69 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHMk1 vs Mk2
Leading reported evidence
Replace library or bookstore visit/purchase
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
hitting search and enter has replaced a library or bookstore visit/purchase.
Leading evidence: 'Replace library or bookstore visit/purchase' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'cool car' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check weights' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
Mk1 is cheaper to fix when you ran tire walls because you can use salvage Boxster body parts for the front half.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
Body: "beefy new high tensile steel tubes" used for the Cab on the windshield and both Cab and Coupe doors for safety.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suspected cause
It seems that the average person thinks any Porsche, especially 911 model is probably a cool car.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Partially correct...the bean counters had already gotten to the car and cut a lot of corners on parts, but the early production appears to have been done on established production lines alongside the last of the previous air cooled cars by skilled craftsmen...not by robots...as the new lines were not up and running yet.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
As much as I have appreciated test drives in 996.2s and can tell the difference from the 996.1s, I have never cared for the headlights, and I worry about the higher likelihood of bore scoring.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I definitely should have used 296 -- that is the "apples to apples" number compared to the C2 as listed in the Excellence stats, so 9.8 lbs to move per HP for the Mk1 versus 9.24 for the Mk2.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
69 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T011819Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm sure this has been addressed before, but when I did a search I found ZERO info as to the difference of MK1 and MK2.
What is the difference?
What years/models did MK1 start and end.
What years/models did MK2 start and end.
That the heck is MK anyway??
Please make is simple for this meager village idiot.
thanks in advance.
Generally the 99-01 are mk1, 02-04 are mk2 *
The mk1 has the 3.4L engine with about 300HP at the crank, mk2 has the 3.6L engine with about 320hp at the crank
The most obvious difference are the headlights. The mk1 shared the headlights with the 986 boxster, whereas the mk2 shares the headlights with the 996 turbo.
The earliest mk1's had the dual row IMS bearing (98-99), the later cars (both mk1 and mk2) had the single row.
mk2 has a glove box and had a cup holder that doesn't eat a DIN unit in the center console like the mk1's did
mk1 aero kit was bigger than mk2.
mk2 introduced the C4S with the wide-body look of the turbo
I'm sure I'm leaving a ton out, and since this is from memory I'm probably wrong on about half of those details, but this should be a good starting point
* 1998 was a changeover year, so there were both 993's and 996's produced. but for the most part, 996's started appearing for the 1999 model year. Same with 2005, all 05 turbos and GT2/3's as far as I know were still 996.2, but a few of the 05 C2 / C4 C4s cars were also 996.2's. Most cars produced in 2005 were 997's however.
The 996 MK2 did actually carried into my05:
#
type
728 4S Coupe
763 4S Cabs
201 Carrera Cab
276 GT3
122 Turbo
18 GT2
129 Targa
90 GT3 Cup
127 Turbo Cab
598 Turbo S
960 Turbo S Cab
Total 996 production of all models for Y 05 was 4012
Data from: Porsche 996 The Essential Companion
"Please make this simple for a village idiot"
Well.. in our tech existence more often than not
hitting search and enter has replaced a library or bookstore visit/purchase.
Sometimes it's like taking an easier/long way/diverted route.
Buy the 996 Essential Companion.
What?? it's like 2 inches thick and 5lbs.
Worth every penny. Get at it and read.
Mangia.
Can't verify the accuracy but this is what I found(not from the 996 companion)
1997 Carrera Coup� 14
1998 Carrera Coup� 8296
1998 Carrera Cabriolet 952
I think mk1 cars have bosch 3 channel ABS, mk2 cars have bosch 4 channel ABS. I assume the 4 channel ABS is more advanced, and when combined with e-gas, can do traction control,
ABD (automatic braked differential), PSM, ..etc.
I don't known whether the 3.4L (5 timing chains) or the 3.6L (3 timing chains) engine is more robust for hard use.
Pretty sure that feature was released on the MKI as well...
Seperately, when did they switch from 4-spoke steering wheels to 3-spoke, or was that just an optional upgrade? Same applies to wheels, right? Some differences there too.
Okay, I'm coming up on two years in my car as a daily driver, what the hell is this foam you're speaking of?
EDIT - just searched, so I guess that's one more thing to look out for. So far haven't seen any.
Ok, I found a magazine article about this, always wanted to write the summary for the forum.. So here is the list, with some duplication of what people wrote above:
3.6 liter engine: with variable CAM lift, not only variable CAM timing like the Mk1. Stroke increased from 78mm to 82.8 mm. Torque increased by 15 ft/lbs. and comes at 350 RPM lower. Crank, conn rods, and pistons are all different. Oiling system improved for more flow.
Transmission: different, uses more durable alloy steel for the gears, drive shaft uses 3 bearings instead of 2, differential now has 4 bevel gears.
Completely redesigned exhaust system (to make it sound more like a Porsche). Has 40 millibars less back pressure. Triple chamber muffler.
Lower front fascia (bumper cover) has larger air intakes (and it looks different). Improvements reduced lift at the front end by 25%. Changes to improve cooling included a different (reconfigured) front trunk lid, front fender openings for air outlet. This also improved under chassis air circulation with 20% improvement in transmissionc cooling.
Rear valance (bumper cover) redesigned. With front and read mods, rear axle lift reduced by 40%.
Suspension spring rates, shock valving, and contact patches all revised for increased performance and because the Mk2 has a slightly higher curb weight (49 lbs).
Body: "beefy new high tensile steel tubes" used for the Cab on the windshield and both Cab and Coupe doors for safety. The Mk2 Cab is 25% stiffer than and the Mk2 Coupe is 50% stiffer.
The wheels are 9% to 21% lighter. New tire choices including putting wider rubber on the contact patch (20 mm, or close to an inch).
The rear drive coupe does 0-62 in 5 seconds vs the Mk1 at 5.2 seconds.
Fuel mileage improved by 1 MPG because of the VarioCam Plus and other engine improvements.
Turbo headlights: not only for looks, but they are brighter with H7 bulbs
New double cup holder.
Electronic controls for hood / trunk vs cables on Mk1.
On board computer is standard on all models vs optional for Mk1. The LCD display below the tach is higher resolution and brighter.
Cab has glass in the rear window (with heater) vs the previous plastic, but smaller and thus less visibility.
Glove box added.
Bose sound system and options are new.
Price increases of $1,400 (coupe), $1,600 (cab) $1,700 (c4)
Here is the article for those who would like to see the source and interesting written explanations:
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...l#post15174035
Other:
The Targa becomes available.
The C4S becomes available.
The Mk2 Tiptronic cannot be removed alone. It requires both the engine and trans to be removed before separating them.
Based on the many threads I have read on this site over the past year and a half, it appears that having cables for the frunk and engine lid on Mk1 cars versus the electric solenoids on the Mk2 cars is enough to make the Mk1 more desirable!
I would also add to the list of differences that the Mk1 3.4 engines appear to be more prone to cracked heads due to differences in head cooling between the 3.4 and 3.6. The Mk2 3.6 engines appear to be more prone to bore scoring and D-chunk (where a "D" shaped piece on the cylinder wall breaks off). In addition, all (or nearly all) of the Mk2 engines came with the small single row IMSB which is not nearly as robust as the dual row IMSB found on the 1999s and some of the 2000-2001.
^^ Until omeone says �pop the trunk� and I cannot [with my key fob]. Some people like the convenience factor.
Also, I thought the 3.6s were more problematic for cracking?
Both sides are correct (in my opinion). I'm very glad my car has the mechanical levers because I don't like worrying about that stuff. On the other hand, it's a pain to open the door, pull the lever, go back to the front of the car, to put stuff in. Even when you are sitting in the car and opening the frunk for someone else, you have to open the driver door slightly to pull the lever (I assume that was done for safety to prevent accidental pulls while driving).
Still, I would take mechanical reliability over remote convenience for sure.
As I age I still like hot girls, but I do t care one iota what they like. I don�t even care if they like me anymore because no matter how hot she is, I don�t want more kids. I want to spend my free time on hobbies not waste it on some frivolous hot girl.
Women can care less about our cars. Your statement is entirely true, I�ve been asked a half a dozen times by twelve year old boys if they can take a picture of my car.
16 years old and my electronic hatches work just fine.
i could swear, just looking at them side by side, that the .2 is wider. Might just be color differences when I've seen them together, or the fatter rears on the .2.
It anecdotal, but Jake from Flat Six Motors has posted numerous times about the superior build quality of the '99 996 (first model year). Something about old school Porsche standards before the bean counters made them cut all the corners.
Agree it's mostly men and teenage boys that are interested in the car. Most only know that it's Porsche and not the SUV. That being said, I have been approached a couple of times women who are completely out of my league after they saw me exiting the car. Both times I looked around before it registered that they were actually talking to me. Probably not for the better, but made me wish I had gotten the car when I was single,,,
Edit...and no I don't think they would've known the difference between Mk I or II. I think they'd know that you could pick up a 996 for the price of Civic before getting the into finer points of mid-model updates.
Although you can pick up a Porsche 996 for the price of a lesser car, you can't actually drive one long term without having money for repairs/maintenance or skill to personally fix. That is why many people still awe at the site of a 996 rolling down the road. They know they can't get one as it will cost too much long term, or they don't know how to do simple to mid-level repairs and maintenance. It seems that the average person thinks any Porsche, especially 911 model is probably a cool car. 90 percent of the population doesn't know the difference between a 996/997 and even newer.
My buddy bought a late model 911 GTS but still came over to my house to learn how to do an oil change. His dealer wanted $250 for an oil change. He bought all the tools he needed to do it on his own as well as 10 quarts of M1 0W40 at Walmart for less than one dealership oil change.
I'm not really concerned about the electronic hatches breaking, which is a low frequency event, but more about having a dead battery from the car sitting too long and then not being able to get to the battery. Neither of my 996's have/had electronic latches, so I don't know how much of an issue it is in practice, but there are enough threads on RL to make me happier to have mechanical.
Good summary, on the IMS, FWIW, I know there are a bunch of sources out there that very on this, but I believe the double row IMS bearing is present through most 2000 996's and many 2001's. I have a 2001 cab that came with the dual row bearing. Most sources seem to indicate they began to 'phase out' in 2000 but it seems that was more the 986's first.
Bottom line, some of the MK1 and all MK2 have single row bearings.
Does anyone know if later MK2's have the 'improved' ones that are a PITA to replace like the 997.1?
Although I haven't confirmed this, this post in the 997 forum (
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...ml#post7944762
) says that engine serial number (not to be confused with chassis serial number) determines dual-row versus single-row. Specifically, 996 had dual row up to 661 14164, and single row starting with 661 14165 and later:
996: Double Row: up to 661 14164
996: Single Row: from 661 14165
Boxster: Double Row: up to 651 12851 (M96.22) up to 671 11237 (M96.21)
Boxster: Single Row: from 651 12852 (M96.22) from 671 11238 (M96.21)
The M96 engines included all 2.5/2.7/3.2/3.4/3.6 and 3.8 engines (non GT3/GT2/Turbo) up until approx 2006 - including the 997.1 Carrera S engines. The M97 superseded the M96.
Putting the battery in the trunk while having a trunk release dependent on having a working battery definitely has to go in the �what the hell were they thinking file�.
Balancing weight fore and aft, I presume. Plus there is no space in the rear of the car for a battery. Plus Porsche loves tradition: my 1972 911 had a pair of battery boxes way out in the front quarters.
Before they extended the 911 wheelbase in 1969, Porsche added 50 to 80 lb of cast iron dead weight in the front bumpers to counterbalance the rear engine weight bias
. Kind of crazy to have useless weight, but I guess it was necessary to tame the handling. Supposedly Porsche did that after a bad review of handling for the early 911 by Road & Track, though I have not verified that story.
Does anybody know the weight difference between identical configurations of mk1 vs mk2 ( e.g. 2wd 6-speed coupe mk1 vs 2wd 6-speed coupe mk2)? I've never seen that stat published. I would think the Mk2 is slightly heavier, but I would guess that the difference is probably pretty small .
The Excellence Magazine article summarized above says exactly that (on page 64):
"The 2002 six-speed coupe weighs 2,959 pounds compared to 2,910 for the 2001 Carrera coupe, which is an increase of 49 pounds"
the cab gains 60
the Carrera 4 gains 59 pounds
C4 Cab is 70 pounds more.
Thanks! Amazing data per model per year -- never knew this existed (now bookmarked in my browser)
Excellent!! (no pun intended)
I think the Mk1 is 2901 rather than 2910. So, if my math is correct, with 20 additional HP, the Mk2 only has to move 9.24 lb per hp (2959/320) versus 9.67 lbs per hp (2901/300) for the Mk1.
Good point. I definitely should have used 296 -- that is the "apples to apples" number compared to the C2 as listed in the Excellence stats, so 9.8 lbs to move per HP for the Mk1 versus 9.24 for the Mk2.
I really wish Porsche would have continued the old super-light alloy wheel studs on the 996 -- would have been just enough to drop it (barely) into the 2800's (from 2901)
It's ironic you said that. I have had my 99 in the shop getting nearly all of the suspension replaced. My car had studs with aluminum lug nuts. The shop recommend I swap those out, which I did. They are super light, but the treads are easily damaged.
Speaking of light, last night out of curiosity I weighed my wheels with a bathroom scale.
The stock wheels on a '99 996 (option 408, technology turbo twist hollow spoke): Rear 50lbs, Front 43lbs.
This is with 265-35-18 in the rear, 225-40-18 in the front, Falken rt615k+ with about 2K miles. The front wheel is 7.5x18, the rear is 10x18, my estimate is that the rear wheels are 24lbs each, the fronts 19lbs each.
Partially correct...the bean counters had already gotten to the car and cut a lot of corners on parts, but the early production appears to have been done on established production lines alongside the last of the previous air cooled cars by skilled craftsmen...not by robots...as the new lines were not up and running yet. That's one of the reasons Jake likes 'em....still craftsman built.
It's somewhat amazing to hear this. Never heard of the factory using those alloy lug bolts on the 996. Would love to see a picture of them if you still have them. If they are anything like the old lug bolts, it's absolutely crazy how light they are compared to steel or even titanium.
I find it strange that the 99 is so durable, yet it�s the cheapest of the 996s. You�d think people would be all over these. So cheap, that in some cases you could buy two for the price of a rare newest C4S.
I know Jake and other would have some stories about D chunk and other issues with the 99 model years - there are 25 modes of failure on this engine - but it still seems pretty reliable compared to all other 996s.
And yet, they have the lowest price. And coming up on 20 years old too, which could make them a classic.
BTW, an aside, Hagarty won�t insurance a classic unless I get a 3rd car.
Part of the reason 99s are probably less popular and go for less money is the less refined interior. Some of the materials are more crummy looking, mainly all the black plastic parts that are more of a pebbly gray appearance. Headlights and taillights with amber elements also have a tendency to look older. All that stuff can be replaced, but costs $$ to do so. And there's a generally-held opinion on all cars that everything gets better with time, so a lot of people are probably blindly assuming a later car is better/faster/stronger/more reliable than an older car. Great news for people that would like to own a 99!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember reading much about increased frequency of D chunk with the 99s versus 2000 or 2001. It appears to me that the D chunk failure occurs more often in the 3.6 of the MK2s. There was a problem with the castings of some of the 99 engine cases that resulted in porosity, intermix, and engine failure. The bad cases should have revealed themselves by now.
I can clarify. We have two cars and two drivers. They require that to insure a classic, any given driver needs to have their own daily driver before they can insure the classic.
My 03 C4S has "emergency cables" that open both the frunk and engine lid. The problem is that they were inaccessable with the respective lid closed. I modified each of them so they can be accesed with the lid closed.
Although I don't know why you would need that option for the rear lid, unless the solonoid (or switch/wiring?) failed.
Paul
I�m on my third MKI. Love these cars so much that each time I sold one and tried something different for a while I ended up buying another.
Just want to correct something that was said by others. Porsche was still using five chains and a dual row IMS as late as October of 2000 when they built my current 2001 996.1. Also, my 2001 has the electronic frunk and rear lid release buttons rather than cables.
As much as I have appreciated test drives in 996.2s and can tell the difference from the 996.1s, I have never cared for the headlights, and I worry about the higher likelihood of bore scoring. To me the .1 is the perfect Porsche. That is, until I can one day afford a 997.2. 🤓
You�ve got it wrong regarding the interior materials on the 99s. They were actually superior to the 2000 and 2001 models. Porsche was using a manufacturer that year who made a highly durable �pebble� texture that was far more scratch resistant. I�ve had an early build �99 coupe, a �00 Cab, and now an �01 coupe. I�m speaking from years of experience with 996.1s.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
