RE: Porsche 997 Carrera: Catch it while you can

[anonymous-user]

jakesmith said:

caymanbill said:

The % is unknowable. The fact that there seems to be a small cottage industry centred around the rebuild of these things tells you enough IMO.

Also the creme de la creme of Porsche pre-purchase inspections, AKA peter Morgan, doesn't deem it necessary to check bores as part of his highly regarded service

Probably best not to use his services then!

[jakesmith]

Yup.. gotta run anyway, just off to do my weekly boreoscope check, exhaust tail pipe soot analysis, stethoscope 'ticking' check, and to install a 7th radiator

[SidewaysSi]

St John Smythe said:

jakesmith said:

caymanbill said:

The % is unknowable. The fact that there seems to be a small cottage industry centred around the rebuild of these things tells you enough IMO.

Also the creme de la creme of Porsche pre-purchase inspections, AKA peter Morgan, doesn't deem it necessary to check bores as part of his highly regarded service

Probably best not to use his services then!

Indeed. A couple of leading specialists I spoke to would certainly beg to differ.

I like these cars but having to having a contingency fund approaching 50% of current values is where the issue lies. Maybe in time they will increase in value and it will be less of a problem but I think there is some further falling to happen before then.

Shame these cars are tarnished by such shocking engineering. Maybe peopke don't want to hear about possible problems if they own such a car but no amount of head in sand will change the facts.

[fastgerman]

Above is an email from Porsche Guildford (largest OPC in the UK?) sent to me in March 2010.

Now I'm sure many dealers will say there are no problems when there are some but I very much doubt Porsche are telling customers to avoid the 997 or that they are stacking engines.

If you can back up your claims with evidence, I'll look at it, otherwise its all just hot air.

My previous post on page 3 has links to Autotrader showing several 997's with over 100k miles.

There was also a link for Peter Morgan, who many people say are THE Porsche inspection company:

Q: Should I worry about bore scoring on a 997?

A: The reality of this problem is quite different than some (with vested interest in the repairs) would have you believe. There have been a small number of failures, but these appear to have been confined to the larger engined or powerkit models (997S, Cayman 3.4, 3.6 996 X51 for instance). It does not appear to affect so much the 3.6 997, the 320hp 996s, 986 and 987 Boxsters and Cayman 2.7. It does not affect the Turbo or GT models, which have a different engine.

Now this is fact - I've owned my 997 since 2011 and its only cost has been service items. I owned an E46 M3 for 3 years, which consistently cost £3k per year in non-service items.

I am happy to budget the same for my 997 C2S, which means I have saved £12k over 4 years should something go wrong. If the engine does need work, so be it. It's a high performance car and it's easy to drop £10k on a F355, 996 Turbo, any aircooled Porsche etc. Atleast it won't be covered in rust and I can use it all year. Wonderful car.

Edited by fastgerman on Saturday 27th June 20:11

[Axel987]

Id be really interested to hear what kind of "vested interest" people such as hartech would have for hyping up this. Their job only begins after the engine start developing serious bore issues. Ridicilous.

As for Porsche claiming there is no inherent weakness with the 997.1 engine, yeah they said the same about the M96. Just kept replacing engines nothing to see here folks move along please

[Patrick Bateman]

I wouldn't expect a main dealer to say anything else.

[Axel987]

excactly. Same issue here. "We rarely see this occur, but if you should be so unlucky we are ready to help : - ) "

Yeah and when presenting their bill : "Here you go sir that will be.... oh look a squirrel!"

[anonymous-user]

Patrick Bateman said:

I wouldn't expect a main dealer to say anything else.

Quite!

[jakesmith]

That quote from Guildford is a joke

[JMo22]

fastgerman said:

Now this is fact - I've owned my 997 since 2011 and its only cost has been service items. I owned an E46 M3 for 3 years, which consistently cost £3k per year in non-service items.

I am happy to budget the same for my 997 C2S, which means I have saved £12k over 4 years should something go wrong. If the engine does need work, so be it. It's a high performance car and it's easy to drop £10k on a F355, 996 Turbo, any aircooled Porsche etc. Atleast it won't be covered in rust and I can use it all year. Wonderful car.

Edited by fastgerman on Saturday 27th June 20:11

Exactly. Whoop-de-doo a few people have had their engines fail out of the 10s of 1,000s of 997s that were made and yet that's all people talk about.

My friend's 1-series BMW spontaneously burst into flames and he was lucky to get out alive and yet I never read anything about that.

Even if your engine blows up it's now £30k all-in for an amazing car. A brand new Golf costs that much so people need to stop whining about a handful of engine failures!

Edited by JMo22 on Sunday 28th June 04:39

[minerva]

I have just checked ebay, expecting to see loads of 996 and 997s without engines... There are none on ebay at all at he moment. It's remarkable. There are, however, HUNDREDS of functioning 911 engines for sale.

Something's wrong, here.

[anonymous-user]

minerva said:

I have just checked ebay, expecting to see loads of 996 and 997s without engines... There are none on ebay at all at he moment. It's remarkable. There are, however, HUNDREDS of functioning 911 engines for sale.

Something's wrong, here.

Nobody has said they all have engine problems, you're making stuff up. It's just something to be aware of if you're purchasing one.

[minerva]

St John Smythe said:

minerva said:

I have just checked ebay, expecting to see loads of 996 and 997s without engines... There are none on ebay at all at he moment. It's remarkable. There are, however, HUNDREDS of functioning 911 engines for sale.

Something's wrong, here.

Nobody has said they all have engine problems, you're making stuff up. It's just something to be aware of if you're purchasing one.

The general consensus (my take) on PH threads about Porsches fills me with dread about purchasing one. I expected there to be many cars advertised as 'repairs' without engines or with engine failure. There aren't any, though.. Even at 5% failure rate, of the many thousands that were sold, there would be more cars without engines for sale than engines?

Not trying to be awkward, just remarking on (very weak) evidence that the 'engine failure' stories are somewhat skewing my opinion of the reliability of Porsche engines.

[anonymous-user]

minerva said:

St John Smythe said:

minerva said:

I have just checked ebay, expecting to see loads of 996 and 997s without engines... There are none on ebay at all at he moment. It's remarkable. There are, however, HUNDREDS of functioning 911 engines for sale.

Something's wrong, here.

Nobody has said they all have engine problems, you're making stuff up. It's just something to be aware of if you're purchasing one.

The general consensus (my take) on PH threads about Porsches fills me with dread about purchasing one. I expected there to be many cars advertised as 'repairs' without engines or with engine failure. There aren't any, though.. Even at 5% failure rate, of the many thousands that were sold, there would be more cars without engines for sale than engines?

Not trying to be awkward, just remarking on (very weak) evidence that the 'engine failure' stories are somewhat skewing my opinion of the reliability of Porsche engines.

I was considering a 996 a few years back but after a lot of research I decided against it. The final nail in the coffin was the specialist that looked after my old 944 track car telling me they wouldn't buy one! Not sure if the failure rate on 997s is considered anywhere near as high as the 996?

[Hungrymc]

Axel987 said:

Id be really interested to hear what kind of "vested interest" people such as hartech would have for hyping up this. Their job only begins after the engine start developing serious bore issues. Ridicilous.

Erm..... You haven't thought this through.....What about the 'preventative' modifications offered? And the service plans / warranty plans? I have no doubt Hartech are a good and trustworthy business, but they do have a natural bias.

I often keep an eye on the classifieds for Hartech engined cars, it always surprises me how few are advertised as the general noise on here is that most cars will go through thier (or equivalents) workshops by the time they've covered 50/60k miles.

Great cars! Go into ownership with a warranty, a war chest, or a healthy attitude towards risk .... and don't kid yourself that you'll run one for the same money as a mondeo.

[Axel987]

There are no preventative measures for bore scoring, which is what hartech makes a living on.
Once it starts, the engine will lunch itself within a few thousand miles tops. All the other small IMS jobs are just small potatoes.

The big one is bore scoring, and there is no way of proofing the engine in advance. Might as well just gamble and let it lunch itself first.

[Hungrymc]

Axel987 said:

There are no preventative measures for bore scoring, which is what hartech makes a living on.
Once it starts, the engine will lunch itself within a few thousand miles tops. All the other small IMS jobs are just small potatoes.

The big one is bore scoring, and there is no way of proofing the engine in advance. Might as well just gamble and let it lunch itself first.

So get yourself an inspection and onto the warranty / service plan to reduce the cost of future problems ... I think that's the pitch.

And I think D-Chunking or a bearing failure are equally key to Hartech and are pretty much as painful as scoring.

Don't get me wrong - I have no downer on Hartech (may well be needing them myself one day). This isn't about Hartech, it's about the fact that any thread discussing these cars is alway converted to an 'engines made of chocolate' thread.

I've just been on autotrader looking at high mileage interesting cars..... Good few 911s past 100K, very few of anything else that's is a similar car at these milages.

[fastgerman]

fastgerman said:

Without a doubt, the most beautiful 911 model series.
A GTS manual 2wd for me please.
Currently owned - 2005 997 C2S, 50k miles and no sign of issues - no oil consumption in 5k miles and clear borescope.
Peter Morgan says - http://www.porscheinspections.com/qanda.php#Cylind...

Edited by fastgerman on Thursday 25th June 21:35

Rust < 993 < 996 < 997

What the article fails to mention is that women throw themselves at 997 owners - fact.

Edited by fastgerman on Sunday 28th June 11:22

[jakesmith]

St John Smythe said:

Nobody has said they all have engine problems, you're making stuff up. It's just something to be aware of if you're purchasing one.

Cmoose asserts that every 997 engine will have bore scoring, at some stage. I believe his words where 'not if, but when'

This is one of two things I take issue with. The fact that there are rarely any Hartech cars for sale, many cars with over 100k for sale that have not had new engines, a previous poster on this thread boroscoped at 80k with no issues, and zero cars for sale with the engine issue, out of hundreds on ebay and autotrader, suggests that this may not be the case

Or let me guess, as it is a progressive non-failure fault, all the owners of affected cars are quietly moving them on. And the reason that there are few Hartech cars for sale is because the owners are keeping them, all, right?

Whichever side you see, my assessment of the above is that not all cara are affected or there woukd be more evidence in the market. And yes I know some dealers sell on known faulty cars.

Still bored of reading about it, even if moose is correct, which I doubt, why bang on about it so much.

[derin100]

JMo22 said:

Values of these have been going up for a year already.

I bought a nicely specced 2005 Manual C2S (GT Silver, Cocoa leather, PCM, Sport Chrono, BOSE, Sport Design wheels) with just under 40k miles for £25k in April 2014. Don't think you can get an equivalent for that now.

Haven't had a single problem and IMO the engine issues are over-hyped. Plenty of cars with worse reliability that don't get as much bad press.

Edited by JMo22 on Saturday 27th June 14:35

That's an absolutely gorgeous car! It would be my ideal car in terms of spec and colour combo if I were to buy one.

To an outsider with very little knowledge on the main subject being discussed here this is a very interesting thread. Clearly, there is a huge amount of detailed and in-depth knowledge amongst contributors. I've skimmed through the thread several times and have learnt much from both the "Yay" and "Nay-sayers"...for want of a better term (If you see what I mean?). However, sometimes it takes the clarity of thought of an ignoramus to see through the trees and the minutia of technical details etc.

It is evident that there seems to be absolutely no doubt that these engines failures do occur. To me, as an ignoramus, it seems that the real significance of this whole discussion isn't really the prevalence of these actual engine failures. The real reason that it has taken on such significance and is being so hotly debated comes down to money! It's because of the cost. If this were a failure that only cost a very small amount of money to rectify would anyone really be that interested or bothered? No, it is only because of the large cost of repair that will fallen upon an unfortunate owner should one of these issues occur.

Did I read somewhere in this thread that someone had paid £9K for an engine rebuild on a Cayman. Did I read somewhere £10K for a 911 rebuild/"new" engine and £15K from a Porsche Main-dealer?

That's an awful lot of money, isn't it? And isn't that what people are really scared of and why it's being debated?

I think of myself as a relatively highly paid (albeit Public Sector) worker, in a responsible job, at the top-end of my salary scale. Those sums for an engine/rebuild could represent more than my total take-home pay for a full quarter of a year's worth of work. Isn't that what people are really scared of and why this whole issue is being debated?

Yet, thus far, I can see no one who has questioned the justification for those sums to repair a fault on a car in the first place. How and why should it cost £15K? Sure, if Porsche set a price of £15K then it follows that an Independent can set (and get away with) £10K because to the average Joe that looks like a significant of £5K saving. Who would blame them? £5K is a lot of money in my World. The fact that the starting premise of it costing or being 'worth' figures anything like £15K or similar huge sums, is what really needs to be questioned.