silver_tt

It is ironic making accusations of fear mongering but not understanding that bore scoring is not even a Porsche-specific problem so these comments have no merit. I own an Audi also and I know a lot about their engines and the problems they can have since I spent the last 20 years working on Porsches and Audis. I can tell you some of their engines (and other VAG) are very similar in that they are Alusil and can suffer from bore scoring. But I don't know of a LN Engineering, Hartech, or FSI for those engines so if it hits you on that platform you are SOL with your only option being a new block ($$$) from Audi (if you can even get one now there have been shortages); and even then you can just have the exact same problem again because it is just the same Alusil block again, not a solution like Nickies are. The bottom line is that the only solution to bore scoring in a Lokasil/Alusil engine like this is Nikasil plating or one of the thermal plasma spray technologies (and this can't be applied in the aftermarket due to being cost prohibitive). The fear mongers have published a lot of information and data, ironically, which if you follow will reduce the chances of you getting bore scoring (or managing it) and ever needing to do business with them.......

I agree about long OCIs. The single best thing you can do for any engine is to change the oil frequently with a high quality oil (my preference is a true synthetic PAO for several reasons even if you can see similar performance in group 1-3 base oils they still don't have the other characteristics I seek in a PAO).

Houndstooth

No, I’m not referring to you. I’m referring to the people and companies that offer expensive rebuilds, special parts that allegedly reduce risk or problems, etc.

I’m not closing my eyes to any risks. I had a bore scope performed on my car which showed no scoring, but I follow procedures to help reduce the risk of it occurring. I’m just pointing out that much of the noise around the bore scoring issue is created by those who earn a living by selling you a solution to the problem. Type in “Porsche 997 bore scoring” into Google and tell me what websites pop up at the top of your list. Two of the top three results are companies that will gladly rebuild your engine or sell your parts therefor—regardless whether you have any actual symptoms of bore scoring.

aglaes

I got a quote of $450 from O2 Motorsports in Redding, CA. Said they could do it. I would like to inquire a little more into exactly how they do it.

That was on top of $150 to do their standard PPI - so $600 total

Houndstooth

I am well aware that cylinder scoring is not a problem exclusive to Porsches. I have owned a BMW and a Subaru that suffered from the issue to some degree. But I’ve also spoken to probably a hundred 997 owners over the years, many with well over 100k miles on their car, and while most of them have heard of bore scoring, maybe only 2 or 3 have experienced it. But based on the comments here you’d think it’s something that will happen to every car. Advising people to factor in the cost of a rebuild into any 997 purchase is frankly absurd.

aglaes

Ed99 - just curious. Did you ever find a 997.1 that did not have the cylinder scoring? And did you end up buying a 997.1?

groovzilla

Even at 34K miles IMO a good idea to get a very thorough PPI & a Bore Scope Inspection when purchasing a 997 at any mileage.
Why?--->The PPI will include the DME Report for engine Over-Revs as well as Cam Deviation numbers which helps in determining health of engine. And as far as Bore Scoring, if car has been living in cold climate it is usually more prone to possible Bore Scoring even at 34K miles.
Cost of through the Spark Plugs Bore Scope Inspection should cost an additional $300-$350 on top of the $250-$300 PPI cost so both PPI/BSI should cost approx $550-$600.
Always best idea to have 997 PPI's at excellent Porsche Specialist Indy shop or Dealer. I've had PPI?Bore Scope Inspections done at both with great results. 2 997S cars I was looking at buying last year had bad scoring.

Ed99

This year only found 2 997.1 that I was interested due to low mileage, well kept maintained, and the options I was looking for. Still in the hunt for one but only looking for 997.2 now vs a .1

bgoetz

I don’t think this is true, pretty sure it is Aluisil with the same issues the 997.2 can have. Maybe I am mistaken and someone will correct me though.

bgoetz

I think these people show up because they are the people providing genuine solutions. FSI isn’t looking for business, in fact they probably turn 3x more people away than they do business with. Jake actually gave a guy his down payment back plus $100 extra because he wasn’t watching the newsletters that they use to update their customers and he took that as a sign the guy was going to be a problem 😂. Jake left the forums and completely changed his business model because perspectives like yours, it just isn’t important enough to him to deal with the critics. Both FSI, Hartech, LN all freely share advice of how not to end up having to do business with them. For what, to get accused of fear mongering, I can totally understand why you see less of them on these forums anymore.

silver_tt

I think you must have misread what I wrote because your response doesn't follow from it (you don't think what is true?).

It is a shame that Jake left RL and quite frankly the value of this forum is greatly diminished without his presence due to the knowledge and experience he brings to the table. It is ironic that the very people he was helping have run him off. This is a person who derived things like torque specs for engine internals that Porsche doesn't even publish. Yes, he wants a few hundred dollars for the instructional video -- but is it fair to criticize him for this? The things I spend that much time on at work we get paid millions of dollars for and my clients would never bad mouth me for charging for it. Lee Jenkins at Hartech is also a giant on this platform. And as far as Jake avoiding certain people, I do the same thing. Warren Buffet has a saying about avoiding people like this even if the transaction is lucrative; because in most cases the long run it ends up being a bigger headache to deal with it than it's worth.

bgoetz

Haha, you are correct, I apparently have reading comprehension issues 😂. Totally agree with you on all points.

8KaboveMSL

@silver_tt Honest question for you regarding your view of bore scoring between 997.1s and 997.2s.

First let's stipulate that bore scoring is not only a M96/7 engine (or a Porsche) problem. Let's also stipulate that 997.2's are definitely susceptible to Bore Scoring and there are many examples of that happening. I will also stipulate that the mechanisms that cause bore scoring in a M96/7 are different than those that cause bore scoring in 9A1.

The thing that I don't understand is how the perception has been formed that the 997.2 are less susceptible to bore scoring. A few data points:

• Jake in all his videos focuses on M96/7 cases, he mentions 9A1s but there is not a lot of content on those engines
• Jake's business appears to be driven by those engines vs the 9A1's. The volumes appear to be greater for M96/7 engines than 9A1s
• I have no indication that LN or Hartech are seeing anything different that what Jake is seeing, their content seems to be similarly focused
• Members here seem to be rathe convinced that the 9A1s are far less likely to experience bore scoring
• 997.2s sell for a decent premium over the 997.1s

If I accept that Bore Scoring is just as likely to happen in 997.2s, then I would have to believe some or all of the following:

• The relative M96/7 volumes at places like FSI/LN/Hartech are driven by self-selection - M96/7 engine owners are more aware of the issue and are options for more preventative rebuilds than 997.2 owners
• That something other than likelihood of bore scoring explains the price premium between 997.2 and 997.1 models (I don't follow the Boxster and Cayman markets and have no idea of whether there are similar premiums between the facelifts and the original models). I frankly don't see anything on a 997.2 outside of likelihood of bore scoring that would justify the difference and I generally believe that the markets eventually get this stuff right in the long run. I could see a smaller premium but $20k to $25k based on IMS, LED lights, slightly better PCM/bluetooth/etc. seems like quite a bit. Specially since the aesthetics are largely the same.
• That a lot of 997.2 owners have their head in the sand or are keeping quiet about their bore scoring issues.
• That given that the mechanisms that cause bore scoring are different, the incidence of bore scoring in 997.2s will increase over time and the incidence rate will equalize over time.

Like I said before, this is not personal. I really just want to understand this stuff better. There is so much incomplete information about this topic (at least on the 9A1 side) that it's not hard to be confused. Appreciate your thoughts.

bgoetz

I think the one factor you have to consider is age, the 997.2 is newer, time will tell if it is a big of an issue. I personally think it is probably less an issue given the mode of failure, but how much less warrants the premium when it still could happen. IMO I like the prospect of the 997.1, banking the $ and having a good down payment on an FSI 4.x when the time comes. Then you have something that is superior to any 997.2 in both build and performance. Only downside is the wait.

silver_tt

Not sure why, maybe people aren't paying close attention. Some clues are right here in this very forum. Take a look at this thread which is one of the last posts ever made to date by Jake:

"Bore scoring is really about the only thing that has been taking the 9a1 out. I’d say that 95% of failure reports with the 9a1 has been related to bore scoring." .... in case it's not obvious, the 997.2 = 9A1 engine
"997.1 is the newest Porsche I’d consider owning." (his next post in the same thread)
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...l#post18066672

One explanation is time bias. When new engines come out and there are failures they are under warranty. Porsche doesn't tell us statistics on failures so we are in the dark for many years until we start seeing failures in the aftermarket and we can get more information. Whenever new models come out people always think they are better but the true test in engineering is time not marketing. When I bought my first 911 a very long time ago people "in the know" were worried about IMS failures or D-chunks on the early water cooled engines and no one really talked about bore scoring much. When Porsche killed the Mezger, a true racing engine with Nikasil cylinders that could be torn down and rebuilt after each race if you were so inclined, and moved to cast in place cylinders in Alusil blocks people ate it up and thought this was proof that Alusil was just as good as Nikasil -- "look! Porsche even uses it in their racing engines now". Boy was that a mistake...

997.2s are direct injected and the introduction of DFI technology was a watershed moment due to consequences like soot formation but for many other reasons as well. 997.2s are 9A1 engines so people are paying a premium for the move to the new engine platform, everyone always thinks newer must be better but new engine design now is completely driven by environmental and emissions laws which are insanely aggressive. Note that in these newer DFI engines there are many other design changes. Piston to cylinder wall clearances are insanely tight (.0007" measured new from the factory) and the piston can actually seize when the bores move at BDC and close that gap. And since the injector is directly in the cylinder at very high pressure you can have scoring issues exacerbated by a bad injector that is leaking or not spraying properly. This is the reason DFI engines typically run 3-4x higher fuel dilution than their port injected predecessors; because that fuel has much less time to atomize and burn completely in a DFI engine and so naturally there will be more residual unburned fuel that can agglomerate and form soot. This is why it's very important to run an oil that is specifically formulated for direct injection if you have a DFI engine like the 9A1.

8KaboveMSL

Please bear w/ me. First of all. thanks for sharing the posts. I'm really not trying to be a smart *** here, just trying to wrap my head around this. I am a relative newcomer to Porsche 911 ownership and I have a lot of respect for the folks here who have a lot more experience in this than I do. I read your quote above and I believe it to be true. I really have no reason to think Jake would put something out there that wasn't true, if anything, he holds back because of all the blowback he gets from some folks.

However, it is one thing to say that 95% of the failures on 9A1s (997.2 and equivalent Boxter Cayman Models) are due to bore scoring and a distinct one to say that 95% of the all the 9A1s will fail and Bore Scoring will be the cause. You're risk guy so I am sure you understand the difference. So, if we limit the universe to only engines that failed, I would even believe that the 9A1s would have a higher incidence of engines that failed due to bore scoring than the M96/7s as there appear to be more know failure modes for the M96/7 (e.g. IMS) which are not an issue on the 9A1s.

My original question was, if we expand the universe to all M96/7s and all 9A1s, which group has a higher rate of engine failure due to bore scoring. We may not know the answer and we may never know w/o getting some data either from Porsche (unlikely) or from the folks on the front line of fixing the issues.

What it also means is there is some serious information asymmetry in the market right now as many buyers/owners believe the 9A1s are way less likely to fail (and fail due to bore scoring) than the M96/7s. It really does look like what Jake meant w/ the comment that the most modern car he would own being the M96/7 (997.1) is an admission that he believes the failure rates on the 9A1s are going to accelerate from here on out and that the spread in the price between a 997.1 and a 997.2 is likely to disappear. He has never said tags outright and even in private I have never heard him discuss anything like that. If true, that would be an interesting trend and it would make a lot people up here really unhappy.