15 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996 C4S Advice needed
Leading reported evidence
Replace without a labour cost
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
The only way I can prove mine was done is because I had the clutch replaced without a labour cost because PGB footed the bill for the seals as a good will gesture.
Leading evidence: 'Replace without a labour cost' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace without a labour cost' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
Half an hour reading the thread on engine failures, and I'm really worried...then guess what - the dealers just called, and the car I was going to test drive has developed a "fault"...?
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Replace without a labour cost
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
The only way I can prove mine was done is because I had the clutch replaced without a labour cost because PGB footed the bill for the seals as a good will gesture.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
Half an hour reading the thread on engine failures, and I'm really worried...then guess what - the dealers just called, and the car I was going to test drive has developed a "fault"...?
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
15 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T025149Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm new here! Been reading the posts for a while - what a great forum!
Was just off to my local OPC today to try out a 996 C4S. Half an hour reading the thread on engine failures, and I'm really worried...then guess what - the dealers just called, and the car I was going to test drive has developed a "fault"...?
I was looking for a low mileage 2 year old car, and was going to spend c£50k c12-20k miles, but this now seems crazy if the 996 is a garage "timebomb" waiting to happen
A couple of questions I could use advice on -
1) Are there such things as 996s that don't suffer from seal/engine problems? What proportion are trouble free? - are we just hearing about a small/low percentage here?
2) Are later 996's any better than earlier ones from a risk perspective? Were there any fixes?
3) I could buy a 997, but it would be a low spec C2...I'd always wanted a C4S, but not sure any more.
4) What questions/evidence should I ask an OPC to understand the risk profile of a car I'm looking at?
Any help, moral guidence and therepy very much appreciated!
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56259
from what ive read in mags and forums
1)3.4's are meant to be the most troublesome.........regarding block problems......but tbh £50k budget will have you in the 2001> 3.6 anyway
2) afaik the 3.6 has a stronger block,tho seemingly there's always the rms issue
3)buy the 997 low spec...........unless you need 4wd.......IMO the 997 will always have the better residual value
4)ask for service records and any warranty records
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56261
Hi Toady. Unfortunately, all of the water cooled ones potentially have the problem except for the GT3, GT2 (Widow Maker) and the Turbo because their block is a different design and more "hand built".
To answer the questions:
1. No there aren't really, but you could be lucky. The %age of failures is very high.
2. Supposedly the 3.6 is more reliable than the 3.4 but 2 of us have had RMS failures this week on 3 year old 3.6s both at 20,000 miles.
3. 997 potentially has the same problems.
4. All you can do is get them to check if any of he problems have been rectified on the car you are looking at.
If you are buying from an OPC, you will at least get a 12 month warranty which is renewable each year for a premium of £725.
Paperwork with the car won't necessarily provide evidence. The only way I can prove mine was done is because I had the clutch replaced without a labour cost because PGB footed the bill for the seals as a good will gesture. So, the clutch is on the invoice but there is no mention of the RMS or Intermediate Shaft Seal.
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56263
But there will be a bigger initial depreciation. First couple of years they all drop like a stone and then slow down
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56264
In my experience 3.6's suffer just as bad as 3.4's
The best advice as allways is OPC 111 point check and Porsche warranty and renew for as long as you can
and you dont have to buy from an OPc to get the warranty.
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56266
i dunno but as he says he's got a budget of £50k then part 3 of his first post says he could go for a low spec 997 C2 with no mention of increasing his budget..........maybe i'm adding 1+1 and getting 3
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56271
I dont think 996 issues are that bad.Internet forums by their very nature will have more people complaining of problems than saying they have not had any any issues. I know there are faults around but dont let it stop you getting one. As said above get one form an OPC and keepthe warranty up. Remember-there are 10s of thousands of these cars around all of which are fine and have had no problems. Or at least no more that any other car! Just my 2p.
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56276
Thanks all - really helpful to hear your thoughts. If I buy the OPC warranty each year (for 9 years) am I 100% safe on an engine failure then?
I havent looked too hard at 997 prices, but guessed this was c£60k territory - I'm happier at £50k (happier still at £30k, but its not going to happen!)
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56282
One other quick and perhaps dumb question- is PSM (stability managment an option or a standard item on a C4S - I don't see it noted in many OPC lists of extras on their stock? Thanks if someone can put me on the straight and narrow...or should that curvy and fat?!
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56397
Ahh, on the subject of dumb questions just to make sure I'm comparing like for like are the following standard on this model -
PSM
Electric/memory seats
Cruise control
As you can see, I've been driving a Merc far too long, but am keen to compare cars as evenly as possible from a spec point of view...
Migration info. Legacy thread was 56398
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
