996-997 wet-sump engine reliability: enter your stats here!
Discussion
Back from hols - but no time to read everything I have missed - just a few points I have picked up that need answering (indeed if anyone is waiting for a specific answer please post the request).
(1) The reason I am glad that we concentrate upon repairs and services rather than sales is 2 fold. (a) because the Internet is making price more important than quality (because you can search for cars on price and not on quality). This results in buyers getting a false impression of the right price of a "good" car because they can list from the cheapest advertised upwards. Instead they want the good car for the price of the crap cheap one and it makes the selection and preparation of good cars almost impossible and often not viable. Many dealers shut down their workshops a few years ago to concentrate upon sales but now find margins squeezed and increasing difficulty in making a living selling quality examples. Newer cars like Boxsters are increasingly bought by those not really interested in the engineering quality anyway - they just want a fashionable car to drive and they don't expect it to go wrong because it is a Porsche - so quality supply does not interest them - again they just seek a low price - while those who read this forum know only too well how much a poor choice can cost them.
(b) There are fewer competitors looking after older Porsche's and each year more cars in the market (because every year more Porsches are sold and added to the existing number being driven around and needing looking after = a growth market). Furthermore the older they get the more work they need. This actually makes our market share potentially larger than main agents who tend to have a high proportion of newer cars but not older ones that are now outnumbering them and will always remain so. To explain - if say Porsche sold 6000/year and there are already say 60,000 on the road then if Porsche mainly looked after cars up to 5 years old - in 5 years time they would still look after 30,000 cars whereas our market would be nearer - 90,000 and so on (figures just for example). In contrast older Porsche's are often owned for longer so the sale of older cars becomes less in numbers with age - even though the overall number on the road increases - or they are increasingly bought and sold privately as they age.
However it is not because of the "repeat failures" that we are glad to concentrate upon services and repairs - as suggested - because we promote our maintenance plan in which we repair faults free of labour charge for as long as the customer owns the car and stays on the scheme - without penalty for mileage, age, number of claims or cost of claims. If we were doing this because the failures were repeating more - it would cost us a fortune - so it is not that - rather more that we are confident in our ability to look after older Porsche's ecconomically (and especially 996's and Boxsters) and better than our competitors.
By solving many of the problems that our competitors can not and finding cost effective solutions (as we have to the engine failures, gearbox problems and even now reconditioning the front transaxles etc) we are able to look after these cars for reasonable costs that enable us to be busy and make a living while offering the best value for money to our customers and that is always a good recipe for a successful business.
(2) Although we found out that the RMS location is not always in line with the crankshaft - we now realise that this was probably not the main reason for the failures and that a different technical problem explains why they fail so often - and we have now tested out a cost effective solution - but - although I am confident in its success - I can only claim to have solved it after several years have passed and no modified RMS failures have occured - time will tell.
In conclusion whereas the Internet has made it more difficult to find, buy, prepare and sell excellent examples - and make a living - the decline in good engineering skills and equipment in many garage businesses has enabled those with more traditional skills to stand out and therefore provide a good service to customers and plenty of work - and that is what is behind our philosophy - excellent value for money and a good reputation - leading to a strong customer relationship and repeat business - for those that are interested in such things.
Baz
(1) The reason I am glad that we concentrate upon repairs and services rather than sales is 2 fold. (a) because the Internet is making price more important than quality (because you can search for cars on price and not on quality). This results in buyers getting a false impression of the right price of a "good" car because they can list from the cheapest advertised upwards. Instead they want the good car for the price of the crap cheap one and it makes the selection and preparation of good cars almost impossible and often not viable. Many dealers shut down their workshops a few years ago to concentrate upon sales but now find margins squeezed and increasing difficulty in making a living selling quality examples. Newer cars like Boxsters are increasingly bought by those not really interested in the engineering quality anyway - they just want a fashionable car to drive and they don't expect it to go wrong because it is a Porsche - so quality supply does not interest them - again they just seek a low price - while those who read this forum know only too well how much a poor choice can cost them.
(b) There are fewer competitors looking after older Porsche's and each year more cars in the market (because every year more Porsches are sold and added to the existing number being driven around and needing looking after = a growth market). Furthermore the older they get the more work they need. This actually makes our market share potentially larger than main agents who tend to have a high proportion of newer cars but not older ones that are now outnumbering them and will always remain so. To explain - if say Porsche sold 6000/year and there are already say 60,000 on the road then if Porsche mainly looked after cars up to 5 years old - in 5 years time they would still look after 30,000 cars whereas our market would be nearer - 90,000 and so on (figures just for example). In contrast older Porsche's are often owned for longer so the sale of older cars becomes less in numbers with age - even though the overall number on the road increases - or they are increasingly bought and sold privately as they age.
However it is not because of the "repeat failures" that we are glad to concentrate upon services and repairs - as suggested - because we promote our maintenance plan in which we repair faults free of labour charge for as long as the customer owns the car and stays on the scheme - without penalty for mileage, age, number of claims or cost of claims. If we were doing this because the failures were repeating more - it would cost us a fortune - so it is not that - rather more that we are confident in our ability to look after older Porsche's ecconomically (and especially 996's and Boxsters) and better than our competitors.
By solving many of the problems that our competitors can not and finding cost effective solutions (as we have to the engine failures, gearbox problems and even now reconditioning the front transaxles etc) we are able to look after these cars for reasonable costs that enable us to be busy and make a living while offering the best value for money to our customers and that is always a good recipe for a successful business.
(2) Although we found out that the RMS location is not always in line with the crankshaft - we now realise that this was probably not the main reason for the failures and that a different technical problem explains why they fail so often - and we have now tested out a cost effective solution - but - although I am confident in its success - I can only claim to have solved it after several years have passed and no modified RMS failures have occured - time will tell.
In conclusion whereas the Internet has made it more difficult to find, buy, prepare and sell excellent examples - and make a living - the decline in good engineering skills and equipment in many garage businesses has enabled those with more traditional skills to stand out and therefore provide a good service to customers and plenty of work - and that is what is behind our philosophy - excellent value for money and a good reputation - leading to a strong customer relationship and repeat business - for those that are interested in such things.
Baz
Baz,
Do you know if any 996 replacement engines that were fitted after the year 2000 have failed again (hence owner having had 2 x replacement engines?) I spoke with a porsche trained mechanic yesterday (who on his last visit to porsche saw 12x996 new engines arrive!) who thinks that later engine replacements do not fail like the earlier ones. What do you think?
Do you know if any 996 replacement engines that were fitted after the year 2000 have failed again (hence owner having had 2 x replacement engines?) I spoke with a porsche trained mechanic yesterday (who on his last visit to porsche saw 12x996 new engines arrive!) who thinks that later engine replacements do not fail like the earlier ones. What do you think?
All the evidence I have seen suggests that there will be little difference.
Unless there has been an improvement in the Lokasil cylinder casting technique - they should be the same and although the camshaft chain drive is different - we have had one of those that failed.
The intermediate shaft problem seems not to have been resolved and the RMS not c ompletely cured.
Having said that some are now reported over 165K and going strong and the incidence of failures is still quite low statistically.
I think that there have been some improvements but in time the later engines will start needing work ust like the earlier ones have - but again - very small numbers.
Baz
Unless there has been an improvement in the Lokasil cylinder casting technique - they should be the same and although the camshaft chain drive is different - we have had one of those that failed.
The intermediate shaft problem seems not to have been resolved and the RMS not c ompletely cured.
Having said that some are now reported over 165K and going strong and the incidence of failures is still quite low statistically.
I think that there have been some improvements but in time the later engines will start needing work ust like the earlier ones have - but again - very small numbers.
Baz
Thanks Baz,
Cant get this bloody engine worry out of my head - have about £25k to spend on a car in August, had a 964 and to old school for me. Wanted a 996 as I love them but cant live with booting it and worrying engine will give up. I know I will end up buying a new 350z (my head tells me) but my heart wants the 996. Yes i could get the OPC warranty for £895 but at 25k to spend it will be an older model and the miles and age will make the warranty unavailable within a couple of years
Cant get this bloody engine worry out of my head - have about £25k to spend on a car in August, had a 964 and to old school for me. Wanted a 996 as I love them but cant live with booting it and worrying engine will give up. I know I will end up buying a new 350z (my head tells me) but my heart wants the 996. Yes i could get the OPC warranty for £895 but at 25k to spend it will be an older model and the miles and age will make the warranty unavailable within a couple of years
g_j_d said:
2001 911 with 63k miles. Had the oil/coolant mixing problem for 3 months now. Just heard today that a complete new engine is required... even my Range Rover was never this bad.
hmm. My understanding about engine failures till now was that it was either an intermediate shaft failure, or engine and gearbox leaking into each other, commending an engine + clutch replacement. Is the oil mixing with coolant a new type of failure for this thread? Is it a known issue as well?no doubt of course that this will count as an engine failure for the purpose of this thread.
Kay
Hi Kay
This is another known fault that can be as simple as a faulty heat exchanger that sits on top of the engine ,easy fix,or a cracked cyl head or internal failure of a gasket or cyl block that can result in engine replacement if left because they do not take kindly to running in water contaminated oil.
If you click on to Hartecs site all is explained in great detail.
Cheers Bob
This is another known fault that can be as simple as a faulty heat exchanger that sits on top of the engine ,easy fix,or a cracked cyl head or internal failure of a gasket or cyl block that can result in engine replacement if left because they do not take kindly to running in water contaminated oil.
If you click on to Hartecs site all is explained in great detail.
Cheers Bob
tonikaram said:
g_j_d said:
2001 911 with 63k miles. Had the oil/coolant mixing problem for 3 months now. Just heard today that a complete new engine is required... even my Range Rover was never this bad.
hmm. My understanding about engine failures till now was that it was either an intermediate shaft failure, or engine and gearbox leaking into each other, commending an engine + clutch replacement. Is the oil mixing with coolant a new type of failure for this thread? Is it a known issue as well?no doubt of course that this will count as an engine failure for the purpose of this thread.
Kay
Simon Taylor in Autocar magazine was one of the first motoring journos to bring this issue to the public's attention back in May 2000 when his long term test 996 C4 needed a new engine at 10,000 miles due to oil/water mixing. Of course, Porsche told him at the time they had "never seen this happen before". Exactly the same thing they told me when my C2 failed in the same way a few months later. I could only think that PCGB and the OPCs were banned from reading Autocar in case they might hear some bad news about their products...
Without wanting to do down Porsche or sound over negative, which I dont because I am very happy with my 2006 997 2s and have had zero problems with it.
Just maybe some problems are engineered, or rather not engineered out of the car. I will take up the 895.00 ukl option on extended warranty in March 08 when my factory 2 years runs out. Just maybe they like to sow the seeds of doubt and as such enjoy the benefits of owners insecurity!
I cant believe that these problems cant be sorted by the r and d at Porsche given the fact they have produced maybe in excess of 250k units. No disrespect to Barry at Hartech, a fine and knowledgeable chap, but how can he get to grips with what needs doing/engineering fixes and the guys at Porsche with greater insider knowledge of the product cant??
I am curious if indeed Porsche made any changes to the 3.8 997 unit or just kept all as was and decided that maybe 1 in 100 failure was acceptable? Any thoughts??? Baz? Thanks just my 2 penny worth. Just for the record I intend to get good value out of my purchase and baring any unforseens I will be keeping my 997 from new for at least the life of the OPC or other warranties (maybe Hartech) in the long term ie around 10 years or more. My son is 15 and would like it for his 25th....maybe!!
He better be good to his old man is all I can say
Just maybe some problems are engineered, or rather not engineered out of the car. I will take up the 895.00 ukl option on extended warranty in March 08 when my factory 2 years runs out. Just maybe they like to sow the seeds of doubt and as such enjoy the benefits of owners insecurity!
I cant believe that these problems cant be sorted by the r and d at Porsche given the fact they have produced maybe in excess of 250k units. No disrespect to Barry at Hartech, a fine and knowledgeable chap, but how can he get to grips with what needs doing/engineering fixes and the guys at Porsche with greater insider knowledge of the product cant??
I am curious if indeed Porsche made any changes to the 3.8 997 unit or just kept all as was and decided that maybe 1 in 100 failure was acceptable? Any thoughts??? Baz? Thanks just my 2 penny worth. Just for the record I intend to get good value out of my purchase and baring any unforseens I will be keeping my 997 from new for at least the life of the OPC or other warranties (maybe Hartech) in the long term ie around 10 years or more. My son is 15 and would like it for his 25th....maybe!!
He better be good to his old man is all I can say86,000 miles so far in my '99 C4. RMS done under warranty 2 years ago (small oil leak all caught by the engine undertray, that I wouldn't have bothered with if not under warranty). Engine hasn't used a single drop of oil in the last 3,000 miles, not tracked, but driven hard and often (just returned from high speed German trip - saw 270 kph on digital speedo)
Have been told (by technical adviser to PCGB) that almost exactly the same percentage of 996 3.4 engines have failed as 993s, but that this is about 4 times the number of engines of course!
Have been told (by technical adviser to PCGB) that almost exactly the same percentage of 996 3.4 engines have failed as 993s, but that this is about 4 times the number of engines of course!
Two points to make today!
(1) Kva's point seems to support my own conclusion that the 996/Boxster failures are not dissimilar to those that have always occurred with previous models - but that there are 2 main reasons why it seems worse.
(a) Internet Forums were not in great use then and search engine techniques no where near as good - so less exposure.
(b) Because the previous engine types followed a long and slow progression - there were many places where they could be fixed and parts available. When the 996/Boxster came out we could not initially obtain parts to repair engines and on top of that very few places had the technology or equipment to handle it - so new replacement engines became the initial solution whereas - more often in the past - rebuilds were (which sound less serious and costs less). Then some of the faults (liked cracked Lokasil cylinders) were entirely new to this type of engine and no previous solution existed.
Furthermore as the engine type was a whole new concept - the manufacturer probably wanted to see and evaluate the first failures to enable improvements to be planned, designed, manufactured and put into production (a common Japanese ideology). Finally - with the new engines costing less to produce - it was probably more viable to simply replace them than rebuild them.
However there has not been one "engine failure" we have not been able to rebuild and often the original fault was relatively minor.
(2) 9hellheaven makes a point that is difficult to answer without seeming to be boasting - but it does need answering because this logic that implies that Porsche must have a unique supply of super humans working there (and everyone else must be inferior) or that were actually right and never made any mistake - even when parts fail prematurely - is just not so.
In my working life I have worked in my own businesses in engineering and the automotive trade and also worked as a technical and management director for public and private businesses in automotive, aerospace and the composite industry.
Generally I have found a catch 22 situation with engineers. You cannot fool a design into working if it is wrong - so good engineers who pursue perfection - become pragmatic - but have to be able to admit or expect things to go wrong and therefore - always seek a better answer. They live in the "real" world.
Politicians, salesmen, financiers, investors, senior managers etc do not do well if they always tell the truth and seek and follow the "right" answer - they rely on persuading others to follow their route to buy, invest, support, follow a policy that may not be right and they have to make it seem to work or they loose their jobs. Furthermore you can never prove if they are right or wrong because there is no parallel universe following the alternative solution by which to judge the outcome. So in every engineering based business there are engineers frustrated because those higher up - seem to them to implement stupid solutions, idiotic policies, and are usually more interested in keeping in with those above them and firing those who may expose them from below, while accountants frequently think that figures are all that matters regardless of the uncertainties of new engineering development.
As a result of this I have (on countless occasions) come across clever engineers within big organisations or just working in their own shed - who have found the right answers to huge issues - when huge conglomerates and highly qualified and paid engineers, executives and businesses could not (however they rarely managed to personally benefit from the experience because those with money or power usually took the eventual credit (or benefit) one way or another).
Indeed it was this frustration - that eventually made me decide to return to my own small business -but perhaps one day I will put some of these experiences into a book, because just on my own - I have enough examples to stagger most sensible readers. For example - I once came out of a board meeting of a £150M turnover public group (where I was the technical director engine development) for a break and put the 2 alternatives being argued about to Sid - the floor sweeper - hunched over his brush and with a woodbine permanently in his mouth and water streaming from his smoke filled eye - his answer happened to be the same as mine and we were both later proven right but it had cost thousands.
It is this "proving who is right" that is so difficult and one of the only ways is in competitive motor sport - where you can be sure that engineers who make winning products must be very good because the results of their labours are on open display - for all to see. You cannot fool a poor engine into reaching the highest top speed or con an unreliable one into finishing an endurance race in first place! You cannot "spin", "lunch, "bribe" or "threaten" a poor race machine into finishing first
Sometimes engineers are their own worst enemy however because the World does not run just on the purity and idealism of mechanical things that work OK - and they are usually over optimistic and things usually take longer and cost more than they estimated - so the ideal solution is a balanced and mutually respectful relationship - that uncompromising "Engineers" like me can rarely handle and non engineers cannot usually understand - it is as if engineers come from Mars and everyone else is from Venus.
In the history of Porsche products there are countless examples of improvements in the original product - being found by small organisations or relatively unqualified individuals - and amongst those we too proudly take our place - previously in particular regard to 944/968 cam chain problems, suspension parts and now with this new generation of 996/Boxster engines. Furthermore it is much more difficult to find a solution to a poor design when you are constrained by the physical limitations imposed - yet many can do it.
There are some parts of these engine designs that I would never had done that way (and neither would countless others) and they would have been better as a result (although they may have cost more to produce) but there are other areas that are really excellent and better than I could have done. There is also the additional problem not only of designing to a cost but also the marketing, financial and litigious downside of admitting a fault existed by providing a re-design upgrade. When I designed engines - I didn't always get everything right first time - so imply no criticism there - but I was usually able to implement a solution immediately. However - it can be more politic to simply try to fix it within the next model and deny a problem ever previously existed - unfortunately this is possibly only a bearable option if you get it right next time - which has not always been the case.
So - yes it is entirely possible - even very likely - that all sorts of people with varying levels of expertise and in large or small organisations would be able to find a solution to - or improve an existing design by Porsche - or anyone else - and if that sounds arrogant or illogical - then tough - thats the way it really is.
Baz
The internet has also been an excellent tool for exposing facts and issues that were easily buried before. It is a superb medium for persuading companies to do the right thing, and for educating the unwary.
So, here's hoping we'll have more statistics.
I have two more to add and will do so later this week.
So, here's hoping we'll have more statistics.
I have two more to add and will do so later this week.
.. To baz!Can we keep the stats coming?
As an aside , I did a quick trawl over the 996's for sale on PH last night , and the amount of ads stating engine failure necessitating a new engine (which is predominantly the case when 996 engine failures occur) , were very very low .. See for yourselves...
This to my mind shows very accurate picture of 996 failure percentages...
Perhaps you might think this is something a chap might not want known if selling a car , but I think most would agree , if I was selling a car with a new(er) engine , I'd make sure it was highlighted rather than hidden ...
Edited by Ballcock on Wednesday 25th July 13:55
Hi Ballcock - you are absolutely right that the number of engine failures is comparatively very small.
However - following a recent posting on here that asked the question about selling a car with a rebuilt or new engine in which the majority admitted that they were put off - some of my customers that have had an engine rebuilt or replaced do not advertise the fact when they sell it. They feel this is OK because the quality of the comodity they are selling is actually better than if it was partly worn out yet know it can put buyers off.
It seems that a lot of the public associate something irrational to the car and feel that if it needed an engine rebuild or a new engine - somehow that car is a "Friday" car or embodies some mystical poor reliability issue that will return and therefore is more of a risk than one in which it has been repaired or replaced.
Engineers like us - know only too well that any engine wears out gradually and that the type of faults that occur usually have no connection to the care taken looking after the car nor the way it was driven and it is always better to have a car with new bits in it than old bits. Despite this - I too have this irrational suspicion about buying a car that had major bits replaced. If I tell a customer that a car I am selling has just had a new clutch and gearbox bearing - they are often not delighted - but put off. It often makes me wish I could sell it as it came in with faults and then repair them afterwards - but then the customer looses confidence in you - the car and his pleasue of ownership is lessened. We always list the work we do anyway and although this reduces our potential customer numbers - we feel we cannot be anything other than open about these things and therefore tend to sell to those who realise they are getting a better car and can supress those natural fears.
So the figures are slightly distorted by this and I think most people would agree that although it is a little silly - we all would still prefer to buy a car that has never had a fault - in the hope that this means it never will.
Most people buying a Porsche are buying a dream of what they imagined for many years - ownership would be like. Many then find it didn't change their lives as they expected and blame the car, the supplying dealer or Porsche - for what was originally their own misconception. I guess buying a car that never had any faults - fits into this imaginary image better than facing up to the probability that they are not perfect and will all need some repairs at some time - so more prefer to buy something with lots of worn out bits in it than one that has had them all fixed and is ready for a period of inexpensive and reliable motoring again.
Baz
However - following a recent posting on here that asked the question about selling a car with a rebuilt or new engine in which the majority admitted that they were put off - some of my customers that have had an engine rebuilt or replaced do not advertise the fact when they sell it. They feel this is OK because the quality of the comodity they are selling is actually better than if it was partly worn out yet know it can put buyers off.
It seems that a lot of the public associate something irrational to the car and feel that if it needed an engine rebuild or a new engine - somehow that car is a "Friday" car or embodies some mystical poor reliability issue that will return and therefore is more of a risk than one in which it has been repaired or replaced.
Engineers like us - know only too well that any engine wears out gradually and that the type of faults that occur usually have no connection to the care taken looking after the car nor the way it was driven and it is always better to have a car with new bits in it than old bits. Despite this - I too have this irrational suspicion about buying a car that had major bits replaced. If I tell a customer that a car I am selling has just had a new clutch and gearbox bearing - they are often not delighted - but put off. It often makes me wish I could sell it as it came in with faults and then repair them afterwards - but then the customer looses confidence in you - the car and his pleasue of ownership is lessened. We always list the work we do anyway and although this reduces our potential customer numbers - we feel we cannot be anything other than open about these things and therefore tend to sell to those who realise they are getting a better car and can supress those natural fears.
So the figures are slightly distorted by this and I think most people would agree that although it is a little silly - we all would still prefer to buy a car that has never had a fault - in the hope that this means it never will.
Most people buying a Porsche are buying a dream of what they imagined for many years - ownership would be like. Many then find it didn't change their lives as they expected and blame the car, the supplying dealer or Porsche - for what was originally their own misconception. I guess buying a car that never had any faults - fits into this imaginary image better than facing up to the probability that they are not perfect and will all need some repairs at some time - so more prefer to buy something with lots of worn out bits in it than one that has had them all fixed and is ready for a period of inexpensive and reliable motoring again.
Baz
Here's some points I'd like to share:
1- on mobile.de, a website where I spend a substantial amount of time, I have the impression that there are alot of Porsches advertised with a replaced engine, more than 1 in 10 (more). Cars with accidents are also stated up front, not much margin for lies or hiding things there.
Therefore the percentage isn't that low after all, unless that pool of data (people who sell) have a higher concentration of replaced engines.
2- I too am put off by cars that had had an engine replaced, for the reason that Baz put extremley well:
On the other hand, a 996 owner once told me "it's like a normal car", he hadn't changed the clutch since new at 90,000Kilometers, nor the engine nor anything else, just a 300 or 400 Euros check up every year. Now that's the dream Porsche ownership and, for me, a much more desirable car than the regular "new clutch new blablabla new brakes new etc" that were all done not sure where by not sure who, envolving not sure how much unmounting and mounting, unscrewing and screwing of not sure how many parts and panels, but incidently has an OPC stamp at the end of the service book saying "checked" as if this meant the car was Weissach new again...
Kay
1- on mobile.de, a website where I spend a substantial amount of time, I have the impression that there are alot of Porsches advertised with a replaced engine, more than 1 in 10 (more). Cars with accidents are also stated up front, not much margin for lies or hiding things there.
Therefore the percentage isn't that low after all, unless that pool of data (people who sell) have a higher concentration of replaced engines.
2- I too am put off by cars that had had an engine replaced, for the reason that Baz put extremley well:
hartech said:
we all would still prefer to buy a car that has never had a fault - in the hope that this means it never will.
Exactly. I am very put off by advertisements saying "I paid 10,000Euros in the last 2 years to get the car into the top notch condition it has today". why was all this done in the first place? To put things it already had? The less work the car has had done the better, and no doubt about it for me (not a typical Porsche thinking).On the other hand, a 996 owner once told me "it's like a normal car", he hadn't changed the clutch since new at 90,000Kilometers, nor the engine nor anything else, just a 300 or 400 Euros check up every year. Now that's the dream Porsche ownership and, for me, a much more desirable car than the regular "new clutch new blablabla new brakes new etc" that were all done not sure where by not sure who, envolving not sure how much unmounting and mounting, unscrewing and screwing of not sure how many parts and panels, but incidently has an OPC stamp at the end of the service book saying "checked" as if this meant the car was Weissach new again...
Kay
.... 
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff