40% of all 1999 996s needed new motors?

Here's a statement that was made by a potential (no longer) buyer of my car. Now I agree, buy the latest and best afforded, but...? I know the motivation behind it, but can some 'experts' comment? This just seems a bit fetched. Someone on Rennlist tell him this? Thanks. "The more I research with the �tuners�, i.e. the independent Porsche experts who all the hard-core PCA guys go to, the more I learned�. Their combined consensus is�. Don�t buy a 99� � as 40% of those motors have been replaced and the rest are a ? mark� If you must, buy a late model 2000 as they sorted several of the design issues of the 99 motor� Even better, buy an 01 as they finally sorted most of the 3.4 design issues If you can afford an 01, seriously consider at 02 as the new 3.6 is considered close to bulletproof � same basic engine at the GT3�s"

I've been trying to deduce the same thing ... going so far as to begin to compile a short list of cars know to have replaced engines by serial #s looking for a trend. Maybe a Registry of 996s should be created (if not already?). I'm in the market for a '99/'00 and am seriously considering one that has had the engine replaced. I'm hoping that the new engine # (W/13k miles) will help me understand it's potential longevity. Any thoughts?

Ahem! Sorry, but that's BS. Only Porsche would know the number of engines replaced and they're not telling. Quoting stuff like that is just blowing worthless and harmful hot air.

Well, from what I read, Porsche isn't telling. I seem to recall this having been a matter of heated debate at some point in the past. With one post claiming an informal poll, and a statistician refuting the entire exercise. KOW, mine doesn't leak a drop, and seems fine. Hard to express that to someone about to part with $30K.

+1 Whoever says these things as facts are full of sh*t.

Thank you. You said what I was thinking.

Totally agree! Would it be possible to get you guys to email my frightened buyer and tell him so? Not trying to start anything, just wanted confirmation of my own thinking. (I'm the bad guy trying to sell something)

Tell him to visit the forum and read threads such as this

Dang it, Doug. Now I can't send him this thread!!!

There is so much misinformation in this buyers statements it's not even funny. I numbered his statements above. 1) The consensus that I have read indicate that the failure rates for the earlier are higher than later cars. However, 40% seems crazy high to me. I asked the Service Director at my dealership (he's a friend of mine) about this claimed rate and he said "no f'n way is it even close to that high". The bottom line is only Porsche knows for sure, but there would be mass riots (IMHO) if the number were even close to that high. 2) As you would expect Porsche seems to have improved the motors over time. I'd recommend you buy the latest model you can afford. 3) See number 2 4) The general consensus seems to be that the MK II's are more reliable than the MK I's. However, the Mk II m96 motor (just like the m96 Mk I motor) is entirely different than the GT3 motor. For more good information on buying 996's read the current issue of Excellence Magazine or Total 911 magazine. Both pulications are running 996 buying guide in their publications this month.

Now, now, now Doug. Be nice! Bring him here and we'll give him a good talking to. Register him under the username newbiegonnageta911

Yah. Quoted him the Exellence $25,754 to $39,200. I'm asking $29K for 61 miles. Man, any auto maker that had 40% engine replacement in say, Mmmm, 20,000 cars would be front page news anywhere.

Really...why?

Damn, I wish I had those odds with the lottos that I buy

we should start a list of 99 996's that HAVE NOT had any engine issues...I will be the 1st one to post...

Yeah.. I guess my thing is, if you want a good '99 cab, for less than 30K, I can help. You want to shop my car with a low mileage 2002, sorry, can't compete. However, let me know where that '02 is for <$30K. I want a shot at it. I hate to open this can of worms, but the 60K service hasn't been done. I mean, the belt's not been replaced.... Ooof. Now I hafta come down another 2K??

just buy a belt... 27 bucks and then you can say the motor won't blow

I drive my 99 biatch hard every day. 68 miles one way to work. 80-85 all the way with the occasion uncircumspect quick blast to xxx digits. every damm day of the work week. I've never had a tighter motor in my 9 Pcars and 4+ sports cars in my life. Due to stupid people...The 99 is one of the best deals in high performance sports cars. I plan to run this baby hard.. then look for another after it hits 200k miles thank you. Dry as a bone tight fast and dammn perfect. She just runs and runs and runs Can someone PLEASE start arnother innacurate rumor about 04 c4's please ? then perhaps I can make that my next daily runner after the price is driven down ?

I drive her every day too, not a prob so far.... 76k and ticking..... 60 miles round trip....daily driver....

Michael - you might not want to use that phrase in the furure. Some newbies may think the "and ticking" part means that it is a bomb ready to explode!

I wonder how many Honda Civics needed new motors in 99. Probably 80%.

Ehh...Id say your on the opposite side of the spectrum... Anyways, i have a 99...I bought the car with the RMS. I replaced it and it hasnt leaked a bit...Almost all of the earlier 996's will have an RMS leak untill they get the updated seal. I dont consider it a deal breaker as it doesnt affect the car... The only other issue I have had was the water pump bearing going out...It lasted 78k miles, what can i complain? Im not regretting my decision to buy a 99 996 with 68k miles one bit...That was untill i drove my first tubo

Gee, my 99 C2 is one of the earliest built, never had an RMS issue, burns NO oil, still on original brakes (60,000+ miles) and I even have the orginal coolant tank cap. Oh yeah, it's also capable of running with more pressure in the cylinders than any of the turbo's.

I haven't had mine long enough to add much here, but my 1999 is on its original engine and now at 78,000 miles. (Of course, now that I've written that, it'll probably grenade on me tomorrow.)

Here's the latest: "...looks like you've taken really good care of the car but you just have to be real careful with Porsches because they are very delicate." Hilarious.

No...but did you hear that the rumor about the 04 Turbos?

That's the same thing I was thinking..

There is nothing wrong with the TT as long as you don't use 2nd gear.

52k+mi, 3 RMS, 1 expansion tank, 30+ track days, no leaks, no worries

WERA, I think that's reasonable for your car. I was thinking about selling mione, and asking $29-30K as well. I've got 82K miles (today!), but it's an '00.

I can't believe you guys didn't jump on potential buyer/chicken's other crazy quote that post '02 its the same engine as GT3... Nope still a further along M96. Bulletproof? I agree, I actually love the hype, kept price down so I could easily scoop one up as my second Porsche. I was originally going to get rid of my Boxster and upgrade to a Cayman, but with Porsche's marketing/pricing plan, I wasn't going to bite. So I went ahead and got a $31K 99 with new engine, so I can sleep soundly at night, now I have 2 for the price of 1 and love watching the "does it explode or not explode" debates. With a personal predilection, that the numbers may be much higher than people think, but pretty soon even the garage queens will be sorted which will indeed make early 996's great values, esp with updated engines like mine that was done in '04. Maybe in 20 years, a disgruntled Porsche employee will tell... until then I will happily drive my cars.

That number sounds BS, and I can also tell you that my 04 engine was not bullet proof. It was replaced at 5k miles. The new one never had any issues. I think the whole engine replacement thing is way overblown, but I also know it sucks when it is your car that has the engine grenade. For my taste I would get at least an 02 simply because in my opinion it looks much better and has the bigger engine.

I bought my 99 about 2 years ago.....could it be that the previous owner replaced the engine...just before I bought it??? ?.....because with 72K on the "clock" mine drives like new! Or does my99 belong in the 60% group?

the heart of this problem is as follows: the early boxsters 98-99 had a problem with porous engine castings which led to tengine replacements in countless boxsters. never heard of a 996 with a porous block. not to say there has never been an engine failure on a 996, but the idiots out there can not differentiate between a boxster problem and a 911 problem. therefore..the misinformation persists regarding 996's as with most b.s it gets repeateded enough and becomes "the truth" not the first time all the "experts" were wrong

That is TOTAL BULLSH!T!!!!! It's More like 85%

So, are you saying there has never been a "porous block" failure? I am not saying you are wrong, just wondering. A friend of mine at work has an uncle who is a Porsche mechanic and he warned me about the porous blocks in the 996s, I bought one anyways because I am a hard-headed but 95,XXX miles and still strong.

the buyer is trying to get you, to get down on your knees price wise.....just don't get bent over.

The buyer is full of horse manure. Don't bite. Tell him to go forth and multiply.

The only belt is the external accessory belt. You have a timing chain.

the 3.6 i doubt shares a single part with the GT3 engine. Maybe a fastener or 2 but thats it. They are completely different. The only thing thats the same are some of the specs, 3.6L total displacement and the flat 6 cylinder arrangement.

What a dumbass! Gt3 motors of mk1 and mk2 are different from the base cars for both generations. 40%, right, maybe he's speaking on the chance of his VD coming back..............................

Say my motor with 78k miles (running perfectly) grenades. How hard would it be to fit a GT3 engine in my mkII widebody? Just daydreaming.

Not sure it'd be hard, but I'd assume you'd need a new tranny as well that's specific to the GT3... and even with just the new engine work alone, that'd be a solid DP on a used GT3 you know what I'm saying? The GT3 engine is THE chosen one with most of the special racing GT1 engine bits so I am a fan of it as well

And it's purple. Unless Prince or Violet Beauregard is in the market for a P-Car...it might be a tuff sell. J/k - seems like a good price. I have about 50% of that milege and was offered $36 on trade.

ha. ha. I like it more than the millenium color, and it catches the light better than the dk. blue variants (lapis, etc.). In a parking lot at night, it looks radioactive. If I could replace the color, it would be only silver or cobalt. Those will be the colors I'll be looking for on the next car. Maybe Veruca Salt will be interested ("Daddeee, I want a 996 nowwwwww").

Anyone who makes this claim that the M96 motor is the same as a GT3 obviously has no idea what he is talking about. It's OK that he didn't buy the car, we don't want him in our club anyway.

<So, are you saying there has never been a "porous block" failure? I am not saying you are wrong, just wondering. A friend of mine at work has an uncle who is a Porsche mechanic and he warned me about the porous blocks in the 996s, I bought one anyways because I am a hard-headed but 95,XXX miles and still strong.> the porous block problem was a boxster only problem never, ever heard or read a report of any 996 with a porous block believe me between al the boards ,since 1999. someone would have reported the issue your uncle is confusing the boxster with the 996

Porous blocks were an issue w/very early '99 - 996s. Do a search. I can't imagine there's any still on the road where it hasn't been resolved though.

I thought I had read a few engines on this board (Rennlist) with porous blocks, maybe I was wrong.

Have a 2000 996 drive on Autobahn all the time from 150MPH-170MPH and outside the RMS being replaced once never a problem.

In a recent 996/986 market update in Excellence, there is only a reference to the 986 as being susceptible to the porous block problem, and I've heard Tool Pants(poster here) also only refer to the 986. I suppose Porsche only knows what the truth is, but I never heard of the early 996's being particularly prone to the porous block problem (emphasis on particularly).

are what I've read about. The former is even publish on one of the Porsche mags, after they themselved took it all apart. I've already forgotten what caused the crack and the name of the mag. Of course when the engine blows, Porsche won't tell us what caused it, so we won't know the percentage of which or real fault. But at least a survey here listed some 84 cases (my drive crashed so I don't have the link anymore, do your own search), perhaps another 5 or so more by now. Then there's also a 986 survery which somewhat shows more problems with '98-'99 cars. I think some 25-30 cases on this, again I don't remember the count since I lost all the pdf files from my drive. I read one turbo had the intermediate shaft issue. Since there's not as much TT as NA 996, it's had to say if this is an isolated case. I bet you, proper maintenance, warm up and smooth driving (even to redline) will make your car more reliable. Not likely done by leased owners, lead foot, or non-mechanically inclined drivers. Just what I arrived at after researching for over 2 years. Still looking for my 2nd P-car, came close on 3 occasions.

Well.. if nothing else, all these posts make me feel better about the whole thing. I know the guys is trying to work on the price, but part of me thinks he actually believes what he was told.