Obtaining historical records
 

Hello,

I am buying a 2004 boxster,
the current owner bought the car from a Porsche dealership and was told
that the engine was replaced presumably due to an IMSB failure,
but he has no supporting documentation and the Porsche Dealership involved
claims not to have records going back that far

Carfax also states that at that time the clutch assembly was replaced,
however no information about the engine replacement.

My mission is to know for certain that this car has a replacement engine.
Has anyone got any suggestions on what I could do?

A replacement engine will have the characters "AT" (Austauschmotor) in the serial number stamped on the engine.

TO

Without documentation, I would have to assume that it never happened.

I would either walk away or buy the car assuming that the engine was never replaced (and adjust the price accordingly).

That would seem to be your answer...

I've been down this same road before involving Porsche "replacement engines". As stated earlier, a Porsche "replacement engine" will display the characters "AT" in the engine number.

http://986forum.com/forums/uploads02...1585720970.jpg

You stated that the Porsche dealership "claims not to have records going back that far". Fine. I don't care what the Carfax says, to determine if the engine is indeed a Porsche "replacement engine" have the owner supply you with the engine number.

Just sayin'........

TO

TeamOxford - can I see the engine number w/o raising the car ?

Seller found an email with items done to the car at that time,
there was a line there saying :

NV Wty Intermediate Shaft

Also managed to speak to a Porsche NA representative that confirmed that the
engine was pulled out and either they put in a reconditioned engine or reconditioned
the original engine and put it back - not sure what that means - maybe means they
replaced ims with the LNE ims ?

Doubtful. Unless you are REALLY thin. You could always drive the car to an oil change joint and check it from the grease pit.

I don't know what this means, but I assume that "Wty" stands for "warranty".

Just sayin'...........

TO

the chance of a LNE replacement is between slim and none and slim left town last week

I'm with JayG on this one. There is little to no chance that Porsche NA would ever put in an LN Engineering IMS in there, unless the previous owner/customer forked up the cash to do this themselves. Even that would be highly unlikely.

I know from experience that PCNA are very stingy with historical data. The problem, as I understand it, is due to privacy concerns and protecting previous owners anonymity. With out the prior owners permission, it won't be released. As for the notion they don't have 'documentation that far back' that is just plain horse feathers.

I agree with previous posts. Porsche would never use anything but OEM parts on a warranty repair. Without proper documentation, assume it didn't happen. Adjust your offer accordingly.

Several years back, there was a legal case the ballooned into a class action over who actually owns and should have access to vehicle records. Basically, the outcome was that the records are the property of the vehicle owner at the time they were recorded, which means that a dealer can legitimately be taken to court for sharing the information, even after the vehicle has changed hands. That has made most dealers totally gun-shy of sharing information.

Our legal advisors require us to get written permission before we share any data, which is often difficult as people move and you cannot find them to obtain permission. Net result is that it has become easier to just say no than spend the time for which you are not going to get paid.

A reasonable dealer, agent, or authority would release/reveal the service records absent any personally identifiable information.

But, nooooooooooooooooooo. :cool:

If they did, they would be in direct violation of the court ruling. The issue is not the owner's identity, it is the fact that they own the information, not the dealer.

why would an owner of the car 12 years ago care about releasing information now,
it's directly related to the car, not the owner.

It is very natural that a car will have multiple owner during its life,
and the information about a car's history since purchased new should
be available to any new owner.

I don't understand what is the big deal here

The "big deal" is that the federal courts ruled shops cannot release the data without permission, period. So regardless of anyone's opinion on the subject, it is what we have to deal with. This has even cost the shops money as we are now required to store all such data "in a secure location which complies with federal guidelines".

It is no different than a four lane, wide open roadway with a 25 MPH speed limit, you ignore it at your own peril...………...

Looks like the big deal is because of the lawyers. ;)

when I wrote "big deal" I did not mean to disrespect the law,
I understand this had a ruling, my question was why, what is the big
deal in keeping these records confidential ?

Good question. Who knows. But if JFP in PA says it's a thing, then it's a thing. I'm just as baffled about it as you.

I still blame it on the lawyers! :D:D

I know that burden. Thank you for the explanation. :cheers:

It has to do with new car dealerships selling information about their customers to firms that compile statistical automotive data; someone somewhere took exception to the dealerships making money off of their information without them even knowing about it. When the dealers did not share the $, and showed no inclination to stop doing it, someone file suit over who "owned" the information, and was therefore entitled to any $ associated with its dissemination or use.

A couple of the usual ambulance chasers saw a chance to make money off of this and turned the filing into a class action, where anyone that had bought a car or had it serviced was entitled to damages, which they had to share with the ambulance chasers. Because the problem crossed state lines, it became a federal legal matter, which means the ruling affects every shop in the country.

Next thing you know, your service data became akin to a national secret. This was your classical pyric victory for the car owners, as very few actually got more than lunch money out of the settlement, the industry is saddled with rules requiring secure storage protection for all customer information, which raised service costs, which were promptly added to every service invoice. Only the lawyers actually won anything of consequence...……..

nice, some criminal find a loop hole in the system and now we all have to suffer because of that

Getting a bit off track here, aren't we?

So, do you have a replacement engine or not?

Just wonderin'...........

TO

Was never the result of criminal action, but rather simple greed.

Wow. And yet, IIRC, we still don't own our own DNA.

As has been mentioned before, he'll have to check the serial number on the motor.

TO - if you have an idea how I can see the engine serial number
w/o lifting the car, I would be happy to hear it.

Otherwise, the next time I'm around the Porsche shop I'll go in and ask
them nicely to lift the car and check

I forget what style bolt head it's called, but if you see those type of bolts used throughout the motor. Then it's probably a replacement motor. it will also be free from any under body corrosion coating on the bottom. Every replacement motor I've seen was a lot cleaner than the transmission it was attached to.

So I got under the car and verified this is a replacement engine

http://986forum.com/forums/uploads02...1586213392.jpg

M96/23AT65466219


M96/23 = what is the 23 ?

6 = 6 Cylinder

5 = Engine Version

4 = what is that

66219 = Engine Serial Number

From Wikipedia, I did simple search

986

1997–1999 2.5 L (2,480 cc) 204 PS (150 kW; 201 bhp) 245 N⋅m (181 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 "M96.20"
2000–2002 2.7 L (2,687 cc) 220 PS (162 kW; 217 bhp) 260 N⋅m (190 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 "M96.22"
2003–2004 2.7 L (2,687 cc) 228 PS (168 kW; 225 bhp) 260 N⋅m (190 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 (VarioCam) "M96.23"
2000–2002 3.2 L (3,179 cc) 252 PS (185 kW; 249 bhp) 305 N⋅m (225 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 "M96.21" (Boxster S)
2003–2004 3.2 L (3,179 cc) 260 PS (191 kW; 256 bhp) 310 N⋅m (230 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 (VarioCam) "M96.24" (Boxster S)
2004 3.2 L (3,179 cc) 265 PS (195 kW; 261 bhp) 310 N⋅m (230 lbf⋅ft) water-cooled DOHC 24-valve Boxer flat-6 (VarioCam) "M96.24" (Boxster S "50 Jahre 550 Spyder")
VEHICLE ENGINE TYPE MY ENGINE NO. TECHNICAL DATA [2]

BOXSTER M96.20 97 V 65V 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,5L /150 KW
BOXSTER M96.20 98 W 65W 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,5L /150 KW
BOXSTER M96.20 99 X 65X 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,5L /150 KW

BOXSTER M96.22 00 Y 65Y 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,7L /160 KW
BOXSTER M96.22 01 1 651 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,7L /162 KW
BOXSTER M96.22 02 2 652 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,7L /162 KW
BOXSTER M96.23 03 3 653 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,7L /168 KW
BOXSTER M96.23 04 4 654 00501>60000 6ZYL/2,7L /168 KW

BOXSTER "S" M96.21 00 Y 67Y 00501>60000 6ZYL/3,2L /185 KW
BOXSTER "S" M96.21 01 1 671 00501>60000 6ZYL/3,2L /185 KW
BOXSTER "S" M96.21 02 2 672 00501>60000 6ZYL/3,2L /185 KW
BOXSTER "S" M96.24 03 3 673 00501>60000 6ZYL/3,2L /191 KW
BOXSTER "S" M96.24 04 4 674 00501>60000 6ZYL/3,2L /191 KW

I don't know how accurate this is, because it specs "VarioCam" on 2003 and up MY, when in reality the earlier motors have it too.

It means it's a 2004 engine.

TO

Thanks TeamOxford,

Does this means that they replaced the original 2004 engine that failed because of the ims bearing
with another 2004 engine with the same ims bearing that could also fail ?

It means that the original 2004 engine was replaced with a 2004 factory replacement engine. It does not mean that the original engine failed because of the IMS bearing.

But since you mentioned that "there was a line there saying :NV Wty Intermediate Shaft", then it may be safe to assume that the IMS bearing was the cause of the failure.

The replacement engine has the same IMS bearing as the original - single row.

TO

Forgive me for digressing for a moment. So, 2000-2002 engines are designated M96.22 and 2003-2004 engines are M96.23. If both versions have single-row IMS bearings, what's the difference?

Number of chains?

Can an M96.23 engine replace an M96.22?

Basically the 03+ is a three chain and 97-02 is a 5 chain. Heads are different but I believe the short block is the same

Thanks. So they're not a direct swap?

Not easily

OK Thank you.

TO - are saying that although Porsche never admitted officially to this IMSB defect,
it replaced engines that were destroyed by it with same engines with same defect and did not try to fix this ?

was the LN Engineering fix already available in 2008 ?

Yes to both..........