Anyone NOT had an engine problem?

Having read this forum and a few others it's hard to avoid the impression that the norm for a 996 engine is an RMS leak and/or an engine failure before about 45000 miles. but maybe thisis just because only those owners who've had a problem discuss it. Is there anyone out there who has had a 996 for a few years and 45K+ miles who has not had either problem? In my recent tour around several OPCs I was told that engine failure was "known about" and that the typical cause seemed to be town drivers who from time to time work the car hard on more-open roads without giving it time to warm up properly. Does this ring any bells? David

Yes, to the first paragraph. Can't comment on the second one, though. Not much fun razzing a cold 'un - think of that awful gear change from 1st. to 2nd. with a cold 'box. They all run better warmed up! FWIW most P owners that I have met are more than happy with their cars. These forums allow the relatively few to blow steam and canvass support (which sometimes is very useful to the rest of us in a roundabout sort of way).

Bad news always travels faster than no news. I'm on my second 996 and my wife has had three Boxsters (no.4 arrives shortly), over the last 8 years. We have never had an engine problem (apart from an RMS under warranty a couple of years ago). We also know quite a few other 996/Boxster owners and we are not aware of anyone having any problems. On the contrary, when you consider the sophistication and performance capabilities of these cars, they are remarkably well engineered and reliable.

How true. If only this thread would reach 10 pages long, as has the "Engine Failure" thread. Come on chaps, how about it? Probably too boring........... Although I have only owned my 996 for a year, it has no history in its 60000 mile life of either a RMS or engine failure. It doesn't need any oil top-ups between changes, an has been ultra-reliable as my daily drive. (As he crosses fingers and knocks on wood).

I must say that i can agree with most of the above. My car a late 98 C4 has had 1 RMS replacement, i have a friend with the same car but a 2001 year and he did not know what RMS was, but if you just own a car and don't go through these web-sites then why should you as i am sure there are 1000's out there who are in this situation. Phil

Also never had any (crosses fingers, touches wood, crosses self) problems with mine and just coming up to 50k miles.

My previous car, C4S, I had for 16 months and 27,000 miles - no issues. Current TT, 9000 miles - no issues. I start the car, drive off after about 20 secs, just long enough for the oil to circulate. I then keep below 50% throttle and below 3500 rpm till the water temp comes up close to normal. Once warm I think you can use full throttle, just make the shifts smooth and have some consideration for the clutch, and avoid ramming into the rev limiter on a regular basis as it sets up unfavourable harmonics. About 10% of it's life is at 30mph, 20% at 40 mph, 70% at national speed limit (+ a lilttle bit[ ]). Normally change gear around 5000, but occaisionally go 100% all out to try to get 1 bar of boost. Trouble is the wheels start spinning unless it is dry and it accelerates so fast you run out of road. The cars have been used everyday in rain, snow, hail, sun, fog, whatever, and live outside. They were/are washed every 2-3 weeks and the wheels cleaned every 2 weeks (since getting the brake dust off on a regular basis is essential). The brakes do rust quite quickly, but all the more reason to do a couple of eye-ball popping stops the next time you drive it, just to make sure they are smooth and shiny (plus they work better when warm). A good wax is all it needs, and a bit of oil every 6 weeks.

Very pleased to read the good news! No doubt we all sympathise with those who've been unlucky it's good to know that there are exceptions. The driving hints are just what I needed, being new to Porsche, though it'll be a few years yet before I can get concerned about boost issues.[ ] Who knows, your message may have saved me 10K. Many thanks. David.

Last 996TT had 45K and no engine problems, no issues with this one either.[ ]

The 996TT has a different engine design which does not suffer from RMS or intermediate shaft problems.

of the 9 posts so far, only two have answered in the 100% positive. The rest are either turbo owners (with a different engine) or have had RMS on previous cars. Come on there must be more!!!

I do love the exquisitely casual throw away line above: "We have never had an engine problem (apart from an RMS under warranty a couple of years ago)" What have the Romans ever done for us?

Five cars, 60,000 fault free miles, over 8 years, and one piddly oil seal, replaced foc at a service, without me even knowing. Seems pretty trivial to me.

I reckon a lot of people won't reply to this post as they'll just consider it tempting bad luck to say 'Nope, no problems whatsoever with my engine, she purrs like a kitten, starts first time, every time....RMS, slipped liners...what RMS, what miners....?' Bang! Doh!

My wife and I are now on our third Porsche, a 996 after a Boxster and a Boxster S covering a combined total of 90k with no engine problems. So far![ ]

I'm sure there are lots of owners who have had no or few problems (I'm not one: I had to pay for a RMS on my 996). The problem is the huge expense if you have an engine failure and this is why I'm going to try (and I mean try: look at what happened to Scouser in the other thread) and get mine back under the warranty scheme. Whether I'll also try and do this with my Boxster remains to be seen. I'd have to add that if I had known at the time of purchase that I'd be advised to shell out £1500 p.a. on two warranties because Porsche couldn't design the engine so that there wasn't a finite chance it would fall to bits, I'd never have bought either. Further, I think it is extremely cynical of Porsche to head off this problem by extending the new warranty to cover the RMS problem while leaving those outside the warranty scheme high and dry. I'm not suggesting that just because I have FPSH on both cars that I deserve the same level of cover as warranty holders but some help towards the RMS and slipped liners et al engine design faults would be a step in the right direction. As it is, the way Porsche have abandoned this group is appalling. I would have once considered myself a new model Porsche buyer in the future: now I would not go near their new cars with a barge pole. Porsche's arrogance sucks.

I have a 996 C4 and have had no problems (45,000). There's never any wood when you need some. Always follow the advice of Stuart Martin above. WARM THE CAR UP GENTLY UNTIL 80 degrees, don't go over 3500rpm until its hot. 3 mates of mine have 50,000 mile 996s and follow this advice too, none have had any problems. I'm positive I could thrash the arse of my C4 and blow just about every major seal, hose, plug, crank etc, but I choose not to. Rgards Si

HI, I have a 93,000 996 3.4 C2 Tiptronic. I have had it for just under a year and done 6,000 mixed miles including motorway, local and Track Day. A few months ago (Brands Hatch Track Day actually) the RMS started leaking and was replaced when the rear diff was serviced (the gearbox had an overhaul about 2 years ago by the previous owner. Apart from the RMS, I do not believe that its had any major work in the past and after 93,000 sounds, feels and drives great! Now I am touching wood......

None of that will stop you having a RMS or slipped liners problem.

I agree Paul...It's a design issue and the 997 has started to have the same problem already. A mechanic at my local OPC said he'd heard the RMS problem affected about 15% of 996's. Well that is an awful lot considering the number they've sold. I'm sure it's more than that though. I think Scouser has had most of them or been responsible for most[ ] Just taking it easy in mine that's all. S

2000 my Carrera 4. 32,000 miles (fingers crossed smiley) no problems with RMS. Will [ ]

I don't thrash mine while cold either, and infrequently when hot for the same general reasons as yourself. As for the other, let us both keep our fingers crossed...

40,000 miles in my 996 and not a drop of oil on the nice clean carpet in my garage.[ ] God - saying this really feels like tempting fate

I've got my fingers crossed for all of us

That means 85% aren't, which is what this thread is all about.

I'm tempting providence here but...no problems ( except a small weep on the RHS rocker cover) with my 02 C2 (9K) or previously with my 01 C2 (6K) ...both fairly low miles though. The rocker cover weep was fixed under warranty during the 24K service. Apparently, if you ever get one, it will invariably be on the RHS. Can't think why this should be. I have however just purchased an extended warranty if only so I can sleep easy!

I've got same ( colour , year, transmission) model as Richard Hamilton , reg Nov 97, now 72k miles , including 6 trackdays during 2001-2 , NO engine problems. Have spent many online hours reading about the well-publicised (by owners) RMS failure and have got used to the idea that this has actually cost me a few £thousand in depressed resale value even though I am in the majority of owners whose cars engines have been unaffected. PS dont do track days in it anymore though [ ]

Sorry guys but warming up the engine is a red herring. To start with your manual says to drive the car "immediatly" you start it. Secondly I have always kept my revs below 3000 until the temp guage hits the middle and my car has never been tracked. It's also had an oil and filter change every 5000 miles. So how do you account for 7 RMS replacements given that scenario. Despite all this my engine sounds great and it goes brilliantly and "does not" use up oil at all. I have never had to top my oil up between oil changes. BTW, my 7th is leaking again at 240 miles since the last one was fitted two weeks back. And just in case your wondering, I have not taken it past 3000 revs since I am breaking in a new gearbox. Also, my engine block has had the new blue bolts fitted including a new IMS and flange. I might add that the bore was measure too at the last RMS change and it was good.....engineer said the blue bolts and correct torque might be the reason for the bore being within tollerance.....yet it still leaks. Figure that one out.

Berny Sorry to hear about the latest RMS giving up the ghost after such a short time - rather than us trying to 'figure it out' I am keen to hear what the 'experts' at Porsche think it is? Surely someone must have an idea or are you expecting too much[8|]

Berney, this is deeply disappointing! Did you pay for this one? If yes, then it will be warranted for 12 months. Have you taken it back for official diagnosis/confirmation?

As expected, this is turning into another RMS problem thread. If the 'Engine Failure' thread reached 10 pages from a minority of owners, it would have been nice if this had at least matched it, from the majority. It might have instilled a bit more confidence in people thinking of taking the plunge into Porsche ownership. Oh well, who cares about apathy anyway?

Richard, I have had very few (relatively speaking) contacts from members who have suffered engine failure - take this as a given

Nigel, the only way "Porsche experts" will get a chance to figure it out is if they get my RMS plagued engine to play with. But since PUK will not replace my engine FOC (they want 50% with a cost to me of £4,500) so this won't happen. Nic, I didn't pay for the last RMS replacement. It was done free when they changed the gearbox. All I had to pay was £9.00 +VAT for the seal plus a few extra quid for the blue bolts. However, I did pay for the 1st RMS seal replacement over a year ago and all the others including this last one have been done under warranty. But they have told me "in clear terms" they "will not" replace the seal again. They have made their suggestion that the only thing that will fix the RMS problem for good in my 996 is a replacement engine. But as I have already said above, it will cost me a small mortgage. I will have to live with a leaking RMS since I simply can't afford £4,500.......and there will be no guarantee that the replacement will be RMS trouble free either! Nic, you recall that PUK said something like "they treat each car differently and merit warranty accordingly". Sothing to that nature anyway. Well wouldn;t you think that after 7RMS's, a gearbox and an awful lot of moaning and pleading on a car that has done only 41,000 miles with FPUKSH they would merit I get a new engine FOC. Especially that the first RMS was done at 28,000 miles and just out of warranty. Meanwhile I continue to bitch and moan across the internet forums. I don;t understand their business ethics. All they have to do is replace my engine which will allow me to pay the £750 quid for extended warranty and they instantly would have me back as a happy 3rd time Porsche customer......and prospectively a 4th. There is no merit for out-of-warranty owners. They think they are doing us a favour by offereing 50% good-will. And that's the best they will ever offer. The fact that a prospective Porsche owner should "always" buy a car with Porsche warranty is not only a monopolising situation but it is also a guarantee that the residual values of Porsche ownership go down the tube once the car is out of warranty. It's going to be an interesting test for us all ahead. I am driving down to Camberley on Thursday for a business meeting (500 mile round trip), then next month am taking it on a Porsche-1.net meet to the Lakes (400 mile round trip) then in May I am "driving" it to Spain on the PCGB trip (not via boat, all the way!) 3000 mile round trip. All this on the same leakng RMS. If it makes it without problems I will be able to vouch that driving around with a faulty RMS is just fine.

Excuse my ignorance, I'm new to Porsche with a Boxster S but what is RMS?

Nic, I know. It just seemed a shame that this thread was hijacked by those who HAVE had problems (RMS or EF), rather than proliferating with comments from people who have NOT. (Which was, after all, the subject of the thread). Mark you, the boys on the GT3 forum can turn an Oil Change thread into one about blow jobs!

Richard, dont get them started about wax or polish!

Alan, just do a search on the Forum. It stands for Rear Main Seal failure and this afflicts between 10-20% of Boxster and 996 owners. By itself it is only a nuisance but on a few cars, it reoccurs, when it becomes more serious.

Rear Main Seal. It's an oil seal between engine and clutch that dribbles on a significant minority of Boxsters and 996s, and is argued to be related to (but not necessarily the cause of) some engine failures. It is either a potential nightmare, or a few spots of oil on your driveway depending on who you listen to. It would take very little time on this Forum and others to become entirely submerged in details, theories, myth and moans about Porsche as a company, and get thoroughly depressed in the process. My advice... just enjoy the car.

Berny, I'm not being funny but... have you thought of changing the car. There surely comes a point where you have to conclude that the bloody thing's cursed and you cut your losses by changing to another (carefully inspected) 996, or a GT3 or a Turbo, or a M3 for that matter. Just for the sake of sleeping better at night, not to mention the ongoing damage to your wallet.

Absolutely spot on.

I'm afraid I have to concur with Scouser on this one. I agree much of the posting across the forums on this subject has gone OTT but I also believe that "out of nothing, comes nothing." 'Porsche', I believe, review the postings on some of these forums to ascertain the general views and opinions of its customers - and so if we all kept quiet about our dissatisfactions, they would naturally assume everything to be all OK, which it clearly isn't. IMO, given the continued RMS hassle Scouser has endured, Porsche should replace the engine free of charge and without further ado, since it's patently obvious that that is the root cause of the failures. By all accounts, in the US, this would have already been done a long time ago under warranty, so why should we here in the UK be any different? [>:]

Just to keep the thread going with its original intention. Sept 2000 C2 Cab - 2400 miles - no leaks. But then again I woudn't expect any at this mileage. Seriously thinking of an extended warranty as its currently is not covered.

Well said concept. If my car had been in the US it would have all been sorted under warranty by now. They get 4 years warranty in the US....yes FOUR years. And to add to that, they have a policy in the US to replace RMS plagued engines FOC even if out of warranty. Basically, they go out on a limb to look after their customers. Richard, sorry I hajacked the thread. Didn't mean to but it was too tempting The fact is that for this Forum users, the RMS issue has touched so many and that's why this thread isn't as prolific as the RMS thread(s). Either they have had engine problems (such as RMS) or they don't want to tempt fate by saying they haven't. MikeO, the bloody thing has indeed been cursed. I would love to cut my losses on the car if it were realistically practical. But how would you go about selling it if it was your car all things considered. I mean what value would you place on it. Fact is, there have ben two serious issues gearbox & engine. The gearbox issue is sorted. The engine one is, well, ongoinging. But the car still runs like a dream and depsite its problems I love her to bits. I have said this before, the problem is NOT the car, it's Porsche UK's & PAG's attitude and stinking policy to wash over this RMS problem. My car can very easily be fixed. Finally, what makes you think that a "carefully inspected" 996 won;t have an RMS problem the second I drove it off the OPC forcourt? Peter Bull, man that is seriously low miles for a 2000 model! Yes get the extended warranty.......ASAP!

Berny, Just a Catch 22 thought - Your car is probably the most publicised problem 996 in the World (a rare honour), and as such is probably worth next to nothing. £4500 would make it worth market value. I just can't believe the stupidity of your OPC to actually replace the RMS 6 times in a year. At an average of 2200 miles per seal it must have been obvious that your particular engine has a problem far worse than the 'average' problem engine. I assume that your car was out of warranty when the RMS first reared its ugly head, and that they have been trying to wriggle out of it ever since. The kicker is that the 6 OPC's warranty claims to PGB would have paid for at least half of a new engine! I also can't believe PAG for releasing the 997/987 with the same engine. The RMS has been a known issue for years, and they had a perfect opportunity to introduce a redesign and stop the problem from perpetuating. What I think we have to accept is that Porsche is now a volume manufacturer and no longer a specialist manufacturer. Their 1 billion Euro profit is the result of charging specialist prices for a volume product. The only question is how long it will take the average punter to realise this, and for Wendolin's policies to have flushed Porsche's hard-earned kudos down the pan? There, that's got the thread even more off track! [ ]

Richard, no doubt my car is well known for its probems but I am sure it's worth more than £4500! How did you come to that figure? For starters all I have to do is get the new engine fitted and it will be worth just as much as anyone elses for the model year. In fact maybe more as it will have both new gearbox, engine, clutch and header tank all with warranty. But the issue is not what it's worth. I own my Porsche outright so I am one of the lucky ones. The only outlay is upkeep. Apart from the gearbox it's been a very cheap car to run. It's also a great fun-factor car being a cab and all. It was and always has been a car for the long term for me. I hope to get 150,000 miles and much more from it. So value is of no concern. It amazes me that I am the only one not chicken enough to kick up a fuss about the RMS issue. I sometimes get the impression that everyone wants me to shut up about it. But if I don't keep up the fight who will? I fight for both me and everyone else here. Anyway, your are right in every respect in regard to Porsche's attitude though. No doubt about it they have lost me as a future Porsche owner in regards to future purchases.....whenever that will be. Maybe in years to come I will look into the AMV8 or something along those lines when the prices drop and they are a few years old (and they don't seem to have serious problems). By then Porsche will have changed from a specialist car company to just another family car manufacturer. But one thing for sure, I am bitter about Porsche not the car. I love the car and I am not about to sell it in a hurry. I am looking forward to the big Spain trip RMS or not its going [ ]

Richard, while I can see your reasoning, I have to say that after a three hour rather detailed factory tour last Thursday, I can say that Porsche are NOT a volume manufacturer. The level of detail and excellence in their production line is incredible. BUT why have they chosen not to fix this RMS problem and why hasn't the publicity killed them? Answer is (I believe), the high level of goodwill in the market, and the fact that most/all other manufacturers suffer similar sorts of problems. For example, I was told that Mercedes and BMW had shut their line down for a week while an electrical problem in a sub assembly was rectified.

half the cost of a new engine[8|] Andrew

its good to see a thread get hijacked again by the few. Never mind it just show how the minorty view point comes across lounder then the majorty.

Berny I obviously didn't make myself clear. I meant that if you were to spend £4500 on (half the cost of) a new engine then it would restore its value to the current market value as you said. At the present time, however, I would suggest that you would have a very hard time selling it - albeit that you don't want to. If you are going to keep the car to 150000 miles, then that's about 15 years at your current rate. (41000 in 4 years). The AMV8 (not yet on the market) should have finished its production run about 10 years before that, so there should be some bargains on the market [ ] Porsche have the capability of fixing this problem, which was not an issue on any of their previous flat-six designs. The GT3 and Turbo engines are both water cooled versions of older designs, so why can't they apply this technology to the 996/986/997/987? Probably a cost issue, but I feel it will be their downfall if they don't rectify it soon. They can't go on producing something with an inherent flaw and continue to maintain their excellent reputation for reliability and 'useability'. Nic The fact that Porsche are diversifying so much with the Cayenne and the forthcoming 4-door Saloon is a clear indication that they are trying to break into the BMW and Mercedes market, and moving away from the niche that they used to occupy so well.

Berny At last you have something positive to work with - may I suggest you pop along to your local Trading Standards and see what they have to say about a garages refusal to rectify work they have done should it prove still to be faulty and therefore not fit for purpose. As I see it the courts are the only way this matter is going to be resolved and the sooner someone sticks their neck out the sooner we all might get the benefit[ ] Burying heads in the sand - alternatively crossing fingers everytime we go out is something that should have been left where it belongs - in the last century.

6 replacement seals. You Brits hold the record. My Boxster friend Jean only had 5 seals put in then Porsche gave up trying to keep the original engine from leaking. Then Porsche put in 3 rebuilt engines, and each had a vibration problem they could not figure out. So a 4th replacement engine, this time new, was put in. Yanks hold the record for number of engine replacements. Of course if the 4th replacement engine leaks there would be a tie. To keep this on track. My antique January 1997 does not leak oil and my engine is the original. It does leak power steering fluid from the rack seals, but that is not an uncommon problem with the early power steering racks. Jeff

Shouldn't this be in with the ' my typing is crop' thread?[ ]

Scouser, Have you tried Watchdog? Si

Nic I think the message IS slowly getting out. At present it's a trickle but once the press get hold of it (and they are bound to eventually) then Porsche sales are going to suffer. I think a good representation of this is in current residuals for cars over the two to three years old bracket (out of warranty)and as the message gets out there going to drop further. I think Porsche are being very short sighted by leaving the problems unaddressed for so long. If not carefull they are going to be left with a black hole in the traditional used car sales that help to fuel the new cars. What then? Take a look also at general sales figures for both Boxster and 911, whilst at present two new models have created a short term demand, overall sales of both models have been down over the past few years. The Cayenne has been "bailing" Porsche out. There may be absolute precision within the factory and there is no doubt that the way in which the cars are built is of the very highest order but the problem is that the engines and a large majority of the car is now built down to a cost.

A bit of trivia you Brits may not know. If you have been around a while you know in the mid 90s Porsche was not doing well financially, and was at risk for being taken over by a larger company. The then new Boxster was going to save the company and keep it independent. Boxster model years 1997 and 1998 only had a 2 year warranty. Our 4 year warranty started in 1999. I started Boxstering in 1999. There were issues with the early cars and it is a very competive market in the US. A 2 year warranty is substandard in the US. A warranty is a big selling point in the US. Porsche went to 4 years. Now it is the Cayenne keeping Porsche afloat.

Laurence I'm sure the press are aware of the RMS issue; it has featured fairly regularly in the Honest John column, and also in the monthly Porsche motoring mags and indeed EVO mag regards Andrew

I am right in saying the 996 Turbo doesn't suffer random engine failures and RMS?

Well, I only came back to Porsche in November, thinking all would be well. I'm finding the 911 an aged lumpy anachronism, so as soon as I can put myself in an Aston Martin, I'm outa here. The hit I'll take on moving my C4S on doesn't bear thinking about!

I like the 996 shape and size and but don't like the horror stories of Engine Failure, RMS doesn't worry me it can be fixed fairly cheaply relative to the cost of the car. but with this in mind I am going to trading my C2 in for a Turbo as I beleive this to have a different engine and doesn't suffer the same random issue's.

What I forgot to add is I have a collegue whom traded a Aston for a Ferrari as it was unreliable so I don't think the nivarna is Aston Martin.

Nirvana is a mid range Toyota. Good build quality, reliable, unstressed, long life, etc. Dull, boring, and not a performance car. This is the trade off. Go for any performance car, and you risk issues (TVR, Porsche, Lambo, Ferrari, Merc, AM, etc). You can reduce the risk based on how you treat the car, but an element of luck remains. The JD power and other surveys (plus stories) continue to show that Porsche is the best bet for everyday usage. This does not diminish the pain, cost and frustration, if you are unlucky, but life's a bitch. Ferrari still beats Porsche for wallet emptying ability.

What I can say is that in my dealings with the AM dealer so far, and meeting the people at the factory, they are at least trying to create happy customers, something you could never accuse Porsche of doing. The AM V8 looks a cracker.

Everything always looks good before you part with the cash[ ]

well said stuart