ADias

And of course, BMW engines never fail either. Heck... run a Lexus engine hours on end close to redline and see how reliable it is. The reality is that those engines are never driven operated like that.

Quadcammer

Lexus, and most other manufacturers run their engines at peak torque for the equivalent of 100k miles.

Most porsche engines aren't run anywhere near redline either.

In fact, I'd say most 911s hardly get more than 5k miles per year

Quadcammer

That was in 96 man.

In 96, the 911 made 282bhp and like 250lbft out of a 3.6.

rodsky

You're a funny guy - I enjoy your posts. You do happen to know that the McLaren F1 has a BMW engine. So even that example contradicts your statement on parts sharing for that engineering masterpiece. I am partial to Patek's - i own one - although its not anywhere close to a grand complication.

No one in this thread (i may be wrong) was waxing on about 915's or races etcs. Most of us objected to someone who claimed that 997.2's had excessive oil useage as a matter of fact. This being based on chat room / internet observation vs. facts or even ownership of said vehicle.

I dont think i'm oblivious to the faults of 911's. I sold my 964 because i didnt think it was very good at all. I believe that Porsche got that one wrong. It was over engineered and overly complex. It wasnt reliable and didnt meet my expectations for the car. The 993 and the boxster saved Porsche from that disastrous era. I personally didnt buy a 997.1 due to it being not that big of a jump over a 996 (apart from the looks) and its inherent issues (IMS, RMS, etc.) hadnt been addressed. I bought the 997.2 when that arrived as a result.

I do think the 911 is a cool car and its appeal is greater than the sum of its parts. I am more "smitten" today than I used to be. And its got nothing to do with marketing (I hope - maybe they did partially brainwash me ). I've had BMW M3's, Mercedes SL's, etc., they're OK. Just OK. Prefer the 911 - just being honest.

Quadcammer

You're right, it is a BMW V12, but if you've researched that engine, you can't help but be impressed. I can only imagine the throttle response on that car.

nevertheless, the rest of your post I can't argue with. I don't think there is a current manufacturer out there that really does a great job. Everyone cuts corners.

The last time I was impressed by a production car was, interestingly, the McLaren mpc-412 or whatever its called. Their technical introduction video was really neat.

Hmm, maybe I should buy a mclaren

Huey

C'mon Mike. You can't compare technology from 15+ years ago to today. Besides, the S54 engine in the 2001 euro-spec M3 made 107bhp/liter in 2001. Not too shabby. I have this same engine in my Z4 M coupe and it is a very strong engine and uses virtually no oil between changes.

There is no question that Porsche provides some great engineering in its cars and I'm anticipating taking the plunge soon. However, one of the things that gives me some pause is that it appears they don't seem to take care of their customers in the same manner that Lexus and BMW do whenever there are problems. Also, I like to do a lot of my own service/maintenance work and I've heard that if Inspections are not done by an authorized dealer, warranty work could be denied, even if there were no services to the vehicle that were lacking. Is this true or just internet rumors?

ADias

You can do the required maintenance yourself and satisfy warranty reqs., as long as you keep records and receipts for materials used. But why would you do that during the warranty? That is not a good way to build goodwill with your friendly Porsche Service Manager, is it? Customer treatment and dealer patronage is a two-way street.

Mike in CA

My only point in talking about my US spec E36 M3 was that I was familiar with the M3's that AYHSMB was talking about. I wasn't trying to compare a 15 year old 240HP M3 to today's technology. But AYHSMB did say that "all" BMW M3's made more than 100HP/L (they don't) and in fact said they made "well over" 100HP/L, when even the Euro spec E46 and E90/92 cars just barely made that number.

BTW, Huey, you might be interested in this information from Wikipedia on the S54B32 engine:

Despite its great success and critical acclaim, the S54 was plagued with rod bearing failures in early production. BMW attempted to blame vehicle owners for the failures early on but eventually started replacing rod bearings, oil pumps, and whole engines under warranty. This fault was attributed to a problem with the connecting rod bottom-end bearing shells that were supplied to BMW by a third party that did not meet BMW's specifications. This problem was fully corrected by BMW on engines produced after 06/2003. A recall was issued to retrofit all M3 cars with affected engines to swap to the proper bearing shells. The recall did not include M Roadster or M Coupe cars with affected S54 engines due to the lower RPM limit.

Guess even BMW can't get it right all the time. I suppose we should start the rumor now that ALL S54 engines are under-engineered, no?

Minok

Whats an ICE engineer? Does that have something to do with snow? I'm speaking about engineering in general and proper engineering means designing a product that meets the specifications. It does not deal with the business decisions that motivate some of the specifications. Maybe thats where we are crossing wires.

I'd like to know form Porsche why the level of oil consumption is what it is, and what the trade off was.. what benefit does the car or the company get from a design that has such a high variance (perceived) in oil consumption vs other makes and models, and what benefit derives from having a mean perceived oil consumption much higher than many(most) other car brands in the price range.

Not sure what a 'nutswinger' is... can you explain that term? Is that a synonym to fanboy? Sort of a cultist or love-smitten person, that sees no faults in the object of their desire no mater what?

I agree to calling out a problem in a product, absolutely. But the 911, in my mind, is very impressive compared to the majority of other car brands/makes in terms of the combination of: performance, ride comfort, daily utility, and aesthetic appeal.

Minok

OK, here I need to call you on that baloney. The Corvette outperforms the 911 if your measure is 'driving fast in a straight line' and that is it.

Build quality, driving quick around a course with corners in it, quality of materials, and fuel consumption, the 911 wins.

ADias

ICE - internal combustion engine.

The Corvette C6 is a capable car (I had one) but it does not outperform a 997.2S, and of course, some engines also use oil, or worse. The C6 handles well (on turns too) but it is a different balance. The whole discussion in this thread is silly. If one looks at a 911 strictly on a numbers performance basis, there are lots of choices. That is not what a 911 fan looks for, and I do not have to spell it out; you know it if you are a 911 fan. The others just continue bitching about its foibles and, hopefully, some they garner courage and move on to greener pastures. And once there, they will discover the grass is not so green on that side, and continue bitching, as that is their nature.

Huey

Here's the thing I find most interesting: BMW finally owned up to the fact that their 8,000RPM baby was occasionally blowing up. They found the culprit (bad bearings), starting using better parts and most importantly, did a recall of all cars made to that point to replace bad bearings with the newer design. They also began using 10w60 oil in these cars at the same time. Since then, this engine has been considered pretty solid--even with the 8,000RPM redline and the fact that it gets a lot of track time.
BMW's approach seems to be much more customer focused than what Porsche did with the IMS. In this case, Porsche replaced all engines that blew up during their warranty period but everyone else was pretty much SOL. Ok, so maybe a few people were offered some "assistance" with their $18k replacement engine. No recalls, admission to any wrong-doing or anything. Porsche did a design update on the IMS (jury is still out on whether this fixed the problem) but never admitted the old design was defective. This is bothersome.

Oh, and by the way, the reference to the M roadster and M coupes were based on the old Z3 version that was produced up through 2002. The Z4 M cars started with the MY2006 and by then the S54 issues had all been resolved.

avader906

You somehow forgot to mention the 997 RSR - the car runs with air restrictors speaking about BHP/liter - or the block and crank (turbocharged) actually winning Le Mans in 98. Show me another production car with the engine that competes in sprint and endurance races ? And then for a split second consider what is the oil consumption like in those.

Mike in CA

Maybe a $30K C6 Corvette is comparable performance wise in some ways to a Carrera, if you don't mind putting up with crappy seats, plastic interior, numb steering, rattles, etc. I do prefer a quality piece, and trying to compare Corvette fit and finish to a Carrera is, as you put it, a fools errand.

What I find interesting is that apparently you feel the same way. A Patek Phillipe is a "masterpiece" to you, but it keeps no better time than a common Seiko quartz. So why spend all that extra money? The answer might shed some light on why some people buy Carreras instead of Corvettes.

Look, we can argue about this forever and resolve nothing. I'm not saying Porsches are perfect, no car is. The point is that I can't think of any other car (that I can reasonably or even unreasonably afford) that offers the combination of performance, style, engineering, practicality, heritage, and just plain fun that the 911 does. That's why I own one. Perfect? No. Put pretty damn great.

Fin Fever

well put, I agree completely

this is probably the smartest thing I have heard out of norcal in a long time