Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
2 3
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

dinsdale

Original Poster:

64 posts

153 months

[news] 
Monday 5th July 2004 quote quote all
I have heard a few nightmare tales of failed engines especially on early 996 cars and have been advised that the 2002 engine is very different to the early versions and that I should go for a 2002 car.

This will mean waiting longer to find the money! Has anyone had any experience of the early 996 cars?

poorcardealer

7,076 posts

126 months

[news] 
Monday 5th July 2004 quote quote all


Yes a few things to look out for..........OIL LEAKS........the earlier cars suffer due to defective oil seals........air con..........ive fixed loads that have leaking pipes.....

cyrus1971

819 posts

124 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
There have been several threads on oil leaks. The 02' car uses the 964 3.6 l block and it is bullet proof. Completely over engineered block from the late 80's when Porsche over built everything. Has been use in all 911 Turbos since without issues and as the 996 puts out 320 BHP (about the same as early Turbos) it was the more appropriate block to use. Hence the change. early 996's can go, there are few warning signes, milage or condition is also not an indicator so be warned. A friend in Germany commented that the failire rate on 3.4 litre 996 units ran to 5% ! AN alternative is to find an early car with a warrantee replaced engine and buy this as the cars were replaced with new no failing oil seals and should be a safe bet. Also to the un-informed a failed engine is goo argument to haggle as it may indicate a buggered car - but you will know better !

cuneus

5,781 posts

127 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Copied from elsewhere:

You've all read and heard way too much about this dreaded RMS nightmare
and many of you will have already had to endure it. Some of you have
endured it several times over.

RMS = Rear Main Seal.
Porsche AG call it the "Crankshaft Seal - Flywheel side".

The RMS can fail in your 996 C2/C4 or 986 at any time. Your car could
be barely weeks old or it could be an early 1997 model. It doesn't
matter. There are even reports of delivery mileage cars dripping oil
in the dealer showroom! The dreaded RMS failure now talked about on a
daily basis on this board or another, can exhibit itself for no
apparent reason. You may track your car or it may be a garage queen;
it could be your daily driver or just a weekender. It doesn't matter.
Why? Because none of these factors take into account a manufacturing
fault that's persisted since the first Boxter rolled out of Stuttgart.
And that's exactly what this RMS problem is: A Manufacturing flaw.

But Porsche AG won't admit to this fact. Furthermore, if your car is
out of warranty then they will often leave you with the legacy of their
incompetence by asking "YOU" to pay the hefty bill to replace the
engine seal.......and it typically takes 8 to 10 hours to perform the
repair!

If that sounds frightening, consider that it might happen again. And
again. And again. And again.

The RMS may indeed cause oil contamination of your clutch and/or flywheel. In this circumstance you would need a new clutch as any oil contamination would couse clutch slipage. It is very rare that the flywheel would need replacing but it too can become badly contaminated. But this is only the start of the problems that could ensue. During RMS replacement, the Porsche engineer uses a special mandrel tool to check the crankshaft concentricity. If it is out of tolerance specification it means the crankshaft is wobbling in the bearing (even if it is only wobbling by a few microns). This causes the seal to loosen and also has effect on the main bearing shells. The result is that oil can leak through the seal....or....residue clutch dust can enter the engine main bearing. In either case it can and ultimately (the cars are only 6 years in production remember) will cause catastrophic engine failure. This is the reason why Porsche exchange the engine when the tolerance of the crankshaft seal opening is out. Furthermore, the wobbling can transmit through to the transmission unit thus causing damage to the gearing mechanism. In fact there is some thought that a faulty gearbox could transmit similar wobbling through to the engine and thus cause the RMS problem in the first place! In all, what I am saying is that this is not a trivial issue. The RMS left unchecked may lead to engine and or gearbox failure. If your car is out of warranty then all best are off in regards to who pays for what.


>> Edited by cuneus on Tuesday 6th July 09:37

jeremyc

11,935 posts

169 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Does the RMS problem apply to other 996 models - GT3, GT2 & Turbo - or is it solely C2, C4 & Boxster?
Advertisement

clubsport

6,863 posts

143 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
cyrus1971 said:
There have been several threads on oil leaks. The 02' car uses the 964 3.6 l block and it is bullet proof. Completely over engineered block from the late 80's when Porsche over built everything. Has been use in all 911 Turbos since without issues and as the 996 puts out 320 BHP (about the same as early Turbos) it was the more appropriate block to use. Hence the change. early 996's can go, there are few warning signes, milage or condition is also not an indicator so be warned. A friend in Germany commented that the failire rate on 3.4 litre 996 units ran to 5% ! AN alternative is to find an early car with a warrantee replaced engine and buy this as the cars were replaced with new no failing oil seals and should be a safe bet. Also to the un-informed a failed engine is goo argument to haggle as it may indicate a buggered car - but you will know better !



The standard 2002 carrera cars DO NOT use the 964 GT1 derived block, this block is used only in Turbo and GT2/3 models, these blocks have the advantage of being dry sumped, the 3.4 and 3.6 blocks are "semi dry sumped".
The 3.6 version is nicer to drive than the 3.4 IMHO etc.. and basically Porsche had the chance to re engineer some areas of the 3.4 which may not have been as over engineered as Porsche engines in the past.
There do appear to be less engine probs with 3.6 carrera units to date.
The 2002

>> Edited by clubsport on Tuesday 6th July 10:53

oldtimer

297 posts

141 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Jeez, looks like the forum is doing a fine job of talking down early 996 prices !
My Nov 97 car has done 65k miles including about 8 trackdays and is a daily driver with no problems yet.

It would be interesting to have some audited figures for just what the % is of failures - simplistically the quote of 5% earlier in the thread would appear to give you a 95% chance of being OK . In the overall scheme of things buying a used car cannot ever be regarded as a 100% reliable exercise , tell you the truth the way I drive my Porsche sometimes could not be called 100% reliable either but I am still around to tell the tale

My point - life's too short to lay awake at night worrying about 996 reliability....they are great cars to drive and will always lose money like any other luxury performance motor that gets well driven...

My advice - get one and keep a bit of cash in reserve for that rainy day RMS failure that may never happen

pdavison

1,301 posts

162 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
What are the costs involved in repairing the RMS problem? I'm considering an early 996 but this thread may push me towards a 993 instead.

RoShambo

580 posts

132 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
OPC's charge 706 to fix the RMS - thats the price for a 2002 C4S (manual)
It will be fixed under Porsche Warranty if under 2 years old & if the car is out of warranty & under 3 years old then a good-will claim will be put through.

Going through the process now & expect a response from Porsche next week on how much they are paying for.

Once fixed I will prob put a Porsche extended warranty on the car - which - interestingly now fully covers RMS, so its absolutely a known problem (which is why I will be pushing for Porsche to cover all the cost of mine)

Independants will do it a lot cheaper.
Its the labour that costs the most - as its a gearbox out job it takes several hours - so the independants who charge half of what Porshce charge per hour is probably the way to go if your car is over 3 years old.

Ro.

murray

253 posts

168 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
What's the cost of the extended Porsche warranty ? Is it model specific ?

Jim

warmfuzzies

2,284 posts

138 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Interestingly enough an OPC technician told me that the tiptronics seldom if ever fail, its always the 996 manwells that go....


kevin

cuneus

5,781 posts

127 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Another nail in the 996 coffin:

TSB 911(996) 1/03 1359 3/07/03

Crankshaft Seal - Flywheel Side (R&R Procedures)

Vehicle Type: 911 Carrera (996) / 911 Carrera 4 (996)

Model Year: As of '99 (X)

Concerns: Technical Manual revised for - Removing and Installing Crankshaft Seal

Information:
In the Technical Manual, Repair Group - 13 59 19 - Removing and installing Crankshaft Sealing Ring -
Flywheel Side, the following is specified in Chapter "installing the crankshaft sealing ring", on pages
13-39 page 3 under Point 2 "Check crankshaft installation position":

If the measuring mandrel (special tool 9699/1) cannot be posotioned, the crankcase must be
disassembled and the bearing housing or crankshaft refastened.

This statement is no longer valid, and is hereby cancelled.

The following applies:

- When checking the installation position of the crankshaft, if the special tool 9699/1 cannot be placed with slight resistance
in the crankshaft housing bore, the engine must be replaced with a replacement engine.

abarber

993 posts

126 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
There was a letter in 911 & PW from a chap with a 996 that has had three such failures, all requiring new engines from Porsche. Fortunately they were replaced free of charge, but he's trying to insist that on the latest failure they fit the 3.6 engine.

Seems like way more than 5%?

clubsport

6,863 posts

143 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
One thing to consider with the 996 as stated above, is if there is a problem..replace the engine
There are no gearbox parts listed, but they supply gearboxes.
The early 996 are now 7 years old, they are fine now but these models may be a nightmare to own as they get older.

sprior

96 posts

129 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
What's the opinion on whether if a car has evidence of the RMS being replaced, is it likely to fail again?
ie: is the original problem the seal, how it was fitted, or the (presumably unchanged during repair) parts it mates with?

dinsdale

Original Poster:

64 posts

153 months

[news] 
Tuesday 6th July 2004 quote quote all
Thanks for all the replies! I know of someone who needed a new engine after 28k miles that was changed under warranty by the factory that subsequently failed again shortly after.

I currently drive a 993 and one of the benefits is that despite its' age you can be almost certain to get over 100k miles if correctly serviced without any major problems.

Its good to see that the previous advice I was given to go for a 02 car onwards is probably correct. The trouble is they cost 20k more than my 993! Perhaps a newer 993 or turbo is the choice........

ismail omar

8 posts

112 months

[news] 
Friday 6th May 2005 quote quote all
Hi Everyone,
i am sitting with a huge problem. My 2003 911 C4S has been diagnosed with engine failure by Porsche South Africa. I have covered 75 000 kms and the driveplan(motorplan) provides cover upto 100 000 kms. Porsche South Africa concludes that they will not repair or replace the engine under the 100 000 km warranty as the cause for the engine failure is 'Driver Abuse'. They have provided evidence from the engine computer reports,which they say indicates that i abused the vehicle.

are there any other porsche drivers of 996 carrera 4 S with similar problems or accusations of driver abuse.
Please someone help me in making me understand what is going on.I am not technically minded and dont know the difference between piston and bearing.
Ismail

verysideways

9,280 posts

157 months

[news] 
Friday 6th May 2005 quote quote all
Can you get them to define driver abuse?

Surely that's what the rev limiter is for?

If the car is "as standard" and you didn't let the oil go below minimum or anything like that, i don't see how they can get away with this. Not exactly an old car!!!

I'd be tempted to get in touch with Porsche AG directly and ask them to get involved.

Good luck, and keep us informed. I'm sure if anyone on here has been in a similar situation they will offer whatever help they can.

All the best.

VS

seandudding

495 posts

135 months

[news] 
Friday 6th May 2005 quote quote all
"Driver Abuse" the only abuse shown on the ecu is over reving, this cannot happen when you are acceleration due to the limiter, but if you are chnging down and are catch the wrong gear, the engine will over rev. I guess if this is done to often the engine will go bang. If this is the case, I agree it is "Driver Abuse", but I guess it is upto them to prove thaths what caused the failure.

DaGinge

4,613 posts

134 months

[news] 
Friday 6th May 2005 quote quote all
Did they utter the words "level 1 over-rev", if so you've no chance, basically it means you selected the wrong gear. Its called a mechanical over-rev and there's nothing you can do about it. Driver "abuse" is maybe a bit harsh, it is a mistake, but one which will cost you big.

If it is not a mechanical over-rev then can you give us details of what exactly they are claiming?
2 3
Reply to Topic