Not to beat a dead Porsche horse, but reliability...
 

OK, I'll just come right out and say it - I often hear whisperings from people that Porsche cars are considered bullet proof and reliable, but as a big bulk of vehicles available today on the used market are from the 986 and 996 eras, I really wonder where they get this claim from. (Either pre or post 986/996..)

I really do commend you guys for putting up with it and finding work arounds, like IMS upgrades, etc - but I must say it is entirely disappointing having such major issues looming. Basically, you can't buy a Porsche from this era without a heavy burden knowing this issue may come up, along with a few others.

I know they say it is actually a very small percentage of cars, but I've encountered numerous vehicles when searching for a pre-owned Porsche that had their engines "replaced due to failure". A very high number for something that most other car companies do not go through nearly as much. Many of these cars were 2005 987 Boxsters as well - not too far off into the past.

When I search for a car, I don't even check cars older than 2006 simply because of these issues - which is a shame, because there are a lot of otherwise good cars in the early 2000's.

Sorry - just had to vent a bit. This is almost like buying a (cheap at first) older Mercedes AMG or even M car - and then the maintenance snowball starts. (Even though not even those high performance cars have a serious major issue like an entire engine failing...)

I can't totally disagree with you regarding the 996/986 era. Though when I bought my 2000 'S' with 51k miles on it back in 2010 the records indicated it would have been in the Consumers 'Above Average' category. It simply had not had many issues and one of the bigger ones my have been done too early. Now yes I replaced a ton of stuff but that is because I wanted to for the fun of it.

I do think though the quality was not that good until the 987/997 line. This is just my view though. Having taken everything apart on my 2000 'S' I can say a lot of stuff seems pretty cheap or not well thought out considering the car sold for over $50k.

I won't go into the IMS issue, mine was a double row and didn't need to be replaced...though I didn't know that until I got in there. Just from my readings here is a list of some of the things I can think of. In my view a lot of this stuff should be able to go 100k miles.

- Window regulator or cable issues
- Convertible top latch rivets
- MAF
- RMS
- Sticky nobs
- O2 sensors
- AOS
- Water pump
- Engine mount
- Light switch
- Ignition switch
- Spark plug tubes

Oh ya and the dumb plastic window.

No argument, but I believe window regulator problems were pervasive among manufacturers back then. Not sure if they still cause problems. I had two windows fall into the doors of a 2001 X5, one on a 2004 A4 (the only problem I ever had with that car), and two bad regulators on a 2002 330Ci.

Several friends have had similar issues including one on a Jeep. The regulator for the 330Ci always failed in the same place, an obvious design issue that should have and could have been corrected, yet the same part was used throughout the model cycle.

Having looked around at other cars, both past and present, I have to say this concept just isn't really valid for me as I think every car has its own issues. No car is 100% reliable and all require maintenance.

In regard to self destruction, well I was amazed at the number of cars I was looking at with overhead cams that brought up the "replace the timing belt every 30-50K or whatever the magic number is) or face total destruction of the engine or at the very least the top end. Many of these same vehicles required replacing the water pump at the same time and the water pump was not an externally replaceable part. You had to remove a major part of the engine components to get to it.

I don't think it matter what car you look at. If you want no worries, just buy new with a warranty. Get a factory extended warranty if possible when you buy it if you want to not be concerned for 5-10 years. Before it expires, buy another new one.

In my experience, my Boxster (128K miles) and 996 (118K miles) are every bit as reliable as my wife's 2002 BMW 325i (137K miles) and my previous 2002 BMW X5 (sold at 125K miles).

All cars have certain parts that are less reliable than others. The 325i suspension is notorious for early wear and the X5 power accessories (doors, windows, sunroof, etc) had to have been made by Lucas in order to be that failure prone.

The M96 IMS bearing never enters my mind, its a non-issue as far as I am concerned.

My car is 15 yrs old, 80+ track days, 108K miles and extremely reliable. It compares well to my fleet of Toyota trucks which have been known to throw worn brake pads :eek:, self destructing auto trans, cracked exhaust manifolds on almost all of them, and failed suspension ball joints.

All cars have warts and the m96 IMS issues are well known and easily solved for about the price of two sets of tires. The cost of an IMS bearing replacement has already been factored into the price of used cars so they are a great value compared to other cars in class. Still a lot of car for the money.

Much ado about nothing.

You will be suprised but a lot of cars has probelms. From 2010 -11Mustangs with their transmission made in china having problems, to Ferraris having problems catching fire. RX8 has a problem which caused Mazda to discontinue selling the car. Infiniti had a problem with the G35s burning oil and killing engines. Hyundai Genesis with there shifting problems. The list goes on trust me. How Porshe kept there reputation for reliable idk. Plus and a minus but we know more about our cars than others which gives us options.

I don't think Porshe figured that a 13 year old car would only have 30k miles on it when they build this thing to be driven the snot out of it. That's our fault, or perhaps the dealership high prices was the reason for this.

I was talking to my brother yesterday and he didn't believe me that a used Masseratti could be had for under 25K!!!! smh I have a passion for Porshes. That flat six rumbling behind my seat is priceless. Sometimes I forget what this car means to other people. I once had a Bmw guy come up to me at a car wash and say your car is Awesome. I was thinkin, he hasn't even driven this thing over 4k rpms! lol

Good point. Heck, even the Maseratis you mentioned had a weak point. The quattroportes and Coupe had less than stellar transmissions that received a lot of complaints in shifting. That and the maintenance are probably why they can be had at such a price.

Frankly, I do not believe our cars are unreliable in the least.

We just talk about it more...LOL!

Rondo I have often thought of the same aspect of the Boxster and thought that the quality is not there. However in my last two years of ownership of my Box 2001 base and now 40k miles(30k miles when I got it) this car has actually been pretty good.

- Replaced accessory belt. Preventive
- Replaced idler pulley due noise.
- Had CV joints refurbished.
- Had installed IMS Guardian.
- Had 4 Michelin tires installed. Normal wear and tear.

Previous owner had Porsche shop close spoiler mechanism off due to it not working. I have no intention of fixing it. So fun for the $$$ this car has been wonderful.

Ideally I would like to have a newer Cayman with a factory warranty but I don't want to spend that amount of $$$. I consider this the danger zone if I spent $40k plus, had no Porsche warranty and the engine blew up. Waiting for a Cayman for around $30k with relatively low mileage. Yep Porsches cost more up here.

This is a very rewarding car and so is this forum as well. To share my feelings with like minded folks is enjoyable. We are all in this boat together and it is a heck of a boat.:)

I realized recently that my 2001 S is the oldest daily driver I've owned (my 5th car). It has left me stranded twice in 7 years of ownership, both times for waterpump failures. It has also been one of the most economical to maintain.

Having owned a 987 previously, and now a 986, I am very impressed with the build quality of Porsche cars. It is far superior to the Mercedes cars I've owned, (CL500, E350, E430).

I have sent you a PM.

An inexpensive, trouble-free Porsche has never existed.

But to be fair to Porsche, the very nature of sports cars is to be lightweight, sensitive to inputs and powerful. These are not things that lend to long-term durability or over-enegineering and certainly not profitability. Profits come from SUVs and sedans, our category is another matter entirely.

This is why on any given day at your local track event you'll see the same 7 or so cars despite hundreds of cars available in the market place from dozens of manufacturers.

I'm surprised, my '89 'Yota has been great, IIRC I still have the original rotors, manual trans. , and original ball joints, with 190,000 Miles. I guess I should do the ball joints soon though with 37" tires .....

Interesting comments, guys. I just found it funny that Porsche was ranked up there with Lexus and I've heard numerous times that they are considered bullet proof. Must be the new cars, then.

Rondocap, what are you comparing them to?

Enough already!!
 

If you want above average reliability, lots of fun driving, and a bargain, buy a Boxster.
If you are totally focused on reliability, buy a f*#$*ing Toyota already!!

This is only because most Porsches are not daily drivers and record little mileage relative to a Lexus. If Porsche reliability were ranked only on its cars that were daily drivers like the Cayenne, they would be very, very far from Lexus.

sports car reliability has to be compared to other sports cars.
Honda built a good, reliable sports car (a legit one, not just a 'sporty coupe') and it wasn't profitable enough to continue.

Party Pooper :(. Actually I do own a Toyota and a Porsche, both great cars, I just think I prefer not to drive my Tundra into a twisty at 60mph :).

Glad I'm not grouchy today.

Exactly. Besides my 2000 Boxster S that gets regular track and AX time, I also have a 2007 BMW Z4 M coupe. Fun car, but the issue with those is early rod bearing failure. We have our IMS issues. Also had my water pump pulley shaft break. Only indication that there is a problem is the battery light comes on. Once it does, you are about 2 minutes away from a warped head and new engine. It's sad that these kinds of cars seem to be plagued...

My last five motors have all been porsches, three 944's a 1976 930 Turbo (Flat Nose conversion) and presently my 2001 Box, all extremely reliable and even more enjoyable.
Look after your porker and it will be good to you !!

My 89 4Run never had ball joint issues but several 96-02 Tacomas have. The 4Run did develop a common cracked manifold and would slip out of 3rd gear under heavy load but she was a workhorse that logged 260K miles without ever burning oil or overheating.

Actually - post 2006 Porsches do seem to be more reliable, IMS issues being more resolved and other things of that nature.

You guys are right - Porsches are not typical cars, and thus cannot really be compared very well.

One thing remains objectively though; the IMS issue, as rare as it may or may not be, is definitely a deal killer for me when considering pre-2006 Porsches.

I've alluded to my cousin here before, he has a 1999 base Box and has not had an issue with it since buying it one year old, drives it quite a bit too. Doesn't know what an IMS is and could not care less, I frankly envy him, he has the right attitude.

Think about all of the preventative dollars spent on cars or the proactive repairs performed as part of a "While I'm in there" project was done. Not knocking it, probably a lot of catastrophes avoided and I'm guilty of doing said "repairs" myself. I just can't help to wonder how much more some people would enjoy their P-Cars if they didn't browse these forums and start to worry as a result.

I would be doing quiet the opposite in your shoes. 97-99 Have very low likelyhood and if you are a worrying type you can have the factory IMS replaced easily in a day.

For the most part, 2000-2004 are most likely to have an issue **BUT** you can also easily have it replaced in a day without splitting open the engine. The issue becomes moot for less than I spent on my last waterpump/rotor job.

2005 You have to take down the transmission to verify if its single row or the not-serviceable bearing. Which means you'll be crossing your fingers until its time to change the clutch, no sense doing all the work just to verify and not replace the clutch.

2006-2008 have two kinds of bearings. The free one from the factory or the $7,000 - $10,000 kind that you'll get once you split open the engine. These revised bearings have been much, much better but a sealed bearing will still need to be replaced, especially one that did not have proper care/oil changes. So once that free bearing has run its course get out the piggy bank.

If I'm buying today I go either 2000-2004 3.2 or save my money until the DFI engine cars come down from post-warranty depreciation.
Realistically, you only need to replace the IMS bearing once even if you don't replace it with a fancy one. Other's can chime in but I've yet to hear of someone who dumped the factory bearing and still had an issue on bearing #2.

3.2 liter
 

My 2000 S with a 3.2 liter and has 75,000 miles on it. The only part failure has been the AOS and and axle seal at the differential. Gas, tires, brakes, oil changes...typical maintenance which I do myself. Car is 13 years old, wholesale is $9,000, retail $14,000 to $17,000 in good times. The 3.2 engine is stronger and better built than the 2.5 and 2.7 in my opinion. Also mine is a Tip, not stick. Seems most failures have been mostly stick cars. By it right and drive it.:cheers:

Forte note: I have a Gravely mower and it had a 10.5 hp engine that lasted 3 years and threw a rod. I replaced it with a 13.5 hp engine. Big difference, the old engine struggled, the new engine has no problems at handling its job. Wonder how many did fail do to being stressed out doing its job that it was not designed to do. Hum.

I can't disagree with you, and I have worried here or there and been mislead but in general I think a lot of folks are like me, they totally love doing a projects for the heck of it. I bought mine to drive and take apart and put back together. It cost a lot but was worth every dime. Sounds like you might have done the same.

Clearly there are threads that do spread fear. Possibly it was correct when it comes to single row IMS but certainly not double row. And replacing water pumps every 3 years with as little miles as these cars drive, seem overkill. Heck I know I was more concerned the water pump I put in might not be as good as the one I took out, but I sure enjoyed doing it.

I think this is a good subject. It's too bad there isn't enough statistical data out there to compare true reliability to what is posted on this forum. Threads like this are the only time we hear folks say "Huh, mine has been bullet proof". Clearly many folks join the forum because they had a problem, but others like me joined to be part of the community and learn.

Back on topic...if one follows the forums a lot there are certainly several areas of issues, are they more then the industry norm for that period...I donno. If so then to the original posters question, yes reliability would be a concern. I will say sometimes I see members post problem after problem, and the talk of how much money to set aside for planned problems and then wonder did I just get lucky and get a great car or on average do most folks have more problems than I did. From watching the forums it sure does seem to be the roll of the dice. I think repair costs then comes into play, someone might say, well if I get a bad one it will cost a fortune to fix.

BINGO!

In every auto forum, there exists an "IMS" that keeps owners awake at night ... in the 12v Cummins it is the KDP, (Killer Dowel Pin). In the 24v, it is the dreaded "6" block. Beemers have main bearing issues, ad nauseum...

Ran into an old friend who owns a 99 996. Another "What is IMS?" guy... never heard of it...

I choose to see it as a rare non-issue. I will maintain it and drive it and enjoy it. I do not think there is a better built vehicle on the road...

Cheers, Jim

Owners who let a dual row car sit for long periods, registering little mileage while infrequently chaging the oil would be mistaken in brushing off the IMS issue because they have two rows. Give a dual row bearing enough time and it will catch up to a single row on failure.


As far as the waterpump, I think its more an issue of mileage.

I don't think there is data to prove this. The previous owner of my car changed the oil every 12 to 15k miles and sometimes the car sat for years without driving it. My double row was fine. Even the class action filed shows double rows to be much less of an issue. Who knows, these are just my thoughts :).

Off topic, at what mileage should one replace their water pump?

certainly no data but look at the causes of single row failures... a dual row's fortification does not eliminate these, they simply better endure.

Which means a dual row bearing is simply afforded more time to replace it. The timing of the lawsuit has come when most Boxsters are only now creeping over 100K miles. Those dual row cars that have been neglected and are still on their factory bearing will start to fail with far greater frequency over the second 100K miles. So Porsche's timing in settling this matter could not have been better.

I believe Flat6 have posted that it should be done every 50K miles. Or maybe that was Wayne Dempsey in "101 Projects for Your Porsche Boxster". Mine lasted 80K miles. But I think the logic is to replace it while its still in its 'sweet spot' and not on the downslope. Seems like airline maintenance logic -- hence why flying is by far the safest mode of travel.

If little things went wrong but the engine was bulletproof, that would be infinitely preferable to the present situation in which the little things work great but the engine might blow up and cost $15k to repair. Couple this with a manufacturer that doesn't give a F about its customers and I'll never, ever buy another.

johnsimion, if the IMS worries you that much and you are unwilling to pay for an upgrade, then sell your car. Of course, if you want to replace it with a legitimate sports car such a BMW Z4, you will find that there are significant issues lurking in those cars as well: the rod bearings, already referred to, and the electric steering pumps that fail regularly and cost about $3000.00 to repair, etc.

Frankly, I consider the reliabillity of the 986 to be terrific considering its age and typical use: take virtually any car that is now between 10 and 17 years old and consistently drive it within an inch of its life and see what happens! Yes, the single row IMS bearing was a huge mistake - but, and it is a significant but, there are fixes and, in the case of the initial single-row bearings or dual-row bearings, ones that are not terribly expensive.

What other car for anywhere near the current price of a 986 can deliver comparable steering, handling, braking, acceleration, sound, ergonomics, appearance and yes - class? Considering the age, for those who don't live in Arizona or California, what other sports car is as resistant to rust? This is not an insignificant feature as rust is not only unsightly, it weakens the structure and costs an absolute fortune to repair properly- if it is worth repairing at all.

Consider the much maligned interior quality in the 986: in spite of their age and the fact that they are often exposed to direct sunlight with the top down, the interiors have actually held up very well - for example, how many 986's have you seen with a cracked dashboard? One has to compare apples with apples and it is unfair to compare any convertible to a hardtop in terms of interior durability.

Consider the brakes - in spite of much harder use than the average sedan, the monoblock 4 piston calipers are extremely durable and do not require replacement with most brake jobs.

Consider the exhaust - how many 10 to 17 year old 986's still have their original exhaust system?

Consider the cooling system - a mid-engine, water-cooled engine will always be much more difficult to engineer and to maintain and the one in the 986 is more efficient and reliable than in virtually any other mid-engine car. When properly maintained, air locks are extremely unusual - and compare that to various Ferraris, Lambos, Maseratis and Fiat X-19's, etc.

Is the ignition switch an issue? Absolutely, but the part costs about $35.00 and it requires about 1.5 hours of difficult, but not expert labour to replace.

Are some of the plastic parts an issue over time? Yes, but is anyone really surprised that a plastic coolant expansion tank or A/OS may be deteriorated after a large number of years, considering the continual heating and cooling and pressure that they have been exposed to? If you are, you may wish to check out BMW or even more mundane brands.

Consider the intended use of the vehicle. In order to obtain the incredible balance of handling and performance while providing decent comfort and ergonomics, wieght had to be kept to a minimum. Porsche used magnesium top bows, aluminum suspension components and various other means to keep the weight to a reasonable level. However, designing and building a car where weight reduction is a priority can lead to parts that are, at times, less durable than their heavier equivalents on more mundane transportation. Just ask the owner of any Lotus, if you have any doubts about that. Again, as perfectlap has pointed out, we have to compare apples with apples and it is unfair to compare the durability of a Porsche with that of a Toyota Camry.

In terms of a car's expected life-span, the 986 Boxster is now a late middle-aged (or older) car that is still capable of providing virtually state of the art performance. In spite of its age, it is still not only capable of, but happy to be driven very hard and it does so with only occasional protest. IMO, the 986 is akin to an incredible athelete who can still 'bring it' in spite of being in their late 30's or beyond. Sure, at that advanced age such athletes typically spend more time on the disabled list than their younger (or much younger) competitors. But the amazing thing is that they are still able to compete at all!

Brad

It seems these cars (I'm sure many higher priced sports cars) do lead an un-typical car lifestyle. Drive time is limited. My car seems to have followed a typical pattern of 4-5k mile per year from it's previous owners. So age and non-use plays heavily into it's reliability. I have driven it 10-11k a year and the more I drive it, the longer the trips the better the car runs.
Some things I want to replace are preventative, water-pump, thermostat.
Other items I need to repair, front suspension, appear to be suffering due to age not miles or use. Mid 60k miles and several boots have cracked and it's a matter of time and grit intrusion before the handling suffers

I suspect that if these cars were driven more traditionally (10 - 15k miles/year) their reliability perception would go up, IMS failure % may go down.
So I replace, water pump, front suspension, etc at 65k miles thats terrible - How Unreliable
BUT replacing at 12 years old now that's not bad at all - That's pretty reliable

My car does protest when I don't drive it regularly

When I bought my Boxster it was a purchase of passion. I had and still do love the design and performance of this car. At the time (mine is a 1998 that had 89K on the clock) and it still appeared to run solid...however, I do have a brain and have the ability to analyze a situation. Anyone who purchases a used car (no matter how few or many miles) must fully anticipate that the previous owner(s) have at some point had not cared for the car and that parts in the car can and will fail regardless of how they were cared for.

In short, I came into my deal knowing whether it was a Porsche, BMW, Ferrari or whatever I purchased, it was going to need work and that requires cash. I think anyone who is purchasing a used sports car and has zero budget for doing any work is foolish and foolhardy. Something will inevitably break. As such, I had fully planed before the purchase to go through the car and return it to a "like new" condition so I could have full confidence that no matter where I drove it...it will get me there and back. Why? Remember my statement above...I love this car.

Over the course of four months I replaced everything I could get my hands on which amounted to purchasing double the value I paid for the car in parts alone (as I did the work myself)...and guess what? I know have a car that runs like new and provides the type of ride and performance that I fully expect this car to give me. If you have no mechanical skills and expect to drive one of these cars, you my friend are trapped to shop rate labor charges and it is going to cost you to get it fixed.

During this process of rebuilding my Boxster, I found some parts that were slightly worn, others on the brink of failure. Giving this, should I therefore determine that the car is a piece of junk and should be scraped or deride the entire line of Porsche vehicles? No. This is the nature of performance based vehicles. Most people want to believe that they are Sunday go to meeting never fail types of vehicles. They are not. The dollars you are paying for these cars is the performance they are giving you and the engineering that goes in behind that. Is the IMS an issues...yes; did Porsche handle the situation correctly...no; is hind sight 20/20...absolutely. But remember, you have two choices: You either drive the car of your passion or not. Porsche is not the only performance car ever made that has issues, nor will it be the last manufacturer to ever have issues. It is the nature of the game.

Life is to short to drive cheap cars, drink cheap wine and spend your time pissed about things that ad no value to living.

not sure if you are being tongue-in-cheek but 65K miles from a suspension on a low-sitting sports car is not bad. Especially if its been subjected to low profile tires and heavy aftermarket wheels over urban roads.

The water pump issue seems to me, and this purely anecdotal, to be an issue of a Porsche component that has little margin of error for any air in the system. The coolant cap is a weak spot and I often wonder if all those who had multiple water pump failures kept up with the updated caps or simply changed them every couple of years to ensure a tight seal. I doubt it. Then you have the coolant tanks that are a second weak spot that are prone to cracking. My point being that the waterpump has to be addressed as part of a group/eco system of items and not just one thing alone. I don't think this is the standard procedure for most owners when it probably should be.

Even if my car were to burn up tomorrow due to IMS/atomic detonation , the $10k I have invested in it was worth it. Every cent..