Engine failure

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Overdrive

I could go on, but my point is that this was the entry level vehicle to get people into the Porsche family. Popular though it did become, Porsche basically expected people to get this, own it for a while, and then want to upgrade to the flagship 911. And even the 911s from that era had some of these problems, too, especially the IMS failure.

in what way was the 996 substantially better as far as engine/cooling design than the 986? Seems to me that Porsche was trying to reduce costs across the board at different level of "cutting back" of course to maintain the margin. From what I understand the 986 was more expensive for Porsche to produce than the 996. The 986 was sold for nearly three years in Europe before the 996, borrwoing heavily from teh 986 parts bin, was unveilded in 1999. If buyers, according to Porsche, were being groomed for future 911 ownership then they were being set up to buy another cost-cutter because the 996 borrowed heavily from the 986 and not the other way around.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

in what way was the 996 substantially better as far as engine/cooling design than the 986? Seems to me that Porsche was trying to reduce costs across the board at different level of "cutting back" of course to maintain the margin. From what I understand the 986 was more expensive for Porsche to produce than the 996. The 986 was sold for nearly three years in Europe before the 996, borrwoing heavily from teh 986 parts bin, was unveilded in 1999. If buyers, according to Porsche, were being groomed for future 911 ownership then they were being set up to buy another cost-cutter because the 996 borrowed heavily from the 986 and not the other way around.

Just to be sure I'm not misunderstanding your question or maybe where it's coming from, I don't believe I said that the cooling system on the 996 was superior to the 986 in any way. All I made a point of is that the cooling system for the 986 barely gets the job done.

By no means am I saying that the 996 is better than the 986, especially not because it borrows parts, and not disagreeing with anything that you've stated, because you are correct. The 996 is certainly plagued with its own problems as I learn from what I read as I learn more about these cars. However, how many average Porsche consumers (read, not the wrench turners and knowledge seeking folks who frequent a forum such as this) with the disposable income to drop six figures on a car think in that way? I think we know that most of them think the more expensive car's simply got to be the better one (and then proceed to complain about how their car looks just like the budget car when you see it from the front). While that logic shouldn't be flawed, it is, because Porsche was indeed cutting costs wherever it could. You're right, they were setting up their buyers, but how many of those buyers really knew that? Most of them probably followed their 15,000 mile oil change intervals like they were told and would be looking to "upgrade" to a 911 some day, provided they weren't one of the unfortunate IMS failure sufferers.

Yes, the two cars were essentially the same from the doors forward for a period. If you were Porsche, why not do it that way? The important parts that made up the differences between the two were behind that, so why not save the company some money like they desperately needed to do to back then? It got them back on their feet enough to start differentiating between the two and bring about a fleet of over a half dozen vehicles for their buyers to choose from, running a whole gamut of 5-to-6 figure price ranges.

I guess I can see how my original post could be misunderstood as kind of saying that the 996 was of better quality than the 986, but that wasn't really my statement. Again, while the logic may seem flawed, I do feel that Porsche expected that their customers would enjoy their Boxster experience and come running back in to trade up in a few years to the only other model in the lineup (at that time) that wasn't fading out of existence, and that just had to be even better for another $30k+

[stephen wilson]

I think his point was, the engine problem is not exclusive to the Boxster, and it's lower price. The 911 had the same design flaw, and resultant failures.

[Frodo]

In any case, while Porsche may have picked up a few pointers from Toyota on cost-cutting, they seem to have dozed through the lesson on reliability. And the one on keeping customers happy when bad things happen to their vehicles waaaay before they should.

I know Toyota would love (just as much as the Porsche corporate types) for Corolla buyers to quickly develop the itch to upgrade to the Avalon. But you know what? Corollas and Camrys will go 200k miles with the best of them, typically without a lot of expensive repairs along the way. Oh well, I guess with the 986 (and other P-cars) it’s a package deal, take the bad with the good, all in the nature of owning a sports car. Intuitively, I probably knew that when I picked up mine…

[jacabean]

there have not been any blown motor post up here recently . one of a 100,000 that are on the road. i went to meet my brother an hour ago, 3 miles down the road . i saw 3 986 cars round trip. guys , you really don't need to panic. i does happen but if you take care of your car and drive it properly i would not worry about .

[BYprodriver]

Originally Posted by buckstr

My engine quit last week with no more warning than a loud ticking sound in the last mile or so of a 10-mile drive in town. The engine itself has only 25K miles on it - a remanufactured engine from Stuttgart because the body shop overheated the original engine during a collision repair in 2006. No external signs of a mishap, so the next step would be to pull the engine and start disassembly. Porsche NA isn't making any commitment until I spend probably upwards of $2K to investigate.

A quick internet search popped up intermediate shaft failures as a recurring problem in Boxster engines. Any experience with sudden engine shutdowns?

Any ideas how to get Porsche to accept some responsibility?

Many thanks.

Sorry this thread has drifted so far off your topic. I spent the day with a PCNA district service manager while working a new model launch & he received several calls from dealership service managers asking for his OK to do goodwill warrantys. In every case his 1st question was did the customer always have the Porsche serviced at authorized dealers? I hope this helps with your discions.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by jacabean

there have not been any blown motor post up here recently .

Well...buckstr might argue with you on that one, at least once he gets a definitive diagnosis (post-mortem?). Hopefully, his is not one of the DOA engines. In any case, I don't think all that many of us here are in an actual 'panic'. It's more of a nagging concern of what could happen, and the impact it would have on our checking accounts. I'm pretty sure I'm going to get the IMS retrofit in the next few months, when I have the clutch done. In the meantime? I haven't stopped driving my Boxster...not by a long shot.

[kpm]

Originally Posted by ASpec818

threads like these really push me to get rid of my S. I always fear something disastrous will occur whenever i hop into the driver's seat.

" It is better to have loved and lost, than to never loved at all"

I used to fear the reaper, now I know that I've done the maintainence and keep an eye out for signs of trouble, but I drive it every chance I get.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by kpm

" It is better to have loved and lost, than to never loved at all"

I used to fear the reaper, now I know that I've done the maintainence and keep an eye out for signs of trouble, but I drive it every chance I get.

Well, there ya' go...my philosophy exactly. Each and every time I hit 4500 RPM I totally forget about IMS issues!!!

[jacabean]

i don't think this guy drove his car enough . the motor was replaced almost 6 years ago . it does suck that this **************** happens but you need to drive these cars thats what they were meant for. i have seen quite a few boxsters and early 996s with 150k on them for sale recently. with my luck mine will be the one that goes kaboom ! at least i know i drive it every chance i get. I have a 2010 Evo Gsr it just sits in my garage 4700 miles on it, my boxster is just such a better car . i told my wife i want to get rid of the evo and pick up a 3.4 996 with an aero kit. so if one goes boom i got the other. obviously , she thinks i'm nuts .

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by jacabean

i don't think this guy drove his car enough . the motor was replaced almost 6 years ago . it does suck that this **************** happens but you need to drive these cars thats what they were meant for. i have seen quite a few boxsters and early 996s with 150k on them for sale recently. with my luck mine will be the one that goes kaboom ! at least i know i drive it every chance i get. I have a 2010 Evo Gsr it just sits in my garage 4700 miles on it, my boxster is just such a better car . i told my wife i want to get rid of the evo and pick up a 3.4 996 with an aero kit. so if one goes boom i got the other. obviously , she thinks i'm nuts .

Hey, I say Go For It. And? Keep me in mind----I got a wife, too, sooo...IF you win out on this one, PLEASE give me some pointers on strategy. I'd be forever indebted.

[jacabean]

it's not going well , i must say. i told her she can have the evo .

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by jacabean

it's not going well , i must say. i told her she can have the evo .

And that didn't do it??? Wow...she be a tough one. Sounds like you got a battle on your hands. Give it your best shot. Stick to your guns. Can't be lettin' these women trample all over our innermost desires, automotively-speaking. Persevere. And...let us know how it works out.

[DenverSteve]

She probably realizes it's not generally "best" to have more vehicles than necessary. Too much sitting around for most of them. Too much insurance. Too much maintenance/tires.... Too much depreciation. Probably better to get what you need/want then when the situation changes, get something else.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by DenverSteve

She probably realizes it's not generally "best" to have more vehicles than necessary. Too much sitting around for most of them. Too much insurance. Too much maintenance/tires.... Too much depreciation. Probably better to get what you need/want then when the situation changes, get something else.

So rational, so pragmatic...where's your sense of adventure??? Pay no attention to him jacabean !

[Overdrive]

Any updates from the original poster?

[Perfectlap]

The PCNA service manager asking if the car was serviced at a Porsche dealer seems ironic.

1-They were recommending oil change intervals that made the problem worse.
2-They were using oil (M1) that at some point changed for the worse.
3-They probably never inspected the oil filter for the cracked pepper size seal fragments.
4-They never advised their Boxster/996 owners that they should be putting a minimum number of miles on their cars per month to maintain proper IMS bearing lubrication.
5-They never informed the Boxster/996 owners that there was an issue whose cause had not been fully determined so they should take steps to address 1 - 4 above in accordance with the 'precautionary principle'.

What I'm saying is that you'd probably have been BETTER off with an indy Porsche specialist, or a well-informed and unconflicted specialist, leading up to the IMS failure.
Or stated another way, you were WORSE off going to the dealer for service.
Actually you may not have had the failure to begin with if you opted for the specialist over the dealer.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

4-They never advised their Boxster/996 owners that they should be putting a minimum number of miles on their cars per month to maintain proper IMS bearing lubrication.

Since you mentioned this it got me wondering if anyone has determined a minimum monthly/annual mileage for the car's well-being? I haven't seen anything on here or elsewhere with a figure. Got one?

[Perfectlap]

That might be tough to figure out since most people own another car so the Boxster never really has a predictable pattern. One guy might drive the car 10K a year but usually on long trips with weeks at a time of the car sitting dry. Another guy might have very low mileage but makes frequent local trips. I'm pretty sure you'd want the car with low miles that was put through the gears with more frequency. Yet conventional wisdom would make the buyer skeptical about buying a low mileage car.
Using total miles to pinponit the highest likelyhood of a IMS failure can be misleading.
The data logger would have to ask the driver some questions about how frequently the car was drive, for example how often gas fill ups were needed. Logic being a guy who only gassed up the car once a month is a red flag.

Maybe its not so much mileage but time. As in the dealer should tell the owner "be sure to put at least 60 minutes on the car every week and no you can't do the whole month's time at at once, that defeats the purpose".

Either way that's definitely a question for the Flat6 Innovations guys.

[jacabean]

i honestly think it's all a crap shoot. a well maintained , driven car seems to be the way to go . the porsche gods control the whole ims thing .