997.2 3.8 Engine Failure
02-02-2019, 04:55 AM
#211
I must have missed that but it makes sense. Why waste a bunch of time discussing his findings with people who have a hard time accepting them.
Makes sense too. The first M96/M97 engines are going on 14 years now vs. 10 years for the first 9a1's. More and more .2 owners here report over 100,000 miles on their cars so will be interesting to see how they hold up. By the way, and this observation of mine may be flawed, but doesn't it seem like IMS failures on the M96/M97 engines if they're going to fail do so at relatively low miles? By low miles related to this I'm thinking less than 70,000. I don't recall ever reading about an IMS failure on a really high mileage car. So it almost seems like as miles pile on to the M96/M97 engines the risk of the most dreaded failure of those engines decreases. Contrary to every other part of the car.
Makes sense too. The first M96/M97 engines are going on 14 years now vs. 10 years for the first 9a1's. More and more .2 owners here report over 100,000 miles on their cars so will be interesting to see how they hold up. By the way, and this observation of mine may be flawed, but doesn't it seem like IMS failures on the M96/M97 engines if they're going to fail do so at relatively low miles? By low miles related to this I'm thinking less than 70,000. I don't recall ever reading about an IMS failure on a really high mileage car. So it almost seems like as miles pile on to the M96/M97 engines the risk of the most dreaded failure of those engines decreases. Contrary to every other part of the car.
02-02-2019, 10:13 AM
#212
Nordschleife Master
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
Posts: 5,128
Received 903 Likes
on
532 Posts
It is amusing to see the degree of insanity related to an engine failure. All manufacturers see common modes of engine failures in even the most robust engines. This shouldn't keep us from driving and enjoying our cars. Any information shared is helpful but there is no need for panic fearing that the majority of 9A1 engines are about to self destruct.
Obviously purchase and drive what you want and I love all 911s, but I will never purchase a non-turbo 997.1 no matter how much I would love to have an 08, factory aero X51 in mint condition to put back. I have almost pulled the trigger twice now on such cars, but each time my indy and factory buddies said better to stick with .2. They ALL say that the (A1s for the most part are bullet proof, but the M96/97s are potential headaches.
Sorry if this steps on the toes of a 997.1 owner. I am not bashing your cars as I love them. I just don't stick my head in the sand or sugar coat crap. BTW, I sold my last 997.2 a month ago so this is not coming from a mine is better than yours insecurity. I, however, am activity looking for that perfect 997.2 GTS right now. The 997s are my favs.
02-02-2019, 10:55 AM
#213
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
By the way, and this observation of mine may be flawed, but doesn't it seem like IMS failures on the M96/M97 engines if they're going to fail do so at relatively low miles? By low miles related to this I'm thinking less than 70,000. I don't recall ever reading about an IMS failure on a really high mileage car. So it almost seems like as miles pile on to the M96/M97 engines the risk of the most dreaded failure of those engines decreases. Contrary to every other part of the car.
Post #980 here is a 117k mile failure - https://rennlist.com/forums/997-forum/629870-ims-failure-for-your-997-car-y-or-n-tell-us-yr-997-1-2-m96-m97-failure-mode.html#post15592735
02-02-2019, 11:17 AM
#214
Things break, it happens, if you aren’t willing to fix them then you shouldn’t play the game, regardless if you choose a 997.1, .2, or different. Drive what you love and take the bumps along the way as they come, like the OP is doing.
These threads, with both the 997.1 and 997.2 make what is a relatively small issue % wise seem way overblown and typically turn into hysteria and debate. It is unfortunate because I really enjoy reading them from the engineering perspective
These threads, with both the 997.1 and 997.2 make what is a relatively small issue % wise seem way overblown and typically turn into hysteria and debate. It is unfortunate because I really enjoy reading them from the engineering perspective
The following users liked this post:
Lateralgrip (03-02-2020)
The following users liked this post:
Lateralgrip (03-02-2020)
02-02-2019, 11:27 AM
#216
This thread gives perspective. I bet this “normal” service is more than 95% of 997 engine builds. Then the cam shaft pitting issues. This is the pinnacle of P-cars of the era and demands crazy prices even now. A couple engine problems/rebuilds are really not that big of a deal IMO
https://rennlist.com/forums/porsche-...r-service.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/porsche-...r-service.html
02-02-2019, 01:18 PM
#217
I do understand why Bruce feels the way he does. If I had had two failures in a Boxter I'd be annoyed if I had a third in a 911.
That said, the M96/M97 does have some known issues. The frequency or propensity of those failures is at the core of this debate. So buying into those cars with those engines at this point comes with a bit of risk. Again, how much risk is debatable. Contrast that with buying one of those cars when new. The expectations of a buyer when purchasing from a manufacturer like Porsche is that they could deliver a durable engine. Something they fell short on, a tough pill to swallow when you couldn't have "known better" because it was a newer product without a a proven track record (for that model).
That said, the M96/M97 does have some known issues. The frequency or propensity of those failures is at the core of this debate. So buying into those cars with those engines at this point comes with a bit of risk. Again, how much risk is debatable. Contrast that with buying one of those cars when new. The expectations of a buyer when purchasing from a manufacturer like Porsche is that they could deliver a durable engine. Something they fell short on, a tough pill to swallow when you couldn't have "known better" because it was a newer product without a a proven track record (for that model).
02-02-2019, 02:43 PM
#218
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I do understand why Bruce feels the way he does. If I had had two failures in a Boxter I'd be annoyed if I had a third in a 911.
That said, the M96/M97 does have some known issues. The frequency or propensity of those failures is at the core of this debate. So buying into those cars with those engines at this point comes with a bit of risk. Again, how much risk is debatable. Contrast that with buying one of those cars when new. The expectations of a buyer when purchasing from a manufacturer like Porsche is that they could deliver a durable engine. Something they fell short on, a tough pill to swallow when you couldn't have "known better" because it was a newer product without a a proven track record (for that model).
That said, the M96/M97 does have some known issues. The frequency or propensity of those failures is at the core of this debate. So buying into those cars with those engines at this point comes with a bit of risk. Again, how much risk is debatable. Contrast that with buying one of those cars when new. The expectations of a buyer when purchasing from a manufacturer like Porsche is that they could deliver a durable engine. Something they fell short on, a tough pill to swallow when you couldn't have "known better" because it was a newer product without a a proven track record (for that model).
The boards back then were hostile to anyone who spoke negatively about these engines... just like Jake faced with the 9A1 reactions... When my first engine blew at 47K miles, folks said I must have abused the car etc. etc. some were just hostile towards me... this is something I just don't get (I face this on music keyboard boards where folks slam, with hostility, audiophile comments). I really don't get the anger and open hostility. All I can say is when you get hit by lighting twice, and you've been on Porsche boards for about 20 years now.... hmmm..... There is a truth in there somewhere, and I am hoping the 9A1 is a "normal" engine. A normal engine by my definition is one that has a small percentage, or normal, failure rate. Of course, I don't know what that is... nor do I suspect anyone here does either. So when do the posting of engine failures constitute abnormal? I can only tell you this.... the number of posts of a 9A1 engine failure, over the last almost 10 years, is nothing.... I mean nothing... like the M96/97 failure postings. not even close. Even so, yea, I do worry.... but I don't change my behaviours.... well maybe I do a bit, I change my oil every 5K miles and drive real easy until warm up. Not sure why I am writing this all... therapy I guess... and show a bit of empathy to Jake who is stepping in to help and build a business.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
Last edited by Bruce In Philly; 02-02-2019 at 02:59 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Alex Koutin (05-29-2020)
02-02-2019, 05:02 PM
#219
Burning Brakes
The frequency of engine failures in Porsche is probably not much different than many other manufacturers. What is different is the cost of the failure. Additionally, considering the cost, you would think they would have got the design right by now or changed the design. Hell, I can buy a ZL1 for what a Porsche engine costs to replace and I won't need to worry about an LS engine breaking. The hostility toward anyone who says negative is basically a reaction to something that threatens their peace of mind. If you say something long and loud enough, maybe it will be true (in your mind). I think many of us practice this form of self-delusionment. A $30K engine failure would be a hardship for many of us and we don't want to face the possibility. If we were all that rich we wouldn't be buying 10 year old cars.
The following users liked this post:
Robocop305 (12-05-2020)
02-02-2019, 05:33 PM
#220
Nordschleife Master
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
Posts: 5,128
Received 903 Likes
on
532 Posts
The frequency of engine failures in Porsche is probably not much different than many other manufacturers. What is different is the cost of the failure. Additionally, considering the cost, you would think they would have got the design right by now or changed the design. Hell, I can buy a ZL1 for what a Porsche engine costs to replace and I won't need to worry about an LS engine breaking. The hostility toward anyone who says negative is basically a reaction to something that threatens their peace of mind. If you say something long and loud enough, maybe it will be true (in your mind). I think many of us practice this form of self-delusionment. A $30K engine failure would be a hardship for many of us and we don't want to face the possibility. If we were all that rich we wouldn't be buying 10 year old cars.
The problem is a lot of guys over the last few years were purchasing 996s and early 997s as affordable introductions to the 911 and were not really in the position to absorb a $20 to $25k failure on a car that did not cost much more. That is pretty much a gut wrenching, slap in the face for someone finally making that jump, and in some cases financial stretch, to get a car they wanted since they were in high school only to have it paper weight itself through no fault of their own. I find that completely acceptable. If the 9A1 had the same pitiful record, I would not touch a 911 with that engine either.
02-02-2019, 06:06 PM
#221
I will continue to assert that many manufacturers have similar problems. Maybe not as bad as the IMS and bore scoring of the M96/97 engines but definitely enough to bring concern. I was looking at M3s and what do you know, they have issues with rod bearings, looked at C6 Z06s with the LS7- valve issues, have a friend that blew his STI engine, what do you know, it's a common issue. I can go on and on but I won't. I am not in denial, I just thought the hysterics were a bit much regarding failures of the 9A1. I don't doubt dealer techs, indystar, and Flat 6 has seen common failures but barely anything to lose sleep over.
02-02-2019, 06:22 PM
#222
Nordschleife Master
Interesting your comments about buying new..... I purchased my 2000 Boxster S new and it was my first Porsche. The boards at the time, and anyone I spoke to in the club, at the track etc... all said the same thing.... Porsche engines are bullet proof... drive it like you stole it... built for it... blah blah blah. Then they started to blow.... actually, they were blowing before I picked it up.... and for different reasons... the biggest reason IIRC was porous blocks... the casting process was faulty and you would get intermix.... then Porsche was catching the porous blocks during testing and then would put iron sleeves in them.. you didn;t know if you had one of them.... then the sleeves would slip.... then they knocked out those bugs by the time or around the time I ordered mine... also the rear main seal would leak... For the RMS, Porsche would test the hole for roundness, if out beyond a spec, they replaced your engine. If they replaced the RMS three times (or on the third time IIRC), you got a new engine. Then the real weaknesses started to show..... the IMS's were going but that was not the only reason for the failures... there were multi failure modes. Anywho.... the point I am making is about the responses on the 'net. For ... oh I don't remember really.... but for about a few years... there was tons of denial. Remember, Porsche was still in the bullet proof glow of previous years. With the denial there was hostility towards any negative comments... it took a while for the 'net to accept the obvious reality of a compromised design. Even today, as we read on these boards "exaggerated".... "hyperbole"... blah blah blah. The only real emotion I feel is for a young person stretching to buy his or her first Porsche and have it blow.... It happened a few times on these boards. I spoke to my dealer's shop foreman before I drove Philly to Atlanta about reliability, I had about 46K miles on it at this point... Bill said, "if it lasted 46K, it will last forever".... 1K miles later.. BOOM. You can't make this stuff up.
The boards back then were hostile to anyone who spoke negatively about these engines... just like Jake faced with the 9A1 reactions... When my first engine blew at 47K miles, folks said I must have abused the car etc. etc. some were just hostile towards me... this is something I just don't get (I face this on music keyboard boards where folks slam, with hostility, audiophile comments). I really don't get the anger and open hostility. All I can say is when you get hit by lighting twice, and you've been on Porsche boards for about 20 years now.... hmmm..... There is a truth in there somewhere, and I am hoping the 9A1 is a "normal" engine. A normal engine by my definition is one that has a small percentage, or normal, failure rate. Of course, I don't know what that is... nor do I suspect anyone here does either. So when do the posting of engine failures constitute abnormal? I can only tell you this.... the number of posts of a 9A1 engine failure, over the last almost 10 years, is nothing.... I mean nothing... like the M96/97 failure postings. not even close. Even so, yea, I do worry.... but I don't change my behaviours.... well maybe I do a bit, I change my oil every 5K miles and drive real easy until warm up. Not sure why I am writing this all... therapy I guess... and show a bit of empathy to Jake who is stepping in to help and build a business.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
The boards back then were hostile to anyone who spoke negatively about these engines... just like Jake faced with the 9A1 reactions... When my first engine blew at 47K miles, folks said I must have abused the car etc. etc. some were just hostile towards me... this is something I just don't get (I face this on music keyboard boards where folks slam, with hostility, audiophile comments). I really don't get the anger and open hostility. All I can say is when you get hit by lighting twice, and you've been on Porsche boards for about 20 years now.... hmmm..... There is a truth in there somewhere, and I am hoping the 9A1 is a "normal" engine. A normal engine by my definition is one that has a small percentage, or normal, failure rate. Of course, I don't know what that is... nor do I suspect anyone here does either. So when do the posting of engine failures constitute abnormal? I can only tell you this.... the number of posts of a 9A1 engine failure, over the last almost 10 years, is nothing.... I mean nothing... like the M96/97 failure postings. not even close. Even so, yea, I do worry.... but I don't change my behaviours.... well maybe I do a bit, I change my oil every 5K miles and drive real easy until warm up. Not sure why I am writing this all... therapy I guess... and show a bit of empathy to Jake who is stepping in to help and build a business.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
02-02-2019, 06:46 PM
#223
Nordschleife Master
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
Posts: 5,128
Received 903 Likes
on
532 Posts
I will continue to assert that many manufacturers have similar problems. Maybe not as bad as the IMS and bore scoring of the M96/97 engines but definitely enough to bring concern. I was looking at M3s and what do you know, they have issues with rod bearings, looked at C6 Z06s with the LS7- valve issues, have a friend that blew his STI engine, what do you know, it's a common issue. I can go on and on but I won't. I am not in denial, I just thought the hysterics were a bit much regarding failures of the 9A1. I don't doubt dealer techs, indystar, and Flat 6 has seen common failures but barely anything to lose sleep over.
02-02-2019, 10:28 PM
#224
I am sorry, but I have to disagree here. The catastrophic failure rate of the 996s and early 997s and now bore scoring is simply unacceptable and a black mark on Porsche IMO. I made a huge shift toward Italians since mid early/mid 2000s and have never seen nor heard of anything like this with the more delicate exotics