C.B.B.C.- Cayman big bang club.
Discussion
And yes.. Porsche should have made them closed deck.. But their focus seems to be on making cars last the warranty these days, and sometimes they fail at even that.. Back in the past they made cars where they had the attitude of "Sod the extra £XXX we will make it last".. But that era had them frequently on the edge of bankruptcy.. But also where do they draw the line.. My dads old Rolls Royce is built to be bullet proof.. But it weighed 3 tons..
Maybe Porsche should make better wishbones, engines, exhaust clamps, coil packs, PCM screens, expansion tanks, key heads... the list is endless of things which eventually fail on a Porsche.. But making them all last and be as good as they can be, is not compatible with being a sports car, as like the rolls royce, the car would weigh a lot more...
I think Porsche do a pretty good job of making a car down to a price which as a rule can last forever and give performance..
The only place I think they really fall down, is not in design, but in customer service when something goes wrong within the warranty or when just out of warranty.. I think that has given them a bad name more than the actual failures themselves.
Maybe Porsche should make better wishbones, engines, exhaust clamps, coil packs, PCM screens, expansion tanks, key heads... the list is endless of things which eventually fail on a Porsche.. But making them all last and be as good as they can be, is not compatible with being a sports car, as like the rolls royce, the car would weigh a lot more...
I think Porsche do a pretty good job of making a car down to a price which as a rule can last forever and give performance..
The only place I think they really fall down, is not in design, but in customer service when something goes wrong within the warranty or when just out of warranty.. I think that has given them a bad name more than the actual failures themselves.
Very good to hear Jon!
As you say, back in 03-04 the worst we had to worry about was the RMS where people made a huge fuss of an oil leak. Later problems as discussed here are much larger.
Going back some, my 2.7RS lunched one side when the timing chain let go. Upgraded to oil fed tensioners, then the crankshaft broke as the oil cooling was insufficient, both on track though. It was all a learning exercise, but expensive.
None of my four water-cooled P cars have had any mechanical problems.
Nic
As you say, back in 03-04 the worst we had to worry about was the RMS where people made a huge fuss of an oil leak. Later problems as discussed here are much larger.
Going back some, my 2.7RS lunched one side when the timing chain let go. Upgraded to oil fed tensioners, then the crankshaft broke as the oil cooling was insufficient, both on track though. It was all a learning exercise, but expensive.
None of my four water-cooled P cars have had any mechanical problems.
Nic
You seem to have had 2 comprehensive replies to consider saying almost the same things and we both mention how relatively rare the occurrence of failures is.
I agree it is a shame that a small number of weaknesses have blighted what would otherwise have been a brilliant all round car in every respect.
However the stress creep that results in "D" chunking - while affected by material quality and consitencey (and therefore varying between cylinders) and influenced by how the car is driven (to some extent) never the less is taking place all the time on all the engines and although some last longer than others - it will eventually cause problems.
It is a greater shame that the change of piston coating in the early 2000's added yet another potential failure of scored bores which often occurs before the cylinders have gone oval enough to crack.
Fortunately our replacement cylinders solve both problems in one go.
Although the closed deck design of the Gen 2 engines should prevent "D" chunking - we are still a little worried that the new piston coating will not last as long as the original coatings did used previously with this type of Alusil cylinder.
I agree numbers are still very small but I don't know how they compare to other similar engines and repairs are very expensive.
It seems to me that this problem it typical of anything in life that is a rare occurrence but very expensive to fix where the traditional solution is to share the potential cost by the majority of users (like car or house fire insurance) and as such options are presently available (and as the typical cost of these cars lowers and the "average" buyer probably has less resources to cover the cost of a repair) that investigating and taking up one of the better options might very well be the best way to deal with the problem and in my view explaining all this empowers those involved to do something to protect their interests - where they may otherwise be in blissful ignorance and be severely caught out.
We have been able to provide an excellent solution at a very reasonable cost because very early on we identified these weaknesses and believed it would result in a lot of potential business and decided to invest a huge amount in research, testing, machinery, training and organisation - which has paid off.
We continue to test and research new solutions and to minimise a few other weaknesses and if numbers increase (as we suspect they will) will carry on with that philosophy so high quality reliable repairs are possible and affordable.
As mentioned above - we supply in various levels and stages to all the very best independent specialists - doing all we can to help those in difficulty find a reliable solution wherever and however their rebuild is to be tackled.
When you handle hundreds of rebuilds each year and have the facilities in house to carry out all the machining and manufacturing you also find lots of other small issues you can improve during the rebuild which those handling a handfull each year would not be aware of - and in this case numbers do improve the outcome for all involved.
We also continue to race the models involved to assess lifespans and various ideas by putting them to the ultimate stress and strain levels (even though in doing so we may shoot ourselves in the foot in public by
testing something to see how long it may last - so far (fingers crossed) without too many problems). This starts all over again at Brands Hatch next Saturday in which the engines we are racing with still have many original features or parts that were replaced three seasons ago - being assessed for longevity.
Those unable to attend will be able to pick up on the races some days later on Motors TV and I hope by mentioning our previous 100% engine reliability record - it will not prove to be a boast I regret while continuing this testing.
There is little anyone can do to avoid problems with ovality and scoring. Changing oil more frequently and fitting a LTT will help prolong life as will not driving at full throttle to soon from cold or after a brief driving pause - but if you want to use the full potential frequently - and can afford it - a pre-emptive rebuild with all 6 cylinders replaced - may prove to be the best answer.
Baz
I agree it is a shame that a small number of weaknesses have blighted what would otherwise have been a brilliant all round car in every respect.
However the stress creep that results in "D" chunking - while affected by material quality and consitencey (and therefore varying between cylinders) and influenced by how the car is driven (to some extent) never the less is taking place all the time on all the engines and although some last longer than others - it will eventually cause problems.
It is a greater shame that the change of piston coating in the early 2000's added yet another potential failure of scored bores which often occurs before the cylinders have gone oval enough to crack.
Fortunately our replacement cylinders solve both problems in one go.
Although the closed deck design of the Gen 2 engines should prevent "D" chunking - we are still a little worried that the new piston coating will not last as long as the original coatings did used previously with this type of Alusil cylinder.
I agree numbers are still very small but I don't know how they compare to other similar engines and repairs are very expensive.
It seems to me that this problem it typical of anything in life that is a rare occurrence but very expensive to fix where the traditional solution is to share the potential cost by the majority of users (like car or house fire insurance) and as such options are presently available (and as the typical cost of these cars lowers and the "average" buyer probably has less resources to cover the cost of a repair) that investigating and taking up one of the better options might very well be the best way to deal with the problem and in my view explaining all this empowers those involved to do something to protect their interests - where they may otherwise be in blissful ignorance and be severely caught out.
We have been able to provide an excellent solution at a very reasonable cost because very early on we identified these weaknesses and believed it would result in a lot of potential business and decided to invest a huge amount in research, testing, machinery, training and organisation - which has paid off.
We continue to test and research new solutions and to minimise a few other weaknesses and if numbers increase (as we suspect they will) will carry on with that philosophy so high quality reliable repairs are possible and affordable.
As mentioned above - we supply in various levels and stages to all the very best independent specialists - doing all we can to help those in difficulty find a reliable solution wherever and however their rebuild is to be tackled.
When you handle hundreds of rebuilds each year and have the facilities in house to carry out all the machining and manufacturing you also find lots of other small issues you can improve during the rebuild which those handling a handfull each year would not be aware of - and in this case numbers do improve the outcome for all involved.
We also continue to race the models involved to assess lifespans and various ideas by putting them to the ultimate stress and strain levels (even though in doing so we may shoot ourselves in the foot in public by
testing something to see how long it may last - so far (fingers crossed) without too many problems). This starts all over again at Brands Hatch next Saturday in which the engines we are racing with still have many original features or parts that were replaced three seasons ago - being assessed for longevity.
Those unable to attend will be able to pick up on the races some days later on Motors TV and I hope by mentioning our previous 100% engine reliability record - it will not prove to be a boast I regret while continuing this testing.
There is little anyone can do to avoid problems with ovality and scoring. Changing oil more frequently and fitting a LTT will help prolong life as will not driving at full throttle to soon from cold or after a brief driving pause - but if you want to use the full potential frequently - and can afford it - a pre-emptive rebuild with all 6 cylinders replaced - may prove to be the best answer.
Baz
LaurasOtherHalf said:
hartech said:
The Gen 2 engines have reverted to a closed deck cylinder design and so should prevent this type of failure although there are already some signs that other cost saving measures will emerge with a few failures for other reasons.....
Baz
Interesting, care to expand?Baz
Ozzie Osmond said:
If you summarise all that detail what is it that causes the problem to emerge,
Its a combination of the open deck design and thin/weak cylinder walls. I am not sure that driving style makes much difference.- Regular high rpm?
- Regular high torque?
- Using too much power from a cold engine"
- Slow engine warm-up?
- rpm too low with a cold engine?
- Too much gentle driving?
In theory, they will all D chunk eventually.
Bumble SV said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
hartech said:
The Gen 2 engines have reverted to a closed deck cylinder design and so should prevent this type of failure although there are already some signs that other cost saving measures will emerge with a few failures for other reasons.....
Baz
Interesting, care to expand?Baz
I have written so much on this subject on other Internet forums that when the same questions, objections and criticisms arise here it becomes too big a task to answer every question on here all over again - sorry.
I will look back and see if I can find some previous answers that cover the questions as they emerge.
However if this topic here follows previous typical content - you will find a lot of people arguing (for reasons best known to themselves) about things they know relatively little about - often completely wrong about many issues.
We do not need to prove anything and frankly it is impossible to prove anything at all because it would take research facilities and costs that even Porsche could not afford - the best you can do is to consider why people have the opinions they do and basically who to believe.
At Hartech we have three graduate engineers, one of whom previously designed engines and gearboxes that obtained podium positions in Grand Prix's, one of whom built one of the fastest 1/4 mile production cars in his class and a lot of other engineers in various disciplines. Our staff between them have solved technical problems for many of the World's leading automotive manufacturers in Europe and Japan - so in terms of experience - we know our stuff. One engineer several decades ago was probably the first to manufacture alloy racing cylinders using chrome, steel and Nikasil bore coatings in the UK - so just by coincidence happened to have more experience of this subject than you are likely to come across elsewhere.
The number of alloy Nikasil liners we fit each year is approaching 4 figures and so - by comparison with any other source - we not only have the experience and analytical capability to work out what is going wrong but also strip, inspect and analyse far more engines of all types than any other Porsche specialists by a massive factor - and this means that we see more problems, see which repeat themselves, can work out what the failure limits are, can consider if there are common factors etc, etc. All this adds up to our opinion on any issues relating to these problems - likely to be at a more reliable level than you are likely to find anywhere else.
We have explained a lot of these problems in our buyers guide (sections 4 and 5) available on the Internet in www.hartech.org but although all the content is right and correct - it is now several years out of date - with much more that we could add if we had time - as a result of being more busy than we expected repairing engines and unable to find the time to update the latest information. I suggest anyone really interested reads it all first before asking further questions.
The main problems relate to cylinder walls being too thin is that composite liners suffer from "creep" resulting in permanent distortion in the direction of repeated stress and heat resulting in ovality. We measure every engine and can confirm that once a cylinder has reached 0.25mm oval it will soon crack. When one of the six cylinders is at 0.25mm there are usually 5 others distorted between 0.15 and 0.25mm - but all different (due to manufacturing differences).
The main problem with bore scoring comes from the combined issue of the silicon particles entrapped in the Lokasil matrix becoming dislodged and the oil film between the cylinder wall and the piston being unable to provide a thick enough oil film to allow the minute particles to escape whereupon they impinge on the piston coating and with the later plastic coating gradually wear them away or pick pieces out until the piston alloy is in contact with the cylinder wall and scores. The older ferrous coatings had a harder surface finish and resisted the particles cutting into them for much longer.
The silicon particles in Alusil are better bonded and resist coming lose for longer. The best analogy I have for this is that if you take a bag of ready mix concrete and just lay the contents out flat and pour water on it - when it has set it is not as strong as if it had been mixed up in a concrete mixer first and the stones are easier to chip out as well. The Lokasil preforms are manufactured by a process that results in a similar scenario - so the later "plastic" pistons coating are likely to last longer in Alusil (Gen 2 in which the silicon and alloy are mixed together while molten) than in Lokasil (Gen 1) which is pre-set).
The amount of coolant that passes into the cylinders is much less than the earlier Alusil POrsche engines (nearer 10% than the original 100%) and the thermostat is set at a higher temperature - so the cylinder wall temperature is higher between the piston and the cylinder wall in some circumstances than they were with earlier designs and we think results in the oil film strength and thickness being too thin in some circumstances to allow the particles to escape and instead allow them to rub into the piston coating.
Having our own "in house" precision machine shop also helps us to manufacture prototypes, fit temperature sensors all over engines (to analyse and confirm what coolant temperatures are in different areas) and experiment with different solutions.
We have also experimented with 7 different types of piston coatings (each fitted to a test engine, run for thousands of miles and striped for inspection) - so our background knowledge of different materials different cylinder coatings, various manufacturing processes etc is second to none. These tests alone cost a six figure sum.
So when we come to a conclusion it is as a result of experience, test results, the ability to test and try different things and as a result of seeing far more engines and failures than anyone else - probably Worldwide.
Presently we find other specialists who have tried to build a handful of engines assuming they know more about the problems than us, we find many that have never stripped an engine or even looked inside one and with no engineering background commenting as if their opinion is more important than ours and of course several other specialists trying to get in on the act with a solution we already know is not the best.
All this does not bother us because we are as busy as we possibly could be and do not need any more business, have no desire to expand our business any more and frankly could not care less about our image in terms of our expertise being questioned. We agree everyone has a right to their opinion and they will inevitably be right about some things and we may not be right about everything - but overall this is a problem not created by us and we are just trying to do our best to help those that suffer from it.
We recognised the potential failures years ago and set-up to provide a service to repair the numbers we expected to fail and we took that risk so early we now handle vastly more than anyone else with a superb reliability record and customer satisfaction rating.
You guys are welcome to choose who to believe and where to go for repairs - we just feel it is necessary for us to counter the misleading information that often gets posted from those we know (for a variety of reasons) are misleading the readers. We feel we should try and at least present the more reliable side of the argument but this is not regarded by us as a competition for honour - we are just often puzzled why so much misleading comment is made by others who clearly have not had a fraction of the qualifications, experience, facilities or repair numbers to compete. It is the downside if the Internet that while it provides a great forum for information it also provides a shop window for others to try and obtain work and elevate their own self importance as a result of the annonimity it also provides. It can become a dangerous mix and we don't have the time or inclination to cover every other posting we find even when it is clear to us it is misleading.
So while this subject may be new to this forum, it is not new to us and we are simply too busy trying to repair engines that have failed to embark on a crusade to correct and answer every question raised - sorry -- we hoe you understand our position.
Please read the "old" background information on out Internet site first and then we will try and answer any more questions resulting to the best of our ability and in the interests of accuracy and to avoid misunderstandings.
Baz
I will look back and see if I can find some previous answers that cover the questions as they emerge.
However if this topic here follows previous typical content - you will find a lot of people arguing (for reasons best known to themselves) about things they know relatively little about - often completely wrong about many issues.
We do not need to prove anything and frankly it is impossible to prove anything at all because it would take research facilities and costs that even Porsche could not afford - the best you can do is to consider why people have the opinions they do and basically who to believe.
At Hartech we have three graduate engineers, one of whom previously designed engines and gearboxes that obtained podium positions in Grand Prix's, one of whom built one of the fastest 1/4 mile production cars in his class and a lot of other engineers in various disciplines. Our staff between them have solved technical problems for many of the World's leading automotive manufacturers in Europe and Japan - so in terms of experience - we know our stuff. One engineer several decades ago was probably the first to manufacture alloy racing cylinders using chrome, steel and Nikasil bore coatings in the UK - so just by coincidence happened to have more experience of this subject than you are likely to come across elsewhere.
The number of alloy Nikasil liners we fit each year is approaching 4 figures and so - by comparison with any other source - we not only have the experience and analytical capability to work out what is going wrong but also strip, inspect and analyse far more engines of all types than any other Porsche specialists by a massive factor - and this means that we see more problems, see which repeat themselves, can work out what the failure limits are, can consider if there are common factors etc, etc. All this adds up to our opinion on any issues relating to these problems - likely to be at a more reliable level than you are likely to find anywhere else.
We have explained a lot of these problems in our buyers guide (sections 4 and 5) available on the Internet in www.hartech.org but although all the content is right and correct - it is now several years out of date - with much more that we could add if we had time - as a result of being more busy than we expected repairing engines and unable to find the time to update the latest information. I suggest anyone really interested reads it all first before asking further questions.
The main problems relate to cylinder walls being too thin is that composite liners suffer from "creep" resulting in permanent distortion in the direction of repeated stress and heat resulting in ovality. We measure every engine and can confirm that once a cylinder has reached 0.25mm oval it will soon crack. When one of the six cylinders is at 0.25mm there are usually 5 others distorted between 0.15 and 0.25mm - but all different (due to manufacturing differences).
The main problem with bore scoring comes from the combined issue of the silicon particles entrapped in the Lokasil matrix becoming dislodged and the oil film between the cylinder wall and the piston being unable to provide a thick enough oil film to allow the minute particles to escape whereupon they impinge on the piston coating and with the later plastic coating gradually wear them away or pick pieces out until the piston alloy is in contact with the cylinder wall and scores. The older ferrous coatings had a harder surface finish and resisted the particles cutting into them for much longer.
The silicon particles in Alusil are better bonded and resist coming lose for longer. The best analogy I have for this is that if you take a bag of ready mix concrete and just lay the contents out flat and pour water on it - when it has set it is not as strong as if it had been mixed up in a concrete mixer first and the stones are easier to chip out as well. The Lokasil preforms are manufactured by a process that results in a similar scenario - so the later "plastic" pistons coating are likely to last longer in Alusil (Gen 2 in which the silicon and alloy are mixed together while molten) than in Lokasil (Gen 1) which is pre-set).
The amount of coolant that passes into the cylinders is much less than the earlier Alusil POrsche engines (nearer 10% than the original 100%) and the thermostat is set at a higher temperature - so the cylinder wall temperature is higher between the piston and the cylinder wall in some circumstances than they were with earlier designs and we think results in the oil film strength and thickness being too thin in some circumstances to allow the particles to escape and instead allow them to rub into the piston coating.
Having our own "in house" precision machine shop also helps us to manufacture prototypes, fit temperature sensors all over engines (to analyse and confirm what coolant temperatures are in different areas) and experiment with different solutions.
We have also experimented with 7 different types of piston coatings (each fitted to a test engine, run for thousands of miles and striped for inspection) - so our background knowledge of different materials different cylinder coatings, various manufacturing processes etc is second to none. These tests alone cost a six figure sum.
So when we come to a conclusion it is as a result of experience, test results, the ability to test and try different things and as a result of seeing far more engines and failures than anyone else - probably Worldwide.
Presently we find other specialists who have tried to build a handful of engines assuming they know more about the problems than us, we find many that have never stripped an engine or even looked inside one and with no engineering background commenting as if their opinion is more important than ours and of course several other specialists trying to get in on the act with a solution we already know is not the best.
All this does not bother us because we are as busy as we possibly could be and do not need any more business, have no desire to expand our business any more and frankly could not care less about our image in terms of our expertise being questioned. We agree everyone has a right to their opinion and they will inevitably be right about some things and we may not be right about everything - but overall this is a problem not created by us and we are just trying to do our best to help those that suffer from it.
We recognised the potential failures years ago and set-up to provide a service to repair the numbers we expected to fail and we took that risk so early we now handle vastly more than anyone else with a superb reliability record and customer satisfaction rating.
You guys are welcome to choose who to believe and where to go for repairs - we just feel it is necessary for us to counter the misleading information that often gets posted from those we know (for a variety of reasons) are misleading the readers. We feel we should try and at least present the more reliable side of the argument but this is not regarded by us as a competition for honour - we are just often puzzled why so much misleading comment is made by others who clearly have not had a fraction of the qualifications, experience, facilities or repair numbers to compete. It is the downside if the Internet that while it provides a great forum for information it also provides a shop window for others to try and obtain work and elevate their own self importance as a result of the annonimity it also provides. It can become a dangerous mix and we don't have the time or inclination to cover every other posting we find even when it is clear to us it is misleading.
So while this subject may be new to this forum, it is not new to us and we are simply too busy trying to repair engines that have failed to embark on a crusade to correct and answer every question raised - sorry -- we hoe you understand our position.
Please read the "old" background information on out Internet site first and then we will try and answer any more questions resulting to the best of our ability and in the interests of accuracy and to avoid misunderstandings.
Baz
JMGPorsche said:
We have seen only a very few cars d-chunk.. from memory a 2.5 Boxster in 2002, a 3.4 996 in 2004, another 3.4 996 in 2007 and that is it.
It really is the minority..
I know of 3 other people in my area with Cayman S's that have gone pop in the last 12 months.It really is the minority..
Maybe you're not seeing them because of what happens:
It stops working, you've never heard of D-Chunk, so you take it to the dealer, he strips it down and tells you it's 7k to repair or 1.5k to put it back together and give it back to you still broken, so you can take it somewhere else, but you aren't sure where else to go.
No choice really is it?
Finally many thanks to Hartech for the explanation, which I (amazingly) understood!
At the moment it seems that in the 3.6, 3.8 and Cayman S engines - the bore scoring is occuring at lower mileages than "D" chunking - so most engine we repair suffering from bore scoring receive new cylinders or re-rounded and supported cylinders so do not then go on to "D" chunk anyway. These are also the engines that are fitted with the later "plastic" coated pistons that we believe will deteriorate quicker than the original ferrous coated pistons contributing to the early bore scoring failures.
The evidence of low mileage "D" chunking is reducing and we think this is probably partly because as the cars age the typical owners probably do not thrash the cars as much as some owners of a newer one and also probably are more interested in looking after them with more mechanical sympathy. It is also a fact that there is some difference in quality of the preform Lokasil liners - how they ended up being entrapped in the block and even the quality of the actual Lokasil and the distribution of the silicon particles within it - meaning in simple terms that the engines that happen to have better all round quality in the cylinder blocks will last longer than those that don't.
However they all still have "oval" bores so will eventually "D" chunk - but averages for mileages that it occurs at will take longer to materialise.
Inevitably driving these cars without high torque delivery (i.e. modest throttles and higher revs) will make them last longer in both bore scoring and "D" chunking modes and lowering the running temperature and frequently changing oil will also help but unfortunately if your engine happens to have vulnerable original Lokasil cylinder quality or lower end piston coating quality - it will still fail sooner than one with better quality that may be driven harder.
Titptronics seem slightly more vulnerable because they normally set off in second and release high torque even if the driver is not trying to go particularly fast in it.
However we are still talking about a very small number overall failing anyway and although all this information is right - the vast majority avoid failing - either due to being on the better end of manufacturing quality, maintenance, or driving styles and use - so as valid as this advice is - you are still unlikely to experience a premature failure however you look after or drive your car.
That said we do not expect them to survive for as long as say 944, 968 or 993 engines are known to. However many 924, Carrera 3.2, 964 and SC engines also needed either top end or full rebuilds at similar mileages we expect to see the majority of these engines failing at but the difference is possibly that these models could still be driven despite the engine deterioration whereas the M96/M97 engines will probably force the issue by failing.
Baz
The evidence of low mileage "D" chunking is reducing and we think this is probably partly because as the cars age the typical owners probably do not thrash the cars as much as some owners of a newer one and also probably are more interested in looking after them with more mechanical sympathy. It is also a fact that there is some difference in quality of the preform Lokasil liners - how they ended up being entrapped in the block and even the quality of the actual Lokasil and the distribution of the silicon particles within it - meaning in simple terms that the engines that happen to have better all round quality in the cylinder blocks will last longer than those that don't.
However they all still have "oval" bores so will eventually "D" chunk - but averages for mileages that it occurs at will take longer to materialise.
Inevitably driving these cars without high torque delivery (i.e. modest throttles and higher revs) will make them last longer in both bore scoring and "D" chunking modes and lowering the running temperature and frequently changing oil will also help but unfortunately if your engine happens to have vulnerable original Lokasil cylinder quality or lower end piston coating quality - it will still fail sooner than one with better quality that may be driven harder.
Titptronics seem slightly more vulnerable because they normally set off in second and release high torque even if the driver is not trying to go particularly fast in it.
However we are still talking about a very small number overall failing anyway and although all this information is right - the vast majority avoid failing - either due to being on the better end of manufacturing quality, maintenance, or driving styles and use - so as valid as this advice is - you are still unlikely to experience a premature failure however you look after or drive your car.
That said we do not expect them to survive for as long as say 944, 968 or 993 engines are known to. However many 924, Carrera 3.2, 964 and SC engines also needed either top end or full rebuilds at similar mileages we expect to see the majority of these engines failing at but the difference is possibly that these models could still be driven despite the engine deterioration whereas the M96/M97 engines will probably force the issue by failing.
Baz
Just in case anyone is in any doubt (I tried to be clear)
When it comes down to anything to do with the crankcases and bores in these engines Barry (Baz) is the governor as far as I am concerned and I believe 100% his observations on the causes, effects and how to deal with them are spot on.
Every specialist I talk has 3 options for customers who suffer bore issues with 9x6 or 9x7 models.
New engine from Porsche
££££££££ and possibly the same issues looming in the distant future possibly in someone elses ownership.. but still..)
Used engine
££££ Russian roulette as the same issue could be just around the corner
Hartech engine.
Where in my opinion, and other specialists, the issue isnt going to happen again
All my observations are based on my Porsche specialist garage with 4 lifts and a catchment area where 50 of the radius is in the English channel..
Barry's observations are based on dealing with just about every engine, that every specialist sends him, which is a massive percentage of all the engines which suffer a bore issue..
So it is pretty much a no brainer why I consider what he says on this subject (as well as a lot of others where he is the daddy) as gospel.
My main worry is that there are people out there thinking any 9x6 or 9x7 is likely to have an engine failure.. Which makes people who own them worry about enjoying them, and people thinking of buying one being put off the idea, which then means the people with one see the values heading down the toilet, which is partly because of people being put off buying them.
Barry is right, there are things you can do as owners to reduce the risk of engine failure... Frequent oil changes, cooler thermostats, magnetic drain plugs... which can all be done quite cost effectively at the right kind of times during maintenance, or as a one off at slightly more cost.
My old 996 had a row or PC hard drive magnets bonded into it and they were checked on every service.. Pure paranoia, but if the car was a keeper I probably would have considered getting a closed deck engine by Hartech.
But the only real sure fire way of knowing for sure would be to buy a car with a Hartech engine, or have your engine converted by Hartech, either direct or via your local specialist.
But one thing I do need to make clear, on this subject I posted my post to support Barry's opinion and the product he offers, not to throw buns at it, he is one of the handful of specialists in the UK who I have total respect for.
Some other specialists might not be so quick to jump in to confirm Barry's points, often because they are less transparent to their customers about who is rebuilding their engine, we are straight about this and have in the past sent 4 or 5 customers direct to him as complete cars if it was obvious without a stripdown that the car was suffering from a bore issue.
Jon
When it comes down to anything to do with the crankcases and bores in these engines Barry (Baz) is the governor as far as I am concerned and I believe 100% his observations on the causes, effects and how to deal with them are spot on.
Every specialist I talk has 3 options for customers who suffer bore issues with 9x6 or 9x7 models.
New engine from Porsche
££££££££ and possibly the same issues looming in the distant future possibly in someone elses ownership.. but still..)
Used engine
££££ Russian roulette as the same issue could be just around the corner
Hartech engine.
Where in my opinion, and other specialists, the issue isnt going to happen again
All my observations are based on my Porsche specialist garage with 4 lifts and a catchment area where 50 of the radius is in the English channel..
Barry's observations are based on dealing with just about every engine, that every specialist sends him, which is a massive percentage of all the engines which suffer a bore issue..
So it is pretty much a no brainer why I consider what he says on this subject (as well as a lot of others where he is the daddy) as gospel.
My main worry is that there are people out there thinking any 9x6 or 9x7 is likely to have an engine failure.. Which makes people who own them worry about enjoying them, and people thinking of buying one being put off the idea, which then means the people with one see the values heading down the toilet, which is partly because of people being put off buying them.
Barry is right, there are things you can do as owners to reduce the risk of engine failure... Frequent oil changes, cooler thermostats, magnetic drain plugs... which can all be done quite cost effectively at the right kind of times during maintenance, or as a one off at slightly more cost.
My old 996 had a row or PC hard drive magnets bonded into it and they were checked on every service.. Pure paranoia, but if the car was a keeper I probably would have considered getting a closed deck engine by Hartech.
But the only real sure fire way of knowing for sure would be to buy a car with a Hartech engine, or have your engine converted by Hartech, either direct or via your local specialist.
But one thing I do need to make clear, on this subject I posted my post to support Barry's opinion and the product he offers, not to throw buns at it, he is one of the handful of specialists in the UK who I have total respect for.
Some other specialists might not be so quick to jump in to confirm Barry's points, often because they are less transparent to their customers about who is rebuilding their engine, we are straight about this and have in the past sent 4 or 5 customers direct to him as complete cars if it was obvious without a stripdown that the car was suffering from a bore issue.
Jon
RYH64E said:
Could someone please tell me if the engines in later 3.4 Caymans have fewer problems than those in earlier models, and if so, from when? I'm thinking of getting one as a weekend/occasional commuting car, but don't want to end up with another moneypit, been there, done that...
post 1/2009 gen 2 cars are proving very reliable!all cars pre gen2 are subject to same problems no matter what age
itsybitsy said:
RYH64E said:
Could someone please tell me if the engines in later 3.4 Caymans have fewer problems than those in earlier models, and if so, from when? I'm thinking of getting one as a weekend/occasional commuting car, but don't want to end up with another moneypit, been there, done that...
post 1/2009 gen 2 cars are proving very reliable!all cars pre gen2 are subject to same problems no matter what age
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff