Shop time is 10 hours, so that's $1000 right off the bat, here in Chicago. The parts in the invoice above don't seem that costly, though. Who knows? Down the road, maybe there will be guys doing this in their driveways, the way current 928 and 944 owners do their timing belts and clutches now - those were high-cost dealer-only jobs in their day...

Emanuel

 

That is the whole point... anywhere from the cost of replacing a seal up to the cost of eventually replacing the engine!!

 

If it was just simply replacing the seal, which seems to be a $1,000 repair in round numbers, I could see that it is not the end of the world. But since its not just the seal itself, but related to the crankshaft, in some (many?) cases it becomes necessary to replace the entire engine (and that kind of problem should clearly be and remain Porsche's problem, and they should live up to it once and for all).

 

The worst part about the RMS problem is not the hassle of getting it fixed - it appears the problem with these cars since the 986/996 has been one of a DESIGN FLAW in the crankcase and not simply a faulty seal. The seal is definitely NOT the issue here - the issue is, Porsche has become aware of a flaw in the design of the bottom-end of these engines, and instead of adressing that (re-engineering it), they have decided that short term profits are more important.

The fact that they passed up the 997 introduction as an opportunity to address this issue is stunning. There's a reason the GT3 variants use a COMPLETELY different engine/gearbox than the street cars, it's because they wouldn't hold up in a racing environment.

After driving the 997S, I've never been more torn - the performance is great, brakes excellent, chassis is great... But I cannot bring myself to purchase an $85k pcar that I cannot track confidently. If there was any doubt about the shift in Porsche's new target demographic, this clears it up - they've abandoned the enthusiast to cater to the grocery-getter crowd, plain and simple.

The sad part is, (as we're seeing now with the used 996 market), these cars are going to depreciate quickly once the "newness" wears off. Shame on you, Porsche - as we see with the GT3, you have the ability to create a world-class sportscar... don't you think the average 911 driver deserves that level of engineering, or is that reserved only for racers now?

OK, rant over.

 

It would be nice to hear a response from Porsche, in terms of why this is not a problem they resolved on the 997. It is doubtful that they will speak up, although I would like to hear a response. In the most recent J.D. Power Survey call I received, I made sure to tell them about the problem. However, I wonder if that means I won't get any quality control calls anymore? A friend who drove a Z8 had issues getting the car service; this owner, of course, complained when he was called for a survey and BMW's solution was just removing him from their list--go figure!

 

Thanks for posting the invoice.

My lease on a Jag X-Type ends in September and I want to lease a 997 through my consulting business. This RMS issue has been weighing on my decision, but it seems the risk of an engine failure is proportional to the owner's lack of vigilance. Shouldn't be that way on a $75,000 "trackable" car, granted, but any high-performance car needs rigorous maintenance. I'd need two sets of tires per year, so right there I have a reason to put it up on a lift. Wish Porsche had an extended powertrain warranty on new cars...I'd likely pay for it.

Bottom line is that the RMS is not a deal-breaker for me.

 

It's not for me, either. And, I don't think it should be for anyone else. Of course, it might affect one's decision to keep the car out of warranty, but for now, that, to me, seems to be the only caveat.

 

The reality is that Porsche figured out how to make a good sportscar and also make money, hence the fact that the 997 and gt3 etc have different engines. The fact that most 997/996 owners and beyond will never track their cars has led them to this point in engines and profits.

Who really keeps these cars for 6-10 years?

No matter what damn car you buy, if you keep it long term you will have thousands of dollars in maint and repairs of all kinds............

Get over the RMS thing and enjoy your damn cars already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

As a lurker from from the 996 board, I can only provide one small ray of hope. My 99 C2 was in for its 45k service and I asked for Sonnen to look at the RMS. Of course it was leaking. There is some history with the car with PCNA (track use, if you get my drift, heh heh) and I was convinced they would tell me I had to fix it myself. Instead they just stepped up and fixed it. This may mean there is a general non-verbal at PCNA that says to keep fixing under warranty. Got a new 2 yr guarantee, so in Dec of 06, I will be back for another RMS at their cost.

 

Wise words, indeed, Robert.

 

"Who really keeps these cars for 6-10 years?"

Why don't you ask the guys who buy these cars on the used market in 6-10 years... By your comment, I guess you have no objection to these cars being "throw away" cars to be forgotten after the new model comes out - pardon me, but I disagree... have you "forgotten" about the 2.7RS? Have you forgotten about the 930? I don't think so, because they were built to be remembered.

 

That is... shall we say... an unqualifiable comment.

I do know people who buy a new car every year. But I know lots of people who enjoy keeping a car - and giving it seat time - for a long time. And this has nothing to do w/ wealth... it has to do w/ the pleasure of picking, enjoying and maintaining a superb vehicle. The consumerist mentality of getting the latest thing on the block makes no sense. I for one, never buy a first-year new model - I benefit from the ones who do, some time later

 

The RMS issue kept me from buying a Boxster S (I never like the 996). Against my better judgement we ordered one of the first 997s because the timing was right for a new car. As others have mentioned, with a car that is "80% new", I expected that the major design flaw from the previous generation had been addressed. Looks like I/we was/were incorrect; I am thankful our 997 is a lease.

I'm shocked that some people here find this to be acceptable. Porsche built its reputation on building sports cars with fantastic performance that were also reliable. When compared to less expensive cars with equal or better performance, Porsche has been able to justify premium prices because of higher quality and better resale value as a result of said quality and long term reliability. It's becoming clear that Porsche's focus on short term profitability will be its downfall, which spells a grim future for the company and is extremely disappointing for some of us that are long time devotees of the marque.

 

All I am trying to say is that if you want to keep a car to race, track or whatever you will have to spend a lot of money on it one way or another.

If you are in the rare minority of keeping a car for 10 years or more than I guess you better buy a gt3...which will still have expensive eating habits long term as well.

I now of some 993 guys who sold their cars because they were facing 3-5k dollar engine issues as well, one of them at 40k miles.

Adias,

since you state you never buy a first year car we can presume that you do not keep your cars over 6 to 10 years, right. If so you would have a 964 as your avatar rather than your new 996..................

 

No logic there. My 996 is not a first-year model and I may keep this car longer than 6 years.