Is the 996 engine prone to blowing up?

A friend of mine (non member) is thinking of upgrading his 993 to a 996 but wants to know what the truth is behind the myth that 996 engines are prone to blowing up. Does thes effect all 996 models or is it within a certain a rmodel or year, etc

There has been endless speculation, horror stories and photo's of "blown" engines hidden behind OPC's premises on previous threads in this forum. The actual truth is very hard to prove either way. My local OPC has seen a few examples, but very low volume compared to number of cars they deal with. My advice is get the Porsche warranty and forget about it. I predict that Scouser will be adding to this thread very soon. Just wait a little while.

I'm with Geoff on this one. If you have the OPC warranty, there isn't much soul searching to worry about

As above. Probably a few failures, exaggerated on various forums. Was it slipped liners on early 3.4s? But my experience, and that of other 996 owners I know, has been pretty much total engine reliability (apart from the odd oil seal). And yes, for security, the Extended Warranty is worth having. It's about £725 pa and is pretty comprehensive. If 996s were unreliable it would cost a lot more. Porsche expect to make a profit on these warranties.

My 'youngster' has done 66,000 miles without a hitch, and there was mention of one that sold recently with 142,000 on the clock. The failures are, as has been said, very rare in comparison to numbers sold. I don't believe there are any more problems with failures (RMS excepted) than you would get with any other high performance car. Don't be put off by high milers - these engines seem to thrive on use.

Hi it was mine that I sold recently with now a 143k on the clock. I used to worry about it too and asked my local independant and in there words they are very rare even the oil seals considering the number sold. For example I read that Porsche sold 3000 cars in the six months Jan to June compared to just 136 Maseratis. I have taken the OPC warranty but of course it is not available to cars with over 125k miles but I have to say if my new car is as reliable as my old one then I shan't be needing it. BTW I was quoted £1400 for a non Porsche warranty compared to the offical £725 so I reckon there is no point not going for the real one.

Early 996 engines are p*ss poor ! Mine was a 99 plate 38k just had the f*cking major service done at £1.8 grand! 700 miles later intermediate shaft went! New f*cking engine! The new engine from Porsche is an 'improved' 3.4 lump with a larger intermediate shaft. Cost £8.5 grand ! Goto to Rennlist.com and see how many blown engines there are there. Or speak to any Porsche specialist and they will tell you how many new engines they fit!

I am astonished to read the above emails and others like them ! From my reading of the very many mails posted on this subject over the last few years, I can only say that my impression as to the alarming regularity with which RMS problems have occurred is quite, quite different to the above messages. Have you not seen the many pictures of the piles of 996 type engines stacked outside the rear of various OPC's throughout the country ? Have you not read of the many examples of owners who have had more than one engine fail ? To blithely dismiss this problem as superficial, whilst at the same time advocating the purchase of an OPC warranty is the biggest example of "head in the sand" since dear old Neville Chamberlain flew back to Croydon Airport after his meeting with Adolf and waving his little bit of paper in his hand. The widespread occurrence of reported RMS failures has been so great as to now cause me to defect to Aston Martin and give my 996 to " 'er Indoors". Let her run it on her company and bear all the grief and expense of having a knackered engine ! Marlin.

SLB am I missing your point? Surely, to ignore the available evidence (damning or otherwise) and blithely purchase a 996 without warranty could be considered "inserting a cranium in the dunes" However, even after taking the evidence into account, I chose to purchase a 996 (with OPC warranty) on the grounds that if the engine blows, the nice people at Porsche will simply install another one; on which basis the issue in question becomes fairly low down in the order of life's little conundrums.

I'm not sure that equating an oil leak (RMS) with "blown" engines is quite right... Not the same thing!

Thx for the advise folks, I'll forward it on to my mate and check out Rennlist for further debate on this subject

David, In the circumstances, if someone such as yourself is determined to buy a 996, then, of course, the purchase of a warranty year after year at several hundred pounds a time, will give you peace of mind............at least until the mileage of your car prevents you from being able to obtain a warranty. As a lawyer, I take the view that a product, especially when it is a very expensive, prestigious car with a hitherto well established reputation for reliability and longevity, must, at the very least ,be made, supplied and being capable of being used in a manner that is fit for the purpose. From my understanding of the matter ( and if this doesn't get me finally banned from the Forum, then nothing will ! ), there is a very good bona fide case for believing that the manufacturer is liable for RMS faults. Thus it follows, that my first course of action would be to avoid buying one of the bloody cars in the first place, or if I had (which is where I find myself), then, secondly, in the event of it failing due to RMS problems, open legal proceedings aided by Tranding Standards against the manufacturer. Quite why no-one appears to have done this in the UK yet, is well beyond my understanding. I would do so at the drop of a bloody hat if it happened to me ! Personally, with a low mileage on my car, I am hoping it won't happen to me, but who knows ! Watch this space-----------unless the plug is pulled on me, of course ! SLB aka Marlin.

Steve In order for your posting to have any possible credibility one needs to know 1) The actual percentage of 996 Engines that have suffered RMS failure 2) The number of those RMS failures that have resulted in a total engine failure 3) The number of owners that are disatisfied with the rectification procesess I suspect that it will equate well with any other car manufacture - Particularly those manufactured by Ford based in and around Newport Pagnell in terms of customer satisfaction My opinion based upon my experience of 996's, and I have had 2 of them, the current one of which is highly tuned is that they are pretty well bullet proof, and yes I am aware that the 996TT is a different engine

When I collated the 996 RMS Survey, I had a handful of owners tick the "Engine Failure" box but gave no other comments. So for the moment, I discounted this as a misunderstanding for RMS failure. There were very few cars with more than two RMS failures (Scouser is a famous exception) BUT its still early in the life of these cars and they do change owners so this mye give an under reading. So, in conclusion, the 996 does suffer from RMS, but no alarming statistics for repeat RMS or for engine failure. As for a court case, I am still waiting to be told about one

A) There are thousands of us that haven't had any problems - It's those who shout loudest that get heard. B) The way I read this is that you passed your car on to your wife not because you had problems, but because you heard other people had problems? And you bought an ASTON for reliability?

. The thing that i find strange is why pass it to your wife if you are that negative about the car, unless you don't get on with her. And I would not say that an Aston is more reliable than a 911? Phil

"Those that shout loudest that get heard"............you surely cannot take me for a shrinking violet ? Yep, I did pass the 996 on to my wife. Whilst I did it partly as a sweetener to keep her off my back when I write out the six figure cheque upon the Aston's arrival, I do also need a car that is as reliable as can be obtained. That is why I have had 911's for the past 30 plus years. But last year I was loaned an elderly DB7 for several months, during which time I gave it several autobahn thrashings and ran down to my farmhouse near Sienna in Tuscany twice. It did not miss a beat and used hardly any oil. I also remember my DBSV8 and DB6 as being similarly reliable, although nowhere near as much fun to drive. Ciao, SGLB

I can't take this thread seriously any more - too much based on ranting and mis-information

Gaxor, Could it be that I have been reading the Forum longer than you ( until recently I have been a member for donkey's years, certainly decades longer than the arrival of the 996 ) ?. If so, then I probably have a wealth of accumulated experience reading many, many messages about the subject of RMS failure messages. Insofar as your other point about the need for an accumulation of data is concerned. I had rather hoped that the Club would have done that, but if so then that is news to me. Had they have done so, then I would have continued as a member, subject to the factory and the club not getting too much into bed together, a matter that even now causes me some disquiet. However, let it be said that if the pendulum has now swung the other way, and that now we are awash with members singing the praises of 996's and pouring cold water on the shock stories of RMS failures, then no-one is happier than me, since apart from these "alleged" failures, I have nothing but respect and happy memories of the 996 as being a bloody good car ! Steve.

I agree with gaxor (same old) and what does (Awaiting Approval) mean. Must be missing somthing?

Steve Your age and seniority has no bearing on your statements - they are not facts and your comments are merely propagating rumour. The club is collating info relating to RMS failures - one must assume that owners feel it is in their interest to record such events, and when published will give us a realistic evaluation of the problem. My point is that to quote mis-information within this forum as fact, with only anecdotal evidence to support the claim is at best mischievous!

Steve, The Club has indeed made a survey of members with respect to RMS failure which has been well thrashed on this Forum. in fact, so far as I know, the only survey in the world Check this thread http://www.porscheclubgbforum.com/tm.asp?m=102495&mpage=4&key=RMS&#118606 996 RMS survey as at May05 There seems a peak failure rate in MY2001, and drop off since. Model_yr %fail Total, RMS _failure, No failure, 1998 20.6% 136 28 108 1999 21.2% 151 32 119 2000 23.8% 84 20 64 2001 29.4% 85 25 60 2002 16.0% 150 24 126 2003 14.3% 119 17 102 2004 5.1% 79 4 75 2005 0.0% 3 0 3 As for repeat failures, these seem mercifully low, with only 12 members over all saying this. Of course, the data is only as good as the forms sent in. I encourage members to send in any change, so we can keep the survey going, as the statistics over time will be very interesting. I have done an analysis by model year and date and mileage the RMS was reported. This gives very interesting results.[ ] BUT the results are probably useless because: current owner was maybe unaware of RMS being replaced under warranty during first two years, or indeed by a previous owner. data reported may not be accurate. BUT here they are anyway (all for 996) BUT VERY APROX only Overall average 3 years and 23,000 miles For MY98 and 99, very few failures reported for first two years of ownership, most after 5 to 7 years. For MY00, the bulk reported after 4 to 5 years For MY01 most at 3-4 years For MY02, most after 3 years For MY03, most after 2 years

Gaxor, You are right-my age and seniority has no relevance/influence on facts, but if, as I see to be the case, you have been a PCGB member for a mere 2 or 3 Winters, and I have closely observed mails both before and since the conception of the 996, then I'd say I would cut it as a witness of some significance, whereas you'd be trailing along as an also ran. Moreover, if I have mis-quoted any information ( a fact of which I have grave doubts), then I have done so based only on the feedback of what has been consistently and widely reported as being the case here in the Forum, which has indisputably got to be the very best and most reliable a source of 996 RMS failure information available anywhere in the World ( other than other Porsche Club forums in,say, Germany or the USA, neither of which I, as a humble nonentity, have access to. But by all means please keep denying the facts ( at least those printed here in this Forum) since if nothing else it'll make me feel less inclined to worry about the need to expect to have to replace my engine. Steve Lyden-Brown.

Wow ! Nick, as a cynical and shellbacked old boulevardier, I cannot say other than that I am extremely impressed at the response time and detail of your reply..............and only a mere hour or two since I published my message. Indeed, I am so impressed that it seems churlish to say that the only thing I could have asked for over and above the research done by the Club on this matter, is that it would have been helpful if it were to have been more widely made known, and available to all relevant parties, such as Boxster and 996 owners. Of course, to furrther exacerbate my discomfiture, this is where you say, hang on you old dodderer, it was !- did you not read the PCGB Post dated whatever ? And of course, as a member no longer, what else could I say but "Sorry, No, I didn't ! ". Yours respectfully, Steve Lyden-Brown.

Thank you Steve. I started the Boxster RMS survey nearly three years ago in response to demand on this and other forums. Then extended to the 996, in fact, made a follow up survey on 996. I and the Club have made many strong representations to Porsche Cars re this and engine failures and I detected a small shift in attitude and support over the period. There has never been any admission, but they revamped the warranty to cover it and made many good will payments - with some provisos. I feel some heat has gone out of the subject, certainly so far as engine failures are concerned. I would not have agreed the Contract of Co Operation if we in the Club could not champion causes such as this, but as always, we have to be sensative to the marque. this is why I have not publicised the results with say a large P Post article. Who would thank me for a drop in resale values?

You have all been waiting for me to chip in so here goes..... .....it still leaks and it's on its 7th RMS. I don't have warranty because Porsche wont give me one until the RMS problem is solved in my car. For this they say I need a new engine. I can't afford a new engine. And so it goes on...... Of course the RMS problem is a manufacturing fault. No doubt about that. But they would never admit to it. And they would never give out the "real" numbers of RMS failure. However, I took it on the Spian trip.....a tad chancy many of you might think. But the car never once gave me any problems. I loose so little oil (two drips max per month) that I haven't even had to top up the oil once either during the Spain trip nor since I returned. My engine sounds as sweet as anything and although I rant on about my RMS problems it doesn;t affect how she drives. As to engines blowing up. I know 5 people personally who have a 996. While I was in Spain two of those people had their engine blow up! I can't say it doesn't worry the living hell out of me every time I start my car up. I absolutely sh1t myself every time. If I hear and noise I panic. I drive along listening and hoping that it wont happen to me. It's a terrible experience. But I call it "The Porsche Experience. There is no substitute". I mean even my daughter's Corsa is more reliable! As far as I am concerned Porsche are a bunch of penny pinching b4stards! They know exactly how to fix my problem and they know how to shut me up and make me a happy camper. I am a loyal Porsche owner, this being my 3rd 911. All they have to do is replace my fecking engine and be done with it. I can then pay my £725 a year and sleep at night knowing that a great company backs the £50,000 technologically advanced German engineered car that I bought 3 years ago. But it seems they are happy to let me rip them and their crapy manufacturing f*ck up to pieces across all the Porsche forums of the Internet. So be it. Incidentally, the worldwide service manager is a genuinly nice lady called Barbara Wilkie. I spoke to her on the phone last year while waiting for my 5th RMS to be done and replacement gearbox (Yes I have had to have one of them too and it cost me almost £3,000!). I explained my RMS problem to her and she was emphatically sympathetic and was totally understanding. At that time I had both gearbox and RMS (engine) problems. She said that if my car had been through the German network it would have been fixed without question under warranty. She could not understand why I had had so much problems with Porsche GB not sorting it all out for me. Nevertheless, she could do nothing for me and went on to explain that despite her support on the matter, if Porsche GB would not fix my car then she could not overrule them. Their decision was final. She did call Reading for me and she called me back. But she said that she could not change their minds. Porsche GB suck. If you want to buy a Porsche I suggest you stick the UK network right up themselves and go direct to Germany. They still have to honour the warranties in the UK. You get the car cheaper and the feelgood factor of knowing that Porsche GB didn't make any money on you is icing on the cake. I might add that with the recent merger of PCGB and Porsche I was hoping that someone somewhere in PCGB would be able to convice PAG or Porsche GB to sort my flippin RMS out. But I am not holding out much hope.

Berny, I've followed your threads and, like most readers, I have total sympathy for your situation and feel that Porsche AG and Porsche GB have made an error of judgement in not trying to reach an amicable resolution. However, and correct me if I'm wrong, but was your car a personal import (ie the car did not come into the UK via Porsche GB)?

Would not worry about that OPC are already taking the p*** on this already.

I would not buy a 996 now, (excluding GT3 or GT2 if I had the spare money [ ]) there is the RMS issue and there are also an alarming number of total failures. A specialist told me the crankcase is not strong enough and flexes. For these reasons resale value is going to be affected, and these cars will keep falling in value. I believe the earlier cars were not engineered to be just good enough (pre 996 ) but were over engineered for the task. For this reason I think the earlier cars will provide better long term value and may outlast some of their younger brothers. Having said that conversly this also means you may get a great 996/boxster at a very good price but with the risk of having to replace the engine at some point. I guess this could mean that aircooled 996's will be running around in the future as earlier engines are fitted to later cars [ ]. Tony Off to research merging 996/964 engines

If there was too much of a problem, Porsche would surely have developed a different engine for the 987/997 ranges? They haven't, so it is evidenty low enough in number of failures (inside warranty, original or extended) that Porsche are happy to continue with the M96 design and pay for warranty failures.

I think this sums up much of the mis-information that travels around the various forums. No one posts 'no news' or 'good news' but any 'bad news' gets blown out of proportion. If there was a serious issue with the engines in the 986/987 and 996/997 then it would be headline news in the mainstream media, OPCs would be overwhelmed with remedial work and Porsche would have redesigned the engines. And, you wouldn't be able to buy an extended warranty for £725.

Mmmmmmm....... sell car 50K replace some engines under warranty and 3? years later sell engines plus labour further £8K+ to some unlucky owners or Redesign engine and retool £?? million Tempting to risk it?

Mis-information it may be but it is definately affecting values. Can you buy a £725 warranty on a 5 year old or 100,000 mile plus example. Will it have exclusions? (trackday use etc.) IMHO One failure would be bad on an OPC maintained car but there are many more than one. Tony

Ops!!! looks like I opened a can of worms here and I didn't even mention the expansion tank issue....................

Yes - up to 9 years No

Steve Your responses using 4 letter words are hardly mature! I gracefully withdraw from this discussion as it is now clearly apparant that it has been engineered to hijack the forum

Oooooh now that is clever! 9 x £725 = £6525 I assume you have to stick with OPC servicing (or annual inspections) to qualify for the warranty. 9 x annual service profit + £XX. So then who would stick with it for 9 years if there wasn't an unnusally high number of failures? Say 10% fail ( I Hope I am exagerating) that means if 50% take up the warranty you are onto a major winner. The warranty cases will be dealt with relatively smoothly - the press advises those who buy the car take out the cast iron warranty and cant see what the fuss is about. Customers dont complain too much as the problem was sorted 'under warranty' excellent service etc. The others, sorry sir if you had taken up the warranty we would love to help you, this failure is most unusual. Sit back and watch the profits roll in. Re-enter motorsport and return the Halo effect. Wow Tony

Not so, as warranty is supplied in initial years Wouldn't most people be more inclined to hang on to the warranty, the older the car became?. With Beemer, the extended warranty is only available if never allowed to lapse in the first place. At least with Porsche the extended warranty is available after OPC inspection even if the original warranty had never been renewed. Personally I would have taken the warranty for peace of mind, even if there had never been a single RMS or engine failure.

A Warranty is just an insurance policy. The underwriter will assess the likely risk, not for individual cars but for the model as a whole, and determine a premium that provides a safe margin of profit. Most warranty claims are for fairly modest amounts, usually less than the premium. Although the Porsche manufacturer's warranty is only two years, even if the warranty is not extended, many items will be covered thereafter, in whole or in part, under a 'sympathetic' warranty claim. However, the conditions are a bit vague and tend to favour longstanding customers with UK OPC supplied cars wth full OPC service histories. I know this because I have benefitted a couple of times, most notably with a 944 turbo I bought in 1987 that incurred problems in year 3. Much of the above comments in this thread apply to many other makes and models. The BMW E46 M3 and E39 M5 get slagged off on the various forums and they all say never buy one without the official warranty. And you would never buy any of the various cars that use the Rover K-series engine if you believed what gets said on the forums. IME, for such focussed performance cars, the 986 and 996 are staggeringly reliable. I've had 12 new Porsches since 1983, including two 996s, and can't fault them. My wife has just taken delivery of her fourth Boxster since 1997 and I can't recall any faults beyond one RMS (dealt with under warranty at the annual service) and a loose pipe on the screen washer tank.

Porsche are running a business. I do not see why you should be surprised that the warranty scheme is designed to at least cover costs, and preferably to make a profit. All elements of your interaction with the company are designed to deliver money - e.g. initial purchase, 2nd hand purcase, trade in price, servicing, financing, extended warranty, accessories/enhancements, bodyshop. They will only cover their costs on the warranty if the number of failures is relatively small per year and if sufficient numbers of people take it up. Take-up is largely influenced by pricing - and for a car of this type I think the cost is not that unreasonable. The warranty has to cover all manner of corrective actions for many minor and unrelated items, that may also consume many of those 700 notes, in addition to the big items. With regard to the original topic though, it is all down to statistics. You cannot say whether an individual car will fail. If you have one that does not, you can't see what the fuss is about - although you can drive about fretting if you wish and swap to a another vendor with a more chequered history (such as any Italian make, or other beginning with A). If you have one that does, it is of little consequence that other people are alright. The main reason for people to be concerned, is not that they fail - every manufacturer has issues. The primary concern seems to be the cost of replacement. Given that volumes are higher than they used to be, the pricings ought to be coming down the cost curve, so parts ought to be slightly cheaper than they are, IMO, for a C2 or C4. GT3/2 and TT parts will be more expensive due to the more limited numbers. It should also be remembered that the cars do not cost 60K new because they have 15K of parts inside them. The cost of replacing the parts will be high, even if you only bought it for a tenner. Although this may not help, if you buy new you know the history. You know it has not been overreved, thrashed when cold, driven with too little oil, spun, driven by a 0-60 maniac, or had the gearbox abused. All these things could cause later failures. The reason 2nd hand cars cost less is because you are buying uncertainty. Therefore get the warranty - or stick 10K in the bank and cover the issues when they occur.

Gaxor, If the purchase of a £50,000 plus car which is then identified as being a model prone to serious and costly malfunctions doesn't prompt the occassional four letter word out of you, then I can assure you that the reading of the bleatings of others who, in the face of mounting evidence ignorantly deny that the car has these latent faults, most certainly will ! Steve

Marlin (SLB), If you want to do something useful, rather than throwing your toys out of the pram (or Aston Martin) why not (in your legal capacity) after work, build a case for Berny et al against Porsche GB and become a hero? My 996 C4 has an RMS issue too and until i fork out £725 they won't fix it.[ ] Enjoying this thread very much by the way, but i'm going to The Nurburgring next Friday and i'm concerned after reading about Vorlands £8,500 engine.[ ] Simon 996 C4

SLB - I can't recall you saying that you have actually had problems with your 996, only a fear of them. Would you mind letting us know what problems you have had with the mechanics of the car?

Spending £100,000+ on an Aston Martin won't guarantee a better engineered, or more reliable car. Incidentally, saw two DB9s in Tetbury yesterday - a Coupe and a Convertible. Surely the Coupe is the better buy? It looked breathtakingly beautiful, whereas the Convertible just looked like a chopped-top boulevard cruiser. And, I bet the Coupe is better to drive, and cheaper.

Could someone please explain to me why Steve Lydon Brown comes up with [Awaiting Approval] it's REALLY ANNOYING[ ]

Its because he is not a member and uses abusive language, so his posts are checked for this before being either released or deleted. And if you think that is anoying for you, its worse for me.[:-]

Steve I hear what you say, but leaving Porsche to go to Aston Martin on reliability grounds... it is taking the proverbial p*ss.... even more when based, by your own words, on other people experiences.... Furthermore, I appreciate your bitterness against PCGB and OPC, but that should not be allowed to spoil the enjoyment of a 911 Turbo and that is relatively to any other supercar... Nothing is perfect or for ever..... Cheers [ ]

Frankly Nic, this individual who is allegedly a professional, does not have the manners to have a civilised conversation with anyone. I think most of us wish he would drive his waste of money unreliable jazzed up Ford back to his shed in Italy and stay there. And if he doesn't think much of Porsche he slates, then he can't think much of his wife.[ ]

Hi, To return to the origin of this thread, and deny SLB any more oxygen [ ] I was talking to my local specialist today, regarding the reliability of the Boxter / 996 engine. There was a 996 just coming into the garage - quote "another smoking engine" He also stated that he will not rebuild 996 engines, only fit replacement engines from Porsche, as if a rebuilt engine failed in another 6 months the owner would blame him instead of the inherent unreliability of the engine... The price of replacement engines from Porsche has also been lowered, to 6500 GBP, from approx 8500 - "probably due to the no of engines they are producing"...... Pete

Sounds like your independent is far too like OPCs - glorified parts fitters. IMO, independents are real mechanics who repair things and stand by their workmanship. I have to say that this is the first reference I have ever heard of smoking 996/Boxster engines. You will find plenty of threads referring to the minimal oil consumption of these engines, especially the higher mileage cars. The older air cooled engines tend to smoke a lot more, generally from worn piston rings and valve guides as they get older.

Can you buy a warranty just for the engine then? I can take a risk with all the other parts, but £6500 plus labour for the engine keeps me up at night.

Hi - he is quite willing to rebuild aircooled engines, and stand by the quality of his workmanship on those. He just does not trust water cooled engines to be reliable, and would rather Porsche warranty them than himself. The last trackday I did was at Bedford last August, and I saw a Boxter there with smoke absolutely pouring from it's exhaust - I'm obviously not sure of the cause, but it did put me off water cooled engines a bit. One thing that I have not seen discussed is a comparison with the Dual Mass clutch / Oil leak issues that appeared with the introduction of the 964. Is the RMS / Engine Failure (making the assumption that there is some kind of issue) any worse / better than the situation then, and is it being handled any differently by Porsche? Pete

Hi, There are non Porsche used car warranties of the type a lot of normal car dealers will sell with used cars - not sure if they would be willing to cover a Porsche - it might be interesting to see if they would, and if there would be a loading for "unreliability" of water cooled engines. I read in Evo that the Ferrari warranty, just for Engine and Drivetrain on a 550 Maranello was about 2400 GBP for a year, not sure what that says about the relative reliability of Ferrari engines... Pete

Hi, this is from the 3.2 topic http://www.porscheclubgbforum.com/tm.asp?m=129909&mpage=1&key=&#129909 Not sure if it would be the same price for a 996 Pete

Burrow01 - when the DMF failed in my own 996 I researched various web-sites looking for previously reported threads on that type of failure. I was assured that they are relatively rare. Earlier 911 models did suffer a spate of DMF failures and they were specific to as particular manufacturer of DMF flywheels, who were then dropped in favour of a new supplier. No names...no pack drill!

DMF failure on 996's - not heard of that one I was just wondering if anyone had experience of how things were handled by Porsche in the early 90's as opposed to now? The values of 964's are definitely affected by it's supposed unreliabilty, so will this also affect 996's even if the rumours are unfounded.. Pete

I fear that it has already happened. So much bad press and extensive forum topics can't fail to devalue the model, and simply put buyers off. No matter that the majority have not experienced any problems, we are all tarred with the same brush. If you look around the classifieds, you'll find loads of UK RHD 996's in the £25-30K bracket that should be £30-35K. It's a real buyer's market, and there are some real bargains out there.

Hello Richard, Your recollection is quite right- I never have said I have had any problems with my 996 . In fact it has been as relaible as most and more reliable than some of the 8 or 9 911's I have had over the last 25 years. The trouble is that I only ever use it for long distance Continental touring holidays and the prospect of a engine blowing/RMS failing when I am in Southern Italy (for example) with my wife and 7 year old daughter does seriously give me cause for concern ! In years past I have had holidays like these in elderly Austin Healeys and Jags etc. all of which I could generally either repair at the roadside or obtain local help...............not so anymore, I think, if my 996 engine destroys itself hundreds and hundreds of miles away from home. OK, so maybe I am a bit of a pessimist, but it does cheese me off, not just to find myself with this potential problem lurking ahead of me, but when ......persist in maintaing that there is neither any potential problems with 996's or even any weight of evidence indicating that there is ! Cheers, Steve Lyden Brown.

I would agree with the values of 996's being much lower than historically you would expect from a Porsche, especially a 911. It shows the value of a reputation for reliability, which Porsche worked hard to get, but seems to be drifting away from. I think Mercedes are also having the same issues, having traded build quality for profit margin recently, and now having to state that reliability / build quality is back on the agenda. With regard to percentage chance of failure, does anyone know the UK numbers of 993's vs 996's ? If a certain percentage of 996's are having problems, the actual number of cars with problems will be larger with a greater sales figure? Pete

We await SLB's views - [Awaiting Approval] - with baited breath...[ ]

Hi Carrera4boy - re: warranties I bought my car from an independent and went for an RAC 5 Star cover which I got from an Independent for about £500 for 2 years cover. When I recently suspected RMS (no problem it transpired) I checked the clauses in the contract and they seemed pretty realistic. If you (anyone else) wants let me have your email address (actually I have your's already) and I can scan and send you a copy. Cheers

FAB, thanks mate, send it over. £250 per year to cover the engine from blowing up, means I'm going to put my foot down hard next weekend at The Ring. Simon 996 C4

Hello NicD, I am sorry to learn that I cause you problems. I had thought that our recent exchange of emails had largely sorted any difficulties I may occassionally inadvertantly cause. Mind you, and I don't intend to make a big deal about it, but I cannot do other than correct your comments about my alleged use of abusive language. I have not been abusive, but I am frequently critical........and why not, when I was a member I saw that as my entitlement. If by "abusive" you mean that my language is salty, yes I will agree, but since all non acceptable words are seemingly automatically edited, then what problem does that cause anyone ? Cheers, Steve Lyden Brown.

By all means deny me the oxygen, and you are more than welcome to my share of it ; after all, are you not confirming what I have been stating ?...merely that 996/Boxster engines are not anywhere near as inherently reliable as we would like ! SGLB. P.S. Is it not just a tad odd, to be denying oxygen on the one hand, but then throwing bucketfuls of petrol on the flames with the other ? Never mind, it is at least highly innovative !

SLB [Awaiting Approval] VERY FUNNY.... Steve, we shall give you sufficient oxygen so long as you use it in the correct manner! We know there are issues with the engine on a minority of Porsches. Mine has an RMS problem but it's perfectly fine to race and generally drive. I have my quibbles with the OPC, but I have spent more on my wife's Ford Galaxy in the past 12 months than the Porker and ive done more miles. Porsches are very reliable cars considering the hammering we do to them. I think you were lucky to drive to France and back in the DB7 unscathed. I've done 15,000 miles without so much as an oil top up.[ ] Good luck with your purchase though.

Now I'm really holding my breath to see what is under the [Awaiting Approval] blanket...what is going to happen when the moderators go on holiday [ ]

Hi Steve - split personality syndrome - on the one hand I agree with you that there is an inherent design problem with the 996 engine, that Porsche are not being forthcoming with the facts to allow people to make correct judgements, and that it is all unsettling for 996/Boxster owners. On the other hand I cannot believe that someone would buy an Aston Martin over a Porsche for reliability reasons, make comments about your experience within PCGB - And then not acknowledge the fact that you did not know about the RMS survey - which I, even as a mere stripling of 1 years membership, had read [ ]

Oliver: Correct. My 996 is a c16 import. But it was manufactured by the same people and in the same place as yours and everyone elses. Furthermore, it is as much an import as any other Porsche. However, although not sourced from the Porsche GB network my car has been serviced entirely by them (apart from the last service a few weeks back), so they have made their money out of it. The issue is this, if Porsche GB would just agree to change my engine (which BTW they have in principal by offering me 50% good-will towards cost, with a cost to me of £4,500), then Germany will re-stock their spares dept with the engine that is used to replace mine FOC. So in essence the issue is over the fitting labour which I have said I would pay. But even with that Porsche GB refuses to do it even though it would cost them nothing to fix up my car and have a satisfied customer. Their resononing is beyond me. One of my previous cars was a DB6. I had it 2 years and never once had an engine or gearbox problem. I did however, experience a faulty diff. The folks at Newport Pagnell replaced it FOC without questions and there was no warranty. It was as I used to call her "Mrs. Reliable". But it was a terrible car to drive and handled awfully. Made a great profit on selling her though [ ] If I had the money I would definitely be looking at the AMV8 though.

Berny, serious questions. 1. How do you know this is true? "then Germany will re-stock their spares dept with the engine that is used to replace mine FOC. So in essence the issue is over the fitting labour which I have said I would pay. But even with that Porsche GB refuses to do it even though it would cost them nothing to fix up my car ". In addition. how do you know what follow up costs may result from this precedent? 2. Why dont you go to the people who sold you the car and made the sales profit, as surely they owe you the satisfaction , rather than Porsche Cars GB who owe you nothing in particular? Are you not confusing Porsche Cars GB with Porsche AG, which although a wholly owned subsidiary, they are not the same entity. It may seem like splitting hairs but if AG wanted to, they could easily instruct GB to take care of this. There must be a reason why they dont and less likely to do with you as with anyone who would follow on behind.

Nic, heres my answers (lengthy): 1: The first RMS fault was diagnosed only weeks out of warranty along with the gearbox noise at about (I recall) 27,000 miles. It was supposedly fixed the first time at a cost to me of £237. But of course it wasn't fixed at all. All others after the 1st RMS have been replaced at no charge to me. It wasn;t until about the 5th RMS that Porsche owned up and said they can't fix it and the only remedy is a replacement engine. By this time almost two years had passed. After lengthly conversations with Reading (Porsche GB) I finally got them to agree to a good will claim on my gearbox (at a cost to me of £2,700) and I got it done under the provisio that the engine would be replaced without any charge to me. The person I spoke to at Reading (Phil Hattam) said that because of my "rare" situation with both gearbox and engine problems, they would almost definitely replace the engine FOC if I where to go ahead with the gearbox change although he could not guarantee it since all decisions are reviewed on a case by case basis and the board would have to review my case to make that decision. But he said that if I had both gearbox and engine changed together it would be cheaper to do so this was the best time to do it. However, he said that I must agree (in principal) to get the gearbox done first before the review board would revisit my case in the hope of getting the engine done FOC as a gesture by Porsche GB in sympathy for my particular rare problems. I agreed to this because the tone of voice Phil Hattam used inferred to me that he could not say for certain "yes" but it was very highly likely given my situation and case history that they would. We joked on the phone but in reality I just knew that Porsche would not let me down on this one. As Phil Hattam said it was as good a case as any he had dealt with so I should not have any problems (although he could not say for definite that I would get the engine FOC). Eventually when I got the money together for the gearbox (some months later) my OPC in Liverpool removed the entire power unit from my car (gearbox and engine). I was expecting to get a call to say the car would be ready (with new gearbox and engine) in 3 days time. But instead they rang me up and said there was a problem with payment as they were instructed to do it at 50% cost vis-a-vis good will and not FOC. I called Reading on the bounce and they said that they had decided that they could not do the engine FOC despite my car being in pieces in readiness for it. Phil Hattam had moved on so I could not get to talk to him. Basically I was at a loss. At that point I just had my OPC replace the gearbox and put my car back together (while doing yet another RMS change under my instruction since the gearbox was out). At this point I was at my wits end and decided to call Germany direct. I was given a phone number for Annette Barbara-Wilkie (the worldwide service manager) in Germany (I won;t say who gave it to me but suffice to say it was a PCGB member). I called her and explained my predicament. She was very understanding and sympathetic and said clearly that in such a dire case as mine with 7 RMS's and gearbox fault to boot, and the fact that my car had been serviced entirely by Porsche UK network, that there should be no question in replacing the engine FOC. Furthermore, she said that she didn't understand why Porsche GB were questioning it because the engine would be shipped back to Germany and Porsche GB would be given another for replacement stock. According to her, all engines that were sent back were replaced, unless they are specifically sent back to be rebuilt because of malicious damage (stage 2 over revs etc) which mine was clearly not. She also said that it was normal practice to change repeat RMS plagued engines warranty or not so long as the vehicle has been serviced accordingly by Porsche. At least this was the stance and policy of PAG anyway (makes sense as this is the same policy adopted in the US too). So she could not understand what the issue was with Porsche GB. But she did state clearly that Porsche GB not Porsche AG had the last say in the matter in relation to any warranty or good-will claim that I was making. Porsche GB's decision is final and she could not and would not overrule it. Although my car is out of warranty, this particular case would be treated as a warranty claim. Annette Barbara-Wilkie said she would call Reading and spoke to them. When she called me back she simply stated that there was nothing she could do as Porsche GB had made the decision not to replace my engine FOC. She didn't know the detailed history of my car so could not make any further judgment but said that all I could do was to go back to Porsche GB and ask them to reconsider. I gave up trying. 2: The company I bought my car from (Khan in Bradford) did give me £1500 towards costs of the replacement gearbox. So it only cost me £1200 in the end. And this was at least a year after I bought the car from them. As for the RMS problem they would not help me with it. They said that this is a manufacturing fault that Porsche should cough up for since the car has been serviced by them. Indeed the car had only just had its 24,000 mile major service done prior to me buying it. At 27,000 miles my gearbox was whining and the engine was leaking through its RMS. As our American friends would say "go figure?". The way I see it is like this: Porsche GB have reviewed my case. My OPC has had the gearbox out 7 times to replace the seal and all but £237 of it was payed by Reading. So they have lost a lot of money on my car and don't want to lose anymore despite the problem really being nothing to do with the business economics but really due to faulty workmanship, bad design or bad manufacture. In essence the car has an inherent problem in the design and the only way that Porsche, be it Porsche GB or Porsche AG can recoup the cost of it all is to lay it back on the customer.....in this case me!. That's where the problem lies. If Porsche really do value their customers then this RMS problem would be clearly swept under the carpet. The RMS would be fixed no questions asked and repeat RMS problem cars would get a new engine, no questions asked. And just in case you think I am wrong, that's the policy taken up by Porsche America......and they get 4 years warranty to boot! All I know is this, there was once a time when Porsche would go out on a limb trying to help their customers. If you had a problem, Porsche would put it right no quibbles. I even saw this mentioned in a video I watched the other night "Porsche Victory By Design". But nowadays it's a money machine. They don;t give two tosses about their customers, their cars or their residuals. Just to prove my point, I even said to Annette Barbara-Wilkie that I would be happy to drive my car to the factory in Germany if they would replace the engine. She said that I could not do this since Porsche GB had made their decision. So I can;t figure what else I can do but just drive it in the hope it will all be alright and it's just a little tiny leak. After all, it runs smooth and doesn;t use any oil and seems reliable......Spain and back no problems.

I understand about the warranty business and why some people may want to take one out for as long as they own their car irrespective of failures. What I do not like is the fact that the engine appears to have very little margin before failure. There is little profit in new cars these days (though more here than most other countries).I believe a lot of the income comes from warranties / parts and servicing. If the 'safety margins' have been reduced to cut costs with the added bonus of increased warranty sales / servicing as a deliberate move then I do not like it. With modern engine management that if you have a certain number of combinations (3,100 rpm for 2 minutes on the first monday of the month at 09.45 say) the managment forces a cylinder to run lean and detonate taking out the engine. I do not believe this is happening but you could generate a random engine failure for no obvious reason you then have control over your warranty business no more than 10 percent have this 'mod' and only one percent of them happen to meet the conditions at the appointed time. These random failures scare people into increasing your warranty business. As I said that is rather an extreme view and I do not believe that is the situation. However random engine failures and scare stories are not going to harm your warranty business. In my view if a modern engine is properly designed and maintained with quality fluids, filters and parts then they should last for at least 200k. It would seem to be the case that with the 996/boxster unit it may fail even with correct maintenance. This is what concerns me, the reliability we have come to expect seems to have faded in the search for profitability. Whilst I cannot deny it affects other manufacturers (BMW) there are others with massive safety margins that seem to take abuse Nissan skylines producing double the output reliably on standard components, Turbo supras with massive outputs and standard internals, Honda Vtech enngines etc. Opel/vauxhall units (properly serviced, cambelt failure can be messy) Back to Porsche, the Turbo, GT3, GT2 units that produce higher specific outputs do not use the crankcase descibed as flexy, Why? has there been a single Turbo, GT3, GT2 RMS failure? Does the higher purchase price allow for more costly engineering? I also feel that many of the current owners do not drive their cars anywhere near the limits, I tend to be hard on my vehicles whilst maintaining them to high standards and driving them gently from cold, could I rely on a 996 / boxter to take it? not that I am really bothered as they would both be slower than my current car [&:] so not really considering it. Tony Without any K series engined cars [ ]

Yes. I know one owner that posts here. (Turbo, with RMS failure).

Other than I wouldn't wish to stifle others, so please do feel free to continue commenting on the matter of Porsche unreliability, I personally really do think that I should make this message my very last utterance on the subject, subject only to the proviso that I may well be forced to comment further (1) if my mails continue to so be so poorly misread and misunderstood by members, or (2) I am prompted to comment by the messages submitted by some members who are clearly in need of some enlightenment in their erroneous views. In closing, though, let me please say that, albeit within the family, I do still keep and drive a 996, a car which despite it's ever increasing reputation for unreliability, continues to provide me with enormous amounts of fun, enjoyment and sheer driver satisfaction. Other than normal servicing it has never required a minutes spannering. I fully expect to keep it as part of my collection until such time as I am steering off towards "The Great Tuning Shop in the Sky" ! I should also say that when I borrowed a DB7 last year ( it was an elderly, 4 owner car with nearly 90,000 on the clock ), I did more miles in that car ( always consisting off high speed driving within Italy, Germany, Holland and France ) than I have done in 911's during the past 5 years. It ran straight as an arrow and as sound as a bell. One last thing, despite the imputed comments of others, it is not my intention to malign or abuse the PCGB. I have expressed my opinion of that body by resigning membership after many,many years. I have no wish to to take any other action against it. Steve Lyden-Brown.

Hello Burrow01, Thanks for your input in which you make the valid and telling point about my seemingly not knowing about the RMS survey. By way of reply, I can only state that whereas I have kept virtually every email on the subject, firstly because I was considering taking on as clients anyone who wished to initiate any sort of legal action, and,secondly, because I foresaw the prospect of my own 996 having problems of this sort, it was because my own car HAS NOT had any problems of this type that I merely collated the information rather than read every piece of it. My own Astons ( a DBSV8 and a DB6 Volante) never cost me anything more than the normal servicing (which admitedly DID cost huge amounts of moolah). The V8 never ran well, but it ALWAYS ran. Moreover, having paid £10,000 for the DB6 in 1977, I then sold it for well over £100,000 ten or so years later, so even if it had of been screamingly unreliable,my profit margin would have covered no end of expensive repair work. Whereas, I paid £43,000 for my 996 two years ago, and what is it worth now ?................don't tell me, I don't want to know ! Cheers, Steve.

Berny, thank you for such a detailed reply and I must aplogise for only a few words as I have to race off for a train and will be away till Monday evening - sorry SLB. Maybe you answered this and I missed it or not, but did Porsche GB import the car to the UK? If yes, then I am with you on this, but if not, then I see their point in not wishing to be too generous on goodwill (as opposed to warranty) since it would not be in their business interests to sort out a competitor importer's problems. Now I recognise your case as a severe one and did my best to intercede on your behalf with not much result, sorry. But I wonder if this is the reason that AG would not intervene either? Anyway, if you lose only two drops a month, then maybe not much of an issue, but of course, that could change anytime.

If by that comment we can assume that all views which differ from yours are erroneous, then I guess we can look forward to many more posts then [ ]

More RMS than Blown engines but: I stand to be corrected here, but in the US, aside from a FOUR year warranty (since 1999), engine replacement (FOC) is the norm in the event that repeated RMS seal replacement proves to be unsuccessful. This compared to a TWO year warranty in the UK, after which if the RMS fails then well... go forth and multiply squire; unless of course you've bought the warranty. I don't know about anyone else, but I personally find this disparity hard to swallow. And my point is, I believe if we had a similar deal here in the UK, there would be considerably less consternation over the subject and with it the likelyhood of reduced deppreciation. Of course, after four years you're on your own....as is the case with most cars.