Considering 2002 996 tt or 2007 S
06-23-2016, 09:07 PM
#31
!["02996ttx50's Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%23759d7b' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
that $2k would be the full replacement of oem parts = the high side of potential spoiler repair costs if one replaced all the components w oem.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
06-23-2016, 09:53 PM
#32
Racer
Thread Starter
that $2k would be the full replacement of oem parts = the high side of potential spoiler repair costs if one replaced all the components w oem.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
06-24-2016, 01:53 AM
#33
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that $2k would be the full replacement of oem parts = the high side of potential spoiler repair costs if one replaced all the components w oem.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
the low side would be a half hour and a can of pentosin and simply refilling the rams. which judging from the cars symptom would tend to suggest that's all that is needed for them to properly deploy again. refill the rams with ch202.
06-24-2016, 12:39 PM
#34
to the OP. youre welcome! one of the first things i learned during my first few months of ownership. the learning curve is steep and long, and worth the ride. i save THOUSANDS on day to day repairs
anyone replacing requiring a full replacement of the pump and innards though would be foolish not to look into and purchase dave's rennkit "eram kit" here w the 3 or 4 in lift! from all i gather, a vast improvement over the oem config as the hydraulics have been eliminated from the equation.
that said, in my 8 yrs of having had two of these, two simple rebleeds have kept my plumage straight and tall, and raised on demand, thanks very much hah!
06-25-2016, 12:30 AM
#35
Racer
Thread Starter
The general used car buying advice is to buy the best car you can find/afford.
The 996 Turbo is 14 years old. The 997 just 9 years old.
While the Turbo has better performance numbers the two cars are not that far apart.
996 Turbo: 3.6l. 420hp at 6000 RPMs. Weight: 1540kg. 0-62mph 4.2 seconds.
Top speed: 189mph.
997: 3.8l. 355hp at 6800 RPMs. Weight: 1475kg. 0-62mph 4.8 seconds. Top speed: 179mph.
Not that far apart but there are of course some differences and in the HP and torque department the Turbo is on top. If raw HP/torque numbers, and 0-62mph times matter that much to you then the choice is clear.
However, a car with a N/A engine with lots of compression, in this case 11.8:1 vs. the Turbo's 9.4:1, can be a sweet car to drive.
While the Turbo does make more torque it requires boost to do so and boost requires RPMs.
The Turbo has the Mezger engine which does not have the IMS and thus the risk of developing the infamous IMSB problem.
The Mezger engine is quite a solid platform and should deliver -- with a little luck -- hundreds of thousands of miles of realtively trouble free service. There are a couple of examples of 996 Turbo engines having obtained 400K+ to even 500K+ miles.
'course, my lowly 2.7l 2002 Boxster has reached 301K miles with no real big engine issues. A big factor to engine longevity is regular oil/filter services with not too many miles between them.
The Turbo has AWD. This version of AWD is not that effective in low traction conditions. I have to say that I'm not as enamored of this AWD system as I was when I was first shopping for a car and came upon the 996 Turbos. Some owners feel so strongly they remove the AWD feature: The front diff with its viscous coupling, the cardan shaft, the front axles and even replace the stuck Turbo front hubs with the hubs from IIRC the 996 GT3.
Understand though that either car will require, or should be fitted with at any rate, proper snow tires. Even with its less advanced AWD system the 996 Turbo will be ok. Just don't expect the front tires to pull the car out if the car is stuck in a situation where the rear tires are spinning.
Both cars have the same brakes. Thus one could think the Turbo with its higher performance/top speed is underbraked compared to the 997 with its lower performance/top speed, or the 997 is overbraked compared to the Turbo.
The 997 comes with 19" wheels/tires. I know the Turbo with its 18" wheels/tires is a pretty harsh ride. Not unpleasantly so in my opinion but often passengers complain. The 997 with its 19" wheels/tires I would think would be a bit worse in this regard.
The 997 interior is supposed to be better. I have no real time in a 997 so I can't comment on that.
You'll just have to drive both as you intend to use the car and see which one you like better.
The 996 Turbo is 14 years old. The 997 just 9 years old.
While the Turbo has better performance numbers the two cars are not that far apart.
996 Turbo: 3.6l. 420hp at 6000 RPMs. Weight: 1540kg. 0-62mph 4.2 seconds.
Top speed: 189mph.
997: 3.8l. 355hp at 6800 RPMs. Weight: 1475kg. 0-62mph 4.8 seconds. Top speed: 179mph.
Not that far apart but there are of course some differences and in the HP and torque department the Turbo is on top. If raw HP/torque numbers, and 0-62mph times matter that much to you then the choice is clear.
However, a car with a N/A engine with lots of compression, in this case 11.8:1 vs. the Turbo's 9.4:1, can be a sweet car to drive.
While the Turbo does make more torque it requires boost to do so and boost requires RPMs.
The Turbo has the Mezger engine which does not have the IMS and thus the risk of developing the infamous IMSB problem.
The Mezger engine is quite a solid platform and should deliver -- with a little luck -- hundreds of thousands of miles of realtively trouble free service. There are a couple of examples of 996 Turbo engines having obtained 400K+ to even 500K+ miles.
'course, my lowly 2.7l 2002 Boxster has reached 301K miles with no real big engine issues. A big factor to engine longevity is regular oil/filter services with not too many miles between them.
The Turbo has AWD. This version of AWD is not that effective in low traction conditions. I have to say that I'm not as enamored of this AWD system as I was when I was first shopping for a car and came upon the 996 Turbos. Some owners feel so strongly they remove the AWD feature: The front diff with its viscous coupling, the cardan shaft, the front axles and even replace the stuck Turbo front hubs with the hubs from IIRC the 996 GT3.
Understand though that either car will require, or should be fitted with at any rate, proper snow tires. Even with its less advanced AWD system the 996 Turbo will be ok. Just don't expect the front tires to pull the car out if the car is stuck in a situation where the rear tires are spinning.
Both cars have the same brakes. Thus one could think the Turbo with its higher performance/top speed is underbraked compared to the 997 with its lower performance/top speed, or the 997 is overbraked compared to the Turbo.
The 997 comes with 19" wheels/tires. I know the Turbo with its 18" wheels/tires is a pretty harsh ride. Not unpleasantly so in my opinion but often passengers complain. The 997 with its 19" wheels/tires I would think would be a bit worse in this regard.
The 997 interior is supposed to be better. I have no real time in a 997 so I can't comment on that.
You'll just have to drive both as you intend to use the car and see which one you like better.
06-25-2016, 07:24 AM
#37
Although some say the x50 was underrated to protect the gt2...
06-26-2016, 05:54 PM
#38
Pro
Where are the pics?
06-28-2016, 01:11 PM
#43
Originally Posted by rick brooklyn
Although some say the x50 was underrated to protect the gt2...
06-29-2016, 06:28 AM
#45
Made same choice 2 years ago and bought an 04 996tt, no regrets.Drive both cars in 3rd gear at 3000rpm and put your right foot down, that should get rid of any doubts.