Has your 996 or 997 engine had a major rebuild? - Page 30 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK

OK, may not be the best thread title but I'm sure you get the idea! Basically, has your engine had to be rebuilt due what is perceived to be a frequently discussed design fault? I don't think we should include RMS failures as those as I understand it won't cause an engine rebuild in the sense we are discussing here (happy to be corrected) Please let me know what failures you have experienced and I'll add those to the poll if needbe to see how many of what failures are happening. Hope this makes sense and if it's been done before my apologies

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Yup, scored bores.

Globs said: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... But that doesn't give actual figures as far as I can see, it's just a discussion thread The poll is multi-answer so if you've had a problem, it's yes and also the problem.

HoHoHo said: Globs said: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... But that doesn't give actual figures as far as I can see, it's just a discussion thread The poll is multi-answer so if you've had a problem, it's yes and also the problem. Oh ok - I just thought you'd missed it!

Globs said: HoHoHo said: Globs said: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... But that doesn't give actual figures as far as I can see, it's just a discussion thread The poll is multi-answer so if you've had a problem, it's yes and also the problem. Oh ok - I just thought you'd missed it! No, I'm simply trying to get some confirmed figures rather than another discussion.

HoHoHo said: No, I'm simply trying to get some confirmed figures rather than another discussion. You could also add an option of 'Haven't bought one because of the faults', it would be interesting to see how many people have skipped these cars.

Globs said: HoHoHo said: No, I'm simply trying to get some confirmed figures rather than another discussion. You could also add an option of 'Haven't bought one because of the faults', it would be interesting to see how many people have skipped these cars. Done

So currently less than 10% failures. Interesting

It would also be of interest if you were to include 986's and 987's.

Isn't RMS a major fault though? How much does it cost to fix? I think this poll is skewed because you have excluded RMS faults.

blueg33 said: Isn't RMS a major fault though? How much does it cost to fix? I think this poll is skewed because you have excluded RMS faults. That's a 'seal' rather than a shaft ....

Cheers HoHoHo, Andyuk911 said: blueg33 said: Isn't RMS a major fault though? How much does it cost to fix? I think this poll is skewed because you have excluded RMS faults. That's a 'seal' rather than a shaft .... I classify that as an annoying oil drip / irrelevance (the old ones dripped!)

blueg33 said: Isn't RMS a major fault though? How much does it cost to fix? I think this poll is skewed because you have excluded RMS faults. Its not exactly an engine rebuild problem though is it. Not a cheep job but also not a rebuild. Its not that uncommon on any car to have a leaking RMS and something to look at when changing clutches. So far the pole is at <8% interesting stuff Edited by Matt Seabrook on Sunday 11th September 18:05

Early days, but I suspect I've got a pretty good idea which way this poll might be........ Glad I bought mine as the poll suggests currently I've got a slim chance of a major problem. Still the doom mongers obviously haven't come back from the pub yet so there may still be a change in statistics

Globs said: HoHoHo said: No, I'm simply trying to get some confirmed figures rather than another discussion. You could also add an option of 'Haven't bought one because of the faults', it would be interesting to see how many people have skipped these cars. What about 'I bought one and now suffer from Porsche Paranoia everytime I log on to a 996 forum'?

General Bilko said: Globs said: HoHoHo said: No, I'm simply trying to get some confirmed figures rather than another discussion. You could also add an option of 'Haven't bought one because of the faults', it would be interesting to see how many people have skipped these cars. What about 'I bought one and now suffer from Porsche Paranoia everytime I log on to a 996 forum'? The results of this poll will ensure you enjoy your car as was intended without thinking it's going to spit the pistons out of the exhaust every time you start it up

What's the relevance of the 4th option?

RDM said: What's the relevance of the 4th option? For me not much, but it was requested as an option in the thread.

Matt Seabrook said: Its not exactly an engine rebuild problem though is it. Not a cheep job but also not a rebuild. Its not that uncommon on any car to have a leaking RMS and something to look at when changing clutches. So far the pole is at <8% interesting stuff Edited by Matt Seabrook on Sunday 11th September 18:05 To me, it depends on the cost or what it leads to if not fixed. If its a £800 job then IMO its not major, if it costs £5k it may as well be in the same class as a rebuild

blueg33 said: Matt Seabrook said: Its not exactly an engine rebuild problem though is it. Not a cheep job but also not a rebuild. Its not that uncommon on any car to have a leaking RMS and something to look at when changing clutches. So far the pole is at <8% interesting stuff Edited by Matt Seabrook on Sunday 11th September 18:05 To me, it depends on the cost or what it leads to if not fixed. If its a £800 job then IMO its not major, if it costs £5k it may as well be in the same class as a rebuild Pretty sure RMS problems don't cost £5k to fix, nowhere near that figure and I've not heard of any instances of engine rebuild as a result of RMS failure (again, stand to be corrected!)

HoHoHo said: Still the doom mongers obviously haven't come back from the pub yet so there may still be a change in statistics You called! I like the cars but, I fall into the latter option. There are other cars I'd rather buy without the risks. Or at least what I perceive to be the risks, rightly or wrongly.

HoHoHo said: Pretty sure RMS problems don't cost £5k to fix, nowhere near that figure and I've not heard of any instances of engine rebuild as a result of RMS failure (again, stand to be corrected!) I really don't know, thats why I asked. Many people are put off by stories of RMS failures, so I wondered what it cost. It was a factor when I was considering a 996, but I admit that I didn't research it properly, so I am genuinely interested

RMS seal is about 17 quid IIRC - my indie does it with a clutch for about 3-4 hours labour so if it was only the RMS at indie rates say 200-250 quid.

The RMS problem didn't put me off getting one, so it is appropriate to exclude that here IMO. It was the IMS that put me off a C4S some years ago. I only understood the scoring issue fairly recently. Around 12% now - which I assume has resulted in a new engine either under warranty, with goodwill or at around £10k (or perhaps slightly cheaper repair indie options). Worth the risk? I think that will always be a personal choice (if you are aware of the issue of course).

You have not included a 'D Chunk' option. This is where the top of the cylinder liner breaks up at the top. MTR

mollytherocker said: You have not included a 'D Chunk' option. This is where the top of the cylinder liner breaks up at the top. MTR Done

The only fly in the statistical ointment (other than the usual issue of non-failure being a passive state), is that there is no way of saying you have had or still have a fleet of working 996, 986, 987, 997 vs someone with one failure as you only get one vote and therefore isn't weighted to the number of vehicles. Additionally, what happens if only one of the cars you own/have owned has failed? For example, I have a friend with three 996 and one failed. So he could only presumably vote for "YES" (failure) and thus ignoring the two that didn't break? On his stats alone the probability would look like 100%, whereas although he was unlucky, his actual stats were 33% chance of failure.

X51 said: The only fly in the statistical ointment (other than the usual issue of non-failure being a passive state), is that there is no way of saying you have had or still have a fleet of working 996, 986, 987, 997 vs someone with one failure as you only get one vote and therefore isn't weighted to the number of vehicles. Additionally, what happens if only one of the cars you own/have owned has failed? For example, I have a friend with three 996 and one failed. So he could only presumably vote for "YES" (failure) and thus ignoring the two that didn't break? On his stats alone the probability would look like 100%, whereas although he was unlucky, his actual stats were 33% chance of failure. That's a valid point - in fact I have had a Boxster S, a 996 and a 997 and not had a major problem on any of the three! This is as good as the forum software will allow I'm suspect, but will give us an idea albeit not 100% accurate. What is interesting is we are now at 2% which indicates to me the problem isn't anywhere near as bad as some posters would have you believe, those who haven't purchased because of the threat of a problem can hopefully see far more cars run as they should than don't. All I can say is..... 'INSIGNIFICANT'

Does the software tell you hoem many votes have been cast?

No engine rebuild, but very recently has needed: 1. A waterpump - looks like the original was on a knife edge and not doing my usual route meant less cool down time off the motorway. It failed in the dealership overnight. Went in for a clutch change. 2. RMS housing replacement (Looks like the RMS has been replaced - but NOT in the history - and the person doing it filled over the centre cavity with gasket sealant, so I decided to have the housing replaced. IMS is smooth, so left it alone. 3. Brake pipes. The two rear hard pipes were very badly corroded in a couple of places. Hidden by the under trays, this corrosion would not have been spotted by MOT, and would only have been noticed at failure. I have seen this posted on PH once before, and I would recommend everyone have the undertrays off for a look. It looks like the coating on the steel (not stainless!) pipes has been rubbed off by the undertrays and then they've obviously got wet. 4. Clutch. I took it in because it was juddering. The clutch plate was fine, but the pressure plate ring had heat marks on it, so had it done anyway given the cost of labour to get in there. Glad I did really, having seen the condition of the rear brake pipes. An expensive day.

Looks like just under 10% failure at the moment. 53 non-rebuilds and 5 rebuilds.

+1 for ims on 2003 986s. imho rms is not a problem(can affect gt/turbo cars),ims is more of a problem on pre 2006 cars and cylinder failures is a worry on all cars(gt/turbo cars not included). stats on cylinder failure is the one i am interested in.

Total number of votes cast so far = 87 (of which 19 haven't purchased) Split currently is 63, 3 and 3. Mods - can this thread become a sticky please - could well become an interesting poll.

Having inadvertently clicked on 'Skip Voting' to review the current results it would appear the option to then Vote is removed. Is there a way of now registering a vote? if not can the Poll administrator amend to show an additional IMS failure vote. Thanks

Kieran said: Having inadvertently clicked on 'Skip Voting' to review the current results it would appear the option to then Vote is removed. Is there a way of now registering a vote? if not can the Poll administrator amend to show an additional IMS failure vote. Thanks I've had a look and I can't see a way of adding your vote - can you back space in your browser?

Can I just add to the opinion that the statistics render the possibility of engine failure insignificant - to ask if any of those who expereinced it (and the cost of sorting it out) regarded it as insignificant. It is a classic low risk but high cost problem that I relate as similar probably to writing your car off or suffering a house fire. They are statistically even less likely to happen to you yet very few would risk not insuring against it because the resulting cost to fix would be so high. However the warranty schemes available can be expensive and often do not actually cover the fault or the whole cost of repair. Often they exclude wear and tear causes or limit pay outs (and are too wealthy to take on legally - referring everything to appeal to delay a result and increase potential costs if you lose). The only ones I know of that are reliable are the Porsche warranty scheme (more expensive but you get a new engine) and our own Lifetime Maintenance Plan (less expensive but you pay for parts - but can have the causes of the faults modified to reduce the likelyhood of a repetition). Baz

HoHoHo said: I've had a look and I can't see a way of adding your vote - can you back space in your browser? Thanks but no joy. I suspect it is a back end function of the Voting software.

hartech said: Can I just add to the opinion that the statistics render the possibility of engine failure insignificant - to ask if any of those who expereinced it (and the cost of sorting it out) regarded it as insignificant. It is a classic low risk but high cost problem that I relate as similar probably to writing your car off or suffering a house fire. They are statistically even less likely to happen to you yet very few would risk not insuring against it because the resulting cost to fix would be so high. However the warranty schemes available can be expensive and often do not actually cover the fault or the whole cost of repair. Often they exclude wear and tear causes or limit pay outs (and are too wealthy to take on legally - referring everything to appeal to delay a result and increase potential costs if you lose). The only ones I know of that are reliable are the Porsche warranty scheme (more expensive but you get a new engine) and our own Lifetime Maintenance Plan (less expensive but you pay for parts - but can have the causes of the faults modified to reduce the likelyhood of a repetition). Baz Baz I think you misunderstood my post. I'm not suggesting it's insignificant to the person personally when their engine goes pop - of course it's significant, upsetting and every other emotion that you feel at the time!. This thread was a result of comments suggesting Porsche had a significant number of engine failures (one quote was 'it happens to them all' or words to that effect) which it would appear (based on figures in so far) as not being the case.

If you want to make it a sticky you want to make it a "Porsche water cooled engine failure" as this is a bit none helpful for owners or potential owners of boxsters & caymans. Or perhaps a "water cooled flat 6 engine failure poll" Just a thought.....

cragswinter said: If you want to make it a sticky you want to make it a "Porsche water cooled engine failure" as this is a bit none helpful for owners or potential owners of boxsters & caymans. Or perhaps a "water cooled flat 6 engine failure poll" Just a thought..... Happy with that thought - but I can't make it a sticky, a mod has to I assume?

yes 2004 996 engine replaced with new unit foc by opc at 15k miles.dont know what the fault was but engine would not turn over. Edited by headlesshorseman on Monday 12th September 15:41

How many has Hartech repaired?

this post is never going to work or show a true picture.if anything it is going to show an over exaggerated view of failures .people who post or look at forums have either had a failure or are worried,i am one of those who had a failure nearly 5 years ago so started looking more into the problems and joined pistonheads and read heavily on other forums.what you have to look at is the amount of 986/7 and 996/7 gen1 cars that came in to the uk in the 10 years (1998-2008) and how many failures there have been.but you will never know how many were repaired under warranty etc.as a rough guide (purely quess work)pgb must have imported some 50000 cars in that time.so lets say they had 4 cars a week in to be repaired over the last 5 years and all the indies together the same.thats 2080 cars or a 4% failure rate.now i have only ever read of say 10+ cars actually failing on these forums.also to paint a truer picture of failure you need to factor in the: TYPE OF FAILURE MODEL(are certain models more likely to fail) YEAR (are some years better than others this is true for the later ims) MILEAGE OF FAILURE (what miles are they failing ie do oval bores occur only on higher mileage cars) GEARBOX TYPE.(does a tiptronic fair better than a manual or visa versa) then again some cars have had numerous owners and the new owner maybe unaware of an engine replaced under warranty and would proudly say 60000 miles and still going strong! imho failure rate is still fairly low (less than 5%)and if you are unlucky the repair can be lot less than a Ferrari service,plus the 996/7 represents a cheap secondhand sports car even if you factor in a Hartech upgrade or lifetime plan. so keep on driving and enjoy a great car Edited by mayes911 on Tuesday 13th September 15:35

mayes911 said: this post is never going to work or show a true picture.if anything it is going to show an over exaggerated view of failures .people who post or look at forums have either had a failure or are worried,i am one of those who had a failure nearly 5 years ago so started looking more into the problems and joined pistonheads and read heavily on other forums.what you have to look at is the amount of 986/7 and 996/7 gen1 cars that came in to the uk in the 10 years (1998-2008) and how many failures there have been.but you will never know how many were repaired under warranty etc.as a rough guide (purely quess work)pgb must have imported some 50000 cars in that time.so lets say they had 4 cars a week in to be repaired over the last 5 years and all the indies together the same.thats 2080 cars or a 4% failure rate.now i have only ever read of say 10+ cars actually failing on these forums.also to paint a truer picture of failure you need to factor in the: TYPE OF FAILURE MODEL(are certain models more likely to fail) YEAR (are some years better than others this is true for the later ims) MILEAGE OF FAILURE (what miles are they failing ie do oval bores occur only on higher mileage cars) GEARBOX TYPE.(does a tiptronic fair better than a manual or visa versa) then again some cars have had numerous owners and the new owner maybe unaware of an engine replaced under warranty and would proudly say 60000 miles and still going strong! imho failure rate is still fairly low (less than 5%)and if you are unlucky the repair can be lot less than a Ferrari service,plus the 996/7 represents a cheap secondhand sports car even if you factor in a Hartech upgrade or lifetime plan. so keep on driving and enjoy a great car Edited by mayes911 on Tuesday 13th September 15:35 I suspect you are correct which I why I started the poll - there are too many people waiting for a problem to happen that simply doesn't doesn't effect as many cars as suggested. Hopefully owners will continue to vote and the results will show that whilst there are failures with a small number of cars, Porsche engines are no more fragile than any other major manufacturer.

Good thread, let me add some analysis. I used to work for Ford as a purchasing manager and I know the only survey we took any notice of was the German TUV stats. They work with a representative sample (i.e. randomly selected from all owners) and from a minimum sample size of 500 and are thorough, unlike the internet chat rooms. So let's check out the TUV stats. 2009 Report Most reliable cars between 8 and 9 years old (i.e. 996 2000 and 2001) Number 1 - Boxster Fault Rate 5.2% Number 2 - 911 (996) Fault Rate 5.3% By contrast the Volkswagon Golf is rated as Number 22 with a fault rate of 14.5% See:http://www.anusedcar.com/index.php/tuv-report-year-age/2009-8-9/221 Now this covers all faults from minor electrical to major engine failure so it's clear that statistically the number of major engine failures which will be a subset of 5.3% must be very low. Now I have sympathy for those unlucky enough to have suffered these issues but statistically they must be a very small minority. The magazines, Total 911 etc, also make no reference to the stats or have ever bothered talking to the TUV which I think is poor journalism. I'm sure if someone actually spoke to the TUV they could give a breakdown of the types of faults and this would put it to bed once and for all!

Blue Streak 2 said: Good thread, let me add some analysis. I used to work for Ford as a purchasing manager and I know the only survey we took any notice of was the German TUV stats. They work with a representative sample (i.e. randomly selected from all owners) and from a minimum sample size of 500 and are thorough, unlike the internet chat rooms. So let's check out the TUV stats. 2009 Report Most reliable cars between 8 and 9 years old (i.e. 996 2000 and 2001) Number 1 - Boxster Fault Rate 5.2% Number 2 - 911 (996) Fault Rate 5.3% By contrast the Volkswagon Golf is rated as Number 22 with a fault rate of 14.5% See:http://www.anusedcar.com/index.php/tuv-report-year-age/2009-8-9/221 Now this covers all faults from minor electrical to major engine failure so it's clear that statistically the number of major engine failures which will be a subset of 5.3% must be very low. My bold It doesn't work like that I am afraid. You are making an assumption. You could just as easily assume that the 5% failure rate is all engine and that the Golf's 14% failure rate is all a squeaky door handle. The data you presented unfortunately does not show the sub sets. What the stats tell you is that overall the Porsche cars are excellent (which is great news) but there is no measure of the seriousness of the faults.

My 2 pence is that I used to own a manual 2005 997 Carrera S. I owned it for almost a year before switching to a 2007 997 GT3. Throughout the duration of my ownership the Carrera was almost completely faultless (had a flat battery and also a puncture but can't blame Porsche for those issues!). However I found out completely by accident that the car had previously had an engine rebuild when I took it to a free 911 health check at an OPC. That OPC then got a b king from Porsche GB for informing me of the rebuild, which was done by Porsche themselves, presumably under warranty, for the previous owner. I do not know any details of the rebuild - why it was done, when etc - all I know is that the car had a rebuild before I bought it. With regards to this actual poll vote, I think perhaps there needs to be another option along the lines of 'Needed a rebuild or had a rebuild in the past but don't know the reason why'. I checked the IMS option but that's just a guess. I did feel a bit cheated / lied to at the time I found out about the rebuild (I had bought the car from an OPC in good faith as you do, and they obviously told me nothing about the cars history). However, as far as I'm concerned now, the car was fine when I bought it, and had anything gone wrong during my ownership I would have taken it back to Porsche to sort out. No car is ever going to be 100% perfect and I still own a Porsche, although a different model. Would I buy my old Carrera S again in the future, knowing what I know about it now? Yes. Now that I know the car had a rebuild in the past, in theory the chances of it needing another are even more slim. If I was going to buy a 997 Carrera S gen 1, I'd probably go for one with higher mileage, my logic being that any engine issues should have been sorted out by then.

Rrroro said: With regards to this actual poll vote, I think perhaps there needs to be another option along the lines of 'Needed a rebuild or had a rebuild in the past but don't know the reason why'. Good call, and it will add a further dimension.

So far, 12 rebuilds and 104 OK. Granted, this is a fairly crude measure, but 10% is a higher failure rate than I was expecting. MTR

Please add 1 more (although in slightly different circumstances. Readers may be aware that I have been waiting for our staff to rebuild the 997 3.8 I bought with scored bores and they have finished and what a great car it is. Ok - my first drive was a "celebration" weekend at the Lakes - but for once my darling wife didn't complain about the harsh ride of the last one (a 996) thanks to adaptive suspension switch on "soft" - in fact she positiveley approved (a first!). Plenty of room (to her amazement) to get two aircraft hold sized small cases in the front boot (thanks to the lack of a spare tyre) and room for more walking equipment (you know what they are like) behind the front seats - a pass on all female fronts - including a light in the sun visor - etc. I managed to stop it accelerating fast enough to worry her about how I was going to drive it on my own (thanks to the fact the tiptronic switch works even in "D" to kick down while on light throttle for smooth quick overtaking without too much frowning from the seat on the left). On a technical note I have previously suggested it may be that driving the cars flat out may contribute to a shorter life (yes I know they should take it and what's the point if they don't etc - I am just making an observation here that the engines are designed close to the limit and for drivers who rarely would drive flat out in every gear they can - the cars may well last better and even better if on the odd occasion they do open it up - the car is warm and everything is up to the right temperature). Well the mpg was already set @ 12.2 when I started driving it and 250 miles later was @ 20.5 - so the previous owner must have been driving it very hard before!). Why not you say - I agree - but it just possibly demonstrates that they are fragile if thrashed and maybe properly warmed up, frequent oil changes and thicker oil as they age - may just preserve the cylinder life longer - if you want massive acceleration on full throttle - everytime you go out in your car - perhaps a turbo is a better bet all round. All in all a great car for the two of us to enjoy a brief break and it looked the business too. Fortunately my trip fown to Silverstone this wekend ) for the final round of the Porsche Championship) is on my own - after which I can report if the car fulfills the Jekel and Hyde change of character - I expect it too - once let free of the constraints of female passenger concerns - suspension on hard and more throttle! I will still be running in of course - but more free to open it up a bit more. I have also managed to solve the problem of the throttle cutting out when left foot braking into a corner - you just do a quick double flick of the accelerator (rather like double de-clutching) as you apply the brakes and the throttle stays on while you continue to brake into the corner. As for the low temperature thermostat we fitted - the car warmed up quickly and never moved from spot on 80 the whole trip - regardless of fast or slow driving and a lot of low gear stuff etc. Considering the price they are available at, the way they perform in contrasting modes and the performance (yet to be fully proven) it must be one of the best sports cars ever made. Whatever the ratio ends up at - you can run one of these on our Maintenance Plan for very littl monthly outlay - no further service costs and a small bill if the engine failed - FOR AS LONG AS YOU OWN IT - NO MILEAGE, AGE OR CLAIM LIMIT - must be a bargain if managed right. I do however recognise that I am in a privileged position - both to buy a car in this condition and of course fix it and run it without worrying about it (and I am testing new engine internals that will reduce rebuild costs further in the future when proven) but that doesn't alter the fact that the 997 3.8 is one hell of a great sports car (and especially when you have reached an age when you no longer need to race everyone all the time and have a partner that worries about the performance of your car and how you are goi9ng to drive it) and a car that can keep them happy and also take on a different character - when you are out on your own (I hope!). Baz _____________

I have a 996 S4 2002 reg have been told I have a blown engine, signs are heavy oil use, black exhaust exits, £4500 - £5,000 to rebuild, it has become a well known problem with the dealers and perhaps wider public, Porsche have their heads in the sand but it is really affecting values + I am now seriously put off buying another one. Oh, and the car is off the road for 4-5 weeks.

Richard Deal said: I have a 996 S4 2002 reg have been told I have a blown engine, signs are heavy oil use, black exhaust exits, £4500 - £5,000 to rebuild, it has become a well known problem with the dealers and perhaps wider public, Porsche have their heads in the sand but it is really affecting values + I am now seriously put off buying another one. Oh, and the car is off the road for 4-5 weeks. Dont forget to complete the poll. MTR

Hi there Those are you who have had a failure, did your car (911) have the additional centre radiator or not?

Isn't the central radiator in the 997.1 for the tip transmission/X51 powerkit?

speedyun said: Isn't the central radiator in the 997.1 for the tip transmission/X51 powerkit? Yes but you can retro-fit it as long as you use Porsche genuine kit and for 997.1 its only circa £100. I did this, still got an OPC warranty etc. and benefit greatly from lower temperatures when on a run or on track, so definetely a good idea for the engine as it makes a marked difference.

Does that mean the central rad on a tip is for the gearbox? If so, you would need to know not only if the failed engine had a central rad, but also if the car was a tip?

speedyun said: Does that mean the central rad on a tip is for the gearbox? If so, you would need to know not only if the failed engine had a central rad, but also if the car was a tip? Correct but does the central rad on a tip car help cool the engine too or is it soley for the tip box? If its just TIP box only, then it will make this hard to narrow things down as that would mean the only cars with additional cooling were X51 cars or retro-fitted cars which there shall be far fewer off? Has an X51 car ever let go?

My understanding is that the rads would make no difference. The problem is an insufficient water circulation around one side of the block (4,5,6?) due to a poor design. We need Baz or some other boffin to confirm though. MTR

'98 C2 Full Hartech rebuild at 65,450 miles by previous owner, now at 76,500 miles. Rebuild included: -1x new cylinder head and overhauled other side -Replacement (beefed up) IMS bearing -New chains -New crank bearings -Hartech Cylinder restraining rings -Modified IMS sprocket -Nikasil (Turbo) cylinder liners -Rerouted cooling for more efficient cooling Previous Porsche Design Chocolate open deck engine: Now with Hartech Engine:

With the greatest respect - read reports from people with standard thermostats and listen to the observations of others and you will find that buffered or not the standard thermostat fluctuates more than our low temperature thermostat (have you tried both yourself - I have). I have also test driven two cars with 4 different thermostat settings and fitted with remote accurate temperature sensors fitted in strategic parts of the engine - recording true temperatures for different conditions and driving (as part of our engine repair development). I had also read others who have fitted ours and found the same and was just reafirming what they said after my first drive in my own rebuilt 3.8 it was more stable than before - that's all. But thank you for trying to rubbish my research and development and point out what an idiot I must be on such a trivial issue and for simply posting my findings for the benefit of other readers. Baz

FYI Cmoose - Hartech is the person who told _us_ about the various ways temperature can be measured in the engine, and how the standard gauge differs from the actual temperatures. This is, in fact, how he arrived at the need for a lower temp thermostat, and discovered the lack of proper cooling past certain cylinders. It's obvious from his posts that he's spent a great deal of time getting accurate temperature readings too as part of his research into the bore-scoring (etc) issues. In essence then, he knows more about the temperatures inside these engines than most people except perhaps for the odd technician in the Porsche engine department (who it seems were told to keep their findings quiet and not rock the boat). So when people tell you about engine temperatures you can generally ignore them (because they will be referring to the standard gauge with has been made 'comforting', but when Baz says something about them he means the real engine temperature and you can guarantee it is accurate.

I don't agree Cablemoose - I have seen the temperature vary a lot during testing and driving customer cars (even though the guauge is buffered) and so have the various respondants of these topics. The important point for owners to realise is that IF (as I believe) one of the problems in these engines is localised bubbling inside the cylinders through running too hot - that will result in temperature fluctuations - even though the thermostat is set for a constant temperature. This is because bubbling temporarily overheats the local coolant and when it mixes back with the rest it creates a sudden temperature blip in the system both from the bubbling and the fact that that area of the block is getting hotter while there is no coolant adjacent to it and that it then takes a little while for the thermostat to respond to and it usually over reacts etc which can be seen on the guauge. The fact that this thermostat of ours runs a lower temperature (and has other designed in response speeds) - reduces that incidence and results in less of these fluctuations. The other important point I was trying to make (but perhaps didn't explain enough this time but have done before) is that our tests show that the dashboard guauge reads reasonably accurately up to about 80 to 82 degrees and then as temperatures rise - understates the actual temperature - eventually by quite a large amount. The fact mine stayed exactly @ 80 is therefore a demonstration of a stable running temperature (since at that position it is still responding reasonably accurately and is not gradually understating the actual temperature - when it is showing a smaller temperature range than it is actually varying in. I think my comment was thereforer significant (as it seems to have been to others). The reason I get annoyed about comments like yours (and I know I should keep it too myself) is that whereas I was merely pointing out what I observed (and therefore what is true and I think relevant) you make a statement that the only reason my guauge stayed still was because the guauge was buffered - which is not true - therefore your post could be misleading to others who do not know any better and therefore it needs correcting (IMHO). Regardless of the argument - you do not know why or how my guauge works or what I observed - but I do know how hundreds of engines respond and after numerous changes to thermostats and coolant flow. I would have been less responsive if you had said something along the lines that - "perhaps the fact it was stable had something to do with the fact it is buffered" and then it is not a statement of fact (in your opinion) but a reasonable comment open to correction if neccessary. I guess I am also having a hard day at the office with too much to do - so may have been less professional in my reaction than I try to usually be and if so - sorry. Baz

No you are saying I am wrong just because it doesn't make sense to you - which is actually rather arrogant and rather unscientific. Basically – you state that - all my research and actual testing and conclusions and actual observations are wrong – just because “it doesn’t make sense to you” (who have done nothing comparable to test or observed the results). I have tested these cars and these engines with accurate temperature gauges fitted into the engine compartments and various feeds (you have not) and I can assure you that with the right thermostat - driven as I did (don't forget running in so although up to say 80mph - not with aggressive acceleration and on a motorway or doodling around the lake district) the gauge (and the temperatures it related to) were more stable than normal. It isn't really relevant if that makes sense to you or not until you similarly test in much the same way and find that wrong (which you would not). I have noticed this stability before with our thermostats (in fact they were designed specially to achieve that) but I have not had many miles in a 3.8 before and now I have – I have been able to report – something that I am very pleased about and that I think is significant (as these are the most vulnerable engines in the range) that they work just as well (in fact better than I expected) in different speeds and conditions in that engine as well. The reason shows up how much ignorance there is about coolant systems. I cannot remember if it was you I had a run in about this recently - but whoever it was stated that the thermostat stays fully open all the time once the car is hot - and this is also completely wrong and shows a complete lack of understanding of the system. Look - the thermostat is a flow control device - that moves in relation to temperature but controls coolant flow. As long as the radiator system is reasonably balanced to the car and the conditions are not too hot for the system to work - then this is how it works. The engine gets up to temperature and the thermostat starts to open slowly and the flow starts to the radiators. If they are designed right it makes relatively little difference to the cooling rate if the speed of the engine changes – the load on the engine changes or the air conditions vary. This is because with good design one thing tends to cancel out another and the cooling remains well balanced. Higher speeds means more load and coolant heat soak but increased speed increases air flow and better cooling etc. one thing seems to balance out the other. The main thing that influences the cooling is the difference in the temperatures and flow rates of the air and the coolant – creating a temperature difference and volume/time. The greater the temperature difference or flow rate the more potential cooling can take place. Just like with cooling down something hot under a tap – if the cold water flow is increased it cools quicker and if the water is colder it also cools quicker (and visa versa). So if the air is very cold – it has the potential to can quicker or if it is very hot – the potential to cool less effectively – so what manages to keep the temperature stable? – the variation of the coolant flow (volume/time). If the coolant is moving more volume and it re-circulates more often the radiators can reduce the temperature more often. However this also means that they coolant travels through the radiator more quickly – so it has less time in there to remove heat. This is where the design needs to be well balanced – if it is things like air temperature and car speed (hence airflow speed) have less of an influence on the cooling potential of the system than if the radiators are too big or too small or the airflow is more variable through the radiator than the road speed on its own would affect. If you doubt this just consider that you all know the engine will overheat if the pump fails or the radiator inlet is blocked. All these variations are then finely controlled by the thermostat. If the coolant temperature is getting too hot (because you are driving hard or stuck in traffic going slow) – it opens a little more and increases the coolant flow and hence more quickly cools the engine. If the engine is getting too cool – it closes a little and slows the coolant flow – allowing the engine to heat up again. How well all this works is dependent on the speed of the thermostat opening and closing and the design of the thermostat valve head. The valve head has to translate the increase in flow to balance the increase in cooling potential of the system – so the reaction of the change is both quick enough (but not too quick) and stable. If for example a very small opening makes a huge difference to the coolant flow rate the temperature would quickly fall and then the thermostat would close quickly again but slow the coolant too much and you would have coolant temperatures fluctuating up and down. Similarly if the thermostat itself opened to quickly or slowly – it would always be chasing the ideal temperature you want the system to run at. The speed it opens (and how far it moves/degree of temperature rise) is dependent on the expansion tube size, volume and what it is filled with while the valve head size influences the relative increase and decrease in flow to the linear movement of the tube at different temperatures. Balancing the thermostat operating speed and the resulting flow rate change through its valve head with the engine type, and use, water pump speed, ambient conditions anticipated etc – all lead to a system that would be stable but anything out of balance would result in fluctuations. The grater distance of the radiators from the engine is also an influence since it also builds in a delay in response time for the cooler coolant to return to the thermostat and influence its position - so - IMHO - needs faster response time to temperature changes. You only have to read other similar posts on this subject to realise the standard thermostat results in such variations – yet it was clear to us that the system as a whole has the potential to cool OK (or it would not work in very hot Countries). We therefore set out not only to provide a thermostat that would allow the engine to run cooler but also one that would make it more stable. Having achieved that I think it was relevant and informative to post my experiences of it in my 3.8 and as this is relevant to the reliability of the range – I think it is both misleading and unhelpful to state that this must be wrong “just because it doesn’t make sense to you” and that the only reason my gauge was stable is because it is buffered. Frankly I don’t really understand why people with less experience than others seem to be so positive on the Internet when they state – sort of categorically – that something is right or something (or someone) else is wrong – as if it is an absolute fact of science and everyone therefore should only listen to them. I mean – it doesn’t really bother me (I usually know what I am talking about when it comes to engines) but it does worry me that others believe them and are therefore completely misinformed – so that is why – in such circumstances – I feel obliged to correct any mistakes. Personally I don’t like putting others down and I don’t like the fact it also makes me seem arrogant and opinionated. Here at Hartech we operate totally opposite and employees at all levels are positively encourages to make decisions and ask questions – as we all try to come up with the best solutions jointly. We are not an autocratic organisation and I am not an autocrat – but the result of our approach means that more of us really understand things and the combined ability we have when we put our heads together is awesome. The basis for this philosophy is that whatever the theory or anyone else says – does it work – if it does – even if we don’t understand why – that is always the first test completed and we then try to work out how and why. We have three graduates, ex-main dealers technicians etc and design and manufacture more engine parts and solutions than anyone else for this range of engines – with an excellent customer satisfaction rate and reliable rebuilds – so I feel that – when we observe something and inform others about it – I would not expect any to state we are wrong – just because THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND IT. I think in these situations a little more respect and a tad more modesty may indeed straighten out most misunderstandings without needing to feel defensive and recriminatory afterwards. Of course the coolant temperature on its way to the radiator - has to vary in order to adjust the thermostat position on its way back and all temperature gauges are buffered to stop them swinging from side to side as things change quickly - but the standard thermostats still reveal that the engine temperature is rising and falling slower than the buffered gause is showing while with ours - the speed of the thermostat and that of the buffered gauge are well matched and therefore this does actually reflect better temperature control. Finally - don't forget we have also altered the coolant flow rates inside the engine slightly to better balance the temperatures inside and that of course also contributes to better temperature stability at different driving engine loads and heats when the coolant mixes back together again on its way back to the radiators. Baz

cmoose: If you don't want Baz to (quite rightly) overreact, don't keep trying to plug your 'You've said this but you're wrong' statement. Baz and his guys do this for a living. You have an opinion, backed up with - insofar as I'm aware - precisely no technical knowledge. If you don't understand the topic, stay off your keyboard.

Hi Mr Moose. Suggest you grab one of the alternative stats as I did and pop it in (your engine that is!). Some of the design features that make it better than the std were repported in my post Aug 1, notably the copper body. Copy here: ************ Aug 1: Baz feedback on your low temp thermostat which I popped in a month ago.... -visually, is a much better better design; copper body, larger diameter so more surface area, hollow bore to thin out the thermal capacity. -my thermostat housing was a 2003 item and the sealing face was poor with very slight leak so users should consider replacing old housing -I actually circumvented the spend by lapping the face on an oil stone! -the cooling system bleeds out much easier due to lower opening temp. -the car now runs at a steady 79 deg C, previously was 88 (measured via climate display). Upon queuing to exit Silverstone in 21c weather for 90 mins with air con on, the engine stayed under 90 deg C all the time! I still get a temperature increase when driving around town just like described earlier but its a lower increase. Still also have trouble shifting the heat energy build up after slowing down from a motorway run, but again its a lower & slower increase, so great, glad I did it. Still think however that I will look for ways to increase the cooling system power so will be doing some airflow improvement mods on the (2) front radiators and also popping in a fan-on (without air-con) override switch -that is unless anyone knows how to set a lower switch on temperature for the fans, ie 90 deg C instead of 101 deg C or so??? Over & out.

Personally, I think this is bad advertisement for Porsche and Porsche owners. The figures the voting give and other forums provide are only based on those searching for the engine problem on the internet and not every owner. Most Porsche owners will just give the car to a main dealer or specialist. So I clicked no, which shows 110 people have no problems, about 10 have had problems and 36 people wouldn't buy one because there could be problems. I have recently purchased a 997 C2S and asked the Guildford Center Dealership the question. Response is here - http://www.fastgerman.com/forum/?p=78 Thank you for your recent enquiry. There is some truth in the matter regards Rear Main Oils seals on the 996 model rather than the 997 models, the problem occurred with the pre face lift models thus pre 2001 models. the latter engines more refined and better reliability being the 1st water cooled engines in the 911. I would not have any concerns regards the 997 model but with there being over 100,000 997s in circulation now and the engine was a development of the previous model of which a similar number were produced. There is no inherent fault with the engines and either model of car should provide the driving enjoyment you desire. Regards Stefan Loots Porsche Specialist Porsche Centre Guildford

Hi CMoose, interesting point, are you an early Boxster? Later models seem to have better air flow exit route in the wheel arches (which I dont). Will likely soon try monitoring the engine temp on my BMW to try understand whether the over-temp occurs there as well (and also whether the gauge is un truthfull!)(

Uh oh another global conspiracy!!!

fastgerman said: Personally, I think this is bad advertisement for Porsche and Porsche owners. The figures the voting give and other forums provide are only based on those searching for the engine problem on the internet and not every owner. Most Porsche owners will just give the car to a main dealer or specialist. So I clicked no, which shows 110 people have no problems, about 10 have had problems and 36 people wouldn't buy one because there could be problems. I have recently purchased a 997 C2S and asked the Guildford Center Dealership the question. Response is here - http://www.fastgerman.com/forum/?p=78 Thank you for your recent enquiry. There is some truth in the matter regards Rear Main Oils seals on the 996 model rather than the 997 models, the problem occurred with the pre face lift models thus pre 2001 models. the latter engines more refined and better reliability being the 1st water cooled engines in the 911. I would not have any concerns regards the 997 model but with there being over 100,000 997s in circulation now and the engine was a development of the previous model of which a similar number were produced. There is no inherent fault with the engines and either model of car should provide the driving enjoyment you desire. Regards Stefan Loots Porsche Specialist Porsche Centre Guildford So the dealer has said "our engines are fine, just one or two niggles with the very early main seals, nothing to worry about chap". Hardly a surprise there. But yet there are still several very well documented common weaknesses with these engines. The only real question is how many actually fail. Certainly enough for it to register loud and clear on any Porsche enthusiast forum and plenty of advertised used cars with replacement or rebuilt engines kicking around.

But Cablemoose I didn't say my car was stable in all driving conditions (like towns) or everywhere - I described exactly what journeys I did, how many miles and explained I was driving it for the first time after a rebuild at the factory (so obviously not racing it but running it in). It was a small comment on a fact I observed and that therefore related to my car, my thermostat and the mods we did internally (which - don't forget others cannot do unless it is stripped and rebuilt). This is the problem I find on the Internet where some people are so anxious to appear knowledgeable they don't read what they are criticising properly and are overly quick to state - "as a matter of scientific fact" that they know better - presumably to elevate their own status. So much research and thorough testing went into making that thermostat - that I was pleased that my own car showed such stability and low temperatures and - I think - rightly annoyed at your criticism - and right to point out to readers who who not know who to believe - all the relavant technical facts supporting those results. After that they are welcome to make up their own minds. However I am sorry it backfired on you - but I didn't start it - did I. If ever anyone thinks I am wrong or need correcting - please don't be shy or frightened about an argument - I am not the source of all knowledge and I know just how much I want to still learn (despite being over 65). I will also be courteous and respectful to proper discussion - and (as has already been seen) don't mind apologising if I am wrong or been too harsh in my response. Baz

anonymous said: [redacted] Gotta say this is a tad patronising given the recipient's expert knowledge. I worked as a race engineer in F1 for 18 years and was always amazed at some of the letters armchair enthusiasts would write to us explaining what we were doing wrong and how we could improve! Used to wind me up too sometimes especially the ones on race strategy. Even on garage tours corporate bobble hatters would sometimes make a point of telling us how things worked Probably wasn't intended to wind Hartech up in fairness, but I can see why it did!

Or another interpretation of your view is that "you cannot ever be wrong about anything and would never admit to being so even if you realised you were". My gauge stayed where it was because of our thermostat and internal changes and if they had not been in the engine it would have fluctuated a lot and run at a much higher temperature - thank you and good night! Baz

anonymous said: [redacted] It is yes, but that scenario only happened in your head . Enough already - the new thermostat is obviously a big improvement for temperature and stability. Baz - have you tried one of these thermostats hooked up on the coolant outflow yet? (obviously with the inlet one removed). I'd be interested to know what the effect was re stability of temperatures. TIA

STiG911 said: cmoose: If you don't want Baz to (quite rightly) overreact, don't keep trying to plug your 'You've said this but you're wrong' statement. Baz and his guys do this for a living. You have an opinion, backed up with - insofar as I'm aware - precisely no technical knowledge. If you don't understand the topic, stay off your keyboard. You may have a point but let's remember that these flawed engines were designed by highly skilled engineers with massive resources and they got it wrong. Technical knowledge and 'doing it for a living' isn't always a guarantee apparently.....

I have not tried it yet Globs but will do. One problem is ensuring that the engine coolant heat gets to the thermostat before the internals overheat - otherwise the coolant may boil before the thermostat sees enough heat to open. I need to analyse the flow paths in the outer housing and work out where to take a byepass feed from that will be easy and simple to utilise. Baz

Watching with interest.. really want a 997 but so far been put off by all the stories Ive heard of massive repair bills!

Looks like a lot less chance of failure than had worried me previously.

aruck said: Looks like a lot less chance of failure than had worried me previously. Running at 15.5% so far, I'd say that is massively high..

s_mcneil said: aruck said: Looks like a lot less chance of failure than had worried me previously. Running at 15.5% so far, I'd say that is massively high.. Given the number of people that only sign up and start posting on PH when their engine is faulty, I'd say the figure is not representative.

I agree it is probably impossible to calculate good statistics without finding out from Porsche in Germany and all the engine rebuilders Worldwide - how many are being replaced with new ones - replaced with used ones or being repaired. Our typical engine rebuild customer does not join PCGB, does not read Porsche Internet forums and is not a Porsche fanatic - so his statistics are largely lost to us. Probably about 50% do and 50% don't - until their engine fails then most do consult the internet but do not participate in postings. Because I don't know how many others are fixing or replacing engines - I cannot help and our own numbers are too small as a part of the whole to pay attention to. It is clearly at a much higher level than previous Porsche engines - but then they sold more too. Taking everything into account (including how many of the older engines we used to repair compared to the numbers sold) - I would guess they are failing at a rate of about 10 times more often - but I expect that number to increase with age (as many of the older cars managed over 250K on the same engines) only time will tell. I don't think Porsche could have maintained the comparative performance if they had made the new engines as robustly as the old ones and then they would have had to run them too rich to get suitable performance out of them and would not then be able to export them to the USA etc. For my money - the only problem with owning one of these otherwise brilliant cars is the lack of support from the manufacturer when they do go wrong. Baz

Baz- It would be interesting to hear your views on the 20k service intervals and whether this is worsening the problems? If people are still 'clocking' cars, and I am sure that they will be, some may be going significantly past 20k? MTR

mollytherocker said: Baz- It would be interesting to hear your views on the 20k service intervals and whether this is worsening the problems? Is that what the service interval is?? Crikey. No room for error there then, a bit of blowby and your goose oil will be cooked!

No problem with that Globs - I think it is far too long. Not only does oil and coolant loose quality over time but things like exhaust leaks and radiators weeping etc can result in wrong mixtures and loss of coolant pressure (which allows bubbling or localised boiling at temperatures it was previously running OK at). This is why we did not exploit the new longer service intervals under our Lifetime Maintenance Plan and believe that 12 months is the maximum safe period between inspecting and servicing the car - even though it costs us 50% more to do it. Baz.

I agree I always advise clients to change at 8k intervals its not going to break the bank 20k is plain ridiculous.

do you really think that everyone who has had to fix there engine on this topic will tell the truth that they havnt fixed it and got rid i would guess that is the tip of the iceberg....

nelly997s said: do you really think that everyone who has had to fix there engine on this topic will tell the truth that they havnt fixed it and got rid i would guess that is the tip of the iceberg.... I think that is the main reason why its hard to quantify the failure rates. MTR

There are lots of problems trying to obtain statistics - perhaps the most obvious of all being that many engines are being driven around today with a scored bore or a weakened cylinder due to crack - that the owner has yet to experience enough symptoms of to take somewhere to investigate and find out. The worrying thing is that two UK engine rebuilders (one a direct compatitor) claim that the later 3.6 and 3.8 engines are "pretty well trouble free" - yet we are getting far higher numbers of these through for scored bores than we even did for all the other problems afflicting the previous models (cracked "D" chunks, IMS failures, cracked heads etc) and as they are newer and have covered fewer miles (and are already failing in greater numbers than before) those optimistic conclusions are so far from reality as to be totally misleading. Baz

hartech said: There are lots of problems trying to obtain statistics - perhaps the most obvious of all being that many engines are being driven around today with a scored bore or a weakened cylinder due to crack - that the owner has yet to experience enough symptoms of to take somewhere to investigate and find out. The worrying thing is that two UK engine rebuilders (one a direct compatitor) claim that the later 3.6 and 3.8 engines are "pretty well trouble free" - yet we are getting far higher numbers of these through for scored bores than we even did for all the other problems afflicting the previous models (cracked "D" chunks, IMS failures, cracked heads etc) and as they are newer and have covered fewer miles (and are already failing in greater numbers than before) those optimistic conclusions are so far from reality as to be totally misleading. Baz So if someone held a water pistol to your head and said pick one that's least likely to fail. You suggest a high mile 3.4? (this would make me happy. Those are the only ones I could afford)

No - not exactly Munster - the 3.4 will eventually have oval bores and probably "D" chunk if it doesn't do the IMS - but overall I do think the 3.4 will last longer - but unfortunately I think a large number will still need doing one day. Baz

where is this thread going? performance engine eh? heres a bit of advice buy one if its had all the liners done and anything else that is out of spec for what we now know to be a problem or budget to have to do this. Ims bearing to be the later one and depending on the miles that all the components up to rebuild spec when the engine was taken down any other option is a gamble and before someone pipes up and says about a warranty don't because by the time you pay for that and the servicing to keep all you ducks in a line its gonna cost you 3K a year thats a new rebuild every 3 years in money these cars will no longer be a viable option soon to pay out all that per year and if they have not had the work done nobody will want one Ive got one!

nelly997s said: where is this thread going? performance engine eh? heres a bit of advice buy one if its had all the liners done and anything else that is out of spec for what we now know to be a problem or budget to have to do this. Ims bearing to be the later one and depending on the miles that all the components up to rebuild spec when the engine was taken down any other option is a gamble and before someone pipes up and says about a warranty don't because by the time you pay for that and the servicing to keep all you ducks in a line its gonna cost you 3K a year thats a new rebuild every 3 years in money these cars will no longer be a viable option soon to pay out all that per year and if they have not had the work done nobody will want one Ive got one! I wonder if people in the US will be sticking an LS7 or something in them sometime? Some do to the old air-cooled ones, apparently they fit quite well.. the rest of the cars pretty sweet so why not?

3 x 997's. (1 x 05 plate, 1 x 55 plate and current 57 plate) No engine failures. No Leaks. No Overheating. No loss of Performance (albeit the steering loosens up past say 20,000 miles). No electrical problems (I do use the Porsche battery charger thingie thou). No IMS failures. No Radiator problems. Current 57 plate car (14K miles) uses less oil per 2000 mile driven that previous older 2 cars (Motorway/A road combo). I MAF sensor replaced on 55 plate car....although that was a bit of epic to identify that particular problem with the OPC. Some of the stuff on here about 997 engines, really surprises me........ questionable on how they have been looked after/service history etc?? Totally agree about the long service interval and many owners get additional minor service whether the OPC says so or not......

Thanks my fellow BWFC supporter - that just goes to show what I always point out - that failures are statistically low in numbers - some are related to how they are driven and cared for - some unfortunately are not. The 997 mainly has failures of scored bores (due to the oil film between the thrust face and the piston being inadequate due to high temperatures and low viscosity), but crankshaft shells will not last like they did on the older air cooled and 4 cylinder cars due to being much smaller and thinner. Baz

hartech said: Thanks my fellow BWFC supporter - that just goes to show what I always point out - that failures are statistically low in numbers - some are related to how they are driven and cared for - some unfortunately are not. The 997 mainly has failures of scored bores (due to the oil film between the thrust face and the piston being inadequate due to high temperatures and low viscosity), but crankshaft shells will not last like they did on the older air cooled and 4 cylinder cars due to being much smaller and thinner. Baz ..Well hopefully my current car remains free of any issues... I see your sign is back up at the Reebok too! ..things must be looking up then!

I hope yours is trouble free too, but if not you know where we are. The sign was up there all the time - they just moved it a bit I think - thank goodness we had something to celebrate last time (about time too). We are developing a second offering to add to the lower temperature thermostat - to reduce the chance of engine failures even further without the need to strip and rebuild the engine - may be a few months off releasing yet - but keep and eye on it - it could make a big difference. Baz

I was thinking about buying a well loved 996. Would an engine rebuild be always be documented as such? i.e. could it be described as something else?

daveco said: I was thinking about buying a well loved 996. Would an engine rebuild be always be documented as such? i.e. could it be described as something else? Not sure what you mean there? Why would somebody go to the trouble of hiding a 996 engine rebuild? It's usually a good selling point. But if it was done on the cheap by somebody unreputable I guess they could document it as anything they wanted or more likely not document it at all.

HoHoHo said: This thread was a result of comments suggesting Porsche had a significant number of engine failures (one quote was 'it happens to them all' or words to that effect) which it would appear (based on figures in so far) as not being the case. I dont understand this attitude. I wouldnt expect any internal engine failiure in a properly serviced modern car before 100k miles and probably 150 to 200. So whether the figue is 10% or 5% or even 2%, itsa surely unacceptable. 100 bhp/litre on the common spec cars is hardly an exotic high output engine. Edited by bordseye on Sunday 27th November 21:15

bordseye said: HoHoHo said: This thread was a result of comments suggesting Porsche had a significant number of engine failures (one quote was 'it happens to them all' or words to that effect) which it would appear (based on figures in so far) as not being the case. I dont understand this attitude. I wouldnt expect any internal engine failiure in a properly serviced modern car before 100k miles and probably 150 to 200. So whether the figue is 10% or 5% or even 2%, itsa surely unacceptable. I didn't have an attitude, I was simply trying to establish is it happening to 'all of them', 'some of them' or 'none of them' As it happens the percentage is higher than I thought it would be but at the same time I do not believe it's representative of the real figure in the real world. I can't remember the exact figure, but there have been somewhere around a couple of hundred thousand 997's sold with suspect engines and I can't remember them being featured on Watchdog or similar because there's a major design fault affecting owners. I'm not suggesting there may not be a problem, but depending on who you talk to in the trade, some make it their aim to find and eliminate the cause, others say the problem is not as widespread as might be thought, go drive it and the chances are extremely high that you won't have a problem. As I said, no attitude, simply trying to establish what's what.

uktrailmonster said: Not sure what you mean there? Why would somebody go to the trouble of hiding a 996 engine rebuild? It's usually a good selling point. But if it was done on the cheap by somebody unreputable I guess they could document it as anything they wanted or more likely not document it at all. Great question and answer all in one there.

HoHoHo said: there have been somewhere around a couple of hundred thousand 997's sold with suspect engines and I can't remember them being featured on Watchdog or similar because there's a major design fault affecting owners. Out of the whole used a new motor trade, the Watchdog headline 'Older Porsche engines may have issues some indeterminate time after the initial warranty expires, so you may want to extend it to 10 years". Yes, I can really see Watchdog sticking up for all those Porsche owners who didn't take the official warranty.... the BBC luvvies would just love to run that program, oh yes, I can see it now

Globs said: HoHoHo said: there have been somewhere around a couple of hundred thousand 997's sold with suspect engines and I can't remember them being featured on Watchdog or similar because there's a major design fault affecting owners. Out of the whole used a new motor trade, the Watchdog headline 'Older Porsche engines may have issues some indeterminate time after the initial warranty expires, so you may want to extend it to 10 years". Yes, I can really see Watchdog sticking up for all those Porsche owners who didn't take the official warranty.... the BBC luvvies would just love to run that program, oh yes, I can see it now And the first 9 words in English please? I think I know what you're saying and I'll try and answer accordingly. I believe that if the problem were as great as some posters claim it is, there would be more exposure in the press....or if it were as great as some posters believe there would be a vehicle recall......or if it were as great as some posters believe the annual warranty wouldn't be as cheap as it is because lots of engines going pop at £10k per time becomes quite expensive, and if I were Porsche I wouldn't want to lose money. So no, I don't think we'll see Watchdog discussing Porsche engines in the future. The problem only occurs in a tiny, tiny percentage of cars (otherwise the USA for example would be having a Class Action which they're not) and unless someone can convince me otherwise we should all simply get on with enjoying our toys, warrant them accordingly (because it's a very complicated piece of machinery and other elements can and do break it's wise to have insurance) and move on.

HoHoHo said: I believe that if the problem were as great as some posters claim it is, there would be more exposure in the press.... The same press advertising new Porsches? Lets face it, no one is interested in these failures, Porsche just want you to buy a new car, the rest are covered under warranty and the poor schmuck left stuck with a broken engine is left out in the cold. Support for this band of non-super-wealthy car enthusiasts is therefore patchy, we are lucky there is Hartech and some other indies who have given these people an option. Yes it is a disgrace, it is appalling, but don't be under the illusion the issue will ever go mainstream - it's going to be Porsches dirty little secret for the next couple of decades and will etch away brand pride and image - and that's it. So yes the problem is great, and I think most engines will fail at some indeterminate time in the future, but this still doesn't make it a great problem. The bigger problem at the moment is the scored bores I reckon, because that's affecting the more recent models, the older IMS/D-Chunk/Oval etc models are in the hands of enthusiasts with no voice.

HoHoHo said: warrant them accordingly (because it's a very complicated piece of machinery and other elements can and do break it's wise to have insurance) and move on. And where would one advise getting a warranty on a 10+ year old, 100,000+ mile, 996? Hartech will only do it if they maintain the car, after an inspection and any faults found are fixed (which seems a great deal really). But it's not practical for everybody to avail themselves of that service due to their location. Any others?

If it's as widespread as thought and you suggest, why hasn't Autocar or Evo and any other number of car magazines worldwide written articles on it, questioned Porsche and exercised their journalistic skills - the answer is surely because it's not a problem. To also suggest 'most engines will fail at some indeterminate time in the future' is something that just can't be substantiated. The poll suggests that's not the case, sure it's a higher percentage than I'd like but it's also only representative of those who seek to post and not the vast majority who simply get in their car and drive it everyday to work or where ever and don't even know forums such as PH even exist!

HoHoHo said: To also suggest 'most engines will fail at some indeterminate time in the future' is something that just can't be substantiated. Its very easy to substantiate that statement actually. Every engine ever manufactured by anybody will EVENTUALLY have a major failure. I am sure we can agree that no engine lasts forever. The point with these engines is that they have well documented weaknesses that cause a high chance of an earlier than 'average engine life' failure. We could argue all day what that is! Maybe 150,000 miles? It doesnt really matter. The question is not how many will fail, they all will, its WHEN wll they fail. The answer has to be 'sooner than they should'. MTR

mollytherocker said: HoHoHo said: To also suggest 'most engines will fail at some indeterminate time in the future' is something that just can't be substantiated. Its very easy to substantiate that statement actually. Every engine ever manufactured by anybody will EVENTUALLY have a major failure. I am sure we can agree that no engine lasts forever. The point with these engines is that they have well documented weaknesses that cause a high chance of an earlier than 'average engine life' failure. We could argue all day what that is! Maybe 150,000 miles? It doesnt really matter. The question is not how many will fail, they all will, its WHEN wll they fail. The answer has to be 'sooner than they should'. MTR We could split hairs here, but I understand your sentiment. In my case and in order to convince me, I need facts and currently there just aren't sufficient confirmed reports of failures to definitely conclude either way.

HoHoHo said: In my case and in order to convince me, I need facts and currently there just aren't sufficient confirmed reports of failures to definitely conclude either way. Wrong, read up on Hartechs analysis of the failures and failure mechanisms. Perhaps you have to have some mechanical 'feel' to understand them, but the facts are abundantly clear, as are the weaknesses.

HoHoHo said: We could split hairs here, but I understand your sentiment. In my case and in order to convince me, I need facts and currently there just aren't sufficient confirmed reports of failures to definitely conclude either way. If I gave you the ratio of replaced/failed/failing engines per cars inspected you wouldnt belive me. I have documentation to substantiate this and am aware cars changing ownership dont give a true picture as this is sometimes the point where the "potential or physical problem" gets disposed of hence distorting figures.

Globs and Gary11 I have no axe to grind with you or anyone and I am not simply looking for a fight. I agree there appears to be a problem, but a wider issue for me is the internet can make a problem for one seem like a problem for all (and just to clarify I'm not suggesting it's only one isolated case!). The poll I started shows that 20% of cars owned by PH contributors have had an issue. What the poll doesn't show us is the fact that there are x thousands of other 997's in the UK all with the 'suspect engine' and we don't know how many have had issues. For example, I don't go down to Mid-Sussex and see a line of 997's waiting for new engines. In fact, I can't remember the last time I did see many cars on ramps with their engine out, and if the problem was as widespread as we are to believe there would be queues of cars. We also don't see thread after thread with owners having problems, but we do see thread after thread of how to cure it and why it's such a problem! Gary11 - if you've got hard and fast evidence which you are prepared to stand by then produce it - post it on the net for us all to see in black and white....why wouldn't you? Globs - Hartech have a fix to a problem but that doesn't mean we're all going to suffer the same fate does it?

HoHoHo said: Globs and Gary11 I have no axe to grind with you or anyone and I am not simply looking for a fight. I agree there appears to be a problem, but a wider issue for me is the internet can make a problem for one seem like a problem for all (and just to clarify I'm not suggesting it's only one isolated case!). The poll I started shows that 20% of cars owned by PH contributors have had an issue. What the poll doesn't show us is the fact that there are x thousands of other 997's in the UK all with the 'suspect engine' and we don't know how many have had issues. For example, I don't go down to Mid-Sussex and see a line of 997's waiting for new engines. In fact, I can't remember the last time I did see many cars on ramps with their engine out, and if the problem was as widespread as we are to believe there would be queues of cars. We also don't see thread after thread with owners having problems, but we do see thread after thread of how to cure it and why it's such a problem! Gary11 - if you've got hard and fast evidence which you are prepared to stand by then produce it - post it on the net for us all to see in black and white....why wouldn't you? Globs - Hartech have a fix to a problem but that doesn't mean we're all going to suffer the same fate does it? ..and what the poll doesn't show or indicate is how well these engines were treated from new and by previous owners?? a few fellow posters indicate its non-OPC higher mileage cars that are the ones in discussion.... which is fair enough.... what any manufacturer cannot legislate for is how well its products are maintained and serviced (inline with its own published guidelines etc) .... I know a few 997 owners and the there is a huge difference in how/when they maintain and look after their cars... and indeed how they drive 'em!!

HoHoHo said: Globs and Gary11 I have no axe to grind with you or anyone and I am not simply looking for a fight. I agree there appears to be a problem, but a wider issue for me is the internet can make a problem for one seem like a problem for all (and just to clarify I'm not suggesting it's only one isolated case!). The poll I started shows that 20% of cars owned by PH contributors have had an issue. What the poll doesn't show us is the fact that there are x thousands of other 997's in the UK all with the 'suspect engine' and we don't know how many have had issues. For example, I don't go down to Mid-Sussex and see a line of 997's waiting for new engines. In fact, I can't remember the last time I did see many cars on ramps with their engine out, and if the problem was as widespread as we are to believe there would be queues of cars. We also don't see thread after thread with owners having problems, but we do see thread after thread of how to cure it and why it's such a problem! Gary11 - if you've got hard and fast evidence which you are prepared to stand by then produce it - post it on the net for us all to see in black and white....why wouldn't you? Globs - Hartech have a fix to a problem but that doesn't mean we're all going to suffer the same fate does it? I would suggest this my friend,take an area say 20 miles around any county perhaps where you live,pick 5 or 6 porsche indys,ring them and ask the question its not rocket science,what I mean is ask people who work on Porsches as a profession rather than merely spouting figures they have read rather than they know from factual personal experiance in the industry,so some one like myself saying out of 20 cars 5 had new engines could be construed by some as 25% failure rate which isnt the case Im merely making the point.I was in a small indy in kent,not high volume and he told me hes changed four engines recently so they are out there. app typos BB keyboard.

ForzaWhitesGen2 said: ..and what the poll doesn't show or indicate is how well these engines were treated from new and by previous owners?? a few fellow posters indicate its non-OPC higher mileage cars that are the ones in discussion.... which is fair enough.... what any manufacturer cannot legislate for is how well its products are maintained and serviced (inline with its own published guidelines etc) .... I know a few 997 owners and the there is a huge difference in how/when they maintain and look after their cars... and indeed how they drive 'em!! Another urban myth. Full of factual inaccuracy based on rumours!

Gary11 said: I would suggest this my friend,take an area say 20 miles around any county perhaps where you live,pick 5 or 6 porsche indys,ring them and ask the question its not rocket science,what I mean is ask people who work on Porsches as a profession rather than merely spouting figures they have read rather than they know from factual personal experiance in the industry,so some one like myself saying out of 20 cars 5 had new engines could be construed by some as 25% failure rate which isnt the case Im merely making the point.I was in a small indy in kent,not high volume and he told me hes changed four engines recently so they are out there. app typos BB keyboard. I have not 'spouted figures' from anywhere other than this thread (regarding %). For the record I've made contact with a couple of well regarded Porsche Garages (as well as two OPC's) and do you know what - and they all said it's not as big a problem as might be thought - isn't the internet a wonderful thing! Now I'm not going to say who they are because they may post on here and it's their decision if they want to get involved in this thread, not mine. And as I have already asked - you are in a position of authority here, please post the evidence you have for us all to see. Edited by HoHoHo on Monday 28th November 16:39

anonymous said: [redacted] I understood their comments to be more along the lines of it's not happening to as many cars as people might be led to believe. FWIW I think there's a possibility and to cover myself I have a warranty and all is well, I drive it hard, enjoy myself and sleep well There's a new thread this afternoon written by a chap who has a Cayman and he's asking should he warrant the car, he knows the possible problems, but should he do it? The existing warranty on the car he purchased was through a third party, worth f-all, and he's asking what to do - but is worried about the engine and a possible large bill. My advice would be regardless of the complexity of these vehicles, it's like any insurance policy - but if you run a car like this without a warranty and you're asking for trouble IMO.

Gary11 said: Another urban myth. Full of factual inaccuracy based on rumours! What is an urban myth? I thought, a fact is only a fact if it can proved to be so? I don't know how many 997's you've owned, (unless of course you're in the trade... then that figures) but my own 'facts' are based on ownership and my own experiences..... infact of the nine (9) Porsches I've owned and over the 500,000 miles or so driven in said 9 cars, the only failures I've encountered are on a 993 and a 968......... They're my (MY) facts. Edited by ForzaWhitesGen2 on Monday 28th November 17:19

HoHoHo said: I have not 'spouted figures' from anywhere other than this thread (regarding %). For the record I've made contact with a couple of well regarded Porsche Garages (as well as two OPC's) and do you know what - and they all said it's not as big a problem as might be thought - isn't the internet a wonderful thing! Now I'm not going to say who they are because they may post on here and it's their decision if they want to get involved in this thread, not mine. And as I have already asked - you are in a position of authority here, please post the evidence you have for us all to see. Edited by HoHoHo on Monday 28th November 16:39 Why is 'he' in a position of authority?? Because poster is in the 'trade'?? Doesn't make him or his organisation an authority..... I agree that its not a big problem v numbers produced/sold (as I've harped on about before) ... IF IT WAS..... and with a brand like Porsche..... it would have been extremely well publicised & dragged through the numerous motoring press & wider media...

ForzaWhitesGen2 said: HoHoHo said: I have not 'spouted figures' from anywhere other than this thread (regarding %). For the record I've made contact with a couple of well regarded Porsche Garages (as well as two OPC's) and do you know what - and they all said it's not as big a problem as might be thought - isn't the internet a wonderful thing! Now I'm not going to say who they are because they may post on here and it's their decision if they want to get involved in this thread, not mine. And as I have already asked - you are in a position of authority here, please post the evidence you have for us all to see. Edited by HoHoHo on Monday 28th November 16:39 Why is 'he' in a position of authority?? Because of his claim earlier..... Gary11 said: If I gave you the ratio of replaced/failed/failing engines per cars inspected you wouldnt belive me. I have documentation to substantiate this and am aware cars changing ownership dont give a true picture as this is sometimes the point where the "potential or physical problem" gets disposed of hence distorting figures. Seems to have the information to hand.

anonymous said: [redacted] Re: your post First Line = YES as documented by the PH'er with the blown Cayman engine in the circumstance you illustrate. Third Line = They have kept schtum, yet a few posts prior we have one guy saying a number of OPC's he's spoken to admit to being problems? Agree it is hard to know how 'big' or comprehensive the problem is, my point exactly. A 'premium' brand such as Porsche would certainly attract attention from all media corners if it was selling 'faulty' goods. Not exactly sure what you were saying with your response to my post? Thanks.

ForzaWhitesGen2 said: IF IT WAS..... and with a brand like Porsche..... it would have been extremely well publicised & dragged through the numerous motoring press & wider media... This reminds me of the Euro.... People knew it was never going to work, but up to about 2008 did you EVER hear the issue being "extremely well publicised & dragged through the numerous financial press & wider media"?? And the CDS market. And private pensions. And the national debt. And immigration (sporadic DailyMail excepted). You'll be amazed how selective the media are, it's almost like they just want to sell magazines and don't really get excited by reliability statistics...

HoHoHo said: Seems to have the information to hand. FWIW We discussed this on another thread,cars offered for sale are a small percentage of overall cars owned and enjoyed,however call it coincidence quite a lot of cars we inspect have had past present or potentially future faults,to be representative of the real world numbers is difficult IMO its like saying to someone like Baz@ Hartec every car you repair has a new engine thats his buisness!With regard to the OPC claim of not being a problem I saw a pile of engines earlier in the year(I counted 17 units) in an OPC,even when we had the nicasil failure (Jaguar BMW) issue in the mid 90s it was not as bad (and I have to say was better administered and rectified)and wasnt latent engine failure occuring randomly due to poor design and engineering.Thats the issue for every story I hear suggesting certain methods of driving or servicing,not over revving, ect ect the experts rebuilders will tell you the opposite can occour it just is too random to call with many failures at very low mileage.We are even getting reports of late 2.9 Boxsters with scored bores (a much simpler unit). I cant think of any other quality manufacturer with an engine unit(s) displaying (quoted on a US website)16 possible modes of failure! G

Gary11 said: HoHoHo said: Seems to have the information to hand. FWIW We discussed this on another thread,cars offered for sale are a small percentage of overall cars owned and enjoyed,however call it coincidence quite a lot of cars we inspect have had past present or potentially future faults,to be representative of the real world numbers is difficult IMO its like saying to someone like Baz@ Hartec every car you repair has a new engine thats his buisness!With regard to the OPC claim of not being a problem I saw a pile of engines earlier in the year(I counted 17 units) in an OPC,even when we had the nicasil failure (Jaguar BMW) issue in the mid 90s it was not as bad (and I have to say was better administered and rectified)and wasnt latent engine failure occuring randomly due to poor design and engineering.Thats the issue for every story I hear suggesting certain methods of driving or servicing,not over revving, ect ect the experts rebuilders will tell you the opposite can occour it just is too random to call with many failures at very low mileage.We are even getting reports of late 2.9 Boxsters with scored bores (a much simpler unit). I cant think of any other quality manufacturer with an engine unit(s) displaying (quoted on a US website)16 possible modes of failure! G To try and make some sense of your post, you're saying it's only because you're inspecting cars that faults are being noted, the rest of us who never change them are running around with cars that have the fault, yet are still to be inspected and diagnosed and our engine is going to go bang? I'll ask again - please post the 'information' you have, because you can chuck as many figures around in a post until you are blue in the face, but until you can substantiate your claim, it means nothing.

HoHoHo said: I'll ask again - please post the 'information' you have, because you can chuck as many figures around in a post until you are blue in the face, but until you can substantiate your claim, it means nothing. What type of grade information are you seeking? I think only Porsche would have the answers you seek, you could write to them - nothing to lose!

Globs said: HoHoHo said: I'll ask again - please post the 'information' you have, because you can chuck as many figures around in a post until you are blue in the face, but until you can substantiate your claim, it means nothing. What type of grade information are you seeking? I think only Porsche would have the answers you seek, you could write to them - nothing to lose! Gary11 has suggested as part of his argument he has written information that is very interesting, I've no idea what it's about but I'm interested in what 'it' has to say. So can he please post said 'information'!

Guys I think we are getting hung up here on the lack of available detailed information. My view, is that we are never going to see any substantive proof that can be deemed as a good sample. I am not saying that there is'nt any, its just that I dont think that it will be published for a number of reasons. Does that mean there is no problem and that we should all celebrate and rush out to buy all of these £9k 996's? Thats your decision. A murderer walks the streets a free man with a lack of solid proof. He is therefore totally innocent. So the 996/997 engine is just fine, right? MTR Edited by mollytherocker on Monday 28th November 21:17

HoHoHo said: Gary11 has suggested as part of his argument he has written information that is very interesting, I've no idea what it's about but I'm interested in what 'it' has to say. So can he please post said 'information'! I did not wish to enter an "argument" all Im saying is there "is" a failure problem with M96/7 units,unfortunately its very unusual just to have one mode of failure and escape with repairing that defect only,the catastopic way the failures occour ie a period of owner denial coupled with a continuation of use means these units mostly have to be completely rebuilt hence the large repair cost,there is no cheap way of repairing scored bores cracked liners ect ect most people dealing in and around these cars are aware of these issues,I cannot publish a copy of client reports that would be wrong and skewed as a representation,as I said I have evidence there are problems there is no doubt of that,you dont see many other engine rebuilders set up a hugely expensive engineering operations just to repair one marques design flaws,please use the net to get a true picture but dont base your opinions either way on one particular poster whos mate has one thats fine or has owned one or two himself,there are several rebuilders/remanufacturers in the US that are happy to discuss failures and causes as Im sure would Baz,how he gets the time I dont know! But credit to him for doing so as no one else seems to be doing much to help.

HoHoHo said: To try and make some sense of your post, you're saying it's only because you're inspecting cars that faults are being noted, the rest of us who never change them are running around with cars that have the fault, yet are still to be inspected and diagnosed and our engine is going to go bang? I'll ask again - please post the 'information' you have, because you can chuck as many figures around in a post until you are blue in the face, but until you can substantiate your claim, it means nothing. Ok so the new rules are we cannot post on here without qualifying every addition or opinion without documentation,I am happy for you to view my postings as meaning nothing,hence its been a pleasure.

Gary11 said: Ok so the new rules are we cannot post on here without qualifying every addition or opinion without documentation,I am happy for you to view my postings as meaning nothing,hence its been a pleasure. No, but if you're going to spout on about how you've got 'written evidence' and use that in a post to defend your position then simply put your money where your mouth is and post it. If you're not going to show us then don't quote it, simply because I could equally suggest I have evidence and written documentation that suggests 80,000 cars are absolutely fine, but I'm not going to share it with you . I'm sure you can scan and erase the private details of those concerned on the documents and we can then all see what's happening.

For me (and it's just my opinion ) you have to come up with a reasonable % or value of total failures... Clearly all of the posters (myself included) on here cannot do that..... Some of the other posters are extremely knowledgeable, given their businesses, about engine failures, issues & weaknesses.... Some 996's are now approaching 14 years old... some 997's are tad over 7 years now....... UK is a large market for Porsche (behind US & Germany I think). I standby my viewpoint that there isn't a problem with the engines in the 911 models quoted above..... I guess the crux of the 'debate' is what % of failures v numbers producted represents the word 'problem'? To me some of the posts/threads on here would put me off (if I didn't know better) from buying a Porsche 996 or 997..... But for what its worth if I end up with my current 997 being high mileage etc, then I'd look at some of the mods quoted by one or more respected Independants.....

I know quite a few people in the trade (Porsche specialists) and when I was in the market for a 996 they all warned me of the potential engine issues. Not scaremongering, just sensible advice. The percentage of actual failures may well be very small (who knows?) but in practice I noticed plenty of cars for sale with major engine rebuilds or replacement engines due to these various problems. I eventually bought a car that had suffered from scored bores (at 51K miles) and was rebuilt by Hartech. The OPC involved denied there was even a problem with the engine, even though it was smoking like a chimney and drinking oil. In fact the very last place I would expect to get a truthful answer on the failure rates is an OPC. It's really not in their best interest to tell the truth. Their standard patter is usually along the lines of "yes some of the very early 3.4s had a few teething troubles as it was Porsche's first water cooled 911 blah blah blah, but everything was cured on the 3.6".

uktrailmonster said: I know quite a few people in the trade (Porsche specialists) and when I was in the market for a 996 they all warned me of the potential engine issues. Not scaremongering, just sensible advice. The percentage of actual failures may well be very small (who knows?) but in practice I noticed plenty of cars for sale with major engine rebuilds or replacement engines due to these various problems. I eventually bought a car that had suffered from scored bores (at 51K miles) and was rebuilt by Hartech. The OPC involved denied there was even a problem with the engine, even though it was smoking like a chimney and drinking oil. In fact the very last place I would expect to get a truthful answer on the failure rates is an OPC. It's really not in their best interest to tell the truth. Their standard patter is usually along the lines of "yes some of the very early 3.4s had a few teething troubles as it was Porsche's first water cooled 911 blah blah blah, but everything was cured on the 3.6". Pretty much the thread in a nutshell!

HoHoHo said: No, but if you're going to spout on about how you've got 'written evidence' and use that in a post to defend your position then simply put your money where your mouth is and post it. If you're not going to show us then don't quote it, simply because I could equally suggest I have evidence and written documentation that suggests 80,000 cars are absolutely fine, but I'm not going to share it with you . I'm sure you can scan and erase the private details of those concerned on the documents and we can then all see what's happening. I dont have to show you any thing and I can say I have evidence beacause I have. Any of these replies posted by the trade are ultimately to help retail user/buyers,I would rather not be pulled into your pedantic argument so this will be my last reply to you. I am happy with my experiance and knowledge though still learn every day, and am also happy to help with sharing knowledge to help porsche enthusiasts (which we all are in the end) Perhaps then in your "proven" word the next engine rebuilder to post on here should be asked to provide documentary evidence before he is belived? To me your introverted cynisim is not based on from what I read any real trade experiance. Thank you for your reply.

Gary11 said: I dont have to show you any thing and I can say I have evidence beacause I have. Any of these replies posted by the trade are ultimately to help retail user/buyers,I would rather not be pulled into your pedantic argument so this will be my last reply to you. I am happy with my experiance and knowledge though still learn every day, and am also happy to help with sharing knowledge to help porsche enthusiasts (which we all are in the end) Perhaps then in your "proven" word the next engine rebuilder to post on here should be asked to provide documentary evidence before he is belived? To me your introverted cynisim is not based on from what I read any real trade experiance. Thank you for your reply. OK - let's agree to disagree, I'm not on a mission to have a bun fight

anonymous said: [redacted] After visiting Baz yesterday and looking at a number of 997 engines stripped down and being rebuilt my head is no longer in the sand..... However I still maintain that failures versus the numbers produced is a very very small percentage.... ..Now where is my Porsche Warranty booklet...

All cars suffer with generic problems, Porsche are no different. The 996 and 7's do suffer with pick up on cyl 6 closest to the tranny. The fault to overcome is around £4500 to solve for relign on 5 & 6 normally. The Boxters with the same engine also suffer form the same issue. But then thats owning sports cars right....? !

ponhead said: All cars suffer with generic problems, Porsche are no different. The 996 and 7's do suffer with pick up on cyl 6 closest to the tranny. The fault to overcome is around £4500 to solve for relign on 5 & 6 normally. The Boxters with the same engine also suffer form the same issue. But then thats owning sports cars right....? ! Very informative and philosophical post.....(no4?)blank profile hmmm.

ForzaWhitesGen2 said: However I still maintain that failures versus the numbers produced is a very very small percentage.... ..Now where is my Porsche Warranty booklet... On that note, please all see here: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... How many of you have a 996 or a 997 without a warranty? and di the 3.6 and 3.8 engines suffer equally?

OK Boxsters don't suffer the same problem at all and it is not just no 6 either. I will soon be updating section 6 of our buyers guide to provide more evidence and arguments about the source of the problem and solutions etc but meanwhile - please - no more of this misleading nonsense. Baz

As a GT3 owner I continue to be impressed with the sheer brilliance of this car over my 4.5 years of ownership - Italy, Hungary, France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Austria have all fallen to its sword. Imola, Spa, Monza, Nurburgring, Mas du Clos, Pau, Hungaroring, Oulton, Donington, Goodwood, Silverstone, Cadwell, have all felt the heat of its exhaust fumes! The emissions on its original cats are so low that it continues to purify the air it breathes. No failures, no dramas, never stranded. Awesome.

paul chocks said: Auto versions of the 4wd 3.4 were known as Carrera 4 tiptronic S - frustratingly often the tiptronic is omitted in descriptions. Maybe it does say C4S on V5C, but it's not the same car as the wide body C4S that was badged as such. yes sorry for the confusion as it's exactly what you e said 4wd3.4 tiptronic s so not as I described before. Can we convert to 3.6 and what would it involve parts ecu? Please

Magic919 said: Don't worry, I don't have a beard :-) thanks I'm bald

Any experts on here that could tell me how my car started with no rattling and knocking after breaking down to this?. As there' is no way the car would have started again in this condition and I didn't say anything to the garage who stripped it down. Last time it was over hauled was because bottom end had bent the rods and seized??? Thanks

No one seems to want to get involved but my brother has spoken to some really helpful people today and one being Grant at hartech so a big thank you for the advice you gave my brother

micky1786 said: No one seems to want to get involved but my brother has spoken to some really helpful people today and one being Grant at hartech so a big thank you for the advice you gave my brother Can only speak for myself but it's not a lack on interest, it's a lack of knowledge. No point me speculating so i'm glad you got solid advice... so what have hartech said? Any ideas?

MrJingles705 said: Can only speak for myself but it's not a lack on interest, it's a lack of knowledge. No point me speculating so i'm glad you got solid advice... so what have hartech said? Any ideas? My brother didn't go into detail with me as we're currently sourcing a crank shaft crank case and other internal parts so he must have got some good advice as I personally know this engine can be repaired a lot cheaper than 5-10k and the parts from a few Models will work as long as we get the right ones PN. I think a nice man from Devon who stripped this car the last time round. £400 total to get the engine out and strip down to pieces. He told us how to go about it if the IMS shaft is single chain or double chain which was also good news but we'll stick with what's in the car now and that's double chain as it'll be stronger imo. I've also read that the rear main seal can leak very easily as it's prone vibration from the crank so spoken to my brother about the modified seal housing which apparently is bulletproof. and wonder if anyone has done this. Also the IMS bearing upgrade for fail safe because if it were my car I'd have got it done as I'm anal when it comes to reliability and would like my car built like a

Do you guys know what material the crank case housing is made out of?. Thanks

anonymous said: [redacted] thank you kindly for the reply to my question cmoose

My 996.1 is currently at Hartech awaiting a rebuild. I won't know the extent of the damage until it's been stripped. Looks like the cam chain tensioner has broken up.

Hey all, As a former 996 3.4 owner I remain interested in wet sump reliability stats. It seems to me that this topic was started with the intention of attempting to prove that failure rates are quite low. However the poll shows the opposite, and now it seems original posters are suggesting the poll is skewed. Funny that! It's worth noting that the official figures for IMS bearing failure on the US class action stats are within shouting distance of the polled stats for IMS failures on this topic. I think (IMH) the over all percentage of failure rates shown here is therefore not a million miles off. To those that say that owners with problems are more likely to log on here, I disagree.. pitonheads is possibly the most popular forum for car enthusiasts, whether their motor starts .. or not.

IMS Bearing failure on my 54reg 997 3.8S at 51k miles. Also found light scoring on cylinders 4-6 when stripped down, (Very light as in could not feel the scoring with your finger and car did not use any excess oil etc). Decided to get it rebuilt properly. Had 6 new 100mm Hartech liners fitted to make it a 3.9L with 6 new Wossner pistons. Also fitted later IMS shaft with larger bearing and bearing outer seal removed. Still running it in now but its driving great. IMS is a real issue on cars up to 2006. If you are running the original bearing there is a genuine risk of failure and you should get it replaced with something like the EPS roller bearing (I'm not a fan of the ceramic LN bearing). I thought I could just wait till my clutch needed replacing and change it then but that now turns out to have been a big and expensive mistake!!! As for borescoring, yep it happens but it can be a very slow process, (not instant death like IMS failure). I found scoring in mine at 32k miles with a boroscope. However it did not have any symptoms (no high oil usage or sooty left exhaust etc). When the engine was stripped 20k miles later (which included 3 trackdays) the scoring was actually very minor and would not have been an issue for many thousands of miles or possible not an issue at all!

krispe said: IMS Bearing failure on my 54reg 997 3.8S at 51k miles. Also found light scoring on cylinders 4-6 when stripped down, (Very light as in could not feel the scoring with your finger and car did not use any excess oil etc). Decided to get it rebuilt properly. Had 6 new 100mm Hartech liners fitted to make it a 3.9L with 6 new Wossner pistons. Also fitted later IMS shaft with larger bearing and bearing outer seal removed. Still running it in now but its driving great. IMS is a real issue on cars up to 2006. If you are running the original bearing there is a genuine risk of failure and you should get it replaced with something like the EPS roller bearing (I'm not a fan of the ceramic LN bearing). I thought I could just wait till my clutch needed replacing and change it then but that now turns out to have been a big and expensive mistake!!! As for borescoring, yep it happens but it can be a very slow process, (not instant death like IMS failure). I found scoring in mine at 32k miles with a boroscope. However it did not have any symptoms (no high oil usage or sooty left exhaust etc). When the engine was stripped 20k miles later (which included 3 trackdays) the scoring was actually very minor and would not have been an issue for many thousands of miles or possible not an issue at all! Sorry to hear that. How much difference is the extra 100cc expected to make? Nice to come away with an upgrade after all that expense, even if it's a small one.

LordHaveMurci said: Sorry to hear that. How much difference is the extra 100cc expected to make? Nice to come away with an upgrade after all that expense, even if it's a small one. Not sure how much difference the 100cc makes as still running it in at the moment. Should hit 1000miles next week, then another oil change and I'll give it the full beans! Car also has equal length manifolds, 200cel cats and different back box, BMC filter, RSS underdrive pulley fitted. I also had the crank, pistons, rods, clutch and flywheel all balanced whilst the engine was apart. Once run in I'll fit a GT3 83mm throttle body and get a live remap done by DMS, The extra 100cc didn't cost much more and as you say it was nice to have an upgrade ,(albeit a relatively small one) after all that expense. I'm crossing all my fingers and toes that when finished and remapped it will hit 400hp ?? (Or at least match an x51 car at >385hp)

krispe said: Not sure how much difference the 100cc makes as still running it in at the moment. Should hit 1000miles next week, then another oil change and I'll give it the full beans! Car also has equal length manifolds, 200cel cats and different back box, BMC filter, RSS underdrive pulley fitted. I also had the crank, pistons, rods, clutch and flywheel all balanced whilst the engine was apart. Once run in I'll fit a GT3 83mm throttle body and get a live remap done by DMS, The extra 100cc didn't cost much more and as you say it was nice to have an upgrade ,(albeit a relatively small one) after all that expense. I'm crossing all my fingers and toes that when finished and remapped it will hit 400hp ?? (Or at least match an x51 car at >385hp) Nice spec car, Krispe. My 3.4 is about to have an engine rebuild at Hartech with new liners, rings, crank bearings, IMS bearing etc. What running in procedure do Hartech recommend? Keeps the revs down for the first 1k miles, then change the oil and you're good to go?

Looking forward to the updates on the 3.9 Hartech engine and mods. I'd like to do this with mine when the time comes. Ohlins too.

Yes - badly scored on cylinder 4 and just starting on 6. Currently being rebuilt at hartech via sports & classic.......

chrisbolton said: Yes - badly scored on cylinder 4 and just starting on 6. Currently being rebuilt at hartech via sports & classic....... Sorry to hear that, 997S? What mileage?

Recently bought a 1998 3.4 Manual 996 About a year ago previous owner replaced cam chains, tensioners and water pump ( not from failure but for future proofing ) also replaced IMS bearing with EPS unit. No record of any engine changes or rebuilds. No oil used after 400 miles Mileage is at 118000

chrisbolton said: Yes - badly scored on cylinder 4 and just starting on 6. Currently being rebuilt at hartech via sports & classic....... 1. Top lurking! 2. Did you vote BEFORE your engine needed a rebuild or is the 1st time you've interacted with this thread? Genuinely interested.

2005 997 C2S 78000 miles no rebuild, although it has had £3k+ of engine work done outside of the normal servicing and the RMS is just starting to weep a little.

My 996 C4S is currently undergoing a full rebuild after scoring found on Cylinder 4 (quite bad with metal found in the oil filter) and partial scoring on Cylinder 5. Rebuild by local (to me) engine rebuilder who I trust. Symptoms present which led me to this issue was significant oil burning and a loud tapping noise. Should be better than new once complete, but won't get the car back for a bit as the guy has a few others in the queue

No idea, I did start a thread about it as I'd only just purchased the car and I noticed it from driving just a few hundred miles. It was an 'intermittent' noise (i.e. I wasn't really listening for it at first) so not obvious on the test drive, and the oil usage only became obvious when I saw the smoke and saw the gauge dropping. Car is on 73,500 miles and I only did 250 of those. I'll update the thread once the car is back (or at least when I have a confirmed return date), but I am having a full 6 cylinder rebuild at minimal cost to myself.

And they said that the 996/997.1 was a reliable engine and the problems were all internet 'hearsay'. This thread proves that they certainly aren't, despite the rose tinted spectacle wearers trying to persuade us all otherwise. Yes I've owned one and yes it needed a rebuild 996.2 (@ 85k miles) My friend had one and yes it needed a rebuild 996C4S (@ 22K miles) His friend had one and yes it needed a rebuild 997.1 (@ 70K miles) Come to think of it I literally can not name someone who I know who's had one which didn't need major engine work.

None of those are the 3.4 - this does seem to be genuinely more reliable than the 3.6

My 3.4 is now on 167k miles and still pulling like a train Touch wood!

Hi sorry about the slow response !! It’s a 2002 c4s - and yes I voted after diagnosis. Car is back now and seems great - just completing 1000mile run in and then oil change. Hopefully all fixed now. Bit like triggers broom after the last 12 months .....

Whether you consider both head banks off as 'major' for a cracked head then I let you decide. Mine is a 3.4 and can confidently say I have no bore scores at 98K

Hi I get my 997 C2S 3.8 next week, mine had 63k miles and went from running fine to tapping within 1000 miles of purchase from a dodgy dealer on ebay that lied and claimed he wasn't a dealer, repair bill is over 60% of what i paid for the car. I should have cut my loss and broken the car but i've offset some of the cost by the increase in value of my 964 so purchasing any 997 seems to be a gamble. For the record the IMS was the smaller item and was OK but i've upgraded to the later larger bearing and hope the car will last another 100K

My 997 3.8 C2s had bore score at 50k. Not sure how long it took to show as bought it with this as a know problem. Now has full Hartech rebuild.. for me it has been a good way into a 997 being my first Porsche. Now just need some better weather to get her run in

I bought a 2003 4s tip, 1 owner and 45k miles full opc history, before purchase had a PPI which inc a borescope which was all fine, needed rear brake pipes as heavily corroded so an engine out job, while out the indie specialist split the gearbox to check the IMS bearing and by turning the engine by hand they could feel the bearing feeling lumpy they advise two options - replace just the bearing with the ceramic LN bearing or replace with Porsche upgraded bearing but would be a full engine strip and rebuild. I chose the LN bearing as it is a 2nd car and prob 2-3k miles a year and looking at keeping the car for a few years. All running very well.

I stripped a 996 engine down today that came in due to sounding rough when warmed up. It turns out that it was actually running remarkably well considering the current state of the engine. A valve seat has dropped out and got chewed up and spat out, damaging the piston along the way. Also has scored bores to bank 1 which less common as it's normally bank 2. I see lots of Porsches and rebuild LOTS of engines and I can honestly say the most common repair to date has to be bore scoring. I've done a few rebuilds due to IMS failures but they are few and far between. Never personally seen a D chunk failure!

got mea Hartech rebuilt engine one owner car and been trouble free motoring and no worries, just drive,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Just seen as its on this topic, of engine rebulild thinking of venturing into the world of porche owenership, Considering a 997 gen 1 as its probably the best I can afford comfortably.... Without too much debt, https://www.usedcarsni.com/2007-Porsche-911-CARRER... Car can be see above, anyway question I have is, Does mileage have any relevance towards the bore scoring issue ? for example if the engine gets to 80k miles can we feel safe it wont happen or can it just happen at any time ? Will of course get a pre-inspection done but just wondering is the fault inherent in all the engines that haven't been taken care of or just some that slipped through the factory with the un-noticed flaw Thanks in advance

It can happen at any time, at any mileage and with any previous service record; there’s no rhyme or reason, just buy a lottery ticket and see what happens

Get the bores scoped before you buy.

I noticed earlier in this thread the RMS leak was mentioned. My 997.1 3.6 has a RMS leak but my indie says it’s nothing to worry about & that a couple of drips spread and make it look a lot worse than it is. When do I worry about it & is it engine out to fix. What is the likely cost approx.?

anonymous said: [redacted] My car is a Tiptronic, I was told it doesn’t have a clutch is that true? As you can tell.. I’m not a mechanic.

AwfulAutoMan said: Just seen as its on this topic, of engine rebulild thinking of venturing into the world of porche owenership, Considering a 997 gen 1 as its probably the best I can afford comfortably.... Without too much debt, https://www.usedcarsni.com/2007-Porsche-911-CARRER... Car can be see above, anyway question I have is, Does mileage have any relevance towards the bore scoring issue ? for example if the engine gets to 80k miles can we feel safe it wont happen or can it just happen at any time ? Will of course get a pre-inspection done but just wondering is the fault inherent in all the engines that haven't been taken care of or just some that slipped through the factory with the un-noticed flaw Thanks in advance Hi, I've actually driven that car. I'm in NI and was in a similar boat. Have you considered the Cayman S as a firsr step into Porsche ownership? It's what I've done. Nice gen 2 987's are well within your budget - like this potentially good example if you don't mind a flight to England. http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019... Edited by Andyoz on Saturday 23 November 09:59

Unfortunately there seems to be a real glut of 996 engine-failures coming up on 911uk.com right now.

Andyoz said: Hi, I've actually driven that car. I'm in NI and was in a similar boat. Have you considered the Cayman S as a firsr step into Porsche ownership? It's what I've done. Nice gen 2 987's are well within your budget - like this potentially good example if you don't mind a flight to England. http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019... Edited by Andyoz on Saturday 23 November 09:59 Hi mate, Going for a test drive in it tomorrow, be glad and appreciative to hear your opinion of it or anything that stood out. Yeah I thought about the cayman S but it's the 911 that I of course really want and generally its going to be a second car for myself mostly not a daily driver, only when the misses wants the daily for herself for the day. Thanks for the input

The Cayman and Boxster are similarly afflicted ... I'm not in these figures only because my Cayman was neither a 996 or a 997. It was a 3.4 987 !

AwfulAutoMan said: Andyoz said: Hi, I've actually driven that car. I'm in NI and was in a similar boat. Have you considered the Cayman S as a firsr step into Porsche ownership? It's what I've done. Nice gen 2 987's are well within your budget - like this potentially good example if you don't mind a flight to England. http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019... Edited by Andyoz on Saturday 23 November 09:59 Hi mate, Going for a test drive in it tomorrow, be glad and appreciative to hear your opinion of it or anything that stood out. Yeah I thought about the cayman S but it's the 911 that I of course really want and generally its going to be a second car for myself mostly not a daily driver, only when the misses wants the daily for herself for the day. Thanks for the input I'd still recommend trying a Cayman S if you haven't already. You're talking a circa 2011 987.2 for the same money as that 911. Feel free to pm me.

ChrisW. said: The Cayman and Boxster are similarly afflicted ... I'm not in these figures only because my Cayman was neither a 996 or a 997. It was a 3.4 987 ! It’s only the 987.1 Boxsters and Caymans that are affected, the 987.2 and 997.2 are all ok

Agreed .. in racing the 3.8 Gen 2 engine in the GT4 Clubsport has been incredibly reliable. Cooling the mid engine has been a problem, oil temperatures have run up to 150C ... the race teams disconnected the oil temperature warning and just chased the oil after each race / meet ?? As far as I am aware there have still been no failures (unlike GT3 !!) Hence the on-going use of this engine in the current GT4 Clubsport ... with slicks.

wow, I didn't think that engine worked at 150 degrees!

EGTE said: Unfortunately there seems to be a real glut of 996 engine-failures coming up on 911uk.com right now. Do you think that's due to the car going/having recently gone through one of those transitional phases of ownership? Or perhaps just an age thing as most must be 100k+ now. I remember from my years on the BMW scene how E36 and E46 M3s both went through a period of ownership where they were cheap enough to buy by the sort of people that would rather spend money on tat like heavy 20" wheels then run them on s t tyres and not bother to service them. Both seem to pop back out the other side of that.

If you want to know more about these failures and know a bit about engines or engineering and enjoy a long technical read - then contact our Sharon om [email removed] and she will send you everything you could want to know - which hopefully will put some readers minds at rest and give others food for thought. They are great cars with generally reliable engines that are cheap to run and if they do go wrong there are alternatives to consider. Baz

anonymous said: [redacted] My crank bearings were just down to copper at c.90k miles. One of the reasons I was glad to have decided to go all in on the rebuild

Andyoz said: AwfulAutoMan said: Andyoz said: Hi, I've actually driven that car. I'm in NI and was in a similar boat. Have you considered the Cayman S as a firsr step into Porsche ownership? It's what I've done. Nice gen 2 987's are well within your budget - like this potentially good example if you don't mind a flight to England. http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019... Edited by Andyoz on Saturday 23 November 09:59 Hi mate, Going for a test drive in it tomorrow, be glad and appreciative to hear your opinion of it or anything that stood out. Yeah I thought about the cayman S but it's the 911 that I of course really want and generally its going to be a second car for myself mostly not a daily driver, only when the misses wants the daily for herself for the day. Thanks for the input I'd still recommend trying a Cayman S if you haven't already. You're talking a circa 2011 987.2 for the same money as that 911. Feel free to pm me. Did you see this one listed. 2009 so should be the updated 385hp engine. 1 owner, low miles. Won't be cheap...wish dealer would just state that bloody price! http://www.wilsonmotors.co.uk/listing/09-porsche-c...

911 997.1 c2s rebuild due to bore scoring.

The problems with my 2005 C2S began at 89k on the clock with a big chunk of white smoke coming out of the righthand side whilst on the German autobahn. The car was taken to Porsche Center Kiel, who immediately suspected scored cylinders. After a check this was confirmed. I took it to a Danish indy Porsche specialist, gave me the good news that it was only oil separator (Eur 3.5k repair). I had that changed, drove 800 km, then the ticking noice began, took it directly back, and cylinder 6 was scored. Had that done (Eur 12k repair w/discount bc of the first repair), drove 1000 km, then my lefthand side was complete black of soot. Took it back to the indy, turned out there was an issue with cylinder 3 - faulty piston ring - had that changed in under the warranty of the repair. Soot issue persists after approx 200 km. Suffice to say I am a bit tired of Porsches. My 1st gen Cayenne S was a nightmare of electrical issues.

my 997 3.8 had bore scoring on the right hand bank, 63k miles on a 2004. The small IMS bearing was OK though but i opted to have the very later big bearing c/w the later modified shaft. Hartech carried out a full rebuild including 6 liners , bottom end and chains etc with head job also

Unfortunately I did not hard rev the engine and check for smoke when I bought it. TW*T

Rossco196x said: my 997 3.8 had bore scoring on the right hand bank, 63k miles on a 2004. The small IMS bearing was OK though but i opted to have the very later big bearing c/w the later modified shaft. Hartech carried out a full rebuild including 6 liners , bottom end and chains etc with head job also When was the rebuild done and at what cost ? if you don’t mind sharing that info.

II bought my 997 at a Mannheim Auction in July 2018, I'm reasonably surely it had been in non specialist dealer network for some time. My online search brought up a photo on Carzana dating from late 2017 with a sticker price of £29,995. But it had been serviced in April, I wonder why ? Maybe sold & returned to dealer ? I researched 997's & found it could well have engine troubles, maybe bore scoring issues. I found that there was a range of options of how to fix them and if so I'd want to be part of decision process of what needed to be done. Sure enough on start up and following round auction block I was convinced this 997 was a little poorly. But it looked very nice in Cobalt blue with GT3 style wheels, full grey leather, PASM, sports chrono etc etc. 66,000 miles. There was me & one other guy interested, he was a dealer. I know I should have stuck to my limit, but it’s a very pretty car. Find another one as they say. I took mine to a local specialist who I knew personally anyway. They did a check & said it did have scoring but would keep going for a year or two but not to go too mad on the revs / load and keep an eye on the oil usage. Nothing much happened over the next 3,000 miles, no worse smoke, no more rattling, no real oil usage, but I was driving it more gingerly than I wanted to. I decided that I loved the car and would bite the bullet. I was introduced to Charlie at William Francis and he agreed to take out the engine, ship it to Hartech for a full rebuild and then re-install, plus a few other bits & bobs, a full service, replace the hoses, service gearbox etc etc. It was gone for two months, then there was 1000 miles running in & oil change, now after a bit longer it drives beautifully. Money wise I’m happy. I always figure that my weekend car is always going to cost me around £100 a week in either depreciation or maintenance or mix of the two. My man maths says that over my first three years ownership I’ll have zero depreciation & have a car with a good engine & nice backstory. Even though it was an auction car it had a full history with loads of paperwork To be honest I would not want to buy a 997 any other way. I know exactly what has been done by two reputable specialists who I'd recommend to anyone. Its not been cheap, but it’s worth it to me.

N111BJG said: II bought my 997 at a Mannheim Auction in July 2018, I'm reasonably surely it had been in non specialist dealer network for some time. My online search brought up a photo on Carzana dating from late 2017 with a sticker price of £29,995. But it had been serviced in April, I wonder why ? Maybe sold & returned to dealer ? I researched 997's & found it could well have engine troubles, maybe bore scoring issues. I found that there was a range of options of how to fix them and if so I'd want to be part of decision process of what needed to be done. Sure enough on start up and following round auction block I was convinced this 997 was a little poorly. But it looked very nice in Cobalt blue with GT3 style wheels, full grey leather, PASM, sports chrono etc etc. 66,000 miles. There was me & one other guy interested, he was a dealer. I know I should have stuck to my limit, but it’s a very pretty car. Find another one as they say. I took mine to a local specialist who I knew personally anyway. They did a check & said it did have scoring but would keep going for a year or two but not to go too mad on the revs / load and keep an eye on the oil usage. Nothing much happened over the next 3,000 miles, no worse smoke, no more rattling, no real oil usage, but I was driving it more gingerly than I wanted to. I decided that I loved the car and would bite the bullet. I was introduced to Charlie at William Francis and he agreed to take out the engine, ship it to Hartech for a full rebuild and then re-install, plus a few other bits & bobs, a full service, replace the hoses, service gearbox etc etc. It was gone for two months, then there was 1000 miles running in & oil change, now after a bit longer it drives beautifully. Money wise I’m happy. I always figure that my weekend car is always going to cost me around £100 a week in either depreciation or maintenance or mix of the two. My man maths says that over my first three years ownership I’ll have zero depreciation & have a car with a good engine & nice backstory. Even though it was an auction car it had a full history with loads of paperwork To be honest I would not want to buy a 997 any other way. I know exactly what has been done by two reputable specialists who I'd recommend to anyone. Its not been cheap, but it’s worth it to me. What was the total cost of the rebuild? If you don’t mind me asking. Why didn’t you just take the car to Hartech?

N111BJG said: Nothing much happened over the next 3,000 miles, no worse smoke, no more rattling, no real oil usage What was the oil usage over the 3000 miles, and was bore scoring actually confirmed? I've paid close attention to the bore scoring problem for many years and never heard of a case that didn't involve high oil consumption.

DRH986 said: N111BJG said: Nothing much happened over the next 3,000 miles, no worse smoke, no more rattling, no real oil usage What was the oil usage over the 3000 miles, and was bore scoring actually confirmed? I've paid close attention to the bore scoring problem for many years and never heard of a case that didn't involve high oil consumption. Yes there was a full inspection done at my friends workshop, I watched the horoscope inspection (it predicted the future for this engine). It was in the early to mid stages of wear. I decided to find out if I liked the car enough to spend the money it needed, so I treated the the engine gently, no short runs & no caning it, hence oil use was not too bad at around 500-600 miles per litre. It smoked on start up & rattled like hell, but no significant deterioration over those 3000 miles. I reckon it would have soldiered on for years like that. But that’s not what I wanted. Giving rebuild costs is a bit misleading because when the engine was stripped down Grant at Hartech gave me a range of options. I regarded just sorting the scored cylinders as a repair to sort the current problem. Whereas I wanted the engine life to be reset to ‘as new’ expectations. Hence a full rebuild with all internal gubbins refreshed. Same with ancillary’s and there was preventative work done too. I could have maybe spent £4-5k less. Of course I had the benefit of a bigger repair budget as a predecessor took the financial hit. Overall I spent one year of my notional budget, say £5k, plus the purchase ‘discount’ which was £9k. Later this year wheel refurb plus tyres, next year new hood & hardtop. Also replace PCM, I was looking at Pioneer, but the Porsche option is tempting, but rather pricey. I expect there are many others that would have approached this differently. I took this route as I didn’t want to inherit someone else’s decision. I wanted to make my own, admittedly with expert & trusted advice. But that’s what I should do, as that’s how I make my living.

Our facebook page shows pictures of a close call on crank bearings in a Cayman S. Rest of the engine OK (luckily including the crank) but bronze just starting to show through. I'll try and post a picture here as well. Baz

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.] https://thumbsnap.com/sc/wcaWbmBX.jpg

N111BJG said: Yes there was a full inspection done at my friends workshop, I watched the horoscope inspection (it predicted the future for this engine). It was in the early to mid stages of wear. I decided to find out if I liked the car enough to spend the money it needed, so I treated the the engine gently, no short runs & no caning it, hence oil use was not too bad at around 500-600 miles per litre. It smoked on start up & rattled like hell, but no significant deterioration over those 3000 miles. I reckon it would have soldiered on for years like that. But that’s not what I wanted. Giving rebuild costs is a bit misleading because when the engine was stripped down Grant at Hartech gave me a range of options. I regarded just sorting the scored cylinders as a repair to sort the current problem. Whereas I wanted the engine life to be reset to ‘as new’ expectations. Hence a full rebuild with all internal gubbins refreshed. Same with ancillary’s and there was preventative work done too. I could have maybe spent £4-5k less. Of course I had the benefit of a bigger repair budget as a predecessor took the financial hit. Overall I spent one year of my notional budget, say £5k, plus the purchase ‘discount’ which was £9k. Later this year wheel refurb plus tyres, next year new hood & hardtop. Also replace PCM, I was looking at Pioneer, but the Porsche option is tempting, but rather pricey. I expect there are many others that would have approached this differently. I took this route as I didn’t want to inherit someone else’s decision. I wanted to make my own, admittedly with expert & trusted advice. But that’s what I should do, as that’s how I make my living. Good man! Have you got a pic. Of your car?

N111BJG said: oil use was not too bad at around 500-600 miles per litre. Ah, ok, that's definitely very high, despite being on the limit of what Porsche states as acceptable (1000 Km/ litre if I recall).

Nope!

Chess said: Nope! Right chess..... there’s no need to go on and on about it!

Just had a 996 C4S with 98k on clock full inspection Boroscope etc all OK so Ive bought.Love the car going to check the Thermostat and install LT opening etc as per Hartech research. Reference Porsche Engineering even the best can overlook or miss that's when trend and analysis comes in as faults appear. just spent 3 months correcting a Wartsilia design Arctic Cooling System . Wartsilia are considered as top Quality Marine Diesel Engine and Propulsion Manufacturers

Old andCrankie rev1 said: Just had a 996 C4S with 98k on clock full inspection Boroscope etc all OK so Ive bought.Love the car going to check the Thermostat and install LT opening etc as per Hartech research. Reference Porsche Engineering even the best can overlook or miss that's when trend and analysis comes in as faults appear. just spent 3 months correcting a Wartsilia design Arctic Cooling System . Wartsilia are considered as top Quality Marine Diesel Engine and Propulsion Manufacturers Got any photos pal? Oil change every 3K. Manual or Tip? I had gear box oil changed and linkage cleaned.. it felt like a totally brand new gearbox.

Mariosbt said: Old andCrankie rev1 said: Just had a 996 C4S with 98k on clock full inspection Boroscope etc all OK so Ive bought.Love the car going to check the Thermostat and install LT opening etc as per Hartech research. Reference Porsche Engineering even the best can overlook or miss that's when trend and analysis comes in as faults appear. just spent 3 months correcting a Wartsilia design Arctic Cooling System . Wartsilia are considered as top Quality Marine Diesel Engine and Propulsion Manufacturers Got any photos pal? Oil change every 3K. Manual or Tip? I had gear box oil changed and linkage cleaned.. it felt like a totally brand new gearbox. Cheers car is Manual for info car had lots work done brakes as like new, New AC pipes Brake lines . New 1200 quid SS exh system Car is well specced with PCM new Front suspension top links wheels have been refurbed a steal for what i paid inspected by top specialist took 4 hrs Jobs to do replace 3 coffin arms and drop links inspect thermostat as water pump is new

catsey said: Mariosbt said: Old andCrankie rev1 said: Just had a 996 C4S with 98k on clock full inspection Boroscope etc all OK so Ive bought.Love the car going to check the Thermostat and install LT opening etc as per Hartech research. Reference Porsche Engineering even the best can overlook or miss that's when trend and analysis comes in as faults appear. just spent 3 months correcting a Wartsilia design Arctic Cooling System . Wartsilia are considered as top Quality Marine Diesel Engine and Propulsion Manufacturers Got any photos pal? Oil change every 3K. Manual or Tip? I had gear box oil changed and linkage cleaned.. it felt like a totally brand new gearbox. Cheers car is Manual for info car had lots work done brakes as like new, New AC pipes Brake lines . New 1200 quid SS exh system Car is well specced with PCM new Front suspension top links wheels have been refurbed a steal for what i paid inspected by top specialist took 4 hrs Jobs to do replace 3 coffin arms and drop links inspect thermostat as water pump is new Old Porsches are ‘The Dogs’! There’s a VW dealer next to my place of work. I drove past today and there was a white car ( may have been a golf ) £37K. My 997.1 was £22K 6 years ago I don’t like this saying.. but buying a decent old Porsche seems to be a ‘no brainier’.

Mariosbt said: Old Porsches are ‘The Dogs’! There’s a VW dealer next to my place of work. I drove past today and there was a white car ( may have been a golf ) £37K. My 997.1 was £22K 6 years ago I don’t like this saying.. but buying a decent old Porsche seems to be a ‘no brainier’. just spent 1500 on suspension LT stat Geo and oil pressure sensor done 600miles no measurable oil consumption no rattles squeaks need to replace tyres in summer (showing age) need to source 2 new rears already purchased 2 front. Warm up usually rev to 5 occasional 6k when warm no point in more change up at 5 to 6K car sings. im still around 5k below market price Car also has sport seats this weekend wheels of steam clean inspect lovely car its coming up 19yrs old and 100k this is a keeper GT2 stable mate

catsey said: just spent 1500 on suspension LT stat Geo and oil pressure sensor done 600miles no measurable oil consumption no rattles squeaks need to replace tyres in summer (showing age) need to source 2 new rears already purchased 2 front. Warm up usually rev to 5 occasional 6k when warm no point in more change up at 5 to 6K car sings. im still around 5k below market price Car also has sport seats this weekend wheels of steam clean inspect lovely car its coming up 19yrs old and 100k this is a keeper GT2 stable mate

this topic is inaccurate 997 gen1 cars had scoring issues so people answering this may be including later 997s also there are loads of people who just had the car bodged and got cylinder 6 fixed to get rid i found when fixing mine that even people who had the same car wouldn't acknowledge the issue on the threads fixed mine with all top hat liners and two new pistons, ring pack full bearing set total 7K

nelly997s said: this topic is inaccurate 997 gen1 cars had scoring issues so people answering this may be including later 997s also there are loads of people who just had the car bodged and got cylinder 6 fixed to get rid i found when fixing mine that even people who had the same car wouldn't acknowledge the issue on the threads fixed mine with all top hat liners and two new pistons, ring pack full bearing set total 7K I’m pretty sure everyone knows it’s regarding Gen1 cars. Mines 2007 3.6 997.1 55k miles no issues ...................... touch wood

Seems people are fixated with 997.1 BORE SCORE ISSUE and IMS. Simply look for a rebuilt one, they are out there.. I asked my local guy (Well known in Porsche used car and former editor of a well known Porsche magazine) to locate me a used 997.1 Hartech rebuilt one. It took about a month to find me one. Owned by one family (Father & son). Father wanted to give it to his son but as did not want to hand him a potential future problem went to Hartech for a full rebuild 13.5k. I have owned this car for a period of 3 years, drive it most days, service and preventative issues dealt with each year by my local porsche indi around 2k a year drives like a dream. All Porsche car will eventually require a rebuild !!!!!

leegrear said: Seems people are fixated with 997.1 BORE SCORE ISSUE and IMS. Simply look for a rebuilt one, they are out there.. I asked my local guy (Well known in Porsche used car and former editor of a well known Porsche magazine) to locate me a used 997.1 Hartech rebuilt one. It took about a month to find me one. Owned by one family (Father & son). Father wanted to give it to his son but as did not want to hand him a potential future problem went to Hartech for a full rebuild 13.5k. I have owned this car for a period of 3 years, drive it most days, service and preventative issues dealt with each year by my local porsche indi around 2k a year drives like a dream. All Porsche car will eventually require a rebuild !!!!! I’ve owned my 997.1 6 years... oil & filter every 3K, drives like a dream, never required rebuild.

Unfortunately there are going to be different opinions about these cars based on their owners experiences. i say "unfortunately" because the problems of IMS failures and particularly bore scoring are influenced more by variations in build quality mixed with previous owners care and driving styles (that make a huge difference to it) than by arguments about the resulting outcomes. Tolerance build up in the original small IMS bearing fit and sealed design combined with oil types used, frequency of oil changes and oil levels can influence their life expectancy. Variations in the distribution of silicon particles in the casting of the cylinders contributes to a huge difference in release rate and plastic piston coatings vary in bonding strength - the combination of which can make a pairing of a particular piston and bore last a long time or not very long at all. So some owners have good experiences and others have poor ones and each posts a comment as if the other is wrong because their engines lasted differently to someone else's - and this reaction is typical of (and indicative of designs near their safe operating limit that allow small variances in quality to have major influences over life expectancy). This opinion is supported by the exceptional reliability that is clearly reflected on various forum posts about the results of replacing those parts with those with better designs like our "closed deck" Alloy Nikasil liners (that are more consistent in surface quality and silicon distribution and have silicon particles about 1/10th the size of those in Lokasil or Alusil). The fact that our liners do not need any piston coating anyway (so can run with all current different coating types available as well - or none) and the larger IMS bearing being available for all rebuilds (old or new types of cam-chain drive covered). With these design changes that correct that variability - engines become exceptionally reliable again and as all N/A I/C engine'd sports cars will appreciate (due to becoming increasingly rare in the years ahead) and with our capacity increases improving fuel consumption and performance - these differences of opinion will probably diminish with time and follow a trend that is already starting to emerge of the overall rating of these cars becoming recognised as absolutely superb (once those engine weaknesses have been addressed). Baz Edited by hartech on Tuesday 13th April 05:25

hartech said: Unfortunately there are going to be different opinions about these cars based on their owners experiences. i say "unfortunately" because the problems of IMS failures and particularly bore scoring are influenced more by variations in build quality mixed with previous owners care and driving styles (that make a huge difference to it) than by arguments about the resulting outcomes. Tolerance build up in the original small IMS bearing fit and sealed design combined with oil types used, frequency of oil changes and oil levels can influence their life expectancy. Variations in the distribution of silicon particles in the casting of the cylinders contributes to a huge difference in release rate and plastic piston coatings vary in bonding strength - the combination of which can make a pairing of a particular piston and bore last a long time or not very long at all. So some owners have good experiences and others have poor ones and each posts a comment as if the other is wrong because their engines lasted differently to someone else's - and this reaction is typical of (and indicative of designs near their safe operating limit that allow small variances in quality to have major influences over life expectancy). This opinion is supported by the exceptional reliability that is clearly reflected on various forum posts about the results of replacing those parts with those with better designs like our "closed deck" Alloy Nikasil liners (that are more consistent in surface quality and silicon distribution and have silicon particles about 1/10th the size of those in Lokasil or Alusil). The fact that our liners do not need any piston coating anyway (so can run with all current different coating types available as well - or none) and the larger IMS bearing being available for all rebuilds (old or new types of cam-chain drive covered). With these design changes that correct that variability - engines become exceptionally reliable again and as all N/A I/C engine'd sports cars will appreciate (due to becoming increasingly rare in the years ahead) and with our capacity increases improving fuel consumption and performance - these differences of opinion will probably diminish with time and follow a trend that is already starting to emerge of the overall rating of these cars becoming recognised as absolutely superb (once those engine weaknesses have been addressed). Baz Edited by hartech on Tuesday 13th April 05:25 What is the current wait time for a rebuild on an engine at Hartech? Do you take the car while the work is done or do you expect the engine to be shipped to Hartech’s premises? Hoping I never need your services of course

Hi, we are happy to help with anything from fitting new cylinders into crankcases through short motors through to receiving the whole car. However - Covid 19 has unfortunately played havoc with our capacity - mainly because it was a well balanced, smoothly organised production process in which we coped with the usual short falls really well but now we can find we are short of a part or a member of staff and it has created a backlog. It sound like you don't need a precise figure because your engine is thankfully OK but when we were firing on all cylinders we could process an engine block in about 2 weeks and a whole car in about 6 but it may be some time before we get back to that and presently we cannot accept any more engine related work until late summer. If or when you need us it is best to contact Grant on 01204 302809 or [email removed] - for an estimate. Baz

No matter how one looks at it, the risk of buying one of these cars is huge, especially if this non scientific thread is anything to go by. Of the 640 votes (excluding those that didn’t buy out of fear) 29.5% have had a failure of some description. When the cost of repairs are factor into this, one would be walking a tight rope buying one and would definitely have to set aside funds to cover repairs that may or not happen, but 30% is diabolical and it’s a wonder folk put up with it.

anonymous said: [redacted] It is what it is. Some that have issues are not even part of the forum, so this is a poll that helps those that are actually on the forum and it's not that great if you ask me. There really is no excuse for this level of unreliability in the UK, as folk can barely stretch the legs of these cars given our heavily policed roads. If one doesn't track it, how can the engines of these cars be put under any real stress? And I don't buy it that people, for the most part, do not look after the cars and thrash them when cold etc. cars should be able to withstand it without the need for expensive engine work. As for me, I fall into the "too scared to take the risk" camp, and I'll be there for some time, because when it goes wrong it costs £££'s to fix.

30% failure rate?? There are loads of owners on the ‘what’s an early 996?’ thread, many are long term owners running cars with well over 100k miles and I don’t think there are ajj no t that have had engine rebuilds - unless the owners specifically looked for cars to buy with rebuilt engines. Stop exaggerating.

Perhaps it is time for some sensible reflections. The failures of these engines are not as easily predictable because they rely on the quality and distribution of the silicon particles in the Lokasil preforms and how they orientated themselves in the castings when the high pressure molten aluminium was compressed at 100 bar and the bonding of the piston coatings (the amazing variations of which can be seen in photos in our reports on bore scoring free from [email removed]) Then engines in drivers cars who never apply high torque will generally get longer life (because the oil is usually cooler and thicker and the thrust loads squashing the piston against the cylinder wall with a piece of silicon trapped between it are lower) and those who use relatively higher revs (but not combined with full throttle) maintain better cylinder wall oil film thicknesses (so Tiptronics suffer slightly more). Continual high revs may well reduce bore scoring but reduce big end shell bearing life. We have had failures from as little as 15K and as high as 170K but at the high end they all have piston coating loss, worn crankshaft shells etc and many unable to rebuild without more new parts. Statistically whether it is 10% or 30% doesn't change the fact that they are on average capable of less miles than their 944/968 counterparts or their 911 earlier variants. it also doesn't change the facts that most will eventually require a rebuild and at least there are now good options either when that happens or beforehand. Whenever you talk statistics you inevitably get someone who didn't fit into the main stream masses and gets upset because "THEIR CAR DIDN@T LAST THAT LONG OR LASTED MUCH LONGER" and I think it might just be worthwhile reflecting on the fact that these statistics are extremely helpful when enabling prospective owners to assess risks and perhaps more importantly specialists to invest in the right level of and amount of facilities to cater for them. We assessed the first engine over 20 years ago and made an engineering decision that sufficient numbers would fail for long enough to justify investing it R & D, technical solutions, manufacturing plant, training skilled and experienced labour, and it has paid off. It too was a risk but statistics still help us direct the growth of the business and are therefore valuable. Problem is if you make a general statement like "generally men are more into cars than women" you immediately get some angry person telling you that they know a female who is mad about cars etc. Statistics don't lie but of their very nature they do NOT APPLY TO ALL THINGS NOR EVERBODY OR EVERY CAR. The best thing is that STATISTICALLY a Hartech re-manufactured standard or increased capacity engine has proven to be a very good option if and when a repair is needed. Baz Edited by hartech on Monday 14th June 07:27

Does anyone the options for going bigger in say a 996 3.4 engine. Can you just use a bigger crank from say the 3.6 engine? What options do you have with your 996 3.4 engine if when stripped down the crank is found to be outside spec?

Mine had a full rebuild and modded from 3.4 to 3.7 at a cost of £15.5k 400 miles before I bought it. 20k miles again the other month it went pop and I was told before another few quid was spent it was the crank bearing. Made me a nervous wreck!

simonas2702 said: Mine had a full rebuild and modded from 3.4 to 3.7 at a cost of £15.5k 400 miles before I bought it. 20k miles again the other month it went pop and I was told before another few quid was spent it was the crank bearing. Made me a nervous wreck! Tough luck Who did the rebuild? It always strikes me as odd, when people sell their pride and joy immediately after a rebuild. Especially if it has an enlarged engine, as most often you don‘t get your money back from a rebuild. I was under the impression crank bearings get replaced when you rebuild the block. Or where the new bearings not up to the increased power of the 3.7?

Filibuster said: Tough luck Who did the rebuild? It always strikes me as odd, when people sell their pride and joy immediately after a rebuild. Especially if it has an enlarged engine, as most often you don‘t get your money back from a rebuild. I was under the impression crank bearings get replaced when you rebuild the block. Or where the new bearings not up to the increased power of the 3.7? It was Hartech. The lad I bought it from was a neighbour with a young family. He lost his job during lockdown a month after getting it back from the rebuild. £39k it owed him!! Yep the crank bearings were replaced but Hartech said they no longer use the crank bearings that were used in 2020 and use a much better one now that they have developed!

simonas2702 said: Filibuster said: Tough luck Who did the rebuild? It always strikes me as odd, when people sell their pride and joy immediately after a rebuild. Especially if it has an enlarged engine, as most often you don‘t get your money back from a rebuild. I was under the impression crank bearings get replaced when you rebuild the block. Or where the new bearings not up to the increased power of the 3.7? It was Hartech. The lad I bought it from was a neighbour with a young family. He lost his job during lockdown a month after getting it back from the rebuild. £39k it owed him!! Yep the crank bearings were replaced but Hartech said they no longer use the crank bearings that were used in 2020 and use a much better one now that they have developed! That is a valid explanation of course.... According to their homepage, the warranty for a crank bearing is 24k miles/24 months (no track driving). It didn't occur during that time per chance??

8 months after the 24 months unfortunately , I took legal advice on it and it turns out legally the warranty wouldnt have passed to me anyway as not an express term of the sale to me which I never knew

I thought that the Hartech rebuilds were generally deemed as bullet proof? Is this suggesting that some part of the build are more prone to potential issues than others? Ie: liners are great, crank bearings ... not as much?

Any rebuild other than a full £15k+ bells and whistles job from ‘you know who’ gets dismissed as not worth the money, yet their top of the line job lasts a bit over 2.5 years and 24k miles If you’re going to give it Bily big b ks about your product it had better stand up. I’d love to know how many miles are on some of these allegedly ‘bullet proof’ rebuilds that are wel in to 5 figures… how many are weekend cars that do a couple of thousand miles a year, and how many are properly driven? Porsche have had enough bad press around the M96, yet there are loads of cars well in to 6 figure mileages.

Our track record of reliability for both road and racing is superb and problems are extremely rare. The reputation we have is well deserved but after hundreds of rebuilds lasting extremely high miles I suppose there is always a very rare possibility of a failure. Despite the issue falling outside of our warranty (and that of the component supplier – Porsche) the work was carried out at a greatly reduced cost. We didn’t need to, but we wanted to help. The main Achilles heel we found when racing was crank shaft bearing big end failure. In common with a lot of modern engines, the normally aspirated M96 onwards standard Porsche offerings are a much lower cost product when compared to their predecessors like 944/968, air cooled family including 993 (as used in the 996 Turbo & GT3) etc. Despite this they’re usually more than good enough to withstand normal road use, but we found that they were occasionally not quite up to it on the track. Unfortunately, neither Porsche (nor anyone else) offer a better-quality alternative so, following our usual approach of trying to improve inherent weak spots, we have now invested a considerable amount to get them made exclusively for us by the motor-sport division of the world’s leading crank bearing manufacturer. They’re a joint design between ourselves and their technical guys and are wider than the original Porsche design to utilise as much of the crankshaft journal width as possible whilst being made from far better material. (They’re actually made by the exact same people who make low volume high precision Formula 1 crank bearings and are superb). They’ve been tested on the track and are now offered in all our 996/997 Gen 1 rebuilds (with the majority of customers choosing them) and are available to other engine re-builders. Following Porsche’s recent price hikes (around 70% for cranks & 50% for bearings) we’re now expanding the range so that we can offer main bearings & exchange professionally repaired re-hardened crank shafts. This is a huge investment for us but we aim to help keep Porsche motoring affordable for many years to come ! Whenever a weakness showed itself we tried our best to provide the best solution and have done so with the cylinders, pistons, IMS bearings and for racing the sumps etc, but we cannot manufacture a whole new engine and really all we can do whenever something starts to show up as a very rare weakness is try to solve it – as we have done once again over the crankshaft issues. Our products for road use are tested on track with endurance racing results of reliable performance and class wins – but there are additional products we advise for track use – for road use our solutions are excellent. It is however fair to say that these were designed as a budget Porsche which we have managed to improve in lots of areas whenever the need arises. Edited by hartech on Friday 19th May 15:03

Hi Baz, thanks for that explanation, very interesting to hear about the issue and the process you guys have put in place to address it. True engineering there. Thanks also for taking the time to reply - nothing like having facts from the source!

hartech said: Our track record of reliability for both road and racing is superb and problems are extremely rare. The reputation we have is well deserved but after hundreds of rebuilds lasting extremely high miles I suppose there is always a very rare possibility of a failure. Despite the issue falling outside of our warranty (and that of the component supplier – Porsche) the work was carried out at a greatly reduced cost. We didn’t need to, but we wanted to help. What’s ‘extremely high miles’? My 3.4 has c.210k miles (all original) and there are loads of cars in the ‘what’s an early 996’ thread on 130k+. I’d expect a £15k+ rebuild to be completely bomb proof and the builder to stand by their work for more than 24k miles or 24 months given the claims made about superiority vs the original product (assuming proper maintenance).

Chris - As a loose guide we suggest people start to think about re-building them at around 100k miles but many many have passed this. Some of this model range that we have repaired failed around 15K and many others in the 50-60 K bracket but of course there are also some that last very much longer. Anyone reading our free technical literature on the subject knows that we have identified some technical areas where there is a random nature to the failures depending on casting quality, piston coating quality etc where we have shown pictures of the different failure modes to prove it. It is not our fault if that random nature makes it difficult to make rebuild mileage recommendations that some with better quality internals easily exceed - but most are getting close to crankshaft wear limits around 100K. That’s one reason why we created our capacity conversions to make a pre-emptive rebuild more attractive. We’ve been re-building these engines for around 20 years and I dare say we’ve re-built a couple of thousand and have rarely seen inside any of them again. It is IMHO entirely unfair to criticise us for not providing a longer warranty than the many parts we have to use that are sourced directly from Porsche themselves – if they are not prepared to extend their warranty any further on what basis should we carry the can if they fail? Yours demonstrates that the engines aren’t as fragile as the internet chat sometimes leads people to believe which is great – you obviously are lucky enough to own a car with a lot of good engine parts in it on the better side of random quality and we wish you well with it. However, to add balance, whilst there are plenty that run fault free for high mileages there are many that don’t and we see patterns of 2 classic issues kicking in at around 100k miles (hence our suggestion). Only today we’ve stripped an engine for crank bearing failure at a much lower mileage than even we would expect (and fortunately just got to it in time before it ate into the crank). Xray eyes would be nice at times ! I don’t think there is any other business providing so many re-designed and manufactured parts as us or to a higher quality or standard – but statistics will always show there are going to be some exceptions and I think it is creditable that we discounted the repair for something we did not design or manufacture and that we have gone to the trouble of investing in improving the quality of that very part afterwards (among so many others). The spend you refer to included a lot more than just a re-build but we don’t want to (and legally cannot) break customer confidentiality (makes it hard to give the full story in the public domain), but yes, as uncommon as it is, it’s disappointing when a component fails (even when we haven’t made it and it’s outside of Porsche’s warranty which is why we stepped in and helped !). Fortunately it’s a very rare event and as mentioned in our lengthy post above, we now have superior bearings manufactured by the F1 suppliers. You might well expect a rebuild to have a longer warranty but if you ever need one you will not find anywhere better able to offer such a statistically reliable product nor a bunch of people more reasonable to try and help on the very rare occasions when it was not their fault. That said we cannot eliminate every single possible original part or Porsche supplied part from possible premature failure and of course have no way of knowing how different drivers use their cars or how they were maintained that sometimes can be relevant.

Its hard to reply to that essay , Baz, without appearing flippant, but that’s not my intention… I know your reputation… I’ve owned my car for 17 years and covered over 150k miles in that time… you can’t be around 996’s that length of time without hearing of Hartech. I’ve read your stuff over the years, and I know you know a lot about the engines. However, with regard to this particular discussion… if I were contemplating a rebuild with you, why would I ‘invest’ in all the optional ‘improved’ parts at significant extra cost if a part you buy off the shelf can fail in a couple of years… leaving me with another massive bill. May as well go for the cheapest rebuild I can find… I’ll probably get 2 of those for similar money to the full bells and whistles… which will likely last longer than 2 years. I’m struggling to see the value personally.

Because our reliability rating is in the over 99.84% which is higher than the original manufacturer and higher by miles than the other engine builders whose engines comeback here (as publicised, photographed and proven by us on our Lee's Gurus forum almost on an almost weekly basis). Also for that minute % that might experience a problem out of warranty - our helpful approach to the cost is significant and unlikely to be available from your preferred cheap rebuilders. I also noted that you have apparently read all about the issues in our free technical reports, seen the proof and photos, read the results of racing success with those standard rebuild parts but don't value them preferring a cheap rebuild instead and being prepared to do it again as a consequence - fair enough - it takes all sorts! You didn't answer the question about why we should stand the cost of a failure of a part supplied from who has recently been the most profitable manufacturer in the World after their own warranty period has elapsed. When you state many examples have covered higher mileages -- I am not sure if by that you mean that all the failures Worldwide that many businesses repair - are a figment of their imagination? or if you accept the volumes that do fail - nor understand what we are supposed to do about it when trying to provide advisories? I am also unsure what it wrong with a small business investing in trying to do a better job for owners of an engine range that should have been much more reliable from the start when the main original manufacturers have not? But look - it is a free World and you are entitled to your opinion and to express it for others to read (although I do wonder why?) - I hope your own engine continues be be trouble free and that you never have to have it rebuilt. If you ever do I hope your belief that an inferior rebuild using parts proven to be less reliable than ours proves to work out for you and that if they do go wrong you find two rebuilds cost the same as one that for the vast majority of satisfied customers is fantastically reliable and lasts longer than the original manufacturer managed. Personally if it ever came to it I would expect that to demonstrate that your present opinion was wrong - but there are plenty of alternatives and if you ever need one I hope you find what you are looking for.

Ok, well that obviously touched a nerve! The fact that the failed component is from a 3rd party is irrelevant (whoever that 3rd party is)… you’re providing a total solution, at a premium price. It’s your responsibility to find/source components that can deliver the level of quality that justifies your price point. If, overall, your failure rate is less than one in a thousand you can clearly afford to stand by your product (you have more than enough margin) and make it right with the owner… particularly when it’s your most premium product.

Unfortunately simple questions do need long answers sometimes but a few paragraphs defending your criticism is hardly an essay and reveals and underlying intent to damage the rightly hard won reputation of one of the best providers of engine solutions for this engine range. In the particular example half the cost wouldn’t have touched what was needed. If we remove the extra things that were originally needed (and can’t go into detail as it’s the private information of our original customer) then it will be similar to what most charge. An issue like this could have happened no matter who built it but your argument about off the shelf parts can be applied to most things which fail in anything, let alone engines, but what sets us apart is how we identify patterns of failure, look at the causes and then develop improvements where we can like we have done in this case. Most of the off the shelf parts are adequate - there are just a handful which fall short and we’ve picked up the mantle where we can where others have just left them be (and continue to do so as new patterns emerge) which should be applauded rather than criticised. Why come to us ? Well, self promotion quite rightly isn’t allowed on here so I won’t get on a sales pitch (nor want to as we’re too busy anyway) but I doubt there’s anyone as experienced, well equipped with their own in-house machine shop, has developed as many solutions as we have and back up our work as well as we do contrary to what you may think. But, you have your views and are free to use who you like should the time come and we wish you well.

Chris Stott said: Ok, well that obviously touched a nerve! The fact that the failed component is from a 3rd party is irrelevant (whoever that 3rd party is)… you’re providing a total solution, at a premium price. It’s your responsibility to find/source components that can deliver the level of quality that justifies your price point. If, overall, your failure rate is less than one in a thousand you can clearly afford to stand by your product (you have more than enough margin) and make it right with the owner… particularly when it’s your most premium product. Hartech provided an engine rebuild option, at a quoted price, a warranty of a stated time, from components available at that time. You seem to state that a £15.5k price should mean it's 'bullet proof', as 'premium', but it doesn't work like that, it's just a higher price than others. They all have their own risks & advantages, eg;- I had a 'Premium' 3rd party warranty/insurance for a car, it was the most comprehensive I could find, better than all the others, & most expensive, but it still didn't cover everything that could go wrong. 'Premium' isn't infallible. 'Bullet proof' would mean a higher price again. It's up to the person spending the money to do the research, weigh up the risk & if it's worth it. No one is forcing anyone to spend this money. Perhaps the real question should be why Porsche are still making these products if there are these potential issues? The reason is cost. They've weighed up warranty work costs v profit v reputation, & come out on this side of the equation. If Porsche doesn't care enough to improve components, it's customer choice if they wish to have a product by a company that thinks/acts this way, irrespective of price point. If Hartech helped out, it's more than Porsche did. Things can always go wrong, but it's the way the supplying company acts that makes the difference. Others can try & solve the issue as data comes available, it may take years. Any company/individual also has to make the difficult financial/time decision to invest in finding this product. Customers can at least be glad there are the Hartech options. Like the TVR Speed 6 engine, which had/can have issues, it took time to resolve them, but it can now be had with a 5 yr/100k mile warranty - engineering solutions are out there, but it's still up to the customer if it's worth it to them.

And by a stroke of luck, irony (or perhaps Karma) on the same day we wrote about premature crankshaft bearing failure the next engine we stripped had these in it - std Porsche big ends that have failed at a fraction of the mileage some others manage to cover. That it is not our fault - we were not involved but unlike the manufacturer who never improved that product and just elevated the price hugely of a new crankshaft - we try to do a better job for our customers so have developed a re-hardening process and proved it over more than a decade and now have much higher quality big ends available. What advice should we give when some fail like this at very moderate mileages and other last longer? The cost of investment in that new product is huge for our tiny business and will not show a profit for several years (if ever) but will help our customers enjoy greater reliability for longer. There are other things we could invest in that make a better return but we are devoted to helping people with Porsches enjoy the marque that we all love despite their short comings. We provide the best cylinder replacement solution, pistons from the most prestigious manufacturer, wider higher quality big ends and now main bearings with a properly re-hardened crankshaft solution and shells to suit (when others claim its Ok to grind through the thin hard layer and run on the softer interior metal). I am finishing with this topic now - more important things to do for customers than respond to what I regard as purposely critical attention seeking posts with no logical or engineering based reasoning to them and facts and figures miles off the mark. Baz

hartech said: ... I am finishing with this topic now - more important things to do for customers than respond to what I regard as purposely critical attention seeking posts with no logical or engineering based reasoning to them and facts and figures miles off the mark. Baz Please try not to take these internet baiters to heart, you offer a great service for all your customers and stand out amongst the crowd.

guyvert1 said: hartech said: ... I am finishing with this topic now - more important things to do for customers than respond to what I regard as purposely critical attention seeking posts with no logical or engineering based reasoning to them and facts and figures miles off the mark. Baz Please try not to take these internet baiters to heart, you offer a great service for all your customers and stand out amongst the crowd. Plus 1 Want a 997. 1 Have a hartech search in auto trader and ebay. Would only buy one with a Hartech rebuild

TrotCanterGallopCharge said: .Like the TVR Speed 6 engine, which had/can have issues, it took time to resolve them, but it can now be had with a 5 yr/100k mile warranty - engineering solutions are out there, but it's still up to the customer if it's worth it to them. Not sure if it's a fair comparison. TVR did not make massive upgrades until Sagaris and later they shut it down. So owners had no option to upgrade to a newer version of Tuscan or whatever and clearly the rebuilt straight six engines out there quite reliable. Porsche A.G. basically washed their hands off with these engines by replacing with 9A1 back in late 2008. Nearly all crappy engineering gone with new architecture but the reality is in terms of price, a premium engine rebuild costs on these cars with the initial car price is sometimes more than a used 997.2 or 987.2 with better engines (9A1) So, a potential owner should really make a sanity check imho whether it's worth or not. Chris, little question, (being the devils advocate with a detail but please no offence! ). Are you the first owner of your car? The reason I'm asking I know a few examples with high mileage but actually the first owner did not disclose the info about an engine replacement in early years under warranty. I've seen similar examples on 986s too on auctions, loads of owners simply do not disclose that info but when you put the cars into ramp or close inspection, recondition engines are mostly easy to spot. (Some shops even put their adv. sticker on them! ). I hope its still on the original engine and you get another 150k too! Edited by ooid on Sunday 21st May 05:42

I thought that if the crank on the m96 was out of spec due to wear it was scrap. Are we now saying they can be recovered?

ooid said: TrotCanterGallopCharge said: .Like the TVR Speed 6 engine, which had/can have issues, it took time to resolve them, but it can now be had with a 5 yr/100k mile warranty - engineering solutions are out there, but it's still up to the customer if it's worth it to them. Not sure if it's a fair comparison. TVR did not make massive upgrades until Sagaris and later they shut it down. So owners had no option to upgrade to a newer version of Tuscan or whatever and clearly the rebuilt straight six engines out there quite reliable. Porsche A.G. basically washed their hands off with these engines by replacing with 9A1 back in late 2008. Nearly all crappy engineering gone with new architecture but the reality is in terms of price, a premium engine rebuild costs on these cars with the initial car price is sometimes more than a used 997.2 or 987.2 with better engines (9A1) So, a potential owner should really make a sanity check imho whether it's worth or not. Chris, little question, (being the devils advocate with a detail but please no offence! ). Are you the first owner of your car? The reason I'm asking I know a few examples with high mileage but actually the first owner did not disclose the info about an engine replacement in early years under warranty. I've seen similar examples on 986s too on auctions, loads of owners simply do not disclose that info but when you put the cars into ramp or close inspection, recondition engines are mostly easy to spot. (Some shops even put their adv. sticker on them! ). I hope its still on the original engine and you get another 150k too! Edited by ooid on Sunday 21st May 05:42 I don’t understand why folks countenance a pre ( 08). 9A1 Porsche . Well documented woes .Even if you take off some incident number volume due to the internet attracting whinges and only bitter and twisted writing about them all . You know filter ……it’s still risky .The engineering of the M96/M97 open deck casting in what ever modal just isn’t up to longevity.

Chris Stott said: Its hard to reply to that essay , Baz, without appearing flippant, but that’s not my intention… I know your reputation… I’ve owned my car for 17 years and covered over 150k miles in that time… you can’t be around 996’s that length of time without hearing of Hartech. I’ve read your stuff over the years, and I know you know a lot about the engines. However, with regard to this particular discussion… if I were contemplating a rebuild with you, why would I ‘invest’ in all the optional ‘improved’ parts at significant extra cost if a part you buy off the shelf can fail in a couple of years… leaving me with another massive bill. May as well go for the cheapest rebuild I can find… I’ll probably get 2 of those for similar money to the full bells and whistles… which will likely last longer than 2 years. I’m struggling to see the value personally. It's the Porsche bits that fail. Sadly. As I have learned the hard way twice. The first one at just 7500 miles and 12 months old resulting in a new engine from Porsche under warranty. Second one (different car) heading for trouble at 60k. Now rebuilt at Hartech and upgraded to 4.1. With their own, better, crank bearings, liners, pistons, closed deck etc. Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 21st May 21:19

ATM - the short answer is "YES". Nitride hardening process only puts a relatively thin hard layer on the crankshaft journals and is a time based process. It can go deeper but takes longer - hence more expensive. in a World where fashion dictates lifespans often more than actual longevity and labour costs have become the dominating component of repair costs - many manufacturers are reducing planned life expectancy. However - we re-hardened some crankshafts (about 15 years ago) and re-machined some suitable shells from other manufacturers to fit - and they have lasted ever since. But it is not the cheapest of processes as the cranks have to be ground twice requiring great precision setting and modifying shells to fit was also expensive. So while good used cranks were available we didn't need to use the solution we had already proven. Now new crankshafts have escalated in price and good used ones are as rare as hens teeth - the time has come where it is worth resurrecting the proven solution and as crankshaft failure is increasing (with the additional mileages covered in the meantime) we hope it justifies a considerable investment in high quality batches of shells. Flammetta - considering that the engine range was always a budget 911 - it is actually a very clever piece of engineering with many quality features (like the hard iron inserts in the crankcase cassettes to maintain main bearing fits). It was a whole new experience for Porsche to change the original designs that were not suitable for economic mass production (too many parts) and make affordable cars which have been great to drive and for which many have lasted an acceptable length of time and mileage. Perhaps the only weak areas were the IMS bearing (although many have survived) and the lack of support for the upper weak cast in cylinder tubes (caused by the need to compress the castings to localise Lokasil) which was improved in later models by changing the material mix, the change away from hard iron coated pistons (apparently enforced by health and safety legislation or the cost of applying it to the process) and the lack of support for the overhang of the flywheel when combined with a narrow rear main bearing. IF the cylinders had been fitted with a top support ring (closing the deck), pistons were still hard iron coated and crankshafts had been fitted with a wider rear main bearing - they would have a greatly improved reliability rating. Those changes could have been made during the production run (but were not) and IF these engines are fitted with closed deck cylinders and better quality wider big ends (as we offer) the become much more reliable. Although not designed for track work or racing (more expensive models available for that and worked well), with the addition of a racing sump and rear crankshaft support these modifications have even proven reliable in winning endurance Championships and with raised torque and BHP using our capacity conversions. It was a brilliantly engineering example of a wholly new solution that only incorporated a few minor weaknesses which could have been sorted and if they had been (or when they are) transforms the package. Perhaps history will show the main problem was ignoring upgrades during the production run that would have improved the result enormously. Baz

As an owner of a 997.1, what grinds my teeth, are blanket statements, that you should not buy a M96/7 engined car at all unless it has been to Hartech. Yes, Hartech do know a thing or two about these engines and I highly respect Baz and his views that he takes time to post here. There are small points where my opinion differs to his. But my opinion is rooted mainly in what I read in different Porsche forums, especially the german PFF, and I'm just a layman that is interested in cars and engines. The cynic in my can't help but notice that the 30 minutes or so it takes for an elaborate post is of course very good invested and are basically free marketing Not that I condemn this in any way! Fair game to Baz and Hartech. Also parts fail and it is unreasonable to expect a infinite warranty by anybody. Of course it is unfortunate when a bearing fails shortly after the warranty runs out, but from the informations given, Hartech/Baz handled correctly. (And I presume people realize that warranties are prized into the end product, right? Every manufacturer does this. When an American gives you a lifetime warranty, you are paying for this. It is basically a bet against the failure if a given part. Of course, the more reliable a product is, the less is the factored in cost for a warranty.) But back to what irritates me: There are other engine builders who rebuild these engines as well! Just as good you ask? I can't know for sure. A very difficult question to answer. There is a very well known PHer for instance, who went to someone else for the rebuild of his high mileage 996 (albeit, as I understand, they used the same Capricorn liners as Hartech do). There are other highly respected engine builders and Porsche indies who rebuild these engines on a regular basis. Yes there are different schools of thought regarding certain aspects on the rebuild. And yes, there have been engine builders who went out of business, especially in Germany, for lack of reliability after a rebuild. But the field has cleared now. By now, these who rebuild these engines on a regular basis know what they are doing. The cult like following of Hartech, to the point where numerous people on the internet claim that you can only buy a M96/7 engined car that has a full Hartech rebuild, really irritates me. There was a lovely X51 997.1 C2S with a rebuild done by Torque/Serdi (iirc) discussed on an other thread, that got borderline slanted because it wasn't done by Hartech. The other thing I highlighted before: not every M96/7 fails prematurely. There are certain design flaws that can lead to premature failure (and then, what is premature? what is an adequate life expectancy for a Porsche engine?). Different engine configurations have different problems and certain elements got changed during the 12 years of production (some changes where for the better, some where for the worse). Every ICE is subject to wear and every engine eventually needs a rebuild. Mileage is less relevant that heat cycles. This is much like airplanes that have a lifespan measured in number of flights, regardless of hours (this is due to the cycles of how often the cabin was pressurized). Also how an engine is driven and how the car has been maintained can have an affect on the engine life. Now take into consideration the known problems that can occur with the M96/7 engines and it gets really difficult to make statements about their reliability. When people want to buy a 9A1 engined 911 to avoid those potential problems, fair enough. If you can sleep better at night do it! But keep in mind that these engines, as many, many others as well, get rebuild due to wear and tear as well. (albeit maybe/probably/I guess far less often) If people only want to buy a M96/7 engined car that has a Hartech rebuild, again: if it makes you sleep better at night keep, go for it! But the narrative that the M96/7 engined cars are a heap of junk and that Hartech is the sole savior is overstated. For the majority of people who just wan't to enjoy a 9x6 and 9x7.1: these are fabulous cars, keep your eyes open when buying, make your homework and enjoy the summer that is arriving drive safely

Filibuster - it's a shame my time trying to explain things irritates you. What is it exactly that you d not like about it? The only people who can fit our Capricorn Liners are us or those agents we authorise to under contract but we do fit those liners for other specialists (and that explains that particular issue). We provide a comprehensive service for other engine assemblers including fitting liners to blocks, building short blocks, building full engines and receiving a car for the whole job. I don't see how we can fairly be criticised for this service or be accused of trying to hog all the actual engine rebuild work. We have never claimed we are the only people who can rebuild these engines and if anyone thinks we have - just think why would we provide the service for others in that case? I think we are the only specialist that has been as successful in the various racing series' over the last 13 years, and carries out the full range of other services, who also has our own dyno, our own precision machine shop, manufactures special parts for engine rebuilds and racing, is carrying out research and development into how to make our engines more economical and expel fewer emissions.- and has set up agencies in a number of different Countries - including more recently to replicate our manufacturing processes in the USA. I also doubt very much there is any specialist who has rebuilt anywhere near as many engines as we do and there is no doubt that the more you see, strip, analyse and repair - the greater knowledge you have accumulated and the more obvious trends are. Those volumes justify investing in systems that smaller operations could not and give an insight into trends that then help us to decide what to invest in to have the greatest benefit for our customers - (like the special crankshaft bearing, pistons, liners, crankshaft re-grinds etc). I don't think anyone could fairly say that is not the highest level of support for individuals and other specialists that any other organisation is offering and that does set-us apart. But I agree with you that there are some other specialists who can put the engine together OK - but you would surely not expect me to promote what they do - that is up to them. Regarding the lengthy posts - you cannot have it both ways. you cannot on the one hand find detailed accurate and technically correct explanations about faults and advice that people are asking about and do so in a sentence - you are not forced to read it.. There is nothing stopping other specialists doing the same and it is very unfair to criticise us for doing so when we usually are the only source of reliable accurate scientifically correct explanations that take time and cost money to do FOC. While you are annoyed that so many people support what we do by voicing their opinion that we are the best place to go to for an engine rebuild - I am irritated by those that then try to find some way to criticise us because of that strong position in the market - that I think (and the majority of the general Porsche public clearly think) is absolutely justified. I also think it is unfair to criticise us for responding to issues like the crank regrinds and new higher quality shells when this is an information medium and the knowledge we post is of value to those who have engine problems and seek a cost effective solution. They say a good sign of success is all those that cannot stand you for it and try to bring you down - just because you are perceived as the best. I admit we set out to be the best and to provide the best properly engineered solutions and rebuilds but it is only our customers that have benefitted from that commitment and we are not doing anything to stop anyone else trying to do the same. Baz . . .

Baz, you have misunderstood me! Your posts do not irritate me and I your opinion together with your lengthy posts is much appreciated. I didn't state otherwise, did I? You come highly recommended and have built up a solid reputation. This takes time and hard work! As you are stating, there are other very good engine builders. You state as much as they "can put the engine together OK". It is only natural that you think highly of your work. A healthy portion of self-confidence is the mannerism of any successful business man. And you have stated clearly where your self-confidence comes from. I have no problem with this whatsoever! I was merely pointing out, and this is what irritates me, that many people on this forum speak about Hartech like it was a cult. Hartech or nothing! This of course comes, amongst your very good reputation, from your many lengthy, technical posts. I was calling them marketing. As I have clearly stated, I have no problem with this. Your reputation comes well deserved and as I have written above, takes a lot of work and a long time. Good for you! Regarding the story about the failed crank bearing, I clearly stated that this can happen to anyone and that you handled the whole situation very well. What I was criticising is that this any many other threads and post resemble an echo chamber for Hartech. It grinds my teeth when people who have never owned a Porsche come here and state that they only consider buying a car with a full Hartech rebuild. If it makes them sleep better, fine by me. But there are cars that work perfectly fine without a rebuild and there are cars that run perfectly fine with a rebuild done by someone else. Again, I was neither questioning your abilities as an engineer, nor the work of your company. I was merely pointing out that the talking about Hartech has reached cult like tendencies and that there are other engine builders available. Some of them are even able to put an engine together in an ok way Oh, regarding the other build I was referring to: I meant PPBB's infamous 996. He had a highly specced rebuild done by Autofarm back in 2017. He mentioned that he initially wanted to go to Capricorn, but due to timing, he ended up with Autofarm castings.

Filibuster said: Baz, you have misunderstood me! Your posts do not irritate me and I your opinion together with your lengthy posts is much appreciated. I didn't state otherwise, did I? You come highly recommended and have built up a solid reputation. This takes time and hard work! As you are stating, there are other very good engine builders. You state as much as they "can put the engine together OK". It is only natural that you think highly of your work. A healthy portion of self-confidence is the mannerism of any successful business man. And you have stated clearly where your self-confidence comes from. I have no problem with this whatsoever! I was merely pointing out, and this is what irritates me, that many people on this forum speak about Hartech like it was a cult. Hartech or nothing! This of course comes, amongst your very good reputation, from your many lengthy, technical posts. I was calling them marketing. As I have clearly stated, I have no problem with this. Your reputation comes well deserved and as I have written above, takes a lot of work and a long time. Good for you! Regarding the story about the failed crank bearing, I clearly stated that this can happen to anyone and that you handled the whole situation very well. What I was criticising is that this any many other threads and post resemble an echo chamber for Hartech. It grinds my teeth when people who have never owned a Porsche come here and state that they only consider buying a car with a full Hartech rebuild. If it makes them sleep better, fine by me. But there are cars that work perfectly fine without a rebuild and there are cars that run perfectly fine with a rebuild done by someone else. Again, I was neither questioning your abilities as an engineer, nor the work of your company. I was merely pointing out that the talking about Hartech has reached cult like tendencies and that there are other engine builders available. Some of them are even able to put an engine together in an ok way Oh, regarding the other build I was referring to: I meant PPBB's infamous 996. He had a highly specced rebuild done by Autofarm back in 2017. He mentioned that he initially wanted to go to Capricorn, but due to timing, he ended up with Autofarm castings. There are other water cooled engine builders available but after 110,000 miles in different 997s over 18 years, which included two bored scored engines. And after a disaster with a box and air-cooled 1970 911 engine rebuild with one of the "best names" in the business (the diff exploded after 1000 miles and within 4000 miles the next owner had to spend 25K on proper, second rebuild with Neil Bainbridge). I wanted to get it right this time. And, for me, it was Hartech or not bother. Regarding the 997s: I know 2 swallows don't make a summer, and some cars do huge mileage with no issues, but my own experience with 997s (which I love by the way) means I would not buy another one unless it had been rebuilt by Hartech. A clear borescope at purchase isn't enough to reassure me now. 10k down the road it could still be knackered. But then I would never sell ours so academic. However I understand why so many posters say the same. Equally I fully understand why that irritates existing 997 owners (unless their car has been to Hartech). PS I should add that, in 43 years of driving, I have never had to have any major engine work done on any of my other cars. Just the 997s. I don't count the 2.2s as it was nearly 50 years old so deserved one. Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 22 May 15:55

hartech said: Filibuster - it's a shame my time trying to explain things irritates you. What is it exactly that you d not like about it? The only people who can fit our Capricorn Liners are us or those agents we authorise to under contract but we do fit those liners for other specialists (and that explains that particular issue). We provide a comprehensive service for other engine assemblers including fitting liners to blocks, building short blocks, building full engines and receiving a car for the whole job. I don't see how we can fairly be criticised for this service or be accused of trying to hog all the actual engine rebuild work. We have never claimed we are the only people who can rebuild these engines and if anyone thinks we have - just think why would we provide the service for others in that case? I think we are the only specialist that has been as successful in the various racing series' over the last 13 years, and carries out the full range of other services, who also has our own dyno, our own precision machine shop, manufactures special parts for engine rebuilds and racing, is carrying out research and development into how to make our engines more economical and expel fewer emissions.- and has set up agencies in a number of different Countries - including more recently to replicate our manufacturing processes in the USA. I also doubt very much there is any specialist who has rebuilt anywhere near as many engines as we do and there is no doubt that the more you see, strip, analyse and repair - the greater knowledge you have accumulated and the more obvious trends are. Those volumes justify investing in systems that smaller operations could not and give an insight into trends that then help us to decide what to invest in to have the greatest benefit for our customers - (like the special crankshaft bearing, pistons, liners, crankshaft re-grinds etc). I don't think anyone could fairly say that is not the highest level of support for individuals and other specialists that any other organisation is offering and that does set-us apart. But I agree with you that there are some other specialists who can put the engine together OK - but you would surely not expect me to promote what they do - that is up to them. Regarding the lengthy posts - you cannot have it both ways. you cannot on the one hand find detailed accurate and technically correct explanations about faults and advice that people are asking about and do so in a sentence - you are not forced to read it.. There is nothing stopping other specialists doing the same and it is very unfair to criticise us for doing so when we usually are the only source of reliable accurate scientifically correct explanations that take time and cost money to do FOC. While you are annoyed that so many people support what we do by voicing their opinion that we are the best place to go to for an engine rebuild - I am irritated by those that then try to find some way to criticise us because of that strong position in the market - that I think (and the majority of the general Porsche public clearly think) is absolutely justified. I also think it is unfair to criticise us for responding to issues like the crank regrinds and new higher quality shells when this is an information medium and the knowledge we post is of value to those who have engine problems and seek a cost effective solution. They say a good sign of success is all those that cannot stand you for it and try to bring you down - just because you are perceived as the best. I admit we set out to be the best and to provide the best properly engineered solutions and rebuilds but it is only our customers that have benefitted from that commitment and we are not doing anything to stop anyone else trying to do the same. Baz . Hi Baz, Apologies for changing tack on the thread, but I was wondering if there's now a reasonably sensible solution for a 991.1 GT3 if the engine lets go beyond the warranty period? Not an imminent concern, but thinking ahead! . .

hartech said: Flammetta - considering that the engine range was always a budget 911 - it is actually a very clever piece of engineering with many quality features (like the hard iron inserts in the crankcase cassettes to maintain main bearing fits). It is fair to say that you are a little bit too generous now. A budget 911? I do have a price list of 996 and 986 from early 97 and 996 s were like 70k back than. They did have the knowledge and skills back than (959) but they really pushed a crappy product to mainstream without any major upgrade until 9A1. Actually, an oil rig test of 9A1 shows how they were already advanced in 2008 but they did not implement it which shows a really bad faith as a brand imho. Similar issues recorded on GT products too such as 991 (finger followers?) But that's another discussion. Sorry If anyone being offended but I think it is a bit naive to over exaggerate these cars, they are what they are and absolute bargain for the people who can work on them.

hartech said: ATM - the short answer is "YES". Nitride hardening process only puts a relatively thin hard layer on the crankshaft journals and is a time based process. It can go deeper but takes longer - hence more expensive. in a World where fashion dictates lifespans often more than actual longevity and labour costs have become the dominating component of repair costs - many manufacturers are reducing planned life expectancy. However - we re-hardened some crankshafts (about 15 years ago) and re-machined some suitable shells from other manufacturers to fit - and they have lasted ever since. But it is not the cheapest of processes as the cranks have to be ground twice requiring great precision setting and modifying shells to fit was also expensive. So while good used cranks were available we didn't need to use the solution we had already proven. Now new crankshafts have escalated in price and good used ones are as rare as hens teeth - the time has come where it is worth resurrecting the proven solution and as crankshaft failure is increasing (with the additional mileages covered in the meantime) we hope it justifies a considerable investment in high quality batches of shells. Baz Ok thanks

The time I spend posting replies is intended to help people understand the true story and statistics about these engines so they can assess the risk they take and try and minimise it. nothing in what I post forces anyone to come just us for a rebuild and the information is available to all my ccompetitors (who largely don't spend their time doing the same) while others can choose to use our intermediate engine services that take advantage of our suprior products and leave them to cary out the bulk of the remaining work.. Crankshaft life is similar. As we see a new engine every day our statistics can be based on far greater numbers than probably anyone else and therefore our advice is likely to be more accurate and therefore relevant. It still doesn't stop anyone going anywhere else as a result of it. Crankshaft shell life is difficult to advise about because of the variations in evidence. Some last over 150K some fail under 60K - what are we to advise? It's like the medical profession - some people have a heart attack under 65 years of age others last into their 90's - so it is right to advise those approaching 65 to think about a good diet, a check up. perhaps exercise and statins - or right to say "well some last into their 90's so therefore we should not give any statistical advice and it's tough luck on those that pass earlier? The cost of a new crankshaft has recently spiraled and therefore I cannot see anything wrong in advising those that want their cars and engines to "live longer" to consider pre-emptive rebuilds. To make that choice more acceptable we offer the best and longest lasting cylinder solution, the best big ends, a business that carries out all the work "IN HOUSE" entirely under our control, proven success of the quality through years of racing reliability and success and a dedicated team that do nothing else but work on these engines every day and gain the most experience of what to look out for and how to improve the resulting rebuilds. So this week another crank failure (this time right at the bottom end of our advisory mileage range (see picture). if the general public want to pass on their opinion that we are the best place for an engine rebuild that is not "our marketing" but theirs and such a reputation is hard won over many years and I think entirely justified. I happen to think there is actually no other specialist as good (because no one else can match the improved quality of the parts we designed, manufactured and supply, the equipment we have and the reputation the general public have experienced), but there are definitely other good ones and the choice is free. On a more serious, practical and extremely relevant note - if we didn't have such high volumes of engines to rebuild we could never justify the enormous cost of developing some of the solutions we provide. Special pistons, superior crankshaft shells that have to be ordered in hundreds, test cars to develop capacity conversions etc (not to mention the work going on to reduce emissions and increase economy to enable our cars to be legally driven in more geographical areas in the future and do our bit to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions). The shells for the specialist crankshaft rebuilds alone have cost thousands and will not show a return for a few years. Such investment would never be possible for other specialists (however "good" they may or may not be) because they simply would not have the volumes to make it viable. We backed our opinion that they will become the next main weak spot and if we are proved wrong we will end up with lots of expensive shells we will never sell and lose money - such commitment to preserving these cars and improving their quality comes about partly because of our engineering expertise but also because of the volumes we have grown to handle - without which - however "good" a competitors might be - they are unlikely to have the volumes to replicate. It is a typical business model where it can almost become self sustaining. DO a good job = more business. Invest in product development = do an even better job = more business = can continue to invest = a better job = more business etc etc. It is only because we invested so much in trying to provide the best engine rebuild service for these troubled engines that we can continue to improve what we provide (as time reveals more weaknesses and spares costs and availability influence choices) and that level of investment is almost a self sustaining benefit because the more we rebuild, the more we can justify investment in further improvements and it all adds up to the best service available - but doesn't stop anyone choosing to go anywhere else - if they want to! Meanwhile we manage to continually improve what we offer. As to the time it takes to write this stuff I got up at 5 am to do this one, we are totally booked up for months ahead and I don't need a greater demand - so why do I do it - because the truth about the engines and the differences in what we provide - should be in the public domain for owners to make informed choices and I feel an obligation to supply it as we have the best intelligence about that - readers can dis-regard it - consider it "just marketing", be competitors trying to discredit us for their own business ends or be jealous that we are so successful and criticise us - but that is out of my hands and up to them. But I do object most strongly to implications that we are no better than loads of other engine builders and only post responses to feather our own nest - and @ 6am now I didn't get up early to do this to get any more business - just to prove that some engine crankshafts do fail early and explain why I feel it is right to inform owners of that rather than keep quiet about it to increase the resulting repair costs for others. Baz Edited by hartech on Friday 26th May 06:12 Edited by hartech on Friday 26th May 07:00 Edited by hartech on Friday 26th May 08:06

very subtle sarcasm there .... No in all honesty, thank you Baz for this info. While I have called on you, you make many valid points. What interests me is the point regarding the crankshaft. This is news to me, in regard of these engines. I heared of failing crankshaft bearings, and I can see a crankshaft going kuputt as a consequence, but what exactly is main problem with the M96/7 engines and their crankshafts? Is this due to an "design fault", driving style or oil grade? You advice people on doing preemptive engine rebuilds, before a crankshaft fails and is not regrindable. Just curious, what is the cost for e preemptive, fully working M96/7 with 100k miles as opposed to one on it's last leg?

Well Fillibuster - in answer to your question - firstly there are different ways to harden crankshafts and different ways to make the crankshaft shells and each costs more or less. The M997/1 has a crankshaft nitride hardened with a hardness depth of about 3 thou (or 0.076mm) and provides a hard surface that will last a very long time as long as the oil pressure and shells are not worn out. The oil pressure is delivered by a gear pump that has relatively low oil pressure at low revs that increases as revs increase until it reaches the relief valve pressure after which it remains constant. It makes no difference if you are on light throttle or full throttle - the oil pressure is the same at any revs and oil temperature. Most engines were like this but the (A1 Gen 2 engine has a variable pressure system with a pump that can exceed the low oil pressures at low revs and can increase the oil pressure delivered to the crankshaft depending on the load (or power) you are selecting - so more oil pressure when under maximum and full throttle than at cruising at the same revs. However despite the relatively crude oil pressure system on your 997/1 the crankshaft is so well made and hard o the surfaces that it will usually survive a very long time despite the less expensive shells fitted as long as the shells are still OK and the driving style has not resulted in the overhung crankshaft wobbling about on fast downchanges and not worn the rear main bearing as a result. The crankshafts are not made with enough hardness depth to re-grind to a hard layer. The shells will eventually wear. How long that takes depends on many factors like how the car was driven in it's lifetime, maintenance, oil grades and condition, avoiding low oil levels, avoiding track use that drops oil pressure under braking or in corners. Most owners will not know how that was applied by previous owners - so there is always a risk. The big ends carry far more load than the main bearings because they drive the crankshaft round and reverse the mass of the piston and rod when it passes over TDC and BDC - so are most vulnerable. The oil that reaches the big ends starts out in the main bearings and there is a hole in the crankshaft that then allows some of the pressurised oil to travel up a hole and reach the big ends. So there are two ways the shells can wear. If a main bearing wears first it reduces the oil pressure in that bearing and therefore reduces the pressure that travels up to the more highly loaded big end - which wears prematurely and soon fails - because as it wears more of the oil being delivered to it can escape from the edges and lowers the pressure at the bearing. or the shells simply wear out too soon. When a shell wears because more of the presurised leaks out the pressure in the bearing drops so it is a vicious circle that quickly deteriorates. Eventually the gap between the shell and the journal gets so great - THAT COMBINED WITH THE LACK OF OIL PRESSURE HAMMERS THE SHELLS UNTIL IT SQUASHES THINNER AND WIDER (AS SEEN IN THE TOP TWO SHELLS IN THE ABOVE PICTURE) . Usually that kills the crankshaft but sometimes we get in in time. The standard big ends are narrower than the big end journal on the crankshaft so offer less support since support is pressure over an area - and if the shells are shorter they offer lower support. That is why our first change was to supply wider big end shells and while we were doing that we contracted the best in the business to make the best quality they could. Stocking costs were very high to get a viable quantity made but we did it to improve the longevity of our engines compared to anyone using standard shells. As long as an engine has an unworn crankshaft - replacing the shells is all that is needed to achieve longer life from it. The crankshaft bearing journals can be re-hardened but you have to grind off the old hard remaining layer before re-hardening by infusing the surface with Nitrides. That then leaves a "white layer" which is not suitable so they then have to be re-ground again.to final size - doubling the handling and regrind costs. The cars are older now than a few years ago so general average mileages are increasing. Most engines we rebuilt before had crankshafts we could re-use and there were some available from breakers so it wasn't worth investing in special big ends of a different re-grind size. As more cars have gone past 70-100K now - more are failing with crankshafts too worn to use and yet the cost of a new crankshaft was not too high (Under £3K). Now they have gone up to £5754 (with Vat) and so suddenly the extra cost of a new (or good used) crankshaft makes doubling the regrind costs more justifiable and so in turn the investment in special shells becomes long term viable. While we are doing that we ordered the top quality possible again (like the big ends - racing specifications). Now we are testing the new set-ups - not because we have any doubts about anything (already proved the re-hardening and grinding process years ago and trust the shell manufacturers) but because we have to be absolutely sure of everything we do before selling to the public and that means building an engine - putting mileage on it and then stripping to check everything and rebuilding it again. All this R & D is something no one seems to take account of when we provide our services and products for rebuilds. It is hugely expensive and every new product goes through the same procedure and delays the point at which volume sales make a viable return. I think it is perfectly reasonable for us to mention this difference in what we provide compared to others when questions are asked about longevity of rebuilds, comparative costs and the resulting criticism for hogging the subject on social media.. We are not stopping any competitor responding with what they do by comparison - or offering technical criticism - but we don't usually see that because we know what we are doing and it would only expose that they often don't at the same level. All this would not be possible if our volumes were not high enough to give us the confidence to invest in these very expensive solutions to improve the resulting rebuilds and make them better than anyone else's. It is entirely possible that there are other specialists that have the background knowledge to engineer the same solutions but it is the first to gain ground on volumes that can justify it and if they then receive the bulk of the work - volumes for everyone else make a similar investment more risky and less justifiable.. It is only because we invested in fixing these engines over 25 years ago when at the time volumes were low but our engineering analysis predicted the failures that followed a few years later (and turned out to be right). If we misjudged that we would have lost a lot of money - but we didn't and now I believe purely as a result of good engineering, investing early and proving the results through the many customers who have enjoyed the performance and reliability since - that we enjoy the fruits of that risk when no one else did the same. It is for that reason I would claim we are the best at what we do and will continue to be so - not necessarily claiming some technical superiority no one else could match but risking getting an early lead in the market that paid off. Mind you - in TT week and having both designed and manufactured 3 different motorcycle racing engines and transmissions decades ago that won several different events there - I have yet to meet another Porsche specialist business with that proven historical capability. I hope this answers all your questions and now await the criticism for providing such a lengthy and comprehensive reply - typically thorough and detailed - like everything we do - and another reason behind our success. Baz . .

To Baz and the guys and girls at Hartech well done, you have earned a very good reputation in the engine rebuild market and as mentioned there are others, there are some that have gone to the wall but no one else spends the time to share knowledge and pictures so again thank you for your time. Yes i have a 996 4s and love it if it came to the time when the engiine needsa a rebuild i will do my own research but Hartech will be top of the list Anyway keep enjoying your cars

Nice looking C2 for sale at the moment that seems to have had several rebuilds. Wonder what happened? Copy and paste from ad: "Recent works include:- · Ignition coils and plugs (2012) · Battery (2012) · Resleeve and new pistons (2012) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2013) · New door and wing (2016) · All pads and discs (2018) · New suspension and arms (2018) · Brakes servo and pipes (2020) · Battery (2021) · Resleeve and new pistons (2022) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2023) · New keys and re-programme (2023) · MOT work (2024)"

Paulm4 said: Nice looking C2 for sale at the moment that seems to have had several rebuilds. Wonder what happened? Copy and paste from ad: "Recent works include:- · Ignition coils and plugs (2012) · Battery (2012) · Resleeve and new pistons (2012) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2013) · New door and wing (2016) · All pads and discs (2018) · New suspension and arms (2018) · Brakes servo and pipes (2020) · Battery (2021) · Resleeve and new pistons (2022) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2023) · New keys and re-programme (2023) · MOT work (2024)" Guessing it wasn't done properly in 2012.

Paulm4 said: Nice looking C2 for sale at the moment that seems to have had several rebuilds. Wonder what happened? Copy and paste from ad: "Recent works include:- · Ignition coils and plugs (2012) · Battery (2012) · Resleeve and new pistons (2012) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2013) · New door and wing (2016) · All pads and discs (2018) · New suspension and arms (2018) · Brakes servo and pipes (2020) · Battery (2021) · Resleeve and new pistons (2022) · Engine rebuild and IMS bearing (2023) · New keys and re-programme (2023) · MOT work (2024)" Seems it was also sold on an auction site in September and back up for sale. Now wing and door sounds ominous too

Sounds pretty much normal honestly, a new engine once every 10 year.