Brian P

I just run at full. The rod bearing problem was something that I thought was specific to 944s.

Daytona24

Yes rod bearing problems I beleive are unique to the 944s - but main bearing problems have occured with the 986s...

Daytona24

Well folks, it's been fun - we've had our ups, our downs... we've been through a lot together. But now I'm starting a new thread, about Porsche "selling out."

Maybe I'll see you there - enjoy your Boxsters as they were designed to be enjoyed (only on the street), and you won't have any problems.

... and a special thanks to Vampyre and Brian P.

Zandramus

has anyone had any success with an accusump in the 968 to combat the problem?

Daytona24

If I am not mistaken, all the Accusump does is give you an extra 3-4 qts of oil available from a remote tank - it doesn't help the 'cavitation' problem the engine has in some long high-speed corners. So I would say that is not a one-stop solution for your problem. The only true solution is a complete dry-sump system ($ expensive!) for your car.

If I'm wrong someone please enlighten me, the 944/51/68 can be great track cars otherwise...

mackgoo

Where are those 9 qts?

Turboflyer

I love my 01 S. Still like the body better than any new model porsche. Well suited and far more car than I know how to drive to its fullest. However, if money was not an object I would have a Twin turbo or the GT3 just for the when I feel the need for more speed. The ultimate is of course always in the eye of the beholder. The carrara GT ?But then what. Remember when the car we wanted 30 years ago was the ultimate....holy.......moley!

brh986

You really can't argue with any of the above (I won't comment on the rest of your posting though). Although the lack of dry sump and warranty nonsense is about all you can complain about on the Boxster S. A boxster S can turn lap times nearly as good as a 996 and will certainly run circles around any Porsche from the 1980's with the exception of *perhaps* a 911 turbo in *very* skilled hands (heavily modified 944 turbos excluded also). There's a website somewhere that has lap times for all sorts of sports cars and if I remember correctly the boxster S is only a couple of seconds behind a 996 on a lap of the Nuerburgring (can anyone post the link?).

The warranty nonsense and the no dry sump is downright bull**** I agree but the mid engine is a superior attribute. A boxster with equal horsepower will spank any 911, try a boxster with a 3.6 swap. I do like the 911 but the rear engine is nothing but a stupid design. Porsche has clearly performed "engineering acrobatics" to minimize if not negate the the negative attributes of a rear engine design but it does changes the fact that it's an idiotic idea from an engineering standpoint.

That said I do have a GT3 on order which has a dry sump and no cup holders, power seats, or "herd of cows leather interior." Real GT3 seats will be my first mod!


I'd also like to add (not specifically in reference to your post) that the porsche tiptronic is awful! It's a disgrace and has no place on a car that is supposedly a sports car. While I'm not even fond of the BMW SMG or Ferrari systems they atleast shift very fast and don't cause a loss in performance. The porsche transmission is a typical slushbox with little shift buttons on the steering wheel. Junk!

brh986

When did they change from "just don't use slicks if you track it" to this nonsense?


Why did your idiot friend let porsche rip him off on all those repairs? Why would you tell Porsche you tracked the car? Also, under current law, it's Porsche's burden to prove: 1.) you tracked the car 2.) the tracking caused the failures they're trying to screw you on

brh986

I beg to differ, ferrari is just as full of **** as porsche just in a different way. Porsche designs engines that go 50k miles without any real scheduled maintenance to speak of and gives you a 4 year warranty.

Ferrari on the other hand side steps reliability and longevity by only giving you a 2 year warranty and requiring every single god damned part in the car to be replaced as "scheduled maintenance" Do you know the 30k service on a 360 costs $7,000 and requires the engine come out? What kind of horendous BS is that? I don't think that's any better than what Porsche is doing.

mackgoo

Please some one explain what the definition of a dry sump is here.

brh986

I'll give it a shot. I fully understand what it is but I don't know all the technical terms.

Basically with a non dry sump system you run into a situation where serious cornering G's can force all the oil so far to the side of the reservoir (i.e. centrifugal forces) to the point that the pump can't suck any oil up and lubricate the engine. I don't exactly how it's done but a dry sump corrects this problem completely. I think one component of the solution is multiple oil reservoirs but I'm not 100% sure.

mackgoo

All I'm saying is every one is saying that the Boxster does not have a dry sump. It does it just doesn't have the 9 qts of oil on one side of the car in a seperate oil tank. the other problem with oil in the pan is the crank frothing the oil up reducing it's ability to lubricate eficiently as well as maintain pressure. I'd venture to say the Boxsters version is better than the old external style. for one the Boxster has scavenging pumps in the heads sending the oil to the sump rather than just draining through the oil return tubes to the crank case then being scavenged and returned to the tank. As there are no external lines to break, although losing the lines on the old system wasn't a common occurance.

Daytona24

All good points, except for yours mackgoo - the Boxster/996 oil system is inferior, period - that's why there have been related issues on the track - 911s never had that problem, so stop dreaming and face the reality - Porsche designed the "sump" into the block for cost saving purposes, not because it's a better design. If it WAS a better design, then they would use it in the GT3 - but they DON'T!!! The GT3 has a good old fashioned dry-sump, like any car intended for serious track use SHOULD.

In any case, brh986, my friend is not an 'idiot' as you put it. He was friends with one of the mechanics at the dealer who had gone to track events with him in the past, that's how they knew what the car was used for. His mechanic friend was equally shocked when they refused to cover some of the repairs.

Again the new Porsches are good street cars, but not serious track cars without a lot of work - and you can thank Japanese cost-saving manufacturing measures, and Porsche bean-counters for reducing the quality of the product right down to the level of any current generation Jap car. Go ahead, slam the door on any old 911 - then slam the door on a 986/996... Just a little example of what I'm talking about. It's a shame too, because if they approached the 986/996 production in the same manner and quality of the old cars, they COULD be great. And maybe I wouldn't consider them WAY overpriced. But they are way overpriced for the quality you get, period. Sad but true, and I wish there were a light at the end of the tunnel, but for now it looks like Porsche is concentrating on keeping their profits up.

By the way, good point about the WORTHLESS Tiptronic. What a JOKE of a transmission compared to ANYTHING else on the market. I'm not a fan of semi- or full automatic trannys, but if you're going to make one, MAKE IT GOOD!! The Tiptronic is exactly what you called it, a piece of crap slushbox. What a disgrace.

Charlie C

I understand you opinion. I loved the look of the 993 and think it's the most beautiful car ever made (so far).

But either we pick what we like from what Porsche produces or we don't buy a Porsche. Then what would happen to Porsche? Would you suggest we buy a BMW or "Vette" instead?

Charlie