long term if you like the look and want to have a car which will with paint care continue to appear pretty new for many years.
Performance & quality have seen incremental improvements with each successive iteration, however no huge leap has been made in performance in the standard 3.6L cars. If you already own a Mk1 996, there's little reason to go to a 996 Mk2, and a 3.6L 996 Mk2 owner won't see a lot going to a 3.6L 997 Mk1, but if you don't already own one then you might want to consider how long you're going to own it and how much you're going to drive it, and decide where you want to enter the performance/depreciation curve.
The 996 Mk2 feels better built than the Mk1 in terms of rigidity, and the 997 much more so than the 996 Mk2, especially when considering materials and little things like door pulls and switches. I personally prefer the interior of the 996 Mk2 to the 997 but I'm sure I could be swayed in the other direction if I were a few years older and more concerned with creature comforts and the appearance of higher quality materials.
Reliability information is anecdotal at best, and often confounded by personal experience (e.g. I know more guys who have had 997 engines replaced than 996, but I also know more 997 owners personally). While I believe it is safe to assume that a newer car with more updated designs will have a better chance of being reliable, every used car has a unique history and I wouldn't buy one of these cars without a warranty unless it was purely a toy.
As for a personal recommendation, if I were buying a 996 today without a doubt it would be an 02-04 turbo if daily driver, GT3 or even an 04 anniversary if street/track/toy. The 997 Carrera S is definitely a step up in performance and perceived build quality from the 996 C2, and I really like the way the 997 C4 & C4S widebody cars look, enough to lure me in if I was buying again today in the ~$40s to $50s but not enough to sell my car. I'd be far better off budgeting for more driver education, as would most current owners. My next 911 will be purchased when this one gives up the ghost, and I have a feeling it will be a Mk1 997 Turbo (saw a gt3RS in Alpine yesterday btw, new new LED taillights)
Well stated.
I'd add that if you have a 996 MK2 now, skip the MK1 997s all together. There is very little "upgrade" in the additional spend especially when it comes down to the driving experience (I'm even talking about the 3.8 here).
Like htny, my next 911 will likely be a 997 Turbo will ALL the trimmings (aerokit, interior everything CF).
I've maxed out my regular Carrera experience with my current MK2. It remains an awesome, awesome car to drive.
Let's not make this into a watch thread now guys. We could be here a while.
I reckon my 1984 GMT Master would be a good match for your air huffing 911 Ed, although it is my Speedmaster Professional that is usually described as the Porsche 911 of watches.
Talk about slippery slopes!
Yeah my bad, what started out as a mild analogy on timeless porsche styling might have gotten a little OT! But while we're digressed I think the 60s Heuer Carreras are a good match for the 911!
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
