How many 996's needed a new engine?
12-15-2008, 02:29 PM
#61
Race Car
Here, I'll make you guys feel better.
My old 2000 M96 has over 110k miles right now and never gave me an issue. The new owner is still enjoying it on the weekends. My new to me '87 Carrera 3.2L is broke and is said to be the most reliable motor the 911 has had besides maybe the 3.0L (SC).
Go figure.
Not sure if there is a moral to the story here, just irony.
My old 2000 M96 has over 110k miles right now and never gave me an issue. The new owner is still enjoying it on the weekends. My new to me '87 Carrera 3.2L is broke and is said to be the most reliable motor the 911 has had besides maybe the 3.0L (SC).
Go figure.
Not sure if there is a moral to the story here, just irony.
12-15-2008, 05:47 PM
#67
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did I just tip-toe through a minefield? 
P.S. Dell: Did you ever come-up with an approximate rate of failure? We all know its near 100% of Rennlist members who have experienced engine failures have reported them…
P.S. Dell: Did you ever come-up with an approximate rate of failure? We all know its near 100% of Rennlist members who have experienced engine failures have reported them…
12-15-2008, 06:26 PM
#69
Nordschleife Master
Further, I am able to report that the you are almost correct wrt the number of RL members whom have reported failures have reported them. It's odd, but I keep getting a value greater than 100%. It seems that some are reporting ad nasueum and thus skewing the results.
In all seriousness though, I do feel horribly for any person that has had to go through that. What I have ZERO TOLERANCE for (well I used to and have since decided that the popcorn tasted much better from the sidelines) is statistical ignorance especially at the most basic level. It's the anecdotal and qualitative interpretation that just illustrates emotion's ignorance over fact. Those people that argue from the emotion side and have ZERO data are the one's I just laugh at now and have since moved on. I won't get dragged down by those clowns anymore.
12-15-2008, 07:17 PM
#72
12-15-2008, 07:24 PM
#73
Burning Brakes
You guys are pathetic. The SAME goons jump all over people who have legitimate questions beyond a simple search and just berate them until they cower away in fear of more bashing. 996 values are diminished world wide and it's not by accident nor these threads on Rennlist so get over yourselves. There have been more than enough engine issues to make current and new potential owners of these cars concerned enough and moreover, most Porsche tech's I know wouldn't spend their own money on an early 996 either. Our advice has been and always will be the same as others with 1st hand experience in these matters. Buy the newest example you can afford, and I would stay away from early 986/996 cars if at all possible (UNLESS you are fully prepared for what legitimately can and has happened enough times to bring attention to the matter AT THE VERY LEAST). Why?? Because I've seen 1st hand that the chances of a major engine failure in early cars are significantly greater than the later years.
I've owned 5 911's as my personal cars AND a motorsports shop exclusive to Porsche. We replaced on average 1 blown 996 motor a month with a ratio of 2:1 on the early Boxsters. My OWN 1999 996 detonated at 23K miles AFTER two RMS failures amongst other serious quality issues.
It's laugh out loud comical to read the same clowns policing this board waiting to pounce....as though your own single example experience that might still be with it's original engine is all the proof you need to establish what concerns are legitimate or not.
Early 996's can easily be had for under $20K, right in line with 20+ years old 911's. You can buy 2 996's for the price of one good condition 993. Either everyone is stoopid....or the market has figured out that Porsche's 1st go at the water cooled design needed a little more evolution to get it right. All you guys who lay in wait for someone to bring it up...are all just pissing in to the wind.
Rant over.
I've owned 5 911's as my personal cars AND a motorsports shop exclusive to Porsche. We replaced on average 1 blown 996 motor a month with a ratio of 2:1 on the early Boxsters. My OWN 1999 996 detonated at 23K miles AFTER two RMS failures amongst other serious quality issues.
It's laugh out loud comical to read the same clowns policing this board waiting to pounce....as though your own single example experience that might still be with it's original engine is all the proof you need to establish what concerns are legitimate or not.
Early 996's can easily be had for under $20K, right in line with 20+ years old 911's. You can buy 2 996's for the price of one good condition 993. Either everyone is stoopid....or the market has figured out that Porsche's 1st go at the water cooled design needed a little more evolution to get it right. All you guys who lay in wait for someone to bring it up...are all just pissing in to the wind.
Rant over.
12-15-2008, 07:41 PM
#74
Nordschleife Master
Can you elaborate on this please. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Are you saying you replace 2 986 motors for every 996 motor?
12-15-2008, 07:43 PM
#75
You guys are pathetic. The SAME goons jump all over people who have legitimate questions beyond a simple search and just berate them until they cower away in fear of more bashing. 996 values are diminished world wide and it's not by accident nor these threads on Rennlist so get over yourselves. There have been more than enough engine issues to make current and new potential owners of these cars concerned enough and moreover, most Porsche tech's I know wouldn't spend their own money on an early 996 either. Our advice has been and always will be the same as others with 1st hand experience in these matters. Buy the newest example you can afford, and I would stay away from early 986/996 cars if at all possible (UNLESS you are fully prepared for what legitimately can and has happened enough times to bring attention to the matter AT THE VERY LEAST). Why?? Because I've seen 1st hand that the chances of a major engine failure in early cars are significantly greater than the later years.
I've owned 5 911's as my personal cars AND a motorsports shop exclusive to Porsche. We replaced on average 1 blown 996 motor a month with a ratio of 2:1 on the early Boxsters. My OWN 1999 996 detonated at 23K miles AFTER two RMS failures amongst other serious quality issues.
It's laugh out loud comical to read the same clowns policing this board waiting to pounce....as though your own single example experience that might still be with it's original engine is all the proof you need to establish what concerns are legitimate or not.
Some Early 996's can easily be had for under $20K, right in line with some 20+ years old 911's. You can buy 2 crappy and high mileage 996's for the price of one good condition pampered, babied, and not driven 993.
I've owned 5 911's as my personal cars AND a motorsports shop exclusive to Porsche. We replaced on average 1 blown 996 motor a month with a ratio of 2:1 on the early Boxsters. My OWN 1999 996 detonated at 23K miles AFTER two RMS failures amongst other serious quality issues.
It's laugh out loud comical to read the same clowns policing this board waiting to pounce....as though your own single example experience that might still be with it's original engine is all the proof you need to establish what concerns are legitimate or not.
Some Early 996's can easily be had for under $20K, right in line with some 20+ years old 911's. You can buy 2 crappy and high mileage 996's for the price of one good condition pampered, babied, and not driven 993.
Oh, I fixed part of your quote as well.
-td