1999 Advantages

Hi all, I'm in the middle of negotiating a deal on a 1999 996 and am wondering the advantages of this MY over the slightly later ones. There seems to be a dedicated following for the '99s and I'm wondering if the fans, (and naysayers!) could post their thoughts.

You'll find lots of supporters of the 1999 model. Jake Raby in particular recommends buying the earliest 1999 that you can find due to build quality and the double-row IMSB. That being said, there seem to be more reports of intermix issues due to porous engine blocks in early models. Here's some additional reading from The Porsche Buyer's Guide 2012 (Supplement to Excellence Magazine): "BEST VALUE 2000 - 01 911 Carrera ($16,000 - 22,000) The base Carrera is a wonderful car at a wonderful price. Our only advice is to skip the 1999 model in favor of the 2000 - 01 Carrera, which is safer (when equipped with the optional PSM traction control), more comfortable (with better-quality interior materials and updated lighting), more powerful, and more reliable (fewer RMS issues), while being just as capable a sports car." If you do your homework, find and buy the right car with appropriate PPI, etc., then you'll probably be fine regardless of the year.

Thanks Dennis.

im happy with mine. I drive it like its meant to be driven , change the oil regularly and i am thrilled everytime i start it up.

advantages: price. light weight. good track car that you can gut and not feel guilty. not sure I'm sold onthe double row bearing advantage (due to seeing pics of double races heavily pitted and destroyed). if you are purchasing a 99 for more than $22K (and for $22k, the car should be perfect and laden with options) you are grossly overpaying for the car. It's 14 years old, not a collector item and as Dennis stated some early engines had some engine block pourosity issues. Is it as much fun to drive as the newer 996? Yup. happy huntng.

Quotes source post: 10390189

For the record, Jake did indicate an affinity for the 1999, but he did not enumerate reasons for this preference. I do like the '99 because of the more robust dual-row bearing. If you're looking at a 99 C4, it does in fact have PSM, so that argument against MY99 may be moot. I have not found the quality of the interior to be objectionable... but then I've always thought the Lotus approach to interior appointment was appropriate for sports cars. Good luck! Keep us posted.

Quotes source post: 10390379

I paid $30K for mine last year. However, it was equipped with full aerokit, full suspension, exhaust, wheels, etc. The previous owner made every upgrade with the best available parts... and there is not a trace of stick-on carbon fiber anywhere in the interior. Approx. $20K in "go" mods without a single tacky "show" mod... I mention this because it may be worth investigating a car even if it's selling for $5K more than the Internet thinks you should pay.

Pros Mechanical 1) Double-row bearing (twice the load capacity as later variants: less prone to failure). 2) Matched coolant port sizes in head gasket (greater coolant temperature equalization between head and block, and between cylinders: fewer problems with head cracks). 3) 5-chain, double-roller design (noisier, but anecdotally less prone to failure). 4) 3.4L engine (shorter stroke: less prone to bore scoring). Personal 1) Cable actuated frunk and trunk. 2) Lighter vehicle. 3) Cable throttle.

Excellent points! 1) Cable actuated frunk and trunk. This seems minor... until your battery dies, at which point this is probably the most fantastic thing about '99s. 3) Cable throttle. Unless you get a C4... they're e-gas, even in '99.

Quotes source post: 10390401

I thought I saw him mention the things I said above. Perhaps I'm putting words in Jake's mouth. In any case, I know he likes the early '99s and he sees lots of cars. Personally, I think the MK I 996 with an aerokit is one of the best looking versions of the 996. I drove several before I bought my '02 C4S, and I didn't notice a big difference in the interior, especially in cars that were optioned with the full-leather package.

Quotes source post: 10390451

+996 The 1st 996 I test drove was an early 99 (Arena Red/Savanna) with virtually no options. it was bizarre to look at the under frunk sticker and see only 4 codes. The previous owner had the dealer install a Porsche single disk cd player since the factory radio was a cassette deck!. it drove great, the owner wanted crazy money for it, and the interior was really bad. not worn or beat up, just really cheap and mustard colored.....

I stumbled upon my 99 C2...in Sept. 06' with 35k miles on it. At that time, I really didn't know much about the first water cooled 911 from Porsche in the USA, although the internet was occupied with RMS issues and fixes. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another MY99, but I'll stick with mine with its original IMSB and to date,a very reliable Porsche ownership experience covering the past 7 years. Many will suggest a newer 996 if your budget allows, but I'm happy to own the MY99.GLWP

+996! A couple of things I'd look out for, after a good PPI and thorough examination: The full leather option really dresses out the interior A later '99 has clear headlights and taillights as opposed to the amber. Really makes it look newer with them Good luck with the hunt!

Great comments guys - I'm hearing conflicting reports about the 99. I've just spoken to a veteran indy Porsche mechanic who says he's seen way more 99s suffering from coolant leaking-related problems than the 2000s or 2001s and when I told him the car I'm considering had already had hydraulic lifters, cylinder head gasket, chain tensioner, intake valves, adjuster glides etc (20k miles ago at a total of almost 7k) he told me I should run away from it as it's bound to happen again with this car. He really didn't have much good to say about the 99s, although I think if they really were that bad then they'd be famous for it - and they're not. Guess he only sees the broken ones right? Anyway I'd still love to hear more opinions...

Quotes source post: 10390438

ALL of these are excellent reasons to look at the '99. I particularly want to point out that it is in fact lighter than the 993's before it, and the 996's after it. If you pick up a copy of 911 World they list all of the main specs for each year in each issue. You have to go way back to find a lighter 911, and unlikely to find a newer street 911 that is lighter. Also, I personally went back to a '99 after owning my first '99 new, then a new '01, then a new '03. The '99 C2 has a cable from your gas pedal to the throttle body. YOU decide how much gas the engine gets, not some computer deciding how much it will let you have. My two later cars sucked at the track with PSM because the car would refuse to go if it thought I was giving it too much gas for its programming. I thought I was driving at the edge and the car was saving me, but Hurley Haywood (who was riding along at the time) told me to turn it off. HUGE improvement. Faster times, smoother faster exits from turns. Just saying.

It was from all the reading on Rennlist that I specifically wanted a 1999. I looked at it this way, it definitely seemed to have some favorable advantages as discussed above plus the lower price entry point (at least by a few K). Slightly less electronics is always a plus in my book. Mine has the full supple leather interior so I don't share any of the interior complaints as indicated here. Really, in the end, find as well kept car that you can find and you will probably be OK, 1999 or otherwise. Every high-end Euro car that I'm aware of is pretty much a crap shoot anyway!!

Quotes source post: 10391042

+1 The '99 is solid - any issues it might have have originally existed will have worked through on any car that has been driven. Each year I look at my '99 and ask if it's time to trade and each year I come to the conclusion that there's no compelling reason to do so - all these years and it still looks awesome (mine has the full aerokit) and drives like a bat out of hell. You can't find better value.

I owned a late '99 C2 for 7 years. Still have a '99 Boxster. Great years, I'd buy another. lighter chassis 3.4 motor, more responsive, quick reving direct mechanical cable throttle, far superior in feel to electric LS diff available, active brake diff original 996 headlights, best looking

all of the above plus..... not to mention 10x better looking. The 99 aero is the best looking 996 of all. even the 996 rsr looks the best of all the newer cup cars.

Quotes source post: 10392014

It looks almost as good as the 2002 - 2005 C4S!

Sorry, but as a 99' 996 owner the 02+ C4S is the best looking of them all. I would never own a yellow car, but in yellow they are incredible to look at. Too bad we all have to share the M96!

Quotes source post: 10393349

The C4S is a great looking car, but it's hard to beat these curves.

It's all good...

My 1999 was delivered to the first owner in June 1998..it's a 15 year old car now ! To be honest, I was not nearly as educated as I am now when I picked mine up over a year ago. I was aware of the IMS and the dual row bearing, and the budget pushed me towards the value in the 99. Although mine has a rebuilt engine (indicated by the "AT" in the serial number). I don't know when or why it was replaced or if it was IMS related. These were key advantages. The cable actuated frunk release came as a pleasant surprise one morning.

My 2000 is almost identical to Thundertub's 99. Except his is red, a 99, Row suspension, factory aero, full leather, etc. I have ridden in his car on the track (he's my instructor) and I can tell you, I have been begging him to sell it to me. I love my 2000 but a 99 aero is a wonderfully set up car for the street or DE right out of the box.

Glad this thread has resurrected as I've now been the proud owner of my '99 for two weeks now and honestly I couldn't be happier. The comments here made up my mind that the '99 was indeed a car with benefits over the later models (and naturally fitted into my price range) so when I had the chance to buy one I spotted at a dealer here in LA whilst driving past, I jumped at it. The options include Metallic black, full leather, supple leather, LSD, 3 spoke wheel, Traction control, Xenon lights and cupholders (both added in 04) and 67k miles. The car had been pampered and 15k or so miles ago had a clutch with RMS. I'm over the moon! Cable actuated trunk, dual row bearing and cable throttle are reasons enough to look at the '99's. Also mine's a late 99, so it had factory updates (was that in Feb 99?) that should negate worries of porous blocks etc you hear of. No debris in oil, no shiny oil in either the engine or diff so a better guarantee you can't really hope for in a 14 year old car. If anyone's reading this wondering if they should look at '99's then my advice after a long time reading these forums and others would be an unequivocal yes! The driving experience of these cars surely must be described in detail in other threads but they really are awe-inspiring. Many thanks all.

Nice to hear some positive news about the MY99 for a change, sounds like you have a winner ICECALM.

bumping '99 thread ! love mine

Sounds like you got a great deal ICE, and since your happy thats really all that matters. That said ... PSM and LSD in a 99?

Thanks. I wasn't especially looking for the limited slip...highly regarded though eh?

LordVicious, There was an option package in 1999 with traction control items, but it was not not standard. In order to get the very desirable LSD, one had to order a package - Option Code P72 - Traction Control with ABD and Limited Slip - $1,215. ICECLAM, look at your option code sticker under the front lip of the trunk lid (hopefully still there) to see if you show P72 among the option codes there. Or, if not, hopefully you have the original Owners Manual and the Maintenance book. Inside one of those you will find the exact same sticker listing the option codes on your car. And if you have Code P95 , then you have hit the option code jackpot...

It's the best looking aero

From the Rennlist 996 FAQ: I did a write up in this 996 FAQ way back in 1999. "I have recently heard that one of the PAG factory machines had a fault up until April 99 that may have resulted in sub-standard casings and the resulting overheating problem. This is entirely unsubstantiated at present but if true would mean that cars built before April 99 will not all suffer from this problem. This has certainly been borne out by my own experience and that of others who have older cars but who have never experienced this unfortunate ailment." Doesn't this support the theory that the early '99's don't have the issue with cracking heads as mentioned earlier in this post. My '99 was built in March 1998 and from what I've read and been told the first couple of thousand built were the best made of all the 996. My car really does run just the way it did when it was new.

Quotes source post: 10390342

Ditto on that statement.. MY 1999 cab with 65000 on the clock double race IMS bearing . No problems.

Yes but no one knows why.

Love mine and only replaced the Starter and coolant bottle in 52,000 miles since new......... June 1998 build date..................

My 99 has LSD without PSM. I'll check option codes when I get home, but I don't believe PSM was an option for a C2 in 99.

Quotes source post: 10464185

You are right, 1999 C2's didn't have PSM because they weren't drive by wire. The three option codes are the following: M220 - Locking differential 40% M222 - Anti-slip regulation (ASR) M224 - Automatic limited slip differential

Quotes source posts: 10464069, 10463247

Ok, who is going to start the "oldest 996 thread" pull out your VIN numbers....

I don't have P72 or P95. Just 222 TC, 224 Active Brake Diff and 220 Locking Diff as Cosmo Kramer said. I just reread that the factory updates were Feb '99. Interesting...

Quotes source post: 10465679

WPOAA2997XS623077 Build Date: 6/98

Dual row bearing is better than single row but don't take that to mean permanent. A serviceable bearing should be replaced and waiting longer to do it increases the possibility of contamination from degradation of the bearings. Either go with the LNE ceramic bearings or simply stick with the lower priced IMBs for some fresh bearings but don't be penny wise pound foolish to save a few hundred bucks on delaying until the clutch is replaced. Also, 3.4 engines are also prone to cylinder wall cracking if (allegedly) the car was driven old lady style...short shifting, low miles. Another cost-cutting gift from Porsche.

Quotes source post: 10393264

+1 Patrick

But, considering all the problems with the 3.4L compared to the 3.6L, any benefit cant overcome the CEF issues.

Awesome Thread! Purchased my Early 99' 996 about a month ago. Just stumbled upon it when looking at a 2005 Boxster S. My 996 was parked in the back, not detailed, but I kept looking back at it for some reason... Anyway, Early 99' with the Amber Lights, Full Leather interior, Ocean Blue on Space Gray, WPOAA2994XS622937 It's my toy and DE car..It's been a blast so far..Just had a local shop do the Fister D Mod for me.. Thanks for all your info! Ken

Quotes source post: 11321850

Good choice! I'm usually given a Boxster or cayman when my '99 is in for service and I'm always soooooooo happy to give the keys back when my car is ready. So where's the photo?

Thanks for the response and I apologize in advance for the photo Whoreing.. Ken

They come with traction control??? Seriously though I wish I had the LSD on mine.

Having daily driven (road trips, to work, etc.) and tracked early and late 996s, I�d have to say the late cars are better, interior/lighting being the biggest differences. I prefer the engine tone of the 3.6 as well. Overall, my experiences had been positive, though one did suffer from low oil pressure/spun rod bearing. It had never seen track. Speaking of track, every 996s I�ve been in (save for the turbo/GT2 and 3) suffer from low oil pressure in long sweeping turns at track (including those with deep sumps). Many of them also had smoke on start up after being driven hard. With all of that said, I�d own a 99 or any other year again and would track them though the 99 would have to be cheaper.

Quotes source post: 11323371

Mine has both, but the LSD does such a good job that the traction control rarely comes on. I politely disagree with the opinion that LSD is not noticed on the street. I notice it a bit on acceleration in lessened traction conditions and all the time on hard tight corners.

What does this tell me about the car?

OK boys, Over in the 997 forum (title was 3000 miles in 6 years) I documented a 2006 c2 cab I was an inch from buying. Owner totally flaked on me. So...... Maybe karma is on my side, I now have right of first refusal on a 1999 c2 cab, w/ 60,000 miles. Clean car fax. no accidents, no paint work, 2 owner. Current owner bought it at 8K miles. Car will be purchased out of state. I have most service records, spoke with shops where serviced, plenty of hi res photos. Owner has stated it is literally "prestine". His exace words where, "you're going to think I had this car stored in saran wrap for the last 10 years". Pictures back this up. Here's what I would like input on, sort of a mystery to figure out. I'll post photos at end. The engine was replaced in 2004 due to oil mixing in coolant (known issue I gather), see attached photo of invoice. So this engine has only 35k miles since replaced. What we are trying to determine is what year engine it was replace with. I have learned the 1999's came with the double row IMSB and later 2000's, 2001's with the single row. The double row being much better as far as failures. On the invoice, as you can see it say 3.4L -01 carrera, which may indicate a 2001 engine was installed. This would have had the single row, unless they deliberately retrofitted it with the double. Do you guys think since in 2004 they may have know the double was better that they would have installed a double when they put the new crate engine in it? The car has brand new top with the glass window, new tires, original window sticker, all manuals, both keys, hard top, all maintenance up to date and verifiable thru records. Has original clutch. I posted the option sticker from the frunk in the previous post and here also. Code Option Description 220 Locking differential 224 Active Brake Differential 437 Comfort seat left 438 Comfort seat right 490 Hi-Fi sound system 537 Left seat with positrol and lumbar 551 Air Deflector (Cabriolet) 692 Remote CD changer (6-disc) 939 Soft leather rear 982 Supple Leather Seats/Trim C02 Equipped with catalytic converter X54 Oval Chrome Exhaust Pipes X70 Metal Door Sill with Insignia X71 Aluminum Instrument Dials Silver w/ black interior. $64,000 ? What do you guys think a good price is for this car? I have agreed on a price already that seems fair. I'll let you know what it is after some of your suggestions.

$64,000? American dollars?

OK I'll bite....sixty four thousand dollar question is a "figure of speech"...must be a young one...before your time. No that's not the price...

Don't mind DTM - he's prolly been drinking.

OK, $64,000 is way too high.

JK - I would say $20,000 upper limit. $18,000 would be a good deal. $16,000 would be a fantastic price.

Quotes source post: 12777497

A: You are in a '1999 advantages' thread. You should start your own thread about this car, and title it appropriately. B: This isn't a stump the chump game. Post what you are paying so we can roll around, laugh and point at you in derision. C: Your ancillary questions really can't be answered specifically by anyone but the guy who built the engine. He's the only one who knows what bearing and cases, jugs, heads you have.

Is there a way to move my post?

Quotes source post: 12777454

Just so you know, my 2001 C4 cab was originally equipped with a double row IMS bearing.