Oh no Professor...I have heard that one many times before also, Sir

 

That's it Steve! You forced the issue, so I have to ask.....WHAT IN THE BLUE HELL IS GOING ON IN HERE?!?!?!?!?

 

Chain jerking...it's fun

 

Steve? I didn't know. Why don't you type with a lisp, then?

 

Great, I just spit Diet Coke through my nose!

 

I am not even going to dignify that .....

 

After spending too long reading about M3 vs. 911 (no "carrera"), this thread is why I joined Rennlist.
You guys are too funny.

 

Look, 85% of all statistics are made up anyways, so why pay attention to any of them.

(PS, the other 15% or just plain wrong)

 

lies, damn lies and statistics...B. Disraeli

 

Alright guys, I give up

 

Dell, outside of the discussion over the validity of the various 'surveys' - do you personally believe that Porsche have experienced any unusual levels of engine failure in the 986 and 996 models?

Have you experienced any engine failures directly yourself?

Just interested.

 

interested in my opinion?

Fine. Do I think there is a design flaw in the RMS seal? Yes. Do I think it's a PITA to have to get the new one put in (even under warranty)? Yes. But.....do I think there are unusal high levels of engine failure in the M96 motor based cars? Not at all. I would bet the incidence is less than 1% of all cars produced in the line.

 

I'm trying to get away from the RMS issue here, as this is not a catastrophic failure, as you mentioned.

People have been confused because PCNA did replace engines based on repeated RMS issues, but that can't be classed as an engine failure.

I'm more interested in the catastrophic failures, slipped cylinder lining, porous blocks / intermix, and intermediate shaft failure.

There are the documented failures, including cases where Porsche have been pressured into providing replacement engines for such failures, way outside of warranty.

Porsche have then insisted that the owners sign non-disclosure documents regarding those engine replacements.

have you ever experienced anything of that sort?

 

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Of course.

Since we have digressed off into the massive engine failure thread, it reminds me of troubles that I've had with other makes. For instance, the late-80's problem with BMW V8 nakasil engines... BMW had to replace many many engine short blocks because of this problem (my car included). I found out later that Jaguar had the same problem. Then, the C5 Corvette Z06 engines (of which I also had one) had a real oil burning issue because of a piston ring problem. And then of course, all of the Chevy V8 engines had an issue with piston slap, because the skirts were so short. Chevy didn't really address either problem real well, although if the engine did burn more than a quart every 500 miles or so, they would pay for new rings. I think the piston slap problem was considered a design feature, and "they all do that".

I'll probably get blasted and ridiculed for even mentioning a Corvette on this esteemed forum, especially considering my board name (hey, I was young and foolish when I joined) but I thought it worth mentioning, maybe.

Point is, every manufacturer at one time or another has issues with something. Personally I'm amazed that they have as few problems as they do. Consider, if you will, two "typical" 911 owners. Dude #1 bought his pristine cabriolet and drives it only on warm sunny weekends, washes it 2 times a week and puts an average of 2700 miles per year on the car. Dude #2 bought his stripped coupe, ripped out the interior and put in a full cage. He takes it to the track almost every weekend and drives the **** out of it. He also averages only 2700 miles per year on the car, but most of those miles are between 6 and 7000 RPM. He has gone through 7 sets of race tires and 4 sets of brake pads. The car was last washed when his tow rig was splashed by a passing 18 wheeler.

But yet Porsche has to build and guarantee an engine that can withstand both extremes of use - neglect and abuse. And generally speaking, the engines do very well under both conditions.

Michael