47 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHC4S rear change up
Leading reported evidence
Replace rear a little
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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
I thought about doing this just to change the rear a little, but I just wasn't sure if I'd like it.
Leading evidence: 'Replace rear a little' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace rear a little' (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 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
I agree that if you were set on those lights then the reflector would look more out of place than it already does (at least to me).
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.
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.
47 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: 20261027T154520Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Here is what I did to the rear of my C4S.
The center reflector was removed, then wrapped in matching gloss black wrap over the center reflector only. Then an update to the OEM lights, installing LED wide-body lights.
I cant say enough how updated the look is. The quality of the lenses is excellent and have to be seen in person. ( yes she a bit dirty..a full detail in process right now)
I would have gone with darker taillights and nightshaded the center reflector to match - and I'd lose the 4S. Looks strange hanging out there all alone, off-center.
Your car, though, so you get the final call...
I am impressed with the match of the wrap on the reflector, though. I may go that route instead of repainting my side skirts - the match looks at least as good as I'm going to be able to do with paint...
I've always hated the reflector, so that looks good to me.
Not a fan of the tail lights as I like the originals.
Also not a fan of the badge. At a minimum I think it should be centered, but I'm not sure about that. I think it's probably an all or nothing situation.
I love it. couldn't be happier. The Red Clear is newer brighter color red and the older lenses had Red/Orange fading that just looks aged.
Here's my logic and I'm just fine that others are not as thrilled.
These lights just don't work with the center reflector. The comparison shot I have with both on the car shows how the beltline divides the red and clear in the OEM.
The new lights dont have that, the clear is smack in the middle and puts the C4S reflector at odds with the new lights beltline.
Separating the lights by taking out the center reflector fixes that and you see the beltline through the lights..across the body into the other light. It just flows. i looked hard at the darker lights but IMHO they don't work for me. They look too modified.
The Red Clear for me, looks more OEM in color. I love it and couldn't be more pleased.
The 4S is in its original place, only the Carrera is removed. Many cars have an offset badge
I agree with this. Personally, I have always loved the reflector strip on the 996 C4S and the way that it works with the OE tail lights. I think it is an excellent and unique look. If you really want to install the LED tail lights, then you have to do something because the lights don't match the strip and it looks very out of place. I think the best options include eliminating the strip as seen above or tinting the tail lights and the strip to match.
It's tough to make this work with the 996 C4S because the reflector strip was meant to be a bit of a throw back to the 993 and earlier cars. Adding LED lighting is an effort to make it look more like the newer cars, and this simply doesn't mix well with the throw back look.
In any case, if Seeeu911 likes it, then that's what matters.
Thanks for the feedback everyone, pro and con ! I love my C4S and hunted long and hard for her, so i didn't take molesting her gorgeous rear end casually. The wrap is removable and the OEM lights are safely stored if when the time comes to make her original again.
They are a fairly new option for the C4S and TT.
you can get them from Del Rey customs
www.delreycustoms.com
Joe Shemula
The cost was $849.00 Shipping $79.00 total $928.00
They are plug and play with no CEL codes as they have resistors built in. Literally 2 torx screws on each. really good quality components with factory connectors. could not be simpler.
The wrap was also very simple. cost me $50.00 from a local custom wrap shop.
I haven't really noticed it before but the center clear section doesn't go straight across, but dips instead. I really don't know why they decided to introduce the dip as it makes it look crooked IMO.
here is a close up of the lens. I could just not stop staring at the change in character this gives it. I'm totally happy.
Stick and Stones may my break my bones.. but whips and chains excite me...
I like it. And easily reversed when selling. Those LEDs are really nice in person. There is a 10% off promo code floating around out there BTW. I got it completely by accident.
x3
The reflector, exclusive to the C4S, makes the rear appear wider. Removing it makes it look like a normal 911. The taillights look great. The sole 4S... WTH?!?@! But hey, if you like it, then that's what matters... As with ugly babies, "it has a face only it's mother could love..."
Sorry, I couldn't resist. Seriously, if you like it, that's all that matters.
You obviously have not spent any time around a C4S. The reflector is not what makes it look wider, it looks wider because it is wider.
If anything removing the reflector, you must see it in person to appreciate it, really opens up the space between the hips making it seem even wider and meaner, more aggressive looking.
Yes, I've spent an exorbitant amount of time around C4S's including mine... Do a search on design and there are Porsche design statements out there where it's that reflector strip that makes it even look wider than it actually is... We're talking only 1.2 inches wider on each side = 2.4 inches in total. Unless you had both cars next to each other side by side, I highly doubt you'd be able to tell a roughly 3% (2.4/72.1 inches) difference in width between the regular vs. C4S model without that red strip. But I bet that if you put that red reflector strip on a regular 911, you'd think that it was wider... We can agree to disagree. But again, if you like the changes you made, then that's good for you. But kindly don't slam anyone here if you don't like the answer to the question you asked otherwise.
This is all in good fun. I dont recall asking a question tho. I think the only person felt slammed is you...
If you cant tell its a C4S without the strip make penance to the Porsche gods today.
post a pic of your C4S please
Doesn't the 997.2 C4S use LED taillights?
If so can you somehow repurpose the red strip from that car to a 996 C4S? That might be a better match since it would have the more modern look and feel you're looking for and you still get to keep the distinctive reflector that is unique to the C4S.
I actually think the strip looks out of place on the 997.2 C4S also. It looks like it was just thrown on there. They did a better job of integrating it with the tail lights for the 991 C4S.
Hmmm.... I thought about doing this just to change the rear a little, but I just wasn't sure if I'd like it. Sort of a tough crowd based on the feedback on here, but I think this actually looks decent. Not feeling the "4S" sitting off center but everything else looks pretty good.
I'm actually surprised at how good those tail lights look. The shape of the lens actually seems to follow the original lines and contours. Same goes for the wrap.
Take a second look everyone and imagine you saw this on the street (without the 4S). $5 says your first reaction is "was that a wide body?" Its inconspicuous and doesn't give much away which I can appreciate.
If the goal is to clean up the car's look then I think this looks great but I'm also a non-conformist that likes both types of 996 headlights
Well, if we're opening this up for discussion again after a year of silence, I'll add my $.02.
- The offset 4S looks wrong. Even if I didn't know that the word Carrera was removed, it just looks out of place. Besides, why just remove Carrera? Is the word Carrera offensive? It's not like the 991 that has "P O R S C H E 9 1 1 C A R R E R A G T S 4 S" written on the deck lid. If you're going to debadge then just debadge.
- The LED lights alone I could give or take -- that's a personal call. I prefer the originals but that's just my opinion. I like the LEDs on the 997. Somehow these scream aftermarket on the 996...and not in a good way.
- The blacked out strip removes what I see as a distinctive design element on the rear of the C4S. Obviously, it's all a matter of personal preference, but I love the strip. The comparison to that Lincoln is laughable...but, it's all about what you like. As others have noted, since it's wrapped, it's a modification that can be undone. Without it, you've made your rear look more like a standard Carrera...which isn't a bad thing...it's just a thing. And, I know the Turbo doesn't have a strip but it also has a big honking spoiler that distinguishes it from its siblings.
At the end of the day, it's your car. Screw whatever anyone else thinks. If you like it then do it! That's my $.02.
-Eric
led tail lights would look better if they looked more like a 991 tail light. Those look like junk.
The 4S by itself looks off balance. Just get rid of all the script. You've successful made it look like a regular 996 by taking off the reflector.
So...you like it? No, that's probably not right. You...don't like it?
OP, every time I see it without the stupid middle strip, I like it better...every time I see a 4S and that strip, I think...
Not my cup of tea personally, but that doesn't matter does it? :-)
I got the C4s because of the tie in to the old air cooled via the strip. I feel that this singular element is the only thing that really references the aircooleds but also only exists on the new watercooled. Otherwise Porsche would not have added the strip back in and call it out in their literature/posters with the 991 C4s.
I do wish the LED lamps were less clunky looking and more refined with the LED execution (and the patterns). The manufacturer didn't want to spend the $$$ required to have a one off for C4s or the turbo.
The split of the dark and red on the OE lamps is there to extend the horizontal feel and thus giving it a wider illusion with an actual minimal width of the body change.
It would be interesting to see if someone deleted the TOP signalling portion of the tail lamp and just had the super wide horizontal strip by itself. That would work well on the black car because it's easy to hide.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.