3.4

[986_inquiry]

ok i'll bite, since i'm buying a new engine anyway is the 3.4 swap as easy as pelican parts makes it sound?

because, it's looking like the price difference from a 2.5 to a 3.4 is only a few grand, and since i'm throwing grands around anyway might as well go bigger, right? Reasonable thinking?

so i'm curious

plan is... to set aside some $ for a few months, and either i'll have the 7g for a used 2.5 installed, or maybe find a clean S, 7g would go a long way towards a S, or save for another few months and just go 3.4 swap and be done

crazy? blown Porsche engines tend to do that to a man :dance::dance::dance:

[Jake Raby]

The 3.4 is our least favorite M96 engine displacement. Definitely the most problematic of the engine family. We see twice as many of them as all other engines in regard to internal problems.

[Bruce Wayne]

that's interesting Jake.. any specific reasons for that ?

[Overdrive]

Why not look for the 3.2 out of an S instead? Even more likely to plug-and-play...though you'll also be wanting the 6-speed tranny in either case.

[Jake Raby]

Originally Posted by Bruce Wayne

that's interesting Jake.. any specific reasons for that ?

Its always been this way. The 3.4 has historically had the most issues. Its the only engine that has an equal amount of IMS/Cracked Heads/ Cylinder failures.

Yesterday we received 5 failure calls, all but one of them were from 3.4 base engines... 5 calls in one day is a new record, puts us at 7 for the week which also tied the record, but we still have today to go.

The 3.2S engine from 2000 is one of the best IMHO, Dual Row IMS bearing, late IMS drive chain and larger capillaries inside the cylinder heads make it show up less here than all other Boxster engines combined. It also has the most substantial cylinder walls and they very, very seldom ever have cylinder issues.

This comes from trend data collected and first hand experience supported by years of research.

[986_inquiry]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

Its always been this way. The 3.4 has historically had the most issues. Its the only engine that has an equal amount of IMS/Cracked Heads/ Cylinder failures.

Yesterday we received 5 failure calls, all but one of them were from 3.4 base engines... 5 calls in one day is a new record, puts us at 7 for the week which also tied the record, but we still have today to go.

The 3.2S engine from 2000 is one of the best IMHO, Dual Row IMS bearing, late IMS drive chain and larger capillaries inside the cylinder heads make it show up less here than all other Boxster engines combined. It also has the most substantial cylinder walls and they very, very seldom ever have cylinder issues.

This comes from trend data collected and first hand experience supported by years of research.

Good enough for me! NO 3.4, look for a clean 2000 S instead

What were the issues with the newer S's? Found a nice 550 spyder at a good price I'm seriously considering....

[Coffinhunter]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

The 3.2S engine from 2000 is one of the best IMHO, Dual Row IMS bearing, late IMS drive chain and larger capillaries inside the cylinder heads make it show up less here than all other Boxster engines combined. It also has the most substantial cylinder walls and they very, very seldom ever have cylinder issues.

This comes from trend data collected and first hand experience supported by years of research.

What is the "trend data" for a 2003 S? Mine only has about 28,000 miles on it with better than regular maintenance.

[BYprodriver]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

Its always been this way. The 3.4 has historically had the most issues. Its the only engine that has an equal amount of IMS/Cracked Heads/ Cylinder failures.

Yesterday we received 5 failure calls, all but one of them were from 3.4 base engines... 5 calls in one day is a new record, puts us at 7 for the week which also tied the record, but we still have today to go.

The 3.2S engine from 2000 is one of the best IMHO, Dual Row IMS bearing, late IMS drive chain and larger capillaries inside the cylinder heads make it show up less here than all other Boxster engines combined. It also has the most substantial cylinder walls and they very, very seldom ever have cylinder issues.

This comes from trend data collected and first hand experience supported by years of research.

Jake, just to clarify you are just referring to the 98-2001 3.4, correct? And I think the late IMS drive chain started in 2001?

[jaykay]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

Its always been this way. The 3.4 has historically had the most issues. Its the only engine that has an equal amount of IMS/Cracked Heads/ Cylinder failures.

Yesterday we received 5 failure calls, all but one of them were from 3.4 base engines... 5 calls in one day is a new record, puts us at 7 for the week which also tied the record, but we still have today to go.

The 3.2S engine from 2000 is one of the best IMHO, Dual Row IMS bearing, late IMS drive chain and larger capillaries inside the cylinder heads make it show up less here than all other Boxster engines combined. It also has the most substantial cylinder walls and they very, very seldom ever have cylinder issues.

This comes from trend data collected and first hand experience supported by years of research.

Regarding 2000 3.2s Jake's opinion/data was echoed by a Porsche service tech that I talked to a number of years ago. He mentioned that he had seen coolant/cracked head issues though. He referred to the 2000 as "a good year"

I please to see a dual row IMS bearing when I pulled it.