TAI2

Early 997 engines can easily be repaired as well.

mjbrox

OMG!

Where can I get the overall notes on this IMS thing.

So, if it is a 2005, then the IMS needs to be upgraded ASAP? If it is a 2006, then it is safe? The 996 is easier (therefore Less money) to replace.

If I drive the crap out of the car, then it is not an issue at all?

philooo

The more money, they better the car, but aside of that, if it is your friend first Porsche I'd say buy a 996 base, in case he doesn't like it, that is easier on the wallet.

Personally I could have afforded the 997 and decided for my first 911 to take it easy and get the bargain with the 996.

Of course it was all a waste now that I am hooked and looking to upgrade into the 997.

TAI2

Here we go again - but it is a confusing topic.

In the end, the 997's (let's call them 1st 1/2 2005) had an IMS that is easier to change IF you needed to. There is tons of talk but the % that need a change seems low (according to the lead Tech at my local Porsche dealer and Fidelity (an aftermarket warranty house)). 2nd half 2005's (and 2006's and on) had a change to the IMS but no guarantees the IMS will not leak and/or fail. But, this IMS change-out is much more complicated and expensive. In the end, the engines were incrementally getting better and better but again, no guarantees.

Driving the car "hard" does have reputation of "reducing" the chances of an IMS leak and/or failure but there is no real data to prove one way or the other.

In my case, my car was purchased with 12K miles and bone dry. PO used it exclusively as a DD. I use it 50% track and 50% DD and it developed an RMS and IMS leak which I had fixed under extended warranty at 15K miles (Fidelity covers this and a complete engine if need be).

Good luck and PM sent.

Palmbeacher

late-966 vs early-997 are mechanically so similar that it really boils down to esthetic preference.

Overall they are very similar in profile and from a rear view. The headlights are the main exterior bone of contention, and the MKII 996 was mitigated significantly from the earlier design. Other than the addition of a glove box, the dash remained the same throughout the 996. I happen to think it's kind of "busy", vs the 997 which has a more flowing, classier look (to me...996 owners will disagree).

OTOH the taillights on the 997.2 make me want to vomit a lot more than the headlights of a 996.

So it's a matter of personal taste, and I personally feel that history will treat the 997.1 as being the high-point of the water-cooled 911 from a styling standpoint.

I happen to believe (and put my money where my mouth is) that '05 is the best value 997.1 stick, for the reasons 1) condition, mileage and equipment considered, it costs the least and nobody but an enthusiast will tell the difference between it and an '08; and 2) the IMS can be upgraded for about $500 at the same time as you do the clutch. Unlike most first-year cars, the '05 997 doesn't seem to have a reputation for being any more troublesome than the later ones.

Of course for any car, especially one >4yrs old, the bigger factor will be its condition...mileage, service history, how it was driven, etc.

Aerokitted

I actually love the 996 design especially the widebody 4S. As for the interior, a well optioned 996 is fantastic. That gray example looks particularly bad because not only is it spartan, but has been run roughshod by someone who obviously doesn't care 1 iota about its condition or maintenance.

No one's going to look at the 996 or 997 gen as the high point of any type of 911 design like we do the 993 simply because they made so many of them. Imho, the 991 looks better, will perform better, thus rendering the previous gen as just that - dated/old. So don't get too hung up on comparing the .1 to .2 from a depreciation standpoint. The 911 and Porsche brand is becoming more and more like a Range Rover where having the newest model is the coolest. The air cooled are much better protected because it was built in a diff Porsche era, under the guise of a completely diff automotive world, economic climate, no internet, etc.

utkinpol

usually they are not even getting opened - look at other thread i started just about that topic.

Ray S

Who told you the motors in the 996 cannot be repaired or rebuilt? They absoultely can be.

utkinpol

several local mechanics and people on the thread i started here. any motor can be repaired but, say, to order a new m96 giving away old core with subsequent install price is apparently cheaper than to open up old one and try to fix it.

more than that - i actually spoke with my mechanic a lot of what options he can offer as i keep beating my car on a track, and he is under opinion that any of modern 996/997 street cars should be treated as disposables because as they get used up they accumulate such list of issues that total 'proper' repair price get astronomical and you have to replace half car to keep it working - axles, bearings, gearbox, steering - all has its limit and when it`s reached it has to be carefully assessed what to do next, financially.

as of motors - he does not open any m96/m97 if it does not crank, he says it is counterproductive price wise. a guy i know had a m97 in his car that developed a tendency for random misfires - and it happened to be in the end a problematic valve - so total bill came to $6K to drop off and put back engine plus 24 hours of labor, $120 per hour. that`s just a valve replacement, so what will it look like if you need to split a case and take it all apart? 80 hours? more? and how much re-anufactured and even new m96 costs?

PS. only point i wanted to make - anybody who buys an old 996 car in $2xK - $3xK price range with no warranty should be aware that it is not a honda accord with a motor that can go 1mln miles without a sneeze. and new m96 motor will cost $15K-$20K together with install labor.

mjbrox

are they that crappy?

I still think he should get something from 86-89

ajayabb

Who's making the Popcorn this time?

utkinpol

good clean 993 car will cost in upper $40K something. i think it should be possible to find clean 996 gt3 car in same price range and considering same or slightly more money spent i would vote for 996 gt3.

PS. just at same time there is a thread about similar topic:
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...-part-2-a.html

as i keep beating up my car and getting above 50 track hours on my M96 and 56K miles i just collect information about all those facts as nothing is immortal.

Ray S

You probably wouldn't take a m96/70 Metzger motor to any old "local mechanic" (unless that local guy had a lot of experience working on that motor), why would you treat the m96/03 (or other variations) any differently? No question the Metzger motor in old GT3's and Turbos is a better engine, but the impression I got was that the OP's friend was on a tighter budget

There are several shops doing internal work on these motors. Flat 6 Engineering for example is expert in all areas of internal work on these motors and Jake Raby (the owner) has a great reputation fixing them.

Chaos

I had two 944 S2 cabs,drove a 993 and bought one,drove a 996 and bought one,drove a friends 997 and sold the 996,bought a Jag but am looking for a 997. Drove a Cayenne and bought one. The new ones always seem better.

utkinpol

it may sound harsh but i think people who got only somewhat $20K budget should not get into this mess. somebody who plans to spend something in lower $20K and get a car that will last 5+ years problems free may get themselves into quite a mess.

there are plenty of probability that this abstract $20K car will run fine but it is also quite possible that owner wil spend more than he paid for it on repairs as those are expensive cars and work on them is even more expensive. if you do not have your own lift, do not know how to do most of stuff on your own - it may get costly, that`s all.