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.
I have to agree with these observations. I have only ever met two types of 996 owners in person:
1: Those that bought the car when it was the current generation and most of these owners cared/know very little about anything beyond it's a sports car/Porsche
2. Those that bought it on a whim because they are cheap or inherited them and these owners also seemed to care very little about anything beyond it's a Porsche/performance car/status symbol they could afford.
Obviously this doesn't even come close to describing all 996 owners, and I would argue that most, if not all of us, just by virtue of being on this board actually have a true appreciation for these cars and would fall into other categories. However, in my anecdotal experience most buyers and owners don't share our appreciation for these fantastic cars, and as such don't know or care about all the little things we do. I'm sure most don't even know 996.1 vs 996.2 or realize that the engine changed midway through production.
I made a comment about it earlier in this thread, but I have been looking for a 996 for about 4 years now, at varying degrees of seriousness depending on what was going on in my life. My musts were always 6 speed and not achromatic. My preferences were always early car, LSD, sports seats, M030, coupe, C2, and good maintenance. Color was probably my second most important factor after manual, and I didn't care about the color being rare, just that I liked it. I did not care one bit about mileage, so long as maintenance and price reflected it. But depending on how badly I needed a car, there were times I was willing to compromise to the point I would have bought any non-silver 6 speed car. I have always been looking for a driver and I can do all of my own work, so that has definitely influenced what I am looking for. I specifically didn't want a pristine low mileage car. Thankfully, I found the right car at the right time and will be closing the deal on my 996 tomorrow, and aside from 2nd choice of exterior and interior color, it is exactly how I would have ordered a Carrera from the factory and has excellent maintenance history! Not bad for buying a 24 year old car!
Type65,
Hope the purchase went thru. If so, welcome to the club!
His strategy appears to be overpay whatever it takes to achieve recognition as the inevitable winner of every auction he participates in, and then reap as many zero-competition GT cars as possible
I dont know... maybe I'm too bad thought... but I don't know how many 996 I see in BaT with under 50K miles (30, 40)... that they look as they had twice that mileage... and nobody barely ask never for even a DME reading...
I dont know... maybe I'm too bad thought... but I don't know how many 996 I see in BaT with under 50K miles (30, 40)... that they look as they had twice that mileage... and nobody barely ask never for even a DME reading...
I don't get it either. It seems like the average buyer cares about mileage on the car above everything else. Seems like people are picking a number for miles driven and applying that for all cars, regardless of age as an equal measure. I'd consider a 991 with 100k miles a high mileage car before I do a 996 with 100k miles. There are plenty ways to put significant wear on a car in less than 50k miles and I've seen 996 cars in far better shape than newer generations.
OVER the past 24 years, countless 996's have proven incredibly durable; yet mystifyingly few wish to recognize the rather obvious fact (by now) that unless M96 blows up (and scant few actually do), the vast predominance of all 996's continue to run strong, on their original drive-train, apparently from here to eternity
AND the water-cooled 996 Mezger variant is quite literally indestructible; according to Porsche Motorsports, anyway: "We have not found a way to break the Mezger yet, so we continue to use it"
HIGH miles on 996 shouldn't be the penalty that it still is, yet the late-90's disinformation-campaign "stigma" persists...
"Not a 'real' Porsche..." "Unorthodox headlight design..." "Used mono-housed headlights to save production time..." "Shared parts like headlights with the Boxster ..." "Shared front clip with the Boxster..." "Shared production with the Boxster..." "Manufactured by Japanese robots..." "Value engineered 911..." "Never be 'collectible'..." "34 modes of engine failure..." "Worst engine design in history..." "Designed by accountants..." "Cheap interior plastics..." "Interior plastics not up to Porsche standards..." "Porsche broke from traditional 911 quality..." "Porsche skimped on quality..." "Porsche 'cut corners'..." "Porsche was on the brink of bankruptcy..." "Missing essentials like glove-box to save Porsche from bankruptcy..." "Saved the company from bankruptcy..."
I'd consider a 991 with 100k miles a high mileage car before I do a 996 with 100k miles. There are plenty ways to put significant wear on a car in less than 50k miles and I've seen 996 cars in far better shape than newer generations.
996 is incredibly durable; yet mystifyingly no one seems to recognize the rather obvious fact that unless M96 blows up (and few actually do), they apparently run strong for all of eternity
And the Mezger variant is quite literally indestructible; according to Porsche Motorsports, anyway: "We have not found a way to break the Mezger yet, so we continue to use it"
High miles on 996 shouldn't just be irrelevant, it should be sought after; yet the disinformation-campaign "stigma" persists...
"Not a 'real' Porsche..."
"Boxster headlights..."
"Boxster front clip..."
"Shared production with the Boxster..."
"Manufactured by Japanese robots..."
"Value engineered 911..."
"Never be 'collectible'..."
"34 modes of engine failure..."
"Worst engine design in history..."
"Unorthodox design..."
"Designed by accountants..."
"Cheap interior plastics..."
"Interior not up to Porsche standards..."
"Porsche skimped on quality...
"Porsche 'cut corners'..."
"Saved Porsche from bankruptcy..."
etc., etc., etc...
Endless and absurd lies
Every drive with my 996 is a pleasure. I think that they are just great platforms to make into whatever you want. Comfort, sporty, race, GT… you can do it all.
The numbers look about the same as mine, when I purchased my turbo 5 years ago. The overrevs are pretty much worthless data, given the last overrev was 200-300 hours ago. Dealers used to use the data to deny warranty claims. If your car has a tune, you will get an overrev.
I don't get it either. It seems like the average buyer cares about mileage on the car above everything else. Seems like people are picking a number for miles driven and applying that for all cars, regardless of age as an equal measure. I'd consider a 991 with 100k miles a high mileage car before I do a 996 with 100k miles. There are plenty ways to put significant wear on a car in less than 50k miles and I've seen 996 cars in far better shape than newer generations.
You are totally right
My point was other though. It looks to me, that almost every 996 that sells in BaT has always under 50K miles... That is what the market wants, and that is what brings the money. But then, you take a look to the pictures, the interior, the seats, the exterior trim , etc, and you have serious doubts as they look as if they would have twice the mileage. 996 age really well, and a car with real 30K-40K miles should look almost like new. But nobody looks to care or question it in BaT (no ask for engine hours report)
I don't mean all of them have the mileage modified, and maybe that Turbo just has the seat belt retainers so faded because standing under the sun, but is something that calls my attention about those online auctions.
To put the subject of Variable Valve Technology into the proper technical context and historical place, calling it "emission/EPA junk" is the biggest misnomer of the century.
Any Racer or engine builder in the 70's 80's who has ever "degree'd a high performance cam" would have given their left nut for a variable valve timing set-up to get a big edge on the competition.
Changing Cam Timing "on the fly" was stuff dreams were made from.....
Back then they would have a stack of different cams for different Tracks, and a host of cam timing tuning aids like off-set keyways of 2* 4* 6* 8* to manually advance or retard the cams 2-8* depending on the Cam and Track and manually adjustable cam gears. Changing cams and spending hours "degreeing the cam" was common place.
On my early 80's Racecar I had built a easily adjustable timing belt tensioner set-up where I could change cam timing by 10* in less than 10min, and a "trap door" in the firewall to extract the cam out of the back of the engine and change cams in 40 min.
Variable Valve Timing Technology came into the racing scene in mid 80's by Renault but was quickly BANNED by Formula 1 and NASCAR.to keep cost down and competition close. Their theory was that one team could dump a ton of money into R&D on Variable Valve Timing Technology that the other teams could not and gain an unfair advantage.
Sure the "Greenies" and EPA had a lot to do with finally getting Variable Valve Timing Technology into the main-stream automakers ( don't they always?) and the factories took advantage of the Technology to help get the fuel mileage up and emission down as well as the power increase and broad power band.
There is still a LOT of technology that hasn't yet made its way from Racing to main-stream, like the pneumatic valve springs that allow 20kRPM, or the "camshaft-less engines" that use electro-magnetic valve actuators instead of Camshafts that have infinite control over valve action . One example is the "FreeValve" by Koenisegg..
So, in no way I would think it be beneath Hans Mezger to be involved in some way with Vario-Cam,, and I have no idea what type of oil heater you are referring to he has patented on the Boxster/996, unless you are just talking about the oil cooler (heat exchanger)...
As a former tech (I worked at Porsche as well as many other companies) and someone who Turbo charged Watercooled VWs back in the 80's, all I can say is HELL YES!
Many people have no idea who we dreamed about this tech that is now on daily drivers, in much the same way people have no idea how futuristic those flip phones looked on Star Trek back in the day and now everyone has what is basically a super computer in their hands.
When variable valve timing became a thing in production cars in the late 80s / early-mid 90s it was amazing to feel it during the RPM band. It felt like a turbo coming on in some cars.
Fascinating stuff.
Anybody hear remember what a mechanically injected early 70's Porsche sounded like? That was pure heaven.
01-27-2022, 09:09 PM
