The 243,000 mile '99 just popped back up...
10-20-2016, 02:27 AM
#46
so if mine is a 12/97 build date, does that qualify as "super rare" since it is one of 14? VIN is WP0ZZZ99ZWS602301. To me that looks like 2300 cars were in front of me.
10-20-2016, 07:13 AM
#47
Drifting
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ephrata, PA, USA now. Originally from the UK
Posts: 3,075
Likes: 0
Received 20 Likes
on
15 Posts
Hurdi,
Looks like our cars are twins. Probably came of the line next to each other. Mine is 1999 C2 cab., arctic silver w/ black interior. Same wheels and production date as yours, 5/99.
Mine has 64,400 miles as of today. I am the third owner. Owned about as year now.
My engine was replaced by the factory due to the oil/coolant intermix back in April of 2004 when the second owner had it. It was just out of warranty but Porsche "good willed" all the parts and only charged the owner labor.
I've always wondered what IMSB mine would have given the new engine replacement in 2004.
Jake if your reading this...Do you have any thoughts?
Looks like our cars are twins. Probably came of the line next to each other. Mine is 1999 C2 cab., arctic silver w/ black interior. Same wheels and production date as yours, 5/99.
Mine has 64,400 miles as of today. I am the third owner. Owned about as year now.
My engine was replaced by the factory due to the oil/coolant intermix back in April of 2004 when the second owner had it. It was just out of warranty but Porsche "good willed" all the parts and only charged the owner labor.
I've always wondered what IMSB mine would have given the new engine replacement in 2004.
Jake if your reading this...Do you have any thoughts?
10-20-2016, 12:43 PM
#48
10-20-2016, 04:32 PM
#49
Rennlist Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by longrowe View Post
so if mine is a 12/97 build date, does that qualify as "super rare" since it is one of 14? VIN is WP0ZZZ99ZWS602301. To me that looks like 2300 cars were in front of me.
Hmm. How would longrowes have a higher serial number but earlier build date, I wonder.
My number is 2779 with a 10/98 build date, which would make sense compared to catfight's.
longrowe, the ZZZ in your indicates it was not delivered to the US originally. The "W" indicates it is technically a 1998 model.
Originally Posted by longrowe View Post
so if mine is a 12/97 build date, does that qualify as "super rare" since it is one of 14? VIN is WP0ZZZ99ZWS602301. To me that looks like 2300 cars were in front of me.
My number is 2779 with a 10/98 build date, which would make sense compared to catfight's.
longrowe, the ZZZ in your indicates it was not delivered to the US originally. The "W" indicates it is technically a 1998 model.
10-21-2016, 01:32 AM
#51
4 spoke steering wheel. I added the 4th stalk to control the OBC, one of my first DIY's
10-21-2016, 01:42 AM
#52
Quote:
Originally Posted by longrowe View Post
so if mine is a 12/97 build date, does that qualify as "super rare" since it is one of 14? VIN is WP0ZZZ99ZWS602301. To me that looks like 2300 cars were in front of me.
Hmm. How would longrowes have a higher serial number but earlier build date, I wonder.
My number is 2779 with a 10/98 build date, which would make sense compared to catfight's.
longrowe, the ZZZ in your indicates it was not delivered to the US originally. The "W" indicates it is technically a 1998 model.
Originally Posted by longrowe View Post
so if mine is a 12/97 build date, does that qualify as "super rare" since it is one of 14? VIN is WP0ZZZ99ZWS602301. To me that looks like 2300 cars were in front of me.
Hmm. How would longrowes have a higher serial number but earlier build date, I wonder.
My number is 2779 with a 10/98 build date, which would make sense compared to catfight's.
longrowe, the ZZZ in your indicates it was not delivered to the US originally. The "W" indicates it is technically a 1998 model.
10-21-2016, 09:22 AM
#53
Rennlist Member
I think there may be some serious over analysis going on here... The Boxster and 996 were Porsche's first mass produced cars. Those production lines were in the early stages of their evolution and there was much going on in the way of sorting out fluid logistics....
I would bet that engine assembly runs on it's own assembly line and finished engines were then stored in anticipation of cars to be built to put them into... Did Porsche use a "first in, first out" or "last in, first out" engine inventory strategy? Did they even give it that much thought? Plus, as engines go through their assembly line's various stages of quality assurance/control, any kind of attempt at maintaining sequential numbering order would surely get jacked up along the way due to many different QC points and failure opportunities. Same can likely be said for the body. Point being that, when the body was ready for the engine install I think the next available engine was put in and then logged on the build sheet. I doubt that assembly would put a body aside to wait for a specific engine S/N to be installed.
Aside of the year code, who knows what the other digits mean?
There were comments made by Jake about a fire in a Porsche building that resulted in the need for engines which did not pass Q/C to be re-sleeved and put into vehicles, so that could account for a sizable lot of serial # variance in terms of engine numbers vs. build dates.
Side-note: In Germany, they don't call failure prone cars "lemons" like we do here... they call them "Montags-Auto" which translates to "Monday Car." Because thats the first day of the work week and workers are still coming down off of their weekend tend to be less focused... I think it was statistically proven that's the day of the week most manufacturing mistakes happen.
I would bet that engine assembly runs on it's own assembly line and finished engines were then stored in anticipation of cars to be built to put them into... Did Porsche use a "first in, first out" or "last in, first out" engine inventory strategy? Did they even give it that much thought? Plus, as engines go through their assembly line's various stages of quality assurance/control, any kind of attempt at maintaining sequential numbering order would surely get jacked up along the way due to many different QC points and failure opportunities. Same can likely be said for the body. Point being that, when the body was ready for the engine install I think the next available engine was put in and then logged on the build sheet. I doubt that assembly would put a body aside to wait for a specific engine S/N to be installed.
Aside of the year code, who knows what the other digits mean?
There were comments made by Jake about a fire in a Porsche building that resulted in the need for engines which did not pass Q/C to be re-sleeved and put into vehicles, so that could account for a sizable lot of serial # variance in terms of engine numbers vs. build dates.
Side-note: In Germany, they don't call failure prone cars "lemons" like we do here... they call them "Montags-Auto" which translates to "Monday Car." Because thats the first day of the work week and workers are still coming down off of their weekend tend to be less focused... I think it was statistically proven that's the day of the week most manufacturing mistakes happen.
10-21-2016, 01:03 PM
#54
Rennlist Member
I think there may be some serious over analysis going on here... The Boxster and 996 were Porsche's first mass produced cars. Those production lines were in the early stages of their evolution and there was much going on in the way of sorting out fluid logistics....
I would bet that engine assembly runs on it's own assembly line and finished engines were then stored in anticipation of cars to be built to put them into... Did Porsche use a "first in, first out" or "last in, first out" engine inventory strategy? Did they even give it that much thought? Plus, as engines go through their assembly line's various stages of quality assurance/control, any kind of attempt at maintaining sequential numbering order would surely get jacked up along the way due to many different QC points and failure opportunities. Same can likely be said for the body. Point being that, when the body was ready for the engine install I think the next available engine was put in and then logged on the build sheet. I doubt that assembly would put a body aside to wait for a specific engine S/N to be installed.
Aside of the year code, who knows what the other digits mean?
There were comments made by Jake about a fire in a Porsche building that resulted in the need for engines which did not pass Q/C to be re-sleeved and put into vehicles, so that could account for a sizable lot of serial # variance in terms of engine numbers vs. build dates.
Side-note: In Germany, they don't call failure prone cars "lemons" like we do here... they call them "Montags-Auto" which translates to "Monday Car." Because thats the first day of the work week and workers are still coming down off of their weekend tend to be less focused... I think it was statistically proven that's the day of the week most manufacturing mistakes happen.
I would bet that engine assembly runs on it's own assembly line and finished engines were then stored in anticipation of cars to be built to put them into... Did Porsche use a "first in, first out" or "last in, first out" engine inventory strategy? Did they even give it that much thought? Plus, as engines go through their assembly line's various stages of quality assurance/control, any kind of attempt at maintaining sequential numbering order would surely get jacked up along the way due to many different QC points and failure opportunities. Same can likely be said for the body. Point being that, when the body was ready for the engine install I think the next available engine was put in and then logged on the build sheet. I doubt that assembly would put a body aside to wait for a specific engine S/N to be installed.
Aside of the year code, who knows what the other digits mean?
There were comments made by Jake about a fire in a Porsche building that resulted in the need for engines which did not pass Q/C to be re-sleeved and put into vehicles, so that could account for a sizable lot of serial # variance in terms of engine numbers vs. build dates.
Side-note: In Germany, they don't call failure prone cars "lemons" like we do here... they call them "Montags-Auto" which translates to "Monday Car." Because thats the first day of the work week and workers are still coming down off of their weekend tend to be less focused... I think it was statistically proven that's the day of the week most manufacturing mistakes happen.
10-21-2016, 02:35 PM
#55
Rennlist Member
10-21-2016, 02:47 PM
#56
Race Director
Porsche also had Toyota in to advise them on how stupid it was to put a Mezger in every car when the vast majority of 911's are never tracked. No, the 996 wasn't the first car Porsche built on a large scale, but it WAS one of the first cars (behind the 986) produced after Porsche doubled down on cost-cutting.
It may be a myth that the 996 was the first Porsche to be mass-produced, but it is NOT a myth that Porsche had never done anything so bold as to engineer two cars - which comprised the opposite ends of the product line (flagship product vs. "entry-level" product) that were identical ahead of the A-pillars. *shrug* I love my 996, but I'm not under any illusions about the 996 being a product of the finance department as much as a product of the engineering department. Pinky Lai had to fight to keep Porsche from using a fixed spoiler on the 996 - Porsche was fully prepared to chuck the iconic 911 profile in favor of cheaper production.
Imagine how the Corvette community would react if Chevy decided that, in order to cut costs, all cars they made would be identical from the A-pillar forward...so a new Stingray would have the same nose as a Cruze or other "entry-model" Chevy...
It may be a myth that the 996 was the first Porsche to be mass-produced, but it is NOT a myth that Porsche had never done anything so bold as to engineer two cars - which comprised the opposite ends of the product line (flagship product vs. "entry-level" product) that were identical ahead of the A-pillars. *shrug* I love my 996, but I'm not under any illusions about the 996 being a product of the finance department as much as a product of the engineering department. Pinky Lai had to fight to keep Porsche from using a fixed spoiler on the 996 - Porsche was fully prepared to chuck the iconic 911 profile in favor of cheaper production.
Imagine how the Corvette community would react if Chevy decided that, in order to cut costs, all cars they made would be identical from the A-pillar forward...so a new Stingray would have the same nose as a Cruze or other "entry-model" Chevy...
10-21-2016, 09:10 PM
#57
>> Porsche had never done anything so bold as to engineer two cars - which comprised the opposite ends of the product line (flagship product vs. "entry-level" product) that were identical ahead of the A-pillars.
(except for the 912, and the speedster, and every 'entry-level' car they offered before the VW-Porsche 924)
Look, I get it-- the narrative's established and it's the 996's turn in the barrel. But the 993 was a massive compromise from a company fighting to stay alive. It was replaced on the same terms and for the same reasons as the 356: it cost too damn much to make, and the market had evolved beyond the cramped, creaky, flimsy old car's ability to be *modified* into viability.
Chevy's a full-line carmaker with a niche sportscar, and has been such throughout Corvette's life. That car has always benefitted from economies of scale that were until recently unfathomable to Porsche. Kind of an apples-to-CAD-designed-aluminum-alloy-head comparison.
(except for the 912, and the speedster, and every 'entry-level' car they offered before the VW-Porsche 924)
Look, I get it-- the narrative's established and it's the 996's turn in the barrel. But the 993 was a massive compromise from a company fighting to stay alive. It was replaced on the same terms and for the same reasons as the 356: it cost too damn much to make, and the market had evolved beyond the cramped, creaky, flimsy old car's ability to be *modified* into viability.
Chevy's a full-line carmaker with a niche sportscar, and has been such throughout Corvette's life. That car has always benefitted from economies of scale that were until recently unfathomable to Porsche. Kind of an apples-to-CAD-designed-aluminum-alloy-head comparison.
Last edited by redlineblue; 10-22-2016 at 01:43 AM.
10-22-2016, 12:59 PM
#58
Race Director
look, I get it-- the narrative's established and it's the 996's turn in the barrel. But the 993 was a massive compromise from a company fighting to stay alive. It was replaced on the same terms and for the same reasons as the 356: it cost too damn much to make, and the market had evolved beyond the cramped, creaky, flimsy old car's ability to be *modified* into viability..
The 993 had a kicks rear suspension, a solid chassis, a 3.6l h6 making as much power as a lot of v8s, a body many consider the most beautiful 911 ever, and enough comforts to keep people happy.
How's that a compromise?
Sound regulations, fuel economy standards, cost cutting, and the power vs. Cost equation resulted in the move to watercooling.
10-22-2016, 03:48 PM
#59
...and the 996 is stiffer (in beam and torsion), lighter, stickier, quicker, faster, more efficient, easier to work on, and more comfortable (thanks in part to having the *logical* interior designed for 993, but which Porsche couldn't afford to put into it).
You'll hear no argument from me about the 993's beauty or desirability. But for fans of a relentlessly-- even ruthlessly-- progressive company to be so aghast at/accusatory about the flagship's evolution just cracks me up.
Loved my 2.2. Loved my 3.2. Love my 996. 911s uber alles.
You'll hear no argument from me about the 993's beauty or desirability. But for fans of a relentlessly-- even ruthlessly-- progressive company to be so aghast at/accusatory about the flagship's evolution just cracks me up.
Loved my 2.2. Loved my 3.2. Love my 996. 911s uber alles.
10-24-2016, 05:18 PM
#60
The owner just posted a dyno video:
http://thegarage.jalopnik.com/i-dyno...les-1788130306
Not a bad outcome really. The car looks like it's in great shape too.
http://thegarage.jalopnik.com/i-dyno...les-1788130306
Not a bad outcome really. The car looks like it's in great shape too.