Has your 996 or 997 engine had a major rebuild?

[hartech]

Interesting comments and remember car manufacturers do not make a car to suit buyers of 10 year old used cars - but to attract buyers of new ones. If it costs less to make and goes faster with better economy etc - and looks the business with all the latest tricks - new buyers will buy it and manufacturers will nake it.

If the design parameters that made the above possible mean that after 10 years it could benefit from an engine birthday - this will not influence the design team to make it slower, heavier and more expensively (with a lower margin) as long as they keep selling new cars.

Porsche simply tradditionally made cars too well - too expensive - for too long and now have dropped into the same zone and mind set as everyone else.

Fortunately there are several specialists with lower overheads who can buck the trend and offer a viable engine repair and/or reconditioning service to make the low used car purchase price attractive - even if a failure occurs.

They are absolutely brilliant cars.

Baz

[poppopbangbang]

My 1998 3.4 C2 lasted 11 years and 120,000 miles before it had any engine issues at all. Eventually the liner of cyl 2 failed. I don't really see this as a major failure or reason to shout how unreliable the 3.4's are from the roof tops. It did BLOODY well to get that far and it certainly hadn't been pampered (just well looked after).

Following the failure Autofarm supplied a Silsleeve block to replace the original and it was rebuilt with later type IMS and RMS, H beam rods, ARP fasteners etc. etc. So it should last at least another 11 years and 120,000 miles without too much issue. We went up a touch in compression and this coupled with the low loss exhausts and a few other bits made 322bhp.

[LordHaveMurci]

poppopbangbang said:

My 1998 3.4 C2 lasted 11 years and 120,000 miles before it had any engine issues at all. Eventually the liner of cyl 2 failed. I don't really see this as a major failure or reason to shout how unreliable the 3.4's are from the roof tops. It did BLOODY well to get that far and it certainly hadn't been pampered (just well looked after).

Following the failure Autofarm supplied a Silsleeve block to replace the original and it was rebuilt with later type IMS and RMS, H beam rods, ARP fasteners etc. etc. So it should last at least another 11 years and 120,000 miles without too much issue. We went up a touch in compression and this coupled with the low loss exhausts and a few other bits made 322bhp.

Just out of interest, is that extra 20 or so BHP noticeable?

[Gary11]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

The six pot BMW wasnt indestructible though and had vanos issues and nicasil issues which (NICASIL) was a difficult fix and many had engines replaced by BMW with revised bores as did Jaguar going back to iron liners,these though whilst mechanical In nature were execerbated by excess sulphur in UK fuel for a period and were a failing in a new tecnology rather than a mechanical break due to poor design and latent weakness.These flaws were engineered out unlike M96/7.

[itsybitsy]

These flaws were engineered out unlike M96/7.


but they were its the dfi lump

[mollytherocker]

itsybitsy said:

These flaws were engineered out unlike M96/7.


but they were its the dfi lump

Thats not 'engineered out', thats a new engine!

[Gary11]

lol hence not M96/7
Thanks MTR

[itsybitsy]

imho removing ims and building a closed deck,improving cooling and changing the material for the liner is engineering the problems out.a new engine was the best course of action to achieve this

[Gary11]

itsybitsy said:

imho removing ims and building a closed deck,improving cooling and changing the material for the liner is engineering the problems out.a new engine was the best course of action to achieve this

Yes (but a over a 10yr timeline).... also its people like Hartec/Autofarm etc doing the re engineering not Porsche,we have had 2.9 engines failing at low mileage I know of 3 with scored bores,it is without doubt an inherently weak engine design,a design that works perilously close to its thermal load capacity,most of its faults lie with overheating and poor maintainence (in relation to cooling system and oil changes) coupled with long service intervals.... and an obvious latent mechanical weakness,its been explained and gone over on here many times by people much more qualified,ask Baz!

Edited by Gary11 on Sunday 9th December 13:37

[roofrack996]

hartech said:

Interesting comments and remember car manufacturers do not make a car to suit buyers of 10 year old used cars - but to attract buyers of new ones. If it costs less to make and goes faster with better economy etc - and looks the business with all the latest tricks - new buyers will buy it and manufacturers will nake it.

So I am not sure what people on here are upset about - I doubt many people contributing are the original owner of the car.

The first owner expected a car, as Baz points out, which would do everything better / lighter / quicker than the previous model, in this the 996 was a massive success. It is a shame quality dropped slightly (cue 964 owners getting misty eyed about reassuring door clunks) but that is life.

The people who benefit are the garages who can turn a profit from fixing issues (all the indies I have visited recently have been busy - probably as much to do with people saving money outside dealership network as mech issues though)and the 3rd, 4th or 5th owners who have acquired a car at a fraction of the purchase price.

I feel sorry for anyone who bought a 996 for life and has had major issues, for the rest of us we have all benefited from low prices and cheap parts.

I can't see what else is to be said, we can't go back in time and there are solutions out there. It would be nice to get back to talking about the good bits of these excellent cars (for me performance per £, flexibility and practicality). Having just brought my new son home in it and then hours later been sliding round roundabouts, in a car that is worth about the same as my Skoda Octavia, I can't think of a better tool. And if it breaks there are lots of people out there to fix it!

[Adam B]

mollytherocker said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I dont agree with this. Production numbers will of course have an effect, but I reckon the 'perceived' engine issues are the main cause.

I have read this thread with much interest, including this mini debate. Purely one personal view of course but I couldn't give 2 hoots about production numbers v 933 (911s are two a penny where i live) but the reliability issue has put me off switching to a 911 from my RS4, so I agree with MTR. More specifically the £2k per year cost of the warranty which I see as a necessity because of the potential engine issues. Also increases the purchase price due to the 9 year limit so car would have to be 7 years old max for me. Hartech is a good option but they are in Bolton which is no good for me.

I can afford the 997/996TT I am considering and the much higher service costs but adding the £2k on top is making it hard to justify when I am considering other large outlays, and that I have beem so happy with the RS4.

[itsybitsy]

and the rs4 has no issues then

[HoHoHo]

Adam B said:

I have read this thread with much interest, including this mini debate. Purely one personal view of course but I couldn't give 2 hoots about production numbers v 933 (911s are two a penny where i live) but the reliability issue has put me off switching to a 911 from my RS4, so I agree with MTR. More specifically the £2k per year cost of the warranty which I see as a necessity because of the potential engine issues. Also increases the purchase price due to the 9 year limit so car would have to be 7 years old max for me. Hartech is a good option but they are in Bolton which is no good for me.

I can afford the 997/996TT I am considering and the much higher service costs but adding the £2k on top is making it hard to justify when I am considering other large outlays, and that I have beem so happy with the RS4.

The warranty isn't £2k btw.

Just over a thousand with breakdown, about £950 without (which I opted for as it was included in my insurance)

Compare that to a BMW M5 for example and it's bloody good value for money.

[Globs]

HoHoHo said:

Adam B said:

I have read this thread with much interest, including this mini debate. Purely one personal view of course but I couldn't give 2 hoots about production numbers v 933 (911s are two a penny where i live) but the reliability issue has put me off switching to a 911 from my RS4, so I agree with MTR. More specifically the £2k per year cost of the warranty which I see as a necessity because of the potential engine issues. Also increases the purchase price due to the 9 year limit so car would have to be 7 years old max for me. Hartech is a good option but they are in Bolton which is no good for me.

I can afford the 997/996TT I am considering and the much higher service costs but adding the £2k on top is making it hard to justify when I am considering other large outlays, and that I have beem so happy with the RS4.

The warranty isn't £2k btw.

Just over a thousand with breakdown, about £950 without (which I opted for as it was included in my insurance)

Compare that to a BMW M5 for example and it's bloody good value for money.

It varies from car to car I think - but the warranty cost is higher than you think because it means you have to buy expensive dud batteries, expensive tyres and pay the OPC to do all the expensive work.

The opposite end is to do the work yourself, as required, but people don't like the idea of the engine going pop (which is sometimes covered by warranty IIRC) - but you can have that fixed independently before it does.

[HoHoHo]

I wasn't including the 'extras', simply quoting a 997 warranty cost which I think is much the same for a 996.

Tyres are no more expensive than any similar car - as it happens the tyres on my wife's 320D M Sport were more expensive than those on my 997.

When I bought my 997 I had a warranty placed on it and I later found out it had a non Porsche approved battery. I asked if that was a problem and the answer was no. Equally I couldn't have a better sat nav/Bluetooth fitted as that would void the warranty!

[Adam B]

HoHoHo said:

The warranty isn't £2k btw.

Just over a thousand with breakdown, about £950 without (which I opted for as it was included in my insurance)

Compare that to a BMW M5 for example and it's bloody good value for money.

I stand corrected, but thought i had read higher than that (996 not 997) plus you pay for a 111 check but maybe that is first year only. Also a pain that you could not replace PCM 1/2 with something better with proper BT and iPod integration

[Callughan]

Including inspection and breakdown warranty is £1480. Some OPC waive inspection, however I do know OPC have become stricter in the last few months and have pretty much zero tolerance on non standard items.

Long time Adam Just do it, find a good one look after it and you'll enjoy it so much!

[Adam B]

itsybitsy said:

and the rs4 has no issues then

Was expecting this. They have two:

1. DRC leaks - Audi extended the warranty to 5 years and updated the parts
2. Coking on DFI engine - got mine done after 5 years of ownership, cost £350 at an indie

Other than that in 5 years I had the cig lighter replaced under warranty, not sure if it ever worked as I don't smoke. Services have been 250-400.

So not really in the same ballpark of financial worry no, IMHO

Edited by Adam B on Tuesday 18th December 13:42

[Hungrymc]

hartech said:

Interesting comments and remember car manufacturers do not make a car to suit buyers of 10 year old used cars - but to attract buyers of new ones. If it costs less to make and goes faster with better economy etc - and looks the business with all the latest tricks - new buyers will buy it and manufacturers will nake it.

If the design parameters that made the above possible mean that after 10 years it could benefit from an engine birthday - this will not influence the design team to make it slower, heavier and more expensively (with a lower margin) as long as they keep selling new cars.

Porsche simply tradditionally made cars too well - too expensive - for too long and now have dropped into the same zone and mind set as everyone else.

Fortunately there are several specialists with lower overheads who can buck the trend and offer a viable engine repair and/or reconditioning service to make the low used car purchase price attractive - even if a failure occurs.

They are absolutely brilliant cars.

Baz

I totally agree with the comments about the fixes developed by the independents - they are great cars but they need guys like You to keep them viable (and keep on finding good value ways to make them even better).

I disagree that the OEM don't design for 10 years down the road. Look how much better cars last now compared to how cars from the 70s and 80s do. This Robustness of design is genuinely essential to the brand. It's very hard to build a reputation for this level of quality and it's very easy to loose it. Porsche are getting away with it at the moment because it's fairly recent, they can't afford it to carry on into newer models. A reputation can be destroyed in on generation of cars but it takes 3 or 4 generations to start building a good one.

[Hungrymc]

Adam B said:

Was expecting this. They have two:

1. DRC leaks - Audi extended the warranty to 5 years and updated the parts
2. Coking on DFI engine - got mine done after 5 years of ownership, cost £350 at an indie

Other than that in 5 years I had the cig lighter replaced under warranty, not sure if it ever worked as I don't smoke. Services have been 250-400.

So not really in the same ballpark of financial worry no, IMHO

Edited by Adam B on Tuesday 18th December 13:42

Good job they don't have the oil pump problem that affects so many of the recent VAG 4 cylinder diesels etc. I have a few friends who've been caught by this one - expensive rebuild on very mundane tackle.

That said, it's all very poor form from Porsche - but I wouldn't swap my 911 because of it.