Quote:
"Because the M96 Block was shared by the 996 also, (it is now shared by the 997, 987 and Cayman), Porsche made the decision to use only A grade blocks for the 996 (makes sense since they're double the cost) and to repair the reject blocks (by post-cast machining and inserting sleeves) for the Boxster. He further said that there were no records as to how many of these stayed in Stuttgart and how many were shipped to Valmet in Uusikaupunki, though some were shipped to each. Hope this helps...:
originally posted by MNBoxster
So, they knew they didn't want to put those blocks in a 3.4L 996 which sold for roughly $75K+ but they were OK for the 2.5L 986 selling for $45K+. Wonder if they thought 996 owners would be more outraged at Porsche using reject blocks in a 996 than 986 owners might be or if the additional HP and torque of the 3.4L motor would be more prone to make those motors fail?
Either way it stinks. If it was a good idea and they really didn't expect a reliability problem, it should have worked in either car. If they thought there might be a reliability issue, then it shouldn't have been done.
The comment about the lack of records on where they went seems like a odd. As anal as Germans can be at times on details--I'm married to one--and the fact that each of these motors required a lot more labor in production than the unsleeved block, you would think they'd know exactly which motor was sleeved, which wasn't and where it went.
Then again, maybe they didn't want to know.....
Interesting story though; thanks for sharing it.