I just did the IMS thing on my C2 ( purely preemptive, no warning signs at all) but now that I have a GT3, it'd be the one more likely to see track time. I did replace the water pump on the C2 when it blew up while on a road trip. The signs were there, weird whine, a bit of water leak, but I did the Press On Regardless route and was lucky to have a dealer 10 miles away she it did go kablooey. As said above, drive it. Stuff happens, but at least it happens while you are in a Porsche.

Now I need to see what is causing the weird clunking noise in the C2's front end.....(the list of what makes you neurotic about these cars that we love so much never gets any shorter)

 

Thanks Porschedog, have been lusting after a gt3, yellow 2005, just cant justify the coinage - damn things are appreciating as we speak! But I have to drive one yet, whole different experience from what I hear! Love the doxie, have a Brittany Spaniel myself, a big galoot named Charlie!

 

Whether we're talking Porsches, especially water cooled ones, or Ford Mustangs, or Corvettes, my track experiences strongly show that stock cars should be retrofitted with improved oiling and cooling systems before being tracked regularly. Track sessions always produce elevated oil and water temps that may exceed the engineered margins for street cars.

My first P-car was a '80 911SC that I used in nearly 15 DE events over some 6 years. As a precaution, I replaced the "trombone" oil cooler with a oil cooler installed in the front air dam, but that was the only mod, except for DOT tires, I made to it, and it never missed a beat. But of course the 911 3.0L engines were well known for their robustness.

Most such mod's. are not expensive...ask some PCA DE folks what mods they recommend as "starters".

relinuca

 

I may be naive, but many of you worry too much - you're borrowing trouble. Perhaps we are just fortunate, but my wife and I both drive our 911 (separate run groups) in 5 or 6 DEs per year. Thus, our car might be on track for a solid hour before a 30 minute brake. We do all of the Porsche service manual items and additional work as recommended by our tech. As others have said, these cars are very capable. Based upon our experience, they are built to withstand track & street time.
Safe driving & God bless.

 

I think there is a genuine issue here because the parts and repair costs associated with our cars are exceptionally high. The prospect of a $15-20,000 bill for a grenaded engine is a really good reason to think twice when compared with alternative car brands with much lower costs.

I also go to the track as does my son. But we run BMWs because the economic downside is quite a bit shallower (ask us how we know).

If your priority is the track and keeping costs within bounds, perhaps a 996 is not such a good idea and its time to get a dedicated track car that is less nerve-wracking? My 996 is sheer delight on the road but just too expensive to fix for the track, in my mind.

 

The March issue tech column said that Porsche Motorsports was the first one saying not to track the car. Perhaps they had bad experiences in the development phase of the engine and Porsche decided it would cost to much to re-engineer. But this is Porsche Motorsports...they are not selling to you and me, these guys service the teams at Daytona and Sebring, etc.

At the same time, the "oil starvation and IMS issues" are one in the same in the opinion of the author of the book 996 The Essential Companion. I tend to follow that opinion in taking my own protective action. Still, as per much of the advice here, I'll sooner than later do the X51 sump kit just to give an additional margin of protection...even if I never get back on a track.

The Ferrari 308s and 328s also had oil starvation issues due to the placement of the oil pickup. The original design was to be longitudinal and dry sump but during development that got nixed. They went to the classic oil sump desing but they did not relocate the oil pickup location. On high speed right hand sweepers such as Turn 2 at Willow Springs and even on certain parts of Mulholland Drive in the Hollywood Hills, you could see your oil pressure drop to zero. Ferrari's ultimate solution was to get rid of the transverse engine layout and go longitudinal with the 348.

The V12 Ferraris in the Daytonas also had issues with the left bank cam gears and chain getting dry. A guy I knew had special tubes put in that squirted oil on the chains on that side of the engine.

 

For those interested in the article.

 

One of the local owners club meetings was at a shop here in town. A tech was talking about how a older boxter (I think 90's or very early 2000's) failed and the rebuild cost around $20k. Forgot what caused the failure, but it had a ton of miles and was used as a track car, so nothing we need to worry about really, it just got old and decided to give up.

Not only was the owner using it as a track car, they were also driving it to the track (cross country) and pulling a small trailer with their track seat and tires. They would get to the event, drop the trailer, put on the track gear, drive the **** out of it, swap everything back, pick up the trailer, and leave.

As far as I know they are still tracking that car, and the rebuilt motor sounds like it had a bit more snort added than the stock one.


Of course Porsche says not to track them, they want to sell you a track ready car...

Actually, there wasn't a red flag raised at another owner club event where we were talking about track days and getting involved with them (once a month or so). Maybe it's more of an internet thing?

 

OMG. Fugging Internet hysteria again. And BS to that stupid Panorama article. "Reiser" in my opinion is probably a student of Jake who - to his credit, only sees failed motors so is biased towards his point of view.

I track my car 5x a year. She's also a daily driver. On any given day when I'm there, there are about 20 - 30 other cars, 80% of which have a M96 engine in it. They too track between 5 to 10 times a year, and most are stock and have been doing it for years.

Enjoy the car. If it scares you, don't buy it or if you already have one, sell it and buy something else.
Geez.

Now if you plan to do RACING in it, of course that's a different matter altogether and of course Porsche Motorsports recommends a racing car from their development to race in.

DE Track sessions are NOT RACING sessions.

 

I tracked my 99' 996 C2 87k, ran and handled great!!! I did get the deadly intermix but I cannot blame it on tracking since it is a common problem. Not the fastest or best handling car out there but its a different world tracking a rear engine car and I love it. I will probably track it again after I can afford Raby's services.

 

Exactly but with DE's once you start to get to the upper groups you are wanting to go faster... That was me hence the track tires. Had I stuck with street tires I think my percentage of failure would have been lowered quite a bit. My initial comment in the post about if you track with street tires you are good. IF you track with R comps you are vulnerable unless to upgrade the oil flow. This is all about the slippery slope.

But to each their own. And to the guys that say well if it blows it blows I'll just deal with it. Big talkers with 15K burning a hole in their pockets.

 

I posted about my experience on racing forum and then just put on here. Apologize if I duplicated the message.
From earlier in this thread: smoke upon start up can be an oil/air separator but we changed mine and there was no smoke on start up...but there was when my engine blew months later!


Jason

 

The guy claimed Porsche Motorsports said not to track the 1999s. I would like to see some proof of them actually saying that. A few minutes of searching the internet reveals no evidence that Porsche Motorsports ever said such a thing. Considering the amount of debate over the 996 and the dry sump issue in particular, I find it difficult to believe that if Porsche Motorsport had ever said such a thing, it wouldn't be linked to and pasted all over the internet. Yet, I at least can find no evidence of it.

I would also point out that the 996 Essential Companion book has several pages on the dry sump issue and never mentions any such statement or any issue with taking the car to the track. I know not everyone agrees with that book's contentions, but the book is nothing if not thorough. I find it very hard to believe the author would have not included such a statement by Porsche Motorsport if one had ever been made.

In short, I think that Reisner pulled that statement out of his @ss. He is repeating some urban myth that he has heard. If someone on this board has a link showing proof that Porsche Motorsports ever said that, I would like to see it and will concede the point. Until I see such a thing, I call Shenanigans. I don't think Porsche Motorsport ever said that.

 

If Porsche said not to track a 996, why did they make Grand AM Koni Challenge 996 cars from 2001-2003?! Those are 996's... and are not street legal meaning they can only be used on the track.

 

Go to the track. It's a blast!