Question about cylinder bore scoring
Discussion
I know the answers are already in the forum somewhere but I don't seem to be able to find he right search phrases so apologies in advance
1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
snapper65 said:
I know the answers are already in the forum somewhere but I don't seem to be able to find he right search phrases so apologies in advance
1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
It is generally believed that the 2.5 and 2.7 are less prone due less stresses and thicker liners.1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
The gen 2 are a new design of engine and are not thought to be afflicted by poor cooling. However, I believe that there was one case reported on here about a year ago but it's probably a one off.
mollytherocker said:
snapper65 said:
I know the answers are already in the forum somewhere but I don't seem to be able to find he right search phrases so apologies in advance
1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
It is generally believed that the 2.5 and 2.7 are less prone due less stresses and thicker liners.1) are there Gen I models (Boxster and Cayman) that are NOT prone to bore scoring? And
2) was the problem adequately addressed in ALL the Gen II models, and if not then which Gen II are least/mostlikely to suffer?
The gen 2 are a new design of engine and are not thought to be afflicted by poor cooling. However, I believe that there was one case reported on here about a year ago but it's probably a one off.
3) The % of cars affected by bore scoring are minimal, perhaps 5 as an absolute maximum in every 100. Until independents and Porsche are happy to divulge numbers we can only look at data available on the net.
I refer to a previous post I made some time ago, when was the last time a thread was started because the owner had found out his bores had scored? They will no doubt be one or two, but I can't remembers any recently and it's more scare than fact.
However, if we have enough that's discussing the issue, there is no doubt it will lead 'one' to believe that a 911/Boxster/Cayman is an inherently bad purchase, which they are not.
And having had two 911's and a Boxster S I can confirm they are not.
They are on the whole brilliant cars with costs associated with the type of vehicle it hey are (much like an M5 is for example). You would be wise to warrant a purchase of this type much as you would with any high performance car, when they go wrong it can be expensive. Equally, don't get a warranty but you need to budget for unforeseen costs.
Over the years I've owned mine I had more warranty claims on other issues than engines and my cars were by no means garage Queens and were averaging 15k miles per annum, perhaps more than most owners drive in a year I would suggest.
mollytherocker said:
He didnt ask your number 3 though.
In terms of the rate of failure, we dont know. Those who do arent saying.
So your 5% suggestion is without foundation. I wouldnt attempt a guess as I just do not know.
I know he didn't, but it's worth mentioning IMO - bore scoring has become completely OTT in terms of a threat to the car.In terms of the rate of failure, we dont know. Those who do arent saying.
So your 5% suggestion is without foundation. I wouldnt attempt a guess as I just do not know.
I'm using the figures based on a poll in this very forum and also from having spoken to a number of dealers and indi's. Granted accoripding to our poll 19 have had bore problems out of nearly 300 polled which is a touch over 5% but I would suggest that's close enough. Bear in mind this is a poll of people who frequent this forum and there are thousands and thousands more who drive 911's with no issues whatsoever.
Those who do know aren't confirming figures because it's not a big problem - what would an Indi have to lose to quote a true figure?
Nothing I'd say.
Also to add I can't find manufacturing figures (they are out there but I can't find them currently), but lets suggest 1,000,000 affected derivatives have been made.
On the assumtion say 10% are failing that's100,000 cars and if that we're the case there would be more in the press than there is. Even at 5% we'd know about it, especially in the US where class action is a second hobby!
Therefore I can only logically assume the failure rate is insignificant.
Edited by HoHoHo on Saturday 29th December 17:40
HoHoHo said:
Therefore I can only logically assume the failure rate is insignificant.
That's comforting. When I was sourcing my Cayman S 18 months ago I remember a well known London Indie claiming around 1:5 of the Gen I Cayman 3.4 and 997 had significant bore scoring. Edited by HoHoHo on Saturday 29th December 17:40
The debate seems to have died down a bit since then
I don't buy any of these failure rate percentage estimations. 5%? So 95% of these engines will last forever? Poppycock.
This is how I see it.
Every engine ever made eventually fails in some way or needs a rebuild. Yes, even my perfect 993.
The point is that the inherent flaws of the M96/97 engine will most likely result in an earlier failure than is usual. The older they get, the more likelihood of a failure.
Surely this is common sense?
This is how I see it.
Every engine ever made eventually fails in some way or needs a rebuild. Yes, even my perfect 993.
The point is that the inherent flaws of the M96/97 engine will most likely result in an earlier failure than is usual. The older they get, the more likelihood of a failure.
Surely this is common sense?
Edited by mollytherocker on Sunday 30th December 13:02
Terminator X said:
mollytherocker said:
The point is that the inherent flaws of the M96/97 engine will most likely result in an earlier failure than is usual. The older they get, the more likelihood of a failure.
You berate an earlier poster for having no facts so where are your facts for this?TX.
If you believe these do not lead to early engine failure then that is your choice.
mollytherocker said:
The point is that the inherent flaws of the M96/97 engine will most likely result in an earlier failure than is usual. The older they get, the more likelihood of a failure.
Surely this is common sense?
I well remember not so long ago on here where a lady who had a carefully driven (mainly town driving?) Cayman with bore scoring after only 20K and just out of warranty. I believe Porsche originally stated it was out of warranty so no free replacement engine. However after a little pressure they relented and paid up.Surely this is common sense?
Edited by mollytherocker on Sunday 30th December 13:02
Reading that thread and others, it seems (and thats only my own assumption) that the more carefully and less driven these cars are, the more it seems the problem arises.
So therefore I would say, drive em like the devils on your shoulder and the Grim Reaper is chasing.
Though there does seem indeed to be issues with Porsche engines of late. I also believe its been blown out of proportion, not helped by some scarmongering (is that free advertising?) by certain Indies who can benefit monetary if you wish to stop this from ever happening or if a fail arises possibly just through bad luck.
Just my opinion of course
F3RNANDO said:
What is the average mileage for a rebuild on a 964 or 993?
Mine was surprisingly early at 70k (well maintained, carefully driven 96 C2). Excessive oil consumption and smokey - top end plus a few other bits. Not cheap! Air cooleds are better than later cars in general but far from indestructible sadly - got out of my 964 before that needed doing (but it was heading that way due to leaks). To cap it all my wife's 997 got scored bores at 7500 miles. Plenty of faultless Porsches in between though. Porsche engines do not have very long lives, but nor do most high performance engines, and they are better than most. One exception is 928 - assuming you maintain it properly (inc. cambekt changes and flex plate) - as they will easily do 250,000 between rebuilds. But then they have other issues...
snapper65 said:
HoHoHo said:
Therefore I can only logically assume the failure rate is insignificant.
That's comforting. When I was sourcing my Cayman S 18 months ago I remember a well known London Indie claiming around 1:5 of the Gen I Cayman 3.4 and 997 had significant bore scoring. Edited by HoHoHo on Saturday 29th December 17:40
The debate seems to have died down a bit since then
So on the assumption there are say 6 years of possible cars (just 911's) that's approximately a figure upwards of say 120,000 cars. Then you have the Boxster and Cayman. That would mean a failure of somewhere around 25,000 cars worldwide. However you look at it we just don't see that kind of cars lying about with their engines out on benches or hear anywhere near that figure across various Porsche forums. I don't work for Porsche so I'm not on their side, but we seem to be continually discussing a problem that will probably not affect the vast majority of owners. At the same time, the poll in this forum would also suggest your indi is out on his figures.
If you assume (and this is plucking figures out of the air) that Hartech are fixing 3 cars per week due to bore scoring that's 156 on a good year. How many indi's fix these problems, 1, 2 3 or maybe 5 or more but I would suggest a handful (unless the PH massive have a better figure?), so that's 780 cars per year or thereabouts - every year. That's 7800 cars per 10 years and that's a lot of cars!
It would be interesting if Hartech or similar would release their own figures to confirm numbers but so far they have refused to so.
I'm not suggesting it doesn't happen, and if and when it does no doubt it's bloody s
t and could possibly cost the owner a substantial amount of money to fix. As Baz has said in a previous thread, the failures are insignificant, but Porsche's customer service with regard to the failure isn't as good as it could be and that's another issue. Either way, until we can see some confirmed figures it's all speculative and does existing and potential owners no good at all. Of course, it will be interesting to see the number of issues 996's and 997's have as they age and rack up 100,000's of miles.As happens so often in life we concentrate on the issues that don't affect us and ignore the ones that do!
Wozy68 said:
Though there does seem indeed to be issues with Porsche engines of late. I also believe its been blown out of proportion, not helped by some scarmongering (is that free advertising?) by certain Indies who can benefit monetary if you wish to stop this from ever happening or if a fail arises possibly just through bad luck.
Just my opinion of course
That's an interesting opinion.....Just my opinion of course
I've just checked all the water cooled 911s over 100,000 miles on autotrader (god I'm bored) there are approx 20 cars on there 2 of which claim hartech rebuilds - the others don't mention anything including a 140,000 mile cabrio.
Is also surprising to see how few high mileage v10 M5s are advertised, you see a few V8s but very few V10s. And no V8 M3s but a few E46
I'm not drawing conclusions from it, just thought it interesting.
Is also surprising to see how few high mileage v10 M5s are advertised, you see a few V8s but very few V10s. And no V8 M3s but a few E46
I'm not drawing conclusions from it, just thought it interesting.
Hungrymc said:
I've just checked all the water cooled 911s over 100,000 miles on autotrader (god I'm bored) there are approx 20 cars on there 2 of which claim hartech rebuilds - the others don't mention anything including a 140,000 mile cabrio.
Is also surprising to see how few high mileage v10 M5s are advertised, you see a few V8s but very few V10s. And no V8 M3s but a few E46
I'm not drawing conclusions from it, just thought it interesting.
Now check all air cooleds over 100,000 miles..... well you said you were bored!Is also surprising to see how few high mileage v10 M5s are advertised, you see a few V8s but very few V10s. And no V8 M3s but a few E46
I'm not drawing conclusions from it, just thought it interesting.
drmark said:
Now check all air cooleds over 100,000 miles..... well you said you were bored!
Ha.. I am... Interestingly a similar number (20 odd) ! A few of which have had work. But to be honest, the classifieds are a bit unusual this time of year.So back to the OP. isn't the conclusion that you can't buy a totaly safe car, so warranty it or set aside some cash... Or if you're really daring roll the dice and just go for it. If its all a bit to worrying, buy a mondeo (set aside cash for a clutch and dual ass fly wheel) or a golf (not a diesel due to the oil pumps)... The risks with a Porsche are greater, maybe unacceptable for you, but no car is garunteed to be risk free.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff