pissedpuppy

Just waiting for more data on them. You'll hear about "less moving parts" - which doesn't concern me. You'll hear about IMS, but those ans RMS, while they do happen, I think it is a small percentage -this doesn't concern me either. I think DFI has had some inordinate issues - this wouldn't bother me too much either, I just prefer more longer term data.

I just don't feel my car is lacking without direct fuel infection. I read a good article on the 997.1 perhaps being one of the last great 911s, and just to cover my ***, I am not talking about TT, GT3s, etc

Anyone spinning a nonS car being equal to or greater....well, you can determine the differences between the two and make an informed decision

I also vote conservatively, and that's not everyone's cup of tea either

pissedpuppy

Prove this please

SMR

Just checked with owner; car has a November, 2005 build date, but is a model year 2006. What is it about the 2005 build date that makes it a "100% skip?"
And, what if I get an extended warranty, does that address this concern?

USMC_DS1

Porsche updated the IMS bearing in mid-2006 MY(manufacturing year). That '06 will likely have the older IMS which is known to have potential failures. Although in relative same percentage of the vehicles a failure could mean engine replacement and very costly. The good news is that LN Engineering has a retro fix using ceramic bearings... ask the owner if he's had this done and by whom. I would call LN to verify that the installer was reputable. An LN bearing improperly installed is bad as well. If it was not done then subtract $2K from the asking price and get it done yourself if you still want the car. Good time to consider doing the clutch replacement as well. Frequent oil changes and regular driving are theorized to benefit the IMS issue so check the service records for regular oil changes preferably more frequent then what Porsche recommends... every 3-5K miles would be great. GL and an extended warranty would be essential in this case as well. Make sure they cover the drive train especially IMS.

PHX 911

IIRC, any car that has a model year (not build date) of 2006 and later, the IMS issue was corrected. I think this was an issue in 996's, but not in 997's, and a 2006 is a 997.1.

rsabeebe

Prove which part?

Spokane5150

I suspect the mileage comment.

I think a 6-year old car spending most of its life sitting isn't good but if its stored in an environmentally safe area I'd be less concerned so long as they ran it down the road and expressway every once in a while. Although, how many people store their cars in temperature and humidity controlled garages. Right??

rsabeebe

I thought it was a common consensus that lower mileage cars are more prone to IMS difficulties (due to lack of use/lubrication), although this is likely less of an issue with '06+ cars with the revised bearing (than 996s and '05 997s). As an owner of an '05, I'm certainly not trying to bring more gas to the fire on this issue. ;-) Forums tend to over exaggerate issues like this - actual incidences happening.

alexb76

Maybe 100% skip is too black/white, the 2005 cars had an older IMS design which has a failure rate of 5% or so (still very low, but with catastrophic result), this was updated in 2006 model... HOWEVER, it is very difficult to know exactly when this upgrade took place, mid-2005? late-2005? Therefore, as a general rule of thumb, skipping any 2005 build date cars is a safe bet if you wanna be very cautious.

There was also many upgrades in late 997.1 cars in electronics (better Nav, plays mp3, etc...) that is worthwhile.

pissedpuppy

all of it

'09 will have no potential IMS issues and the mileage on the '06 is low enough that it could be a concern. The higher the mileage, the better off you are in that regard.

rsabeebe

997.2 have no bearing. Done.
997.1 cars with lower mileage are thought to have a higher potential for IMS failure due to less use. This 'idea' has been stated on this board many, many times. Not an original idea of my own.
I didn't prove ****, but that's all I've got.
Would you like to 'prove' something in contradiction to that?

rodsky

pissedpuppy

I can prove you have no facts to back your thought/opinion/theory on mileage.

Hear say only. Anecdotal. If true, I guess high mileage cars would command a premium. They don't.

There's my proof

rsabeebe

Wow!! You really are the pissy type, aren't you? Angry at most things every day, are we? Dude, don't waste your time and breath getting your panties in a twist because of things I say. It's really not worth your time.

For the record, I would say that most information on this topic IS opinion and theory. Some of it is factual (basically everything AFTER a failure), but not enough consistency to be validated. Let me guess, you probably have an issue with that statement too.

Btw, 'high mileage and commanding a premium' isn't even close to what the actual comment was discussing. The point was, lower mileage cars still have the 'potential' for a failure, due to their somewhat limited use, where a car with 60K miles shows a bearing still in good working order (and potentially a car that will be a non-failure). Let's call that a theory. Notice no absolutes in my statements - none of us can really prove anything in regards to an IMS failure.

What great theories do you have on the whole IMS issue or are you just here to tell people that their comments are purely anecdotal, which unless you're a Porsche certified mechanic, most comments here are.

Don't forget your meds.

rodsky

Hence the name pissedpuppy.

One thing you did prove for certain is that a 997.2 will have no IMS issue regardless of mileage