RE: PH Fleet: Porsche Cayman S
Discussion
frayz said:
I had a similar journey to Cayman ownership.
Sold my Mini GP to fund the 911 dream, all be it a cheap 996 that i would be able to afford. This crept to a 997.1 Carrera S of which was a lovely car but after the GP just wasnt special enough, it was a beautiful sports car but just the same as any other 911 to me. Then the budget creep crept in and i was looking at 997.2 Carrera S's due to the scaremongering of bore score and IMS bearing issues.
I also looked at the likes of an RPM Technik CSR with an idea that all the above issues had been adressed and arguably it would be more special than a basic 911. Howver the worry of dropping that much money on a £15k 911 with £25k of mods just wasnt in my depreciation budget.
Thats when i found my dream car that ticked all the Porsche boxes for me. A Peridot green, Manual Cayman R.
Little, light, NA, manual and very special to drive.
Ive driven it back to back with a number of GT3s in both 996 and 997 flavour and never once been disapointed when getting back into the R. Absolutely love it.
As you can tell i think the 987 Cayman is a very underated tool for pure driving bliss
Lovely looking R there.Sold my Mini GP to fund the 911 dream, all be it a cheap 996 that i would be able to afford. This crept to a 997.1 Carrera S of which was a lovely car but after the GP just wasnt special enough, it was a beautiful sports car but just the same as any other 911 to me. Then the budget creep crept in and i was looking at 997.2 Carrera S's due to the scaremongering of bore score and IMS bearing issues.
I also looked at the likes of an RPM Technik CSR with an idea that all the above issues had been adressed and arguably it would be more special than a basic 911. Howver the worry of dropping that much money on a £15k 911 with £25k of mods just wasnt in my depreciation budget.
Thats when i found my dream car that ticked all the Porsche boxes for me. A Peridot green, Manual Cayman R.
Little, light, NA, manual and very special to drive.
Ive driven it back to back with a number of GT3s in both 996 and 997 flavour and never once been disapointed when getting back into the R. Absolutely love it.
As you can tell i think the 987 Cayman is a very underated tool for pure driving bliss
Just wondering does the R suffer from the same potential engine problems as other 987 Caymans?
Or had Porsche sorted the issues by the time the R was launched?
I've had my 2.7 for about a year, and as a road car it's great. The only issues with it are that you'll have to play around a little with setup if you're tall (say 6'2" plus), the gearing is very long, and the ride on 18" wheels isn't quite as good as it might be. I don't miss any extra speed the S would have given me, and a 2.7 flat 6 is an all time classic engine size and shape . Maybe a bit heavy, but with 8"s and 9"s, it has plenty of grip for me. There are a lot out there in Arctic Silver, which makes the choice of second hand ones a bit more monotonous. Factor in Porsche (independent) costs for servicing and work if you can't do it yourself, but even with that it seems like a very good value car to me.
Magnum 475 said:
2.7 - doesn't bore score.
3.2 - doesn't bore score.
3.4 (gen 1) - bore score is generally considered to be a question of 'when' not 'if'.
Gen 2 engines (any size) don't usually bore score. There have been one or two cases reported that you can find if you really go looking, but it's so few that it's really not a problem at all.
Let's throw IMS bearings in for Gen 1 cars too
987.1 3.2 - most have the 'small' IMS bearing, the one that fails. This can be uprated to an LN ceramic bearing quite easily. There are people who recommend that this shouldn't be done due to potential issues if not done perfectly, but it's been done by a lot of people. IMHO, a 3.2 with uprated IMS bearing is the best option for a 987.1. There are rumours that some late 3.2s have the 'large' bearing, but not fully confirmed by any engineering shop (this has been done to death on forum threads elsewhere).
987.1 2.7 - I **think** these all have the large bearing, which is not known for failing. This one's the lowest risk of failure.
987.1 3.4 - all have the large IMS bearing, so pretty safe in this regard (of course, the bore scoring issue makes this the engine to avoid).
Great summary. Care to offer the same for the 986.1 & 986.2?3.2 - doesn't bore score.
3.4 (gen 1) - bore score is generally considered to be a question of 'when' not 'if'.
Gen 2 engines (any size) don't usually bore score. There have been one or two cases reported that you can find if you really go looking, but it's so few that it's really not a problem at all.
Let's throw IMS bearings in for Gen 1 cars too
987.1 3.2 - most have the 'small' IMS bearing, the one that fails. This can be uprated to an LN ceramic bearing quite easily. There are people who recommend that this shouldn't be done due to potential issues if not done perfectly, but it's been done by a lot of people. IMHO, a 3.2 with uprated IMS bearing is the best option for a 987.1. There are rumours that some late 3.2s have the 'large' bearing, but not fully confirmed by any engineering shop (this has been done to death on forum threads elsewhere).
987.1 2.7 - I **think** these all have the large bearing, which is not known for failing. This one's the lowest risk of failure.
987.1 3.4 - all have the large IMS bearing, so pretty safe in this regard (of course, the bore scoring issue makes this the engine to avoid).
jhayward1980 said:
A similar thing happened to me. Man maths is a dangerous thing, I wish I'd never learnt it. I, however, started with the thought "I'd quite like a Z4 again"...
Similar story here.The £10k replacement for the wife's MR2 went from MX5 to S2000 to Boxster to Z4 when she saw an Alpina at Silverstone, then she decided a coupe was better for using as a daily, then she realised there was an 'M' version. Still, she seems to have made a good investment.
Titan2 said:
Lovely looking R there.
Just wondering does the R suffer from the same potential engine problems as other 987 Caymans?
Or had Porsche sorted the issues by the time the R was launched?
The R model has the 3.4 direct fuel injection engine from the facelift 987.2 with a 10hp fettle.Just wondering does the R suffer from the same potential engine problems as other 987 Caymans?
Or had Porsche sorted the issues by the time the R was launched?
This means that all the IMS and bore scoring problems from the pre-facelift cars up to 2009 are gone.
DFI has it's own disadvantages though, mainly in the coking of the intake valves which is inherent to any kind of dfi.
Some more than others, the Audi RS4 (B7 if I'm not mistaken) and R8 with the same engine are known for this.
Especially lazily driven cars will suffer the quickest, but at some point in any dfi engine's life the valves and inlets need to be treated to walnut blasting to remove the buildup. Which is not extremely expensive btw.
The whole coking issue is not all that threatening to the engine, up to a point obviously, but it reduces performance and increases emissions and fuel burn - precisely the opposite of what direct fuel injection was developed for.
richthebike said:
I can't let "GT86 is more involving than 996" pass by! I can't imagine how you've made this conclusion, so would be interested to hear how you got there.
Based on a few owners going from one to the other saying so, even the odd 981 owner, but then they would say so wouldn't they. Personally only have experience of the same gen Boxster, I assume the rear engined 996 isn't superior there. All entirely subjective, depending on preference depending if engine or handling is what involves (some prefer the engine, some prefer the odd 200kg or more real life kerb weight difference), feel free to disagree based on your own hands-on experience Onehp said:
richthebike said:
I can't let "GT86 is more involving than 996" pass by! I can't imagine how you've made this conclusion, so would be interested to hear how you got there.
Based on a few owners going from one to the other saying so, even the odd 981 owner, but then they would say so wouldn't they. Personally only have experience of the same gen Boxster, I assume the rear engined 996 isn't superior there. All entirely subjective, depending on preference depending if engine or handling is what involves (some prefer the engine, some prefer the odd 200kg or more real life kerb weight difference), feel free to disagree based on your own hands-on experience Then there's the matter of 300bhp flat sixes vs a 200bhp flat 4, better visibility, easier to place, feels smaller too... all ups the involvement for me.
Anyway, horses for courses and each to their own. Was just interested in the comparison basis.
Bought my 2011 Boxster S from Ashgoods 2 years ago and apart from a self caused leak. The only non-service related work needed is a new water pump which is going on this Friday. There is a mobile Porsche Specialist just started up in West London area and he is certainly taking the pain (and price) out of ownership.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Stock it is very wheezy indeed. I really enjoyed mine with some tweaks, 230bhp ish NA and good torque where previously the awful torque dip was sat. Sounded good too with a exhaust, still miss it. Close to 1200kg kerb (1050kg Ferrari/Alfa weight ) Of course a 996 tweaks well too... In fairness, Porsches are supposed to be pretty great out of the box, the GT86/BRZ was intended to be tweaked ...
Not sure where Rich comments on visibility and easier to place come from, both are very similar I would say, both great visibility with low noses and bulged front wheel arches, and same width within a few mm.
Edited by Onehp on Friday 5th April 12:07
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff