When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
To add another perspective..... what incentive does Porsche have to design anything that lasts much longer than warranty period? Look at the profile of so many 911 owners; lease and upgrade after 2-3 years. Maybe rack up 5k miles a year. Say after the cars are 5-7 years old and are on the 2nd or 3rd owner and parts break, the owner now pays labor and parts cost to replace. So, more money for Porsche. I'm already convinced BMW designs their cars to last a day past warranty.
To add another perspective..... what incentive does Porsche have to design anything that lasts much longer than warranty period? Look at the profile of so many 911 owners; lease and upgrade after 2-3 years. Maybe rack up 5k miles a year. Say after the cars are 5-7 years old and are on the 2nd or 3rd owner and parts break, the owner now pays labor and parts cost to replace. So, more money for Porsche. I'm already convinced BMW designs their cars to last a day past warranty.
There is more than an element of truth to this. BMWs cost significantly more in their native Germany than they do in the US for good reason: due to strict TUV regulations and incentives cars in Germany are typically sold on (out of country) in just a few years. In the US on the other hand BMW knows the average car that makes it onto the road will stay in service for a decade or more. The mark up on expensive brake rotors, high pressure fuel pumps, etc that BMW sells out of warranty over that time more than offsets the up-front discount. It’s a disposable razor model, and it’s the same one Porsche uses with its own race cars. GT3 Cup cars for example are relatively cheap to buy (for what they are) but they have time change suspension, engine rebuilds, etc, that more than make up for the discount over the service life.
That said let’s consider: using that logic what incentive does Porsche have to risk shelling the engine? If your goal is to keep cars on the road consuming expensive spares the last thing you want is a failure expensive enough to take a car out of service. An oil pan or pump failure is one of the few failure that would trigger retirement- a new or rebuilt engine that approaches the value of a used car is a sure way to insure it’s parted out. And that’s a double whammy- an opportunity for more used parts lost plus an entire set of cheap used spares onto the market. Thus even ignoring reputation damage I’d suggest there’s actually good financial incentive for Porsche to avoid failures on the critical parts we’re discussing well past the warranty period. By that logic I’d suggest cars that break or are too expensive to maintain are likely not in Porsche’s best interest.
As a point of reference. Not everyone drives 3000 miles a year and flips their cars. My 2010 Cayman was "abused" for 130,000 miles without any significant issues. Had one part failure (can't remember exactly what, must have been plastic...ha, ha) even though it was tracked and autocrossed heavily. Only mod was addition of the center (3rd) radiator. Drove it hard, drove it often, drove it nearly every day until traded in 6 years later for GT4.
There is someone on GT4 forum who has in excess of 100,000 miles on GT4. Our GT4 has over 40,000 miles and never had 3rd gear issue (but did get a new tranny under the campaign). Only routine maintenance, multiple oil changes. It's a shame the GT cars don't get driven hard and driven often. There are a few people who do. The cars seem to work very well when driven often.
As a point of reference. Not everyone drives 3000 miles a year and flips their cars. My 2010 Cayman was "abused" for 130,000 miles without any significant issues. Had one part failure (can't remember exactly what, must have been plastic...ha, ha) even though it was tracked and autocrossed heavily. Only mod was addition of the center (3rd) radiator. Drove it hard, drove it often, drove it nearly every day until traded in 6 years later for GT4.
There is someone on GT4 forum who has in excess of 100,000 miles on GT4. Our GT4 has over 40,000 miles and never had 3rd gear issue (but did get a new tranny under the campaign). Only routine maintenance, multiple oil changes. It's a shame the GT cars don't get driven hard and driven often. There are a few people who do. The cars seem to work very well when driven often.
This how Porsche’s should be driven. Hats off to you.
None of the how much will it be worth 10 days after I buy it thread, get bored and want the newest gotta have it toy.
I don’t think anyone is under the illusion the engine will be 6BT, 2TR-FE, 4.0HO, or dare I say 1995 3.6 porsche, reliable.
That being said, I don’t think the pan will fail first or frankly ever within the economic life of the vehicle. Plastic parts that move or are near things that move are a proven bad idea in engines (for example chain guides in jag/ford V8, various gears dating back to at least the go devil Jeep engine of WWII).
Going through every flat engine Porsche made, many of them had serious, serious issues.
Everything through the mid-70s rusted (full galvanized body did not happen until 1977). Even cars from dry climates have issues. Drivetrains were pretty good until you got to mag case engines, especially the 2.7 with thermal reactors. The 73.5 and up CIS is basically crap, the MFI before then is good, but very expensive to repair and maintain. Setting aside CIS, the 78-83 3.0 SC are pretty reliable and the 84-89 Carreras even better, but the 3.2 have head stud issues and some other problems, not as bad as the 3.0 or 2.7, however. Things got better with the 964, but the early ones are all leakers due to gasket design (or lack of gasket design) which I think was changed in mid-91 model year. So mid-91-94 964 C2 are pretty good (wonder why they are so spendy). You still have to maintain them (valve adjustments, $500 sets of plug wires, complicated oil change). C4 964 are not bad, but there are a lot of heavy and expensive parts in a 964 C4. 95 993 are even more bulletproof (I may be biased because I own one, but I picked it out because of my view). 96-98 with OBD2 throw codes for secondary air and, yes, maybe it can be cleaned in situ, but many have had to do top end rebuilds to fix it. They also have a terrible alarm design. I don’t think anyone will tell you any air cooled turbo is a low maintenance proposition. Only the 993 had modern EFI and they eat turbos if you install the wrong oil filter. I won’t even start with water cooled and IMS through 08. Even the vaunted mezger turbos and GT cars have coolant line issues and perpetual RMS leaks. And they eat the LSD in the trans. Clutches too. The dream 4.0 GT3RS, well they may have pushed to far as they are not as bulletproof as the 3.8. So that leaves us with ten year old cars or newer, not old enough IMHO to really judge. Sure, bore scoring seems to be an issue. GT4 trans were junk, 991.1 GT3 engines were junk. Water pumps fail. Etc etc etc.
I don’t think anyone saw these issues coming before they were released (unlike somethings where the internet knew it before the vehicles were even produced e.g. 07 diesel emissions, direct injection carbon issues, turbo issues, cvt trans) and I doubt anyone here is going to predict the faults of the 9A2 evo or anything else on the GT4/718 spyder. But if you asked me to bet, it would be the start stop system, the GPF (not applicable to US), and especially the new injectors. I’d bet the plastic pan lasts 25 years easy. I also think, long term, the 9A1 in the 991.2 GT3/RS/speedy will be more reliable.
I don’t think anyone is under the illusion the engine will be 6BT, 2TR-FE, 4.0HO, or dare I say 1995 3.6 porsche, reliable.
That being said, I don’t think the pan will fail first or frankly ever within the economic life of the vehicle. Plastic parts that move or are near things that move are a proven bad idea in engines (for example chain guides in jag/ford V8, various gears dating back to at least the go devil Jeep engine of WWII).
Going through every flat engine Porsche made, many of them had serious, serious issues.
Everything through the mid-70s rusted (full galvanized body did not happen until 1977). Even cars from dry climates have issues. Drivetrains were pretty good until you got to mag case engines, especially the 2.7 with thermal reactors. The 73.5 and up CIS is basically crap, the MFI before then is good, but very expensive to repair and maintain. Setting aside CIS, the 78-83 3.0 SC are pretty reliable and the 84-89 Carreras even better, but the 3.2 have head stud issues and some other problems, not as bad as the 3.0 or 2.7, however. Things got better with the 964, but the early ones are all leakers due to gasket design (or lack of gasket design) which I think was changed in mid-91 model year. So mid-91-94 964 C2 are pretty good (wonder why they are so spendy). You still have to maintain them (valve adjustments, $500 sets of plug wires, complicated oil change). C4 964 are not bad, but there are a lot of heavy and expensive parts in a 964 C4. 95 993 are even more bulletproof (I may be biased because I own one, but I picked it out because of my view). 96-98 with OBD2 throw codes for secondary air and, yes, maybe it can be cleaned in situ, but many have had to do top end rebuilds to fix it. They also have a terrible alarm design. I don’t think anyone will tell you any air cooled turbo is a low maintenance proposition. Only the 993 had modern EFI and they eat turbos if you install the wrong oil filter. I won’t even start with water cooled and IMS through 08. Even the vaunted mezger turbos and GT cars have coolant line issues and perpetual RMS leaks. And they eat the LSD in the trans. Clutches too. The dream 4.0 GT3RS, well they may have pushed to far as they are not as bulletproof as the 3.8. So that leaves us with ten year old cars or newer, not old enough IMHO to really judge. Sure, bore scoring seems to be an issue. GT4 trans were junk, 991.1 GT3 engines were junk. Water pumps fail. Etc etc etc.
I don’t think anyone saw these issues coming before they were released (unlike somethings where the internet knew it before the vehicles were even produced e.g. 07 diesel emissions, direct injection carbon issues, turbo issues, cvt trans) and I doubt anyone here is going to predict the faults of the 9A2 evo or anything else on the GT4/718 spyder. But if you asked me to bet, it would be the start stop system, the GPF (not applicable to US), and especially the new injectors. I’d bet the plastic pan lasts 25 years easy. I also think, long term, the 9A1 in the 991.2 GT3/RS/speedy will be more reliable.
To add another perspective..... what incentive does Porsche have to design anything that lasts much longer than warranty period? Look at the profile of so many 911 owners; lease and upgrade after 2-3 years. Maybe rack up 5k miles a year. Say after the cars are 5-7 years old and are on the 2nd or 3rd owner and parts break, the owner now pays labor and parts cost to replace. So, more money for Porsche. I'm already convinced BMW designs their cars to last a day past warranty.
This is the world we now live in. For most owners, we won't hit the mileage before time, and components will fail if not changed out based on time. We see this today with the M96 engine and looking back though the decades, Porsche never got everything right, nor do other manufacturers.
I see both sides of this. I know plastics have come a long way, but this isn't a disposable appliance. Some components should not be made in plastic and the rationale behind doing so is cost driven coupled to rising fuel economy requirements and ever more stringent emissions standards.
Case in point, the 9A1 engine block castings were lighted by Porsche a few years into production, saving about 4 kg (if memory serves me from reading this in the SAE magazine). End result is that we can't sleeve then anymore because they turn into swiss cheese and we can't with long term reliability over bore, plate, and hone them much further than the stock bore size. They are optimized to maximize output and reduce weight while making them last beyond the warranty period.
Same goes with a plastic component. Optimized for weight reduction and to last past the warranty period. How much further depends on many variables. If the sump pan was cast aluminum, as it was on the 9A1 engine prior to being changed to plastic, we wouldn't be having this conversation as we would not be concerned with how the aluminum pan will have aged after 30 years.
If you plan on leasing your Porsche sports car and getting a new one every few years, you won't be concerned with this. The car is just an appliance at that point and you probably won't be doing anything more maintenance wise than what Porsche states, which is designed again for reduce the total cost of ownership, which is figured into metrics like JD Power. Many new to the Porsche brand fall into this category. For most of us who plan on keeping the car beyond the warranty period, we will think and do differently.
For those who don't want a plastic pan (like myself), we've already made a replacement for the 9A2 almost as soon as cars arrived with the plastic pans, as we have done for the disposable plastic PDK oil pan/filter combos.
This is the world we now live in. For most owners, we won't hit the mileage before time, and components will fail if not changed out based on time. We see this today with the M96 engine and looking back though the decades, Porsche never got everything right, nor do other manufacturers.
I see both sides of this. I know plastics have come a long way, but this isn't a disposable appliance. Some components should not be made in plastic and the rationale behind doing so is cost driven coupled to rising fuel economy requirements and ever more stringent emissions standards.
Case in point, the 9A1 engine block castings were lighted by Porsche a few years into production, saving about 4 kg (if memory serves me from reading this in the SAE magazine). End result is that we can't sleeve then anymore because they turn into swiss cheese and we can't with long term reliability over bore, plate, and hone them much further than the stock bore size. They are optimized to maximize output and reduce weight while making them last beyond the warranty period.
Same goes with a plastic component. Optimized for weight reduction and to last past the warranty period. How much further depends on many variables. If the sump pan was cast aluminum, as it was on the 9A1 engine prior to being changed to plastic, we wouldn't be having this conversation as we would not be concerned with how the aluminum pan will have aged after 30 years.
If you plan on leasing your Porsche sports car and getting a new one every few years, you won't be concerned with this. The car is just an appliance at that point and you probably won't be doing anything more maintenance wise than what Porsche states, which is designed again for reduce the total cost of ownership, which is figured into metrics like JD Power. Many new to the Porsche brand fall into this category. For most of us who plan on keeping the car beyond the warranty period, we will think and do differently.
For those who don't want a plastic pan (like myself), we've already made a replacement for the 9A2 almost as soon as cars arrived with the plastic pans, as we have done for the disposable plastic PDK oil pan/filter combos.
This looks great! What’s the part/sku # for this? Thank you!
This looks great! What’s the part/sku # for this? Thank you!
We decided to re-design the sump and do a version with increased capacity, like our 9A1 deep sump. Bit more complexity, but we hope to have them done by years' end. These cars can benefit from an additional 2.5 quarts of oil. They run cooler and recover faster if the oil does get hot.
07-16-2019, 01:23 AM
