Any Porsche exec's listening?

[ky944s]

As much as I've loved my Porsches (earlier ones) this whole engine thing has me second guessing a Boxster of any sort. New is way too much for me and used comes with no safety net, except for my wallet .
I've been loyal to the brand for a while, but now I think I might jump ship on my next sports car (keeping my 86, 944).

[Jeph]

Originally Posted by ky944s

As much as I've loved my Porsches (earlier ones) this whole engine thing has me second guessing a Boxster of any sort. New is way too much for me and used comes with no safety net, except for my wallet .
I've been loyal to the brand for a while, but now I think I might jump ship on my next sports car (keeping my 86, 944).

Please don't let this example deter you... You'll miss out on a great car. When everything goes fine with the ownership of a Boxster, one doesn't post that "everything is going swell." These engine tragedy cries are often the loudest. I'm not debating the whole "Should Porsche do something" riff. I'm just mentioning to read a few posts of engine failures and decide the car is no good is premature. But it's your call of course.

Another thing; those that have these problems usually aren't on the message board for long... not because they have no use for it due to engine explosion, but because it's first (and last) thing they post about. These posts are like grenades.

[ky944s]

Originally Posted by Jeph

Please don't let this example deter you... You'll miss out on a great car. When everything goes fine with the ownership of a Boxster, one doesn't post that "everything is going swell." These engine tragedy cries are often the loudest. I'm not debating the whole "Should Porsche do something" riff. I'm just mentioning to read a few posts of engine failures and decide the car is no good is premature. But it's your call of course.

Another thing; those that have these problems usually aren't on the message board for long... not because they have no use for it due to engine explosion, but because it's first (and last) thing they post about. These posts are like grenades.

I've seen some with over 100,000 miles on them and this is a good thing. I havent writen a Boxster off yet. I drove a 2001 last Sunday and WOW the owner let me open it up once and that was enough for me (I tried to hide my grin).
I just wish there was a way to catch the problem before things go bad.

[Jaxonalden]

I agree with Jeph. I was on another thread talking about over-revving these motors and how that's not a good idea. A couple of people wrote back saying if these cars couldn't take banging off the rev limiter or shifting at redline repeatedly they aren't worth the cost of owning one. They, of course, don't care about their cars in my opinion. Abuse is abuse and you will pay the price for it. With that said, buying any used car without checking it out first "thoroughly" is like picking up a girl at the neighborhood dive and having her tell you she doesn't have any STD's.

Good thing about Porsche though, you can look into the diagnostics and see the abuse. Those are the cars you stay away from.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by Jeph

Please don't let this example deter you... You'll miss out on a great car. When everything goes fine with the ownership of a Boxster, one doesn't post that "everything is going swell." These engine tragedy cries are often the loudest. I'm not debating the whole "Should Porsche do something" riff. I'm just mentioning to read a few posts of engine failures and decide the car is no good is premature. But it's your call of course.

Another thing; those that have these problems usually aren't on the message board for long... not because they have no use for it due to engine explosion, but because it's first (and last) thing they post about. These posts are like grenades.

I don't think we are overeacting on the engines. Having said that, it is a great car. Just not out of warranty.

[Jeph]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

I don't think we are overeacting on the engines. Having said that, it is a great car. Just not out of warranty.

I don't think anyone is overreacting. I'd post my complaints about my engine failing.

I will disagree with your statement that these are only great cars during the warranty period (and a majority of forum members would side with me). Mostly because that's a pretty vague statement. Every car is great under warranty!

Am I wrong to say the main difference between a car under warranty and car out of warranty is who pays for repairs? If one can't afford the maintenance on the car, they can't afford the car. If one can't afford the car, then your statement would be accurate. Otherwise, what makes it not so great? The chance that the engine might fail?

@Jaxonalden
I think even a car with a clear/desirable history can still crap out, as in the case of 2001saxster.

[senna21]

Originally Posted by Jeph

If one can't afford the maintenance on the car, they can't afford the car. If one can't afford the car, then your statement would be accurate. Otherwise, what makes it not so great? The chance that the engine might fail?

The issue isn't the cost of repairs. The issue is the cost of a $10K engine failure on a car that's currently depreciating like a rock. Maybe you think a total engine replacement is a "normal" repair I certainly don't. Window regulators, torn rear windows, ignition components, rear wheel bearings and even having to replace 4 catalytic converters before 100k miles I would consider general maintenance but certainly not complete engine failure.

As far as the abuse question goes I'd say if Porsche isn't engineering its cars to test out the rev limiter at least once a day then they certainly don't deserve the price tag they've got. My little Toyota's got a redline of 7k. It's widely known within the MR2 community the actual redline is closer to 8.5k. It came with 200hp but the stock internals have been proven to hold up to 500hp. The turbo is set to run at 10psi while it could be run to 17 safely. My point? Toyota over engineered the car and then detuned it to be reliable. I'm sure Porsche does the same. If you read the article about the engine failures I'd posted one point they make is none of the track cars they have have ever had an engine failure. Porsche designs cars that will have to be driven on the Autobahn on a regular basis, do you really think they would factor that in to the engineering?

But, as we all know they made a mistake. Either in the design or the manufacture of the engine. I've only driven a few but I can tell you that I do believe they're wonderful little cars. I know an owner with over 150k on his odometer and has never had any problems. And he has no hesitation to hit the rev limiter every now and again. I also have a coworker who's got over 60k on theirs and I doubt it's ever been brought above 5k. Their only issue was with the top not working at one time.

Like I said I'd love to have one. But, I'm not happy about having to roll the dice on whether or not I might have to replace the engine before 200k miles. If there were a rebuild option like Autofarm's here in the US I wouldn't have a problem at all. But when the option is $10k to Porsche or $3,500 for a used motor that might also take a dump on a car that's depreciating quickly that's not a good financial option. Whether you've got the money for the repair or not.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by Jeph

I don't think anyone is overreacting. I'd post my complaints about my engine failing.

I will disagree with your statement that these are only great cars during the warranty period (and a majority of forum members would side with me). Mostly because that's a pretty vague statement. Every car is great under warranty!

Am I wrong to say the main difference between a car under warranty and car out of warranty is who pays for repairs? If one can't afford the maintenance on the car, they can't afford the car. If one can't afford the car, then your statement would be accurate. Otherwise, what makes it not so great? The chance that the engine might fail?

@Jaxonalden
I think even a car with a clear/desirable history can still crap out, as in the case of 2001saxster.

Well, this is all subjective. I don't think having a car with an engine that is overaly at risk for grenading is a great car. We of course are not talking about the cost of maintenance, we are talking about the cost of a new engine.

Large difference there, at least to me.

Can I afford to replace an engine? Certainly I can. Do I want to? Ah, no!

Would I own a used boxster without a warranty? No, I would not. Anyone is free to take that risk, just not for me, thanks.

Now, to make sure that no one thinks that I am totally risk adverse, I have a Lexus with 128K miles on it. Love the car, and it has no warranty. I am worried.

Not really. Could the engine go tomorrow. Yes.

Will it cost 12K for another? No.

Its all pereptual, nothing here is really factual as only Porsche has the data and they ain't talking.

[pbanders]

Originally Posted by Jaxonalden

I agree with Jeph. I was on another thread talking about over-revving these motors and how that's not a good idea. A couple of people wrote back saying if these cars couldn't take banging off the rev limiter or shifting at redline repeatedly they aren't worth the cost of owning one. They, of course, don't care about their cars in my opinion. Abuse is abuse and you will pay the price for it. With that said, buying any used car without checking it out first "thoroughly" is like picking up a girl at the neighborhood dive and having her tell you she doesn't have any STD's.

Good thing about Porsche though, you can look into the diagnostics and see the abuse. Those are the cars you stay away from.

Touching redline when shifting under WOT isn't abuse. If it were, every PCA and BMWCCA DE event would be littered with broken engines. It doesn't happen. Abuse is exceeding redline. Abuse is going to high revs with cold oil. Abuse is repeated drop-clutch full throttle starts. There is a difference. BTW, touching redline or briefly engaging the rev limiter is not the same as exceeding the maximum specified engine speed.

I drive my car is it was designed and intended to do, as do I suspect most owners here. As for "paying the price" for doing this, I have owned Porsches since 1982 and have never had any problem with engine failures, including signficant track time. I encourage other Porsche owners to fully utilize their car's potential, and do so without feeling the need to "baby" it.

[pbanders]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

Well, this is all subjective. I don't think having a car with an engine that is overaly at risk for grenading is a great car. We of course are not talking about the cost of maintenance, we are talking about the cost of a new engine.

Large difference there, at least to me.

Can I afford to replace an engine? Certainly I can. Do I want to? Ah, no!

Would I own a used boxster without a warranty? No, I would not. Anyone is free to take that risk, just not for me, thanks.

Now, to make sure that no one thinks that I am totally risk adverse, I have a Lexus with 128K miles on it. Love the car, and it has no warranty. I am worried.

Not really. Could the engine go tomorrow. Yes.

Will it cost 12K for another? No.

Its all pereptual, nothing here is really factual as only Porsche has the data and they ain't talking.

I agree completely. Data shows that the Boxster engine has significant design flaws that result in an unusually large number of engines failing (e.g. cylinder liner, IMS). These failures are due to design problems, and are not due to driving our cars hard, but within specified limits of operation. This has been clearly evidenced by the number of owners who have rarely (if ever) driven their cars hard, who have clean OBDII records, who have still had engine failures.

Porsche's reluctance to extend support outside of warranty for those failures has been lamentable. It is for this reason that I've done the same as you, and purchased an aftermarket warranty. IMO, it's cheap insurance.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by pbanders

Touching redline when shifting under WOT isn't abuse. If it were, every PCA and BMWCCA DE event would be littered with broken engines. It doesn't happen. Abuse is exceeding redline. Abuse is going to high revs with cold oil. Abuse is repeated drop-clutch full throttle starts. There is a difference. BTW, touching redline or briefly engaging the rev limiter is not the same as exceeding the maximum specified engine speed.

I drive my car is it was designed and intended to do, as do I suspect most owners here. As for "paying the price" for doing this, I have owned Porsches since 1982 and have never had any problem with engine failures, including signficant track time. I encourage other Porsche owners to fully utilize their car's potential, and do so without feeling the need to "baby" it.

I don't get the sense that the older air cooled engines imploded at anywhere nearly the rate as these newer designs.

Any thoughts on that?

[pbanders]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

I don't get the sense that the older air cooled engines imploded at anywhere nearly the rate as these newer designs.

Any thoughts on that?

There were problems with the cam chain tensioners that plagued engines for years (finally fixed), issues with the 2.7 L case, I"m sure there are gobs more issues. That said, the bottom end of the air-cooled sixes were capable of going as much as 300K before rebuilding.

However, I don't think that any of the air-cooled six variants had the failure rate of the early 996 motors, but Porsche isn't talking so facts and figures are hard to come by.

Other significant Porsche engine problems: early 944 cam belts (snap!), 928 Nikasil blocks, etc.

[pbanders]

Originally Posted by ky944s

As much as I've loved my Porsches (earlier ones) this whole engine thing has me second guessing a Boxster of any sort. New is way too much for me and used comes with no safety net, except for my wallet .
I've been loyal to the brand for a while, but now I think I might jump ship on my next sports car (keeping my 86, 944).

I used to have a 944, I loved it, very easy to drive hard. The Turbo's are still really incredible track cars, especially for the money.

I don't think a Boxster motor is that much worse than a 944 motor in terms of issues. 944 repairs are what used to keep my buddy Rich Bontempi in business! Water pumps, oil leaks, cam belts, etc.

Boxster's are a really good deal, you can pick up a fairly new car for a good price, and then spend $2K of the money you saved (or less) on an aftermarket warranty to cover any engine problems.

I think all of us should print this thread, and mail it to Atlanta. That might get some attention when hundreds and maybe thousands start showing up in their mailroom.

Let me be the first one here to say that, "It's in the mail!"

[rick3000]

Did you seriously mail it?
If so, post the address and I will too!

[ky944s]

Originally Posted by pbanders

I don't think a Boxster motor is that much worse than a 944 motor in terms of issues. 944 repairs are what used to keep my buddy Rich Bontempi in business! Water pumps, oil leaks, cam belts, etc.

Boxster's are a really good deal, you can pick up a fairly new car for a good price, and then spend $2K of the money you saved (or less) on an aftermarket warranty to cover any engine problems.

That is all true, but I can do all the maint. on the 944, from front to rear. My current one is at 217,000miles. I can afford my warranty on this car (944), ME. I have a lift and the whole 9 yards (I am a mechanic). But when a Boxster engine go's (IMS etc) with no warning it becomes scrap from the looks of it. .

If there was a "fix" for this I would have no problem with that. If I can't prevent or fix it, it scares me.

[Jeph]

I don't think engine replacement is "normal." Nor do I think the occurrence of this problem is "normal."

Many of you make it seem like it's 50/50 -the car may or may not explode. That's annoying. Debbie Downers...

Mail to:

Porsche Cars North America
Attention: Customer Commitment
980 Hammond Drive, Suite 1000
Atlanta, GA 30328

[Paul]

Air cooled 911s require a lot more regular maintenance than the motors Porsche sells today. Some air cooled 911 owners pull their motors every 15,000 miles to adjust the valves.

Today's motors make more horsepower per cubic inch, get better mileage and in LA actually clean the air.

IIRC, Porsches used to have a 1 year 12,000 mile warranty.

Yesterday's Porsche 911 motors leak oil. Today's owners go ballistic when a rubber seal on the back of the crankshaft allows oil to drip on their garage floor.

I encourage every Porsche owner to do their own maintenance, most of it is very simple. Even the 60,000 986 service is easily doable by anyone handy with basic tools.

Bottom line, we've bought a toy, enjoy it anyway you like, replace it if you break it. If you can find more fun, for less cost or financial risk, buy another toy.

I haven't shifted mine above 7000 yet today, but the wife just asked if we are going to later this evening.....

[ky944s]

Originally Posted by Paul

I encourage every Porsche owner to do their own maintenance, most of it is very simple. Even the 60,000 986 service is easily doable by anyone handy with basic tools.

Bottom line, we've bought a toy,

I do my own maintenance. 60,0000 miles would be great if the engine makes it that far.
A toy? I'm glad you think of it that way. I know it's not an investment but, when you finance or lease $30-$50,000 and for a new one more to me it is no longer a toy.
At the cost of parts (new or rebuilt engine) they should "almost" be bullet proof.