996 hasn't even slightly blown up shocker! ;)
Discussion
Did just over 400 motorway miles in my 3.4 over the weekend, now on almost 87k miles with no rebuild 
Averaged 29 MPG, 1st time in 4.5yrs I've ever bothered working it out, that was with 2 adults, 2 kids & a weekends worth of luggage
Saw my 1st ever white 996 Coupe on the journey, made it look newer as everything is bloody white at the moment!
Averaged 29 MPG, 1st time in 4.5yrs I've ever bothered working it out, that was with 2 adults, 2 kids & a weekends worth of luggage
Saw my 1st ever white 996 Coupe on the journey, made it look newer as everything is bloody white at the moment!
Edited by LordHaveMurci on Monday 7th April 12:24
Enjoy the beast!!!! Its plain and simple, if it breaks then that is life, deal with it, Mine is a 996 turbo with many "works" by Ken and the NineExcellence Team, it has not missed a heartbeat in 5 years and over 20k of excitable driving!!! If you want be downbeat get a Fiesta and trash it to death and keep yer licence to boot !!!!
FRPs Porsche said:
Enjoy the beast!!!! Its plain and simple, if it breaks then that is life, deal with it, Mine is a 996 turbo with many "works" by Ken and the NineExcellence Team, it has not missed a heartbeat in 5 years and over 20k of excitable driving!!! If you want be downbeat get a Fiesta and trash it to death and keep yer licence to boot !!!!
Ah yes, but thats got the proper engine in it! 
My Basalt Black '99 C2 is now at 92k miles and going strong with no drips on the garage floor either.
As a reward for behaving itself over the last 45k that I've put on it, it's going to be treated to some paint, a detail and wheel refurb. Then it will probably shed its internals on its daily trundle to the station...
As a reward for behaving itself over the last 45k that I've put on it, it's going to be treated to some paint, a detail and wheel refurb. Then it will probably shed its internals on its daily trundle to the station...
Edited by chris_w on Monday 7th April 10:46
Well done guys, proof that supports what we always say that they are brilliant cars and failures are rare in you are unlikely to experience one in your ownership (how else could we afford to cover the engine rebuilds under our Lifetime Maintenance Plans).
However on average they will not last as long as most previous models without needing an engine rebuild and furthermore I hope you guys are Worldly wise enough to realise it is difficult for me to be entirely open about my technical opinion based on experience about the life expectancy of these engines - we are a small business vulnerable in defending ourselves against larger businesses.
The fact is that in our opinion the relatively new Lokasil cylinder preform material used in these engines is not consistent enough in its quality to operate with as much predictability of its effective lifespan as previous cylinder alternatives like iron, Nikasil plated steel, Nikasil plated alloy (as used in most other models) and alusil (as used in the rest). There are some examples where large areas have simply "desolved" the surface and others where wear rates vary across the adjacent surface areas.
Furthermore our tests show it is not as strong and also suffers from "Composite Creep" making the need for a closed deck design more important. The only "open deck" models that worked Ok (except eventually under turbo high tuning levels without cracking) were the 924S/944/968 in which the cylinder walls were thicker and the material strength far higher.
Similarly the relatively new plastic piston coatings are not as robust as the previous ferrous coatings (applied to Alusil and the early Lokasil cylinder engines) that are no longer available. They seem to last reasonably well in Alusil and almost any coating (or no coating at all) lasts well in Nikasil (hence the factory abandonong Lokasil in favour of Alusil in Gen 2 engines).
Putting these facts together we expect more failures and many at lower mileages than engines not incorporating these deficiencies.
Whether or not the frequency of failures or the average mileages they occur at is acceptable or not is something different people and those in different circumstances may well disagree over and argue about. It frankly makes little difference to us as we will get to repair the Lion's share anyway and nothing we say in advance makes any engine fail when it otherwise may not do.
I think we deserve some credit for developing ways to prolong the life of engines that have not yet failed (by supplying LTT and other imminent new products) when it effectively does us out of potential business and we also advise several different ways we think will reduce or delay failures by different oil change schedules, different recommended oils, different driving styles and advice about when not to thrash the engine.
Obviously those driving with caution and sympathy will generally have engines that will on average last longer than those that thrash the life out of them too early, without sufficient oil changes and from cold. The difference in the expected lifespan is large between the different driving styles and engine conditions - but there are still some failures that are purely down to the quality of some engine parts being less than others of the same components in other engines.
We also test out ideas and life spans on our racing cars (even though we could avoid the resulting possibility of a race failure and the down side for the driver and our reputation that results). We did for example race with Loikasil cylinders in the Boxsters for the last 2 seasons (supporting our theory that failures are more likely due to low revs torque) and demonstrating the advantages of the oil we use and the temperatures we race the engines at.
The fact of the matter is that this design of engine is not as good as it could have been and changes during rebuilds can make them better, leaving rebuilds too long can become more expensive and we also think the public have a right to know and with our understanding of the engine - that we have a duty to inform people about that .
If some people think it is all unnecessary it has no down side for us as we will get to see our share of the ones that fail anyway - but what we cannot justify is keeping quiet about the situation and in so doing lure more people into suffering the consequences when being informed about it provides an opportunity to either avoid the potential problems or better still take out some protection to reduce the costs if it happens to them.
Great cars they still are - great value they certainly are - as long as you know what you are getting yourself into at the outset! and even after that the numbers failing are still small - but how they ramp up as mileages increase is something we all have to wait for "on average" - but from the increase in the number of rebuilds we are seeing it does seem to be ramping up at the moment.
Baz
However on average they will not last as long as most previous models without needing an engine rebuild and furthermore I hope you guys are Worldly wise enough to realise it is difficult for me to be entirely open about my technical opinion based on experience about the life expectancy of these engines - we are a small business vulnerable in defending ourselves against larger businesses.
The fact is that in our opinion the relatively new Lokasil cylinder preform material used in these engines is not consistent enough in its quality to operate with as much predictability of its effective lifespan as previous cylinder alternatives like iron, Nikasil plated steel, Nikasil plated alloy (as used in most other models) and alusil (as used in the rest). There are some examples where large areas have simply "desolved" the surface and others where wear rates vary across the adjacent surface areas.
Furthermore our tests show it is not as strong and also suffers from "Composite Creep" making the need for a closed deck design more important. The only "open deck" models that worked Ok (except eventually under turbo high tuning levels without cracking) were the 924S/944/968 in which the cylinder walls were thicker and the material strength far higher.
Similarly the relatively new plastic piston coatings are not as robust as the previous ferrous coatings (applied to Alusil and the early Lokasil cylinder engines) that are no longer available. They seem to last reasonably well in Alusil and almost any coating (or no coating at all) lasts well in Nikasil (hence the factory abandonong Lokasil in favour of Alusil in Gen 2 engines).
Putting these facts together we expect more failures and many at lower mileages than engines not incorporating these deficiencies.
Whether or not the frequency of failures or the average mileages they occur at is acceptable or not is something different people and those in different circumstances may well disagree over and argue about. It frankly makes little difference to us as we will get to repair the Lion's share anyway and nothing we say in advance makes any engine fail when it otherwise may not do.
I think we deserve some credit for developing ways to prolong the life of engines that have not yet failed (by supplying LTT and other imminent new products) when it effectively does us out of potential business and we also advise several different ways we think will reduce or delay failures by different oil change schedules, different recommended oils, different driving styles and advice about when not to thrash the engine.
Obviously those driving with caution and sympathy will generally have engines that will on average last longer than those that thrash the life out of them too early, without sufficient oil changes and from cold. The difference in the expected lifespan is large between the different driving styles and engine conditions - but there are still some failures that are purely down to the quality of some engine parts being less than others of the same components in other engines.
We also test out ideas and life spans on our racing cars (even though we could avoid the resulting possibility of a race failure and the down side for the driver and our reputation that results). We did for example race with Loikasil cylinders in the Boxsters for the last 2 seasons (supporting our theory that failures are more likely due to low revs torque) and demonstrating the advantages of the oil we use and the temperatures we race the engines at.
The fact of the matter is that this design of engine is not as good as it could have been and changes during rebuilds can make them better, leaving rebuilds too long can become more expensive and we also think the public have a right to know and with our understanding of the engine - that we have a duty to inform people about that .
If some people think it is all unnecessary it has no down side for us as we will get to see our share of the ones that fail anyway - but what we cannot justify is keeping quiet about the situation and in so doing lure more people into suffering the consequences when being informed about it provides an opportunity to either avoid the potential problems or better still take out some protection to reduce the costs if it happens to them.
Great cars they still are - great value they certainly are - as long as you know what you are getting yourself into at the outset! and even after that the numbers failing are still small - but how they ramp up as mileages increase is something we all have to wait for "on average" - but from the increase in the number of rebuilds we are seeing it does seem to be ramping up at the moment.
Baz
Again to add to the positives, I had a 996.1 followed by a 996.2 followed by a 997S.1 (all of which, of course, had differing versions of the cylinder cracking, RMS-eating, bore-scoring, IMS bearing-destroying, 'exploding', M996/7 motor)!
I'm really pleased to report that over the nearly 10 years that I owned these cars and well over 100,000 hard-driven miles, I never once had any of the 'inevitable' engine issues. All 3 cars ran beautifully at the point that I sold them, hadn't noticeably lost any performance with miles and all used very little oil. The only maintenance I did differently to servicing per manufacturer schedules, was to make sure the oil was replaced every 8-10000 miles and regular visual checks on known weak items like the header tank, rads and water pump bearings/seals.
Whilst I wouldn't ever deny that a percentage of these engines has gone pop (there used to be a stack of dead engines outside my local OPC, for example) it's quite possible to own one or more of these cars and never experience a serious issue. Certainly it's true that tales of problems normally find their way on to forums far more often than 'my car was just normal' stories, so maybe the likelihood of major failures isn't as big as it might at first appear.
I'm really pleased to report that over the nearly 10 years that I owned these cars and well over 100,000 hard-driven miles, I never once had any of the 'inevitable' engine issues. All 3 cars ran beautifully at the point that I sold them, hadn't noticeably lost any performance with miles and all used very little oil. The only maintenance I did differently to servicing per manufacturer schedules, was to make sure the oil was replaced every 8-10000 miles and regular visual checks on known weak items like the header tank, rads and water pump bearings/seals.
Whilst I wouldn't ever deny that a percentage of these engines has gone pop (there used to be a stack of dead engines outside my local OPC, for example) it's quite possible to own one or more of these cars and never experience a serious issue. Certainly it's true that tales of problems normally find their way on to forums far more often than 'my car was just normal' stories, so maybe the likelihood of major failures isn't as big as it might at first appear.
Just to please you guys let me remind you that several years ago we took in a 996 with 153K on the clock (I think it was a cracked cylinder then) rebuilt it, I drove it around for 2 years and then sold it and it is still going strong.
It did have very oval cylinders before we rebuilt it but it does show how good they can be but also that you would not expect to re-bore or re-sleeve any of the earlier different engine types made in the previous 20 years say.
If we were able to analyse all the various owners - their driving styles - the care the car received and from where etc - I guess that the engines that last the longest (on average) would be more often owned by drivers changing oils regularly, warming them up properly, not driving them excessively fast immediately after a short stop etc - but usually it would be impossible to carry out such research and we are left to draw our conclusions from the cars and owners we see here.
I think this feedback however is better than almost any other source as we are dealing with hundreds each year, recognise the typical customer attitudes for those who have owned it a long time and find there is a general correlation between them that we use to create a general opinion.
There are also a few that must be down to quality control or materials variations - when a low mileage car never thrashed and often tiptronic and driven by a more sedentary owner - fails - but this is probably at the ratios most high performance cars fail at anyway and very rare.
That is why we promote our Maintenance Plan because it has no time, age, mileage or cost limit and so enables an owner to enjoy the car without worrying about it too much and if a very rare failure occurs (for whatever reason) they have minimal costs to fix it and an opportunity to future-proof it at very little additional cost (as the bulk of the labour is covered under the Plan).
The Maintenance Plan costs work out less than you generally would find anywhere else because the monthly payments cover not only the labour for all regular services but the parts as well, the labour for most repairs (even wear and tear ones like clutches and brakes etc) and changes the oil at least once/year (or less in higher mileage examples).
Baz
It did have very oval cylinders before we rebuilt it but it does show how good they can be but also that you would not expect to re-bore or re-sleeve any of the earlier different engine types made in the previous 20 years say.
If we were able to analyse all the various owners - their driving styles - the care the car received and from where etc - I guess that the engines that last the longest (on average) would be more often owned by drivers changing oils regularly, warming them up properly, not driving them excessively fast immediately after a short stop etc - but usually it would be impossible to carry out such research and we are left to draw our conclusions from the cars and owners we see here.
I think this feedback however is better than almost any other source as we are dealing with hundreds each year, recognise the typical customer attitudes for those who have owned it a long time and find there is a general correlation between them that we use to create a general opinion.
There are also a few that must be down to quality control or materials variations - when a low mileage car never thrashed and often tiptronic and driven by a more sedentary owner - fails - but this is probably at the ratios most high performance cars fail at anyway and very rare.
That is why we promote our Maintenance Plan because it has no time, age, mileage or cost limit and so enables an owner to enjoy the car without worrying about it too much and if a very rare failure occurs (for whatever reason) they have minimal costs to fix it and an opportunity to future-proof it at very little additional cost (as the bulk of the labour is covered under the Plan).
The Maintenance Plan costs work out less than you generally would find anywhere else because the monthly payments cover not only the labour for all regular services but the parts as well, the labour for most repairs (even wear and tear ones like clutches and brakes etc) and changes the oil at least once/year (or less in higher mileage examples).
Baz
Great to hear so many positive thoughts on these great cars and thanks to Baz for his very expert opinions. Can't blame you for a bit of marketing en route.
Clearly some of these engines don't have the bullet-proof reputation of earlier models but the low purchase cost and minimal depreciation, now that the 996s have reached the bottom of the depreciation curve, make them very good value in my opinion, provided you accept that they will never be as cheap to run as a much newer hot hatch or coupe of similar value.
I am determined to enjoy mine and stop worrying about the relatively small risk of catastrophic engine failure because I've always wanted a 911 and love the marque and the ownership experience.
If you don't fancy a bit of risk get a hot hatch still in warranty......
Clearly some of these engines don't have the bullet-proof reputation of earlier models but the low purchase cost and minimal depreciation, now that the 996s have reached the bottom of the depreciation curve, make them very good value in my opinion, provided you accept that they will never be as cheap to run as a much newer hot hatch or coupe of similar value.
I am determined to enjoy mine and stop worrying about the relatively small risk of catastrophic engine failure because I've always wanted a 911 and love the marque and the ownership experience.
If you don't fancy a bit of risk get a hot hatch still in warranty......
Automental said:
Great to hear so many positive thoughts on these great cars and thanks to Baz for his very expert opinions. Can't blame you for a bit of marketing en route.
Clearly some of these engines don't have the bullet-proof reputation of earlier models but the low purchase cost and minimal depreciation, now that the 996s have reached the bottom of the depreciation curve, make them very good value in my opinion, provided you accept that they will never be as cheap to run as a much newer hot hatch or coupe of similar value.
I am determined to enjoy mine and stop worrying about the relatively small risk of catastrophic engine failure because I've always wanted a 911 and love the marque and the ownership experience.
If you don't fancy a bit of risk get a hot hatch still in warranty......
A perfectly reasonable post.Clearly some of these engines don't have the bullet-proof reputation of earlier models but the low purchase cost and minimal depreciation, now that the 996s have reached the bottom of the depreciation curve, make them very good value in my opinion, provided you accept that they will never be as cheap to run as a much newer hot hatch or coupe of similar value.
I am determined to enjoy mine and stop worrying about the relatively small risk of catastrophic engine failure because I've always wanted a 911 and love the marque and the ownership experience.
If you don't fancy a bit of risk get a hot hatch still in warranty......
Well my daily smoker hit 175.5 k on way home tonight.
Was working till 10pm tonight and was in at 7am, so i pretty knackerd to say the least.
But what was waiting for me in the car park to cheer me right up...... the 911
Makes the drive home alot more cheerful having that to hoon around in rather than some boring german derv machine.
Pretty sure the motor is in next months Total 911 magazine, cant wait to see the pictures of it.
My fellow petrolhead mates cant believe the car has done the mileage it has, one even joked it must have had a haircut the wrong way !!! lol
Was working till 10pm tonight and was in at 7am, so i pretty knackerd to say the least.
But what was waiting for me in the car park to cheer me right up...... the 911
Makes the drive home alot more cheerful having that to hoon around in rather than some boring german derv machine.
Pretty sure the motor is in next months Total 911 magazine, cant wait to see the pictures of it.
My fellow petrolhead mates cant believe the car has done the mileage it has, one even joked it must have had a haircut the wrong way !!! lol
Automental said:
It seems like most of the horror stories have happened at relatively low mileage. My indy feels that most of the failures have already happened hopefully, so those of us with slightly more leggy cars (mine has done 72k) can maybe relax a bit??
So let's hear from some more high mileage owners to cheer ourselves up.
That's what I heard too, when mine was on 82k miles. I was told that if it's gonna go, it'll go before 80k so I decided not to have the IMS changed.So let's hear from some more high mileage owners to cheer ourselves up.
A few hundred miles later, the IMS went and I paid 9k for a rebuild.
Sorry to put a downer on a positive thread, but this myth of "it'll only go at low miles" needs to be stopped.
I have decided the internet is the best way to spoil both the joy of motoring and any vestiges of romance or mystery associated with cars. It takes minutes before the doom mongers / victims of failure pounce on anyone who has had a positive experience and make them feel bad for saying something good. It is a bit like surfing medical websites for possible joint ailments that affect 30 to 50 something men rather than going out for a run / cycle / swim. I thought car people had a bit more about them than that.
Whatever we may all hope there are costs associated with these cars breaking; I know and have experienced most of them. The problem is that the argument seldom moves on from, "this shouldn't happen" to, "it has happened, it has been fixed and I still love / now hate the car". Even when the car is fixed you can normally - and quite naturally - sense a grudging resentment. The bit that is lost in the mire is that even with £15k spent on a £10k 996 that is still a huge amount of performance for £25k.
The only people I have sympathy for are those who had a problem having bought the car new, looked after it and had it properly serviced. Anyone who buys secondhand only has so much knowledge of the former life of the car and accepts that by purchasing this way they trade financial savings (up to £65k in the case of most of these cars!) for increased risk of an issue. To complain about an issue - any issue - in, for example, a car touching 13 years old - and with potentially sketchy history - can best be described as naive or more likely wanting something for nothing.
I will not be visiting Pistonheads, 911 UK or any other car website again for a chat, it is all just too depressing. Off to google the chance of being struck by lightning.
Whatever we may all hope there are costs associated with these cars breaking; I know and have experienced most of them. The problem is that the argument seldom moves on from, "this shouldn't happen" to, "it has happened, it has been fixed and I still love / now hate the car". Even when the car is fixed you can normally - and quite naturally - sense a grudging resentment. The bit that is lost in the mire is that even with £15k spent on a £10k 996 that is still a huge amount of performance for £25k.
The only people I have sympathy for are those who had a problem having bought the car new, looked after it and had it properly serviced. Anyone who buys secondhand only has so much knowledge of the former life of the car and accepts that by purchasing this way they trade financial savings (up to £65k in the case of most of these cars!) for increased risk of an issue. To complain about an issue - any issue - in, for example, a car touching 13 years old - and with potentially sketchy history - can best be described as naive or more likely wanting something for nothing.
I will not be visiting Pistonheads, 911 UK or any other car website again for a chat, it is all just too depressing. Off to google the chance of being struck by lightning.
roofrack996 said:
I have decided the internet is the best way to spoil both the joy of motoring and any vestiges of romance or mystery associated with cars. It takes minutes before the doom mongers / victims of failure pounce on anyone who has had a positive experience and make them feel bad for saying something good. It is a bit like surfing medical websites for possible joint ailments that affect 30 to 50 something men rather than going out for a run / cycle / swim. I thought car people had a bit more about them than that.
Whatever we may all hope there are costs associated with these cars breaking; I know and have experienced most of them. The problem is that the argument seldom moves on from, "this shouldn't happen" to, "it has happened, it has been fixed and I still love / now hate the car". Even when the car is fixed you can normally - and quite naturally - sense a grudging resentment. The bit that is lost in the mire is that even with £15k spent on a £10k 996 that is still a huge amount of performance for £25k.
The only people I have sympathy for are those who had a problem having bought the car new, looked after it and had it properly serviced. Anyone who buys secondhand only has so much knowledge of the former life of the car and accepts that by purchasing this way they trade financial savings (up to £65k in the case of most of these cars!) for increased risk of an issue. To complain about an issue - any issue - in, for example, a car touching 13 years old - and with potentially sketchy history - can best be described as naive or more likely wanting something for nothing.
I will not be visiting Pistonheads, 911 UK or any other car website again for a chat, it is all just too depressing. Off to google the chance of being struck by lightning.
Take it easy roofrack, nothing to get depressed about here. Just a simple case of sharing experiences and knowledge to the benefit of all. You'll find plenty of "it has happened, it has been fixed and I still love it" type comments in these threads. For your benefit, and with absolute honesty, I'll say it now: it happened, it got fixed, and I love the car to bits. Had a great time on track at Silverstone just last weekend.Whatever we may all hope there are costs associated with these cars breaking; I know and have experienced most of them. The problem is that the argument seldom moves on from, "this shouldn't happen" to, "it has happened, it has been fixed and I still love / now hate the car". Even when the car is fixed you can normally - and quite naturally - sense a grudging resentment. The bit that is lost in the mire is that even with £15k spent on a £10k 996 that is still a huge amount of performance for £25k.
The only people I have sympathy for are those who had a problem having bought the car new, looked after it and had it properly serviced. Anyone who buys secondhand only has so much knowledge of the former life of the car and accepts that by purchasing this way they trade financial savings (up to £65k in the case of most of these cars!) for increased risk of an issue. To complain about an issue - any issue - in, for example, a car touching 13 years old - and with potentially sketchy history - can best be described as naive or more likely wanting something for nothing.
I will not be visiting Pistonheads, 911 UK or any other car website again for a chat, it is all just too depressing. Off to google the chance of being struck by lightning.
As you say, the total cost of buying and fixing is still very good value for the pleasure it gives.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff