b8_rdc

Not to be a jerk but I feel the same way. First thing I did when got home when buying my Porsche was drain the oil. Could of been a total waste, but I didn't want to risk incorrect weight oil from car place. With all the posts online saying a deeper oil pan is a waste at best and dangerous at worst, I would of ripped the thing off.

slicer

Prior to going through this experience I may have shared your perspective. Let me point out a couple of things. I think 99% of Jay's business comes from cars that have had engine failure. Not from people proactively trying to avoid engine failure. In other words he is not selling his product or service based on fear. He is simply waiting for the inevitable to happen - more engine failures. I called him to discuss my situation and he gave me 30+ minutes of his time even after he determined that I was not a likely candidate for his services. In fact he helped convince me that I shouldn't use him to repair the engine. Say what you want but he has vast knowledge about this engine and is a strong contributor to this forum with information based on actual experience. Unlike myself and probably 75% of the members of this forum who are simply regurgitating information that they have gathered from others.

Wow I wish I would have contacted you prior to buying the car. You obviously know all there is to know about engines, failure causes, etc. If you read all of my replies in this thread you would have noticed that I have based my recommendations not only on my experience, but also on conversations with those who deal with these engines on a daily basis in both street and track applications. Those people consistently pointed out the oil starvation and IMS problems with this engine. You can argue whether the previous owner of my car caused the problem by not installing the oil pick up spacer. But you can't argue the fact that there have been many failures caused by oil starvation on M96 engines when used on the track.

If you don't track the car then you don't have as much to worry about. If you do track the car (even relatively mild DE events such as mine), please do some research on the upgrades needed to safely do so.

DreamCarrera

Well, at least we agree on a couple of points...

silotwo

And cut from Jake's earlier and very well illustrated post:

"BTW- If you are going to track that Cayman you might consider this... Needless to say we are already seeing 9a1 failures from track cars and as always we are the first to create the solutions."

I guess my belief that the fear would be put to rest when the day arrives that I can be in a 2009 or newer has been shattered.

golftime

First, my sincere sympathies to the OP. Having read this entire thread, I am more than a bit embarrassed for Porsche for the direction its engineering has taken; that is the 996 is apparently not designed to handle even modest track driving. Are you kidding me? The most winning manufacturer of race cars in history and the iconic 911 is not even modestly track-able? Whether it occurred at the hands of the OP (remember, he was passed by a Dodge) or the prior owner, this is nothing short of a sad reflection on Porsche. Making a fast car is suprirsingly easiy these days. Toyota Camrys with the V6engine, along with dozens of other cars will go 150 MPH.

My previous P-car was an 87 with, yes, a dry sump. The lineage is supposed to get better, not worse, as time goes on, preserving the high standards set by the prior designs. I guess Porsche missed that lesson. I understand Corvettes have suffered from similar oil starvation. That's what I expect from a Corvette, and why I don't own one. This is a Porsche, as I said, the most winning manufacturer in racing history. I once read a quote many years ago from a race car driver stating that Porsche was the car most designed to go straight from the show room to the track. Apparently that has changed. I don't care it is not a GT3 or Turbo. What's the point of making a profit if it comes at the cost of your reputation? Lubrication is the most basic tenet of engine survival followed by cooling, and if Porsche is cutting it this close, shame on them. There are no excuses. And somebody in Stuttgart, who made this stupid decision, if they are still there, should be fired.

Flat6 Innovations

What can you expect when your oil pump is driven by a simplex chain thats smaller than a kid's bicycle and has a sprocket thats fixed with a single 6mm diameter fastener with nothing to index it?

slicer

Please don't give me another thing to worry about! The Cayman will not see any track time and is still under manufacture's warranty. It's the wife's car....

KrazyK

Glad you got a good one Slicer, I just dont agree that you should give up on the 996. Seems like some are great that last over 100K with no issues, then there are some that give out at 30K. I was paranoid about buying mine until I spoke at length with Hanz at RAC in Dallas. Seems the failures really are a small percentage. I bet if you remove the owner induced failures from the pool, the percentage would be even lower. It just seems like more failures to you because thats what you experienced, even if it was self induced, or "user error".

There is no way you can blame any auto company for their design if you improperly mod it then track or race it. You are not using the product as it was intended. Congrats on the mini Porsche though.

BruceP

This would be a fair statement if all, or even most, tracked 996s blew their engines up. They don't. There are legions of these things circling racetracks year after year without incident, for pete's sake.

The world is not made better by people who demand to be protected from every possible risk. Sometimes, sh*t just happens. Especially on a race track. Even to real race cars. Come on. If you can't afford to play, don't. Racing is not a right.

golftime

Bruce, I have to disagree with you. Yes, "stuff" happens, and I can understand that with even the best prepared race cars, with "prepared" being the operative word. But that is not what was revealed in this thread. Almost to a person, everyone with an expertise in these cars, including guru Jake Raby, has weighed in and said that Porsche abandoned the dry sump oil system most likely due to the costs involved, and therefore if you plan to track your 996 at all, the first thing you need to do is upgrade the engine lubrication system. I go back to my original statement that this is unacceptable given the fact that the previous generation 911 had a more track ready lubrication system, particularly given the fact it was engineered 20 years earlier.

BruceP

I can understand being disappointed, but I think what you're really disappointed about is that Porsche changed. I, too, find it kind of sad that Porsche couldn't survive on the buyers who care about dry sump oiling, but that's the free market for you. That's why Porsche is such a different, and bigger, car company now. But they didn't conceal anything from you. They never advertised that the car had a dry sump when it didn't. Caveat emptor and all that, right?

Targatoo

No. Cost benefit analysis applies.

As it was said, 1000's of these cars have done millions of laps and not all of them blew up. Some did. And my dad's Mercedes E Class blew up in the drive way. **** happens.

There is a chance that tracking the car will increase the risk of catastrophic failure. If you are uncomfortable with the risk you can try to insure yourself (upgrade certain components, get a newer car with warranty, etc) or avoid the track.

You have to make the decision: is it worth the cost to insure against an unknown probability of failure

perryinva

Of course, we all know, all of this could have been avoided if he had just used Slick 50, which allows your engine to run with no oil, if required....

come onguys, let's lighten up! I appreciate the info the OP has presented. Bashing him as the "cause" is arrogance at it's best. You weren't there, you don't know what the circumstances were. He readily admits his oversights, and accepts that perhaps it "would have happened anyway", but has every right to "feel" that a Porsche isn't what it used to be with regards to the track.

Lets, face it, todays ultra high performance treet tires (even yesterdays, like the PS2) blow the doors off what were at one time dedicated track tires, not too many years ago. The same can be said for suspensions. I remember clearly when 300+ HP in a car that size was a supercar. So comparing today to yesteryear is more just waxing nostalgic, than being realistic. it is what it is. Consumer beware.

I STILL get a huge grin every time I drive my Carrera. That's what counts to me.

jumper5836

I've been tracking my 996 since 2005 and I haven't seen many 996 at all until just lately when it just happens that these cars are now so cheap.

Lot of 996's never see the track and many more of them are garage queens. Many of them that do see the track are not even driven hard and many never see R compound or slicks. I think you'd getter a more realistic view of these engines by following the Boxster spec or Koni race teams that run these engines and ask them how long the engines last.

Personally I think the cars that are not driven everyday are the ones that have ims problems and that the cooling system is the weak point in these engines. It is so close to the edge of being at the maximum temperature that any problem in that area will cause a problem. These cars should be running 10 degrees cooler which would give the engine a much better chance of not overheating.

The oil starvation is a big issue on some tracks and if your driving at them, you should either modify the engine to cope with it or change your tires so you don't pull as high of g forces that cause the problem.

At least ours engines are not as bad as the 2.7 engine in the early 911's

ZX9RCAM

Sorry the OP had a problem.
My 99 just broke 110,000 miles & still going strong.