thomapa1

I believe the point is that you can get a low mileage lemon (or gem) or a high mileage lemon (or gem)...the trick is to do your research and proper due diligence to pick the best example for your price range and tolerance level. Best of luck

"02996ttx50

don't be so easily frightened! i would think that with the low mileage your car incurs, you may never experience any problems at all!

i've found that for the most part, problems only manifest while being driven. though i've heard that some leak while garaged but that's part of the joy of ownership, isn't it?

"02996ttx50

i completely agree but would only add, there are a few issues with these cars that i alluded to upthread and didn't mention by name at the risk of being obvious.. and that the lower the mileage, the less likely they've cropped up and been dealt with. my point.

however, all other things being equal, i would of course as would many prefer a low mileage example rather than a higher mileage car. although, using my car as an example, i'm no longer worried about the 2nd gear popout/ accumulator/slave/spoiler/fuel pump/fpr/coolant tank/ps tank valve etc etc..

i've read the tsb's; been there, fixed that. but great cars!

judd944

I looked at two cars before I pulled the trigger. One had 68k miles and just had new brakes and a clutch. bone stock. - asking 38k
The other car had 29k miles with mods. asking 45k
I bought the low miles car with the following thoughts. I am going to drive it 10-12k per year for the next 3 years. I paid 43k for the 29k mile car that will have ~60-70k miles on it when I go to sell it. people are afraid of the "100k" mark on cars and I can only imagine this will be a big deal to people looking for a Turbo. I did not want to be selling a 100k + car. I figure I will get my 5k price delta right back when I sell the car.

SSST

Sounds like not turning the key is normal for you.

ltc

So, can someone define "driven frequently" ?

Is 1200 miles a year the correct number?
100 miles a month per year?
1 1200 mile joy ride?

I would have normally assumed that friction is the reason mechanical devices fail, but apparently I must have missed something.

So, a properly maintained (fluid changes, temperature controlled storage, proper cold start technique) low mileage car is going to fail how?

SSST

If you drive your car an average of twice a week, average 12 miles per outing, that would qualify as regular use in my book. Assuming you change your fluids regularly regardless of miles, then I would agree that possible problems cited would be avoided.

If the car tends to sit for weeks or months at a time, without proper precautions, then there are some potential issues to at least be aware of.

As a buyer, I wouldn't let that scare me off, but as someone mentioned there is a premium for ultra low mileage cars. A moderate mileage car that has also been cared for is just as reliable and may be a better value.

My car was driven an average of 7000 miles a year before I bought it. I put 7k on it last year, about 1/2 of it the first 3 months until the new wore off. I expect to put about 4k/year going forward. That means I have 5 more years before I hit 80k which is normally when I sell a car.

80k well maintained miles is nothing for one of these cars. Hopefully it will be a classic by then in which case I may keep it.

"02996ttx50

therein lies the irony. components on this iteration of the porsche turbo have been known to fail, with non use as a contributing factor. ( cue **** to ask me for the evidence of that.. )

so.. now it's "temperature controlled storage". lol.

your car is perfect, nothing on it will ever fail through any fault, other than your own.. and this too shall pass. sleep now, lewis

to the OP. sorry for all the digression, niggling minutia,.. and welcome to the sandbox

Macster

It is my opinion that a car to be considered driven frequently would be a car that is driven between 6K to 9K (or more) miles per year with the miles driven per unit of time (week/month) about the same.

For instance I would not consider a car with an average of 6K miles per year with those 6K miles added in one week or so long road trip with the car then sitting unused the remaining 50 weeks a frequently driven car.

If a car is used often enough wear by metal to metal contact is nil. (I think that T2 who has a Turbo with over 300K miles on its engine attests to that along with my 02 Boxster with over 254K miles along with about a zillion other cars that have fewer (or in some cases more) miles and are still on their original engine and still healthy.)

There are many areas of the engine that should metal to metal contact occur the engine goes from healthy to very sick maybe even dead before you can even think of something pithy to say.

Thus it is my opinion that most wear is chemical in nature.

By this I mean wear that arises from corrosion. In this case acid in the oil attacks the base metal of say the cylinder walls, the rings, pistons, bearings, etc. and during operation the violence of the friction of the oil tears away metal particles that due to corrosion no longer have a sufficient bonding to their surrounding metal and over time this results in wear, an increase in clearances, if you want.

Now there are exceptions. I'll not detail the one which involves mechanical failure related to say oil pump failure (rare anyhow) or from oil break down (at least while the engine is running) which should never occur if the car is properly serviced and has a properly functioning cooling system.

What I will touch upon is one exception that comes from a little used, underused car. If a car is left unused a long time (how long I don't know but my WAG would be weeks) that enough oil has had to drain away, bleed away, there may be marginal lubrication in places and metal to metal contact can occur in these places.

I might add too that with no use the oil stratifies and corrosive layers of oil (or unburned gas even water) can form. Remember too that when the engine is running and then shut off the oil is homogenous and oil, water, unburned gas and corrosive compounds are mixed throughout the oil, so wherever there is oil when the engine stops running these layers of corrosive acids will develop, from in the oil tank, the oil sump, right down to inside the zero-lash adjusters.

Anyhow, metal to metal contact occurs due to insufficient oil, and maybe aided by oil that has sat so long its lubrication properties have been temporarily diminished due to contamination and stratification.

This metal to metal contact happens at engine crank/start but is short lived (not short lived enough though if it were my engine!) so the wear is not exceptionally heavy. But it is real, nonetheless.

Now a car that sits unused long periods of time is likely a car that is not driven much and the oil doesn't get hot enough often enough long enough. As a result the oil becomes more heavily contaminated with water and unburned gas and other combustion byproducts that lead to the formation of corrosive compounds.

These corrosive acidic compounds of course tend to deplete the anti-corrosive fighting additives in the oil.

These acidic compounds can't help the anti-detergent and anti-foaming additives much either.

So the oil is more corrosive and less an oil from this treatment.

To add insult to injury some owners do not take the above into consideration (and this is understandable) and as a result the oil is not changed as often as the infrequent and short trip usage warrants it be changed.

Might add to that with a little used car acidic layers form in the cooling system too and over time this can eat a hole in a radiator or an oil/water heat exchanger or a heater core or even attack head gaskets. The result can be a compromised cooling system which can bring with its own problems.

(You don't think the cooling system has to deal with corrosion? Take a peek at the cooling passages of an engine. Some few years ago I posted the oics of a 996 engine torn down to rebuild after an IMS bearing failed. One could see very clearly the oil sump area and the base metal (alum. of course) had a relative healthy appearance to it. But another view showed the coolant areas around the cylinders and the alum. (same material/alloy as in the sump) had a dull/sickly gray appearance that clearly looked to have been created by acid action.)

Sincerely,

Macster.

ltc

could you please elaborate on which components on this iteration have been known to fail and how this relates to non use?

"02996ttx50

i can, and will. but some other time. it's not as if i'm going anywhere. cheers.

ltc

Strange response.
You had time to reply with a statement, but not the answer to the question?

"02996ttx50

sorry, no. since i don't have time to go digging through old receipts in an effort to support both my memory of the events, as well as *my* notion, that low mileage porsche 996 turbo's can have problems develop simply from non use. that has been my experience. and yeah, that took some time too, but i'll have to leave it at that since i'm not up for debate. though a list of these things exists from an earlier post of mine to which you may refer if you like. thanks.

ltc

Not looking for a debate by any means, simply details and clarification regarding your statement, since it is the first time I had read such a statement on RL.

I will take the opportunity to review your previous posts for your list.
Was that post in this forum or in another RL forum?

"02996ttx50

i'm back. i can't remember which thread but it's recent and upon reflection, it's really not worth looking for. so to clarify for you the things i replaced on my low mileage turbo that may or may not have been prematurely aged by being garaged for long periods and rarely driven were:

rear spoiler mechanism ( replaced entire assembly ( was told it was left in the deployed position for extended periods ).. who would do that, and how would they know!? also clutch slave and accumulator. i also had a few problems such as the coolant tank needing replacement, but that is also something that will obviously age, whether driven regularly or not. also, the ps pump but that was just the valve whistle deal, and had nothing to do with "sitting" per se, but rather no one had bothered to change it out in spite of the TSB ( and warranty ). this may have not been noticed since the car prior to my purchase had not been driven a lot. now, rather than further attempt to support my contention that lower mileage tt's are prone to having mechanical issues as a direct result of extended NON use, i will simply pass along that this is information i have been given from very reliable and ( to me ) trustworthy and qualified porsche techs, and i have no reason to doubt them. they state simply that the cars respond better to regular and frequent workouts, and don;t like to sit. whatever that means, is anyone's guess.

now, doesn't make them right either, but i am inclined to agree simply based upon my having once had a low mileage car, that then had issues after merely being driven, albeit immediately after a cpo certification and being strenuously driven with more regular frequency.

juxtapose this to my experiences with an 03 tt, that has 90k miles and the sh*t driven out of it daily, and nothing ( well, mostly nothin' ) breaks.

that's all i've got.