I've just bought some poverty Pork ....

I've just bought some poverty Pork ....

Author
Discussion

edc

7,421 posts

196 months

Monday 19th August
quotequote all
ooid said:
edc said:
'Most' would suggest over half of those cars. I don't think it's even anywhere near that although admittedly have no numbers to back that up.
Jake Raby from flat 6 innovations had mentioned on rennlist a few times, he has seen this issue on 00-01 cars, mostly. They call it the problematic cylinder head castings that have only less expansion plugs or something.
That's a different sentence and meaning to your original post that implied most 2000-01 cars had a problem. A higher count of head problems for 2000-01 compared to other years across all 986 cars is a very different meaning. The statement you quote also doesn't quantify any issue or likelihood of it happening.

Escy

1,883 posts

94 months

Monday 19th August
quotequote all
My understanding was the cracked cylinder heads was an issue with the 3.2 and the 996 engines rather than the 2.7

cmoose

44,929 posts

174 months

Monday 19th August
quotequote all
ATM said:
I just can't get my head around buying the 2.7 when I know the 3.2 is not a lot more.
Agreed. The 2.7 is seriously sweet, but the 3.2 in the 986 ain't far off in that regard and the extra torque across the rev range is very nice to have.

Half a litre is a big old gap, especially when the starting point is 2.7. With the 911 models, I'm not bothered over, say, 3.6 or 3.8, more than enough shove either way and an extra 200cc when you've got 3600 is a pretty small step. Anyway, the 2.7 feels pretty, well, thin some of the time while the 3.2 has a little bit of that 'big motor in a small car' thing going on. Think most of the time, the 3.2 has just about enough grunt to be a bit exciting in sheer performance terms.

edh

2,849 posts

214 months

Monday 19th August
quotequote all
You probably also get a better spec in a 3.2. Some of the 2.7's are quite spartan. Early 3.2 with a dual row bearing is a good option.

ATM

9,542 posts

164 months

Tuesday 20th August
quotequote all
I'd like to try a 2.7 on 16's. Its just a shame the wheel design is so sheet.

Rosewood Red

381 posts

98 months

Wednesday 21st August
quotequote all
ATM said:
Its just a shame the wheel design is so sheet.
hehe

I wonder if some wheels like the below, with their widths and offsets, would work on a 986:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Porsche-944-Cup-1-2-16-...

cmoose

44,929 posts

174 months

Wednesday 21st August
quotequote all
Another left-field 16-inch option....


RM

270 posts

42 months

Wednesday 21st August
quotequote all
cmoose said:
Another left-field 16-inch option....

I was just looking for this photo. There is one on Rennlist, I think, on 15" teledials with chunky tyres. Looks great!

ATM

9,542 posts

164 months

Wednesday 21st August
quotequote all
RM said:
cmoose said:
Another left-field 16-inch option....

I was just looking for this photo. There is one on Rennlist, I think, on 15" teledials with chunky tyres. Looks great!
LIKE

Well done Moo

Huntsman

6,637 posts

195 months

Thursday 22nd August
quotequote all
RM said:
cmoose said:
Another left-field 16-inch option....

I was just looking for this photo. There is one on Rennlist, I think, on 15" teledials with chunky tyres. Looks great!
I reckon a 986 on 15" teledials would be a fab daily car.

RM

270 posts

42 months

Thursday 22nd August
quotequote all
Huntsman said:
I reckon a 986 on 15" teledials would be a fab daily car.



edh

2,849 posts

214 months

Thursday 22nd August
quotequote all
Looks ace on teledials

2Btoo

1,163 posts

148 months

Friday 23rd August
quotequote all
edh said:
Looks ace on teledials
I'll second that. I guess they won't go over the calipers of a 987 Cayman?

pattyg

1,185 posts

172 months

Saturday 24th August
quotequote all
What’s the consensus on the car below? Low mileage not always a good thing but it looks very clean with barely any advisories on previous MOTs. I questioned the panel gap at the bonnet and they sai£ bonnet wasn’t closed properly.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/porsche-boxster-2-5-199...

Mogul

2,386 posts

168 months

Saturday 24th August
quotequote all
I reckon it's closed properly (the bonnet, foglight, inner front wings all appear to line up nicely).

The front PU simply needs to be moved about 5mm rearwards.

That should solve the curious extra line between the PU and the lower front corners of the front wings, ahead of the side markers.

Low miles maybe but it looks like it has been out in the elements. Those front grilles are perished/faded grey. Worth investing in a pair if you decide to buy it and then take the front PU off.

cmoose

44,929 posts

174 months

Sunday 25th August
quotequote all
Agreed. Bonnet almost certainly closed, bumper misaligned. It's bound to have come off several times for routine maintenance, so needn't necessarily indicate a prang etc, though you might query the competence of whoever most recently refitted it...

kippax

2,784 posts

194 months

jakesmith

4,744 posts

116 months

Sunday 25th August
quotequote all
kippax said:
‘Modern classic, going up in value’, on a Boxster worth half of my 3 year old Smart car... what else is the seller deluded about!?

Bullet-Proof_Biscuit

396 posts

22 months

Tuesday 27th August
quotequote all
The bonnet gap sometimes looks worse than it is when looking down, possibly top edge of bumper not correctly located, 30 mins r&r to fix.

Bullet-Proof_Biscuit

396 posts

22 months

Tuesday 27th August
quotequote all
Bye bye cooking Boxster, now it's 'Episode 997 - 'Enter the Melt(y)'