Porsche 911UK Forum

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Would really appreciate some hands on advice.

IainW

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2010
Messages
11
Hi guys,

Essentially I am looking for some solid buying advice but from a more hands perspective.

I will in the not too distant future be sticking my e46 m3 up for sale once it is returned to standard ;-)

IMG_5692.jpg


Its been a great car and bmw's are pretty much in my blood, however i now have another m3 to turn into a dedicated track car, so its time to scratch the 911 itch.

Essentially I am after an (996) 02/03 3.6 Carrera 2 or 4 in MANual :grin:

For reasons of my location i am unlikely to be able to get a Porsche inspection so need some good practical advise about the particular foibles of this model.

I am aware of the RMS issue, which to me sounds like small beer and would be something that i would be prepared (and hopefully able) to tackle myself.

However i have also heard talk of an intermediate shaft failing, is this on the oil pump or timing chain? Are there any: Early indications? preventative fixes? what damage does the shaft failure actually cause? valve piston interface, what (i seem to read lots about it but not much about what actually happens)?

Is rust an issue on straight cars?

Are there any other issues of real note?

Sorry for all the questions, but the general bmw owner perception of 996 engines is that they are made of some soft of soft German cheese with bearings of bratwurst.

Many thanks in advance for the help! :thumbs:
 
IainW said:
Any thoughts on the above guys?

I'm surprised that you haven't had some responses by now as it's usually me that just points people with such queries down the 'Search Forum' route where all your questions and many, many more will have already been discussed.

I'm not a MANual person so can't comment on anything technical but I've never seen rust on any 996 except some badly pranged examples.

There's loads of ex Beemer owners on here, especially the E46M3, so you should get some interesting feedback re pros and cons.

Happy hunting.
 
Hi, you would benefit from a read through on this special site for some extra background and techie info http://www.oz951.com/public/emmy.htm writter/run by a member here.

I'm sure you will love the Porsche. The 996 has had more problems perceived or otherwise it is a very solid car if you buy right and it is cared for.

If you enjoy tracking then it would be better with a 2, if not to save a bit of weight.
 
Hi IainW, welcome to 911uk - there are quite a few ex-E46 M3 drivers on here. If you want a track car and are used to hammering an M3 around a circuit, I guess a rwd C2 would be more suited to you. A 4wd Carrera may prevent you from shaving seconds off those lap times tbh! You don't state your budget here else I would have automatically pointed you in the direction of a GT3.

You've already heard about the RMS issues and if you are prepared to tackle those then that's fine. Remember, it may well be worth changing the clutch when you do an RMS job. IMS is explained very well in the latest edition of Porsche World magazine (I think). IMS starts when bits of the actual shaft start disintegrating and mixing themselves into the engine oil (I'm sure someone will be able to explain much more technically than I ever could). There are preventative measures to stop IMS from happening such as driving the car gently once started and not exceeding a certain number of revs whilst the engine is warming up to reach operating temperature (personally I don't go over 3000rpm for the first 15 mins or so and accelerate very gently - I also find many people staring at me as they pull out to overtake whilst I do this). Also after a long journey its vital that you let the engine cool down and by letting it idle for a couple of minutes or so before you turn off the ignition will prolong engine life.

A Peter Morgan Porsche inspection usually covers the country as there are multiple staff involved in that particular set-up so check before you buy.

You might also want to talk to Stuart on this forum....secretly I think he's looking to off-load his well sorted 3.6L C2 - this is the type of car that's suitable for you I'd guess. Happy hunting in the mean time - it's half the fun of Porsche ownership.

~ Maxie :thumbs:
 
Thanks guys much apreciated.

I am not looking for the Porker to be a track car as i have an e36 m3 that i am rebuilding and converting so this would be to replace the m3.

Sadly my budget is relatively small as it has to be split many ways with an impedning child and equirements for a new bathroom :roll:

I am tempted by the C4 as the wether in the isle of man is inclement to put it mildly (keep hoping to move back to the uk!) so the 4wd system would be of benifit during the winter months, though i am not clear on how much the system blunts the performance.


Realisticly my budget is in the high teens, though if this is a complete improbability i could raise to mid 20's in a reasonabl time frame, though i must admit i am reluctant to do it unless its a complete pre-requisite.
 
You'll get a nice 3.6 (996.2) for just under £20k. There's loads of choice at your budget so take your time.

As a keen driver you'll notice the difference between a 2 and a 4 but it shouldn't be enough (0.5 secs worse 0-60 and a couple of mph off the 177 top speed) to put you off and the 4wd will definitely help you in adverse weather.

Good luck. :thumbs:
 
I too had the same model before changing over to a 996, 3.6 Carrera 4. Absolutely love it to bits and on track I am a bit faster than my M3. Very similar though performance wise. I too debated the 4 versus 2 and not much in it. If you use it everyday in snow and ice then maybe 4. However subsequent generations are progressively dialing out rear ended feeling and lift off oversteer. I think my 4 more stable at high speed but lose some of that nice front end lightness of the 2. Lots of scare stories on the net. A very good article in Total 911 magazine this month summarising the IMS with comments from Hartech and Autofarm on the topic. Basically For the 911 changed to a sealed bearing for the IMS. So with wear in a small% you get faster wear of bearing without lubrication from engine oiling. This leads to imbalance, more heat, friction perpetuating cycle till failure and secondary total engine disaster. People reckon 5-10% of engines may have this problem. Porsche redesigned bearing, shaft, securing lug several times in life of 996 but never fully fixed it until the mark 2 version of 997. Theory is that higher mileage cars less likely to have IMS failure as sone wear allows oil in to lubricate and cool. Best prevention according to experts is warm up engine properly before >3000 revs, use 5/40 oil rather than 0/40, once warm don't be afraid to use whole of rev band rather than lugging around all the time at low revs. Regarding the cylinder liner problem, cracking this also tends to be overestimated, again 5-10% maybe. Thinking is that with water cooling and thinner walls, uneven heat , and due to minor flex in block. Once again same advice re IMS and make sure oil levels allows ok. Don't be put off by scare stories they are cracking cars
 
All great information here guys, so very much appreciated!

To be completely honest the car will be driven hard, on of the compensations of living in the IOM is the derestricted roads, so my average "take the car for a spin" is more akin to a trackday :lol: hence why my road going m3 runs about on 140 treadwear track softies, alcon 6pots and monotube suspension :oops:

I guess that i am looking for somthing with a bit more lightness and poise than the slightly hammer like m3, it is a superb car and does shrink round you at pace, but is never completely "alive" in my opinion.

There seems to be a certian school of thinking whereby 996's that get 7 bells of ***** driven out of them suffer fewer engine problems than the ones that lurk about in the golf club car park (in terms of block failure). clearly this is only an opinion but i would apreciate any thoughts you guys have on this.

Clearly i would like the answer to be yes, as it will better suit the life that whatever car i buy will endure, but if its complete balls then I would sooner know.


Getting down to a lower level of detail, engine access, looks to be a pain, is this a fair statement or is it better than it would appear?

I ask as m3's that i have owned require a fair degree of top end fettling, regular shim checks, plugs, cover gaskets etc etc this is not a big problem as access is good and other than a bit of back ache you can get it all done in a few hours.

As such is the 3.6 a hydraulic lifter engine or a solid?
What is acess to the heads like?
Is top end maintainace a bit of a non issue on this engine?


Least importantly, :oops: is there much to be had in the power stakes from the 3.6 320 bhp from a 3.6 isn't huge power are there any lurking little wads of extra wallop lurking that are easily released?
 
IainW said:
Least importantly, :oops: is there much to be had in the power stakes from the 3.6 320 bhp from a 3.6 isn't huge power are there any lurking little wads of extra wallop lurking that are easily released?

imo 320 is all you'll get for your budget. You might get an older car that's had the mods done but that's a different route into 996 ownership entirely.

If you get a nice car and intend to increase the power at a later date I think you'll be disappointed at how many £'s each extra bhp will cost you.

More likely you'll realise how great 911 ownwership is and sell your soul to trade up to something built with the requisite bhp already on tap.

That's the problem with having any 911 ........ you'll end up wanting a different one :grin:
 
dzung said:
I too had the same model before changing over to a 996, 3.6 Carrera 4. Absolutely love it to bits and on track I am a bit faster than my M3. Very similar though performance wise. I too debated the 4 versus 2 and not much in it. If you use it everyday in snow and ice then maybe 4. However subsequent generations are progressively dialing out rear ended feeling and lift off oversteer. I think my 4 more stable at high speed but lose some of that nice front end lightness of the 2. Lots of scare stories on the net. A very good article in Total 911 magazine this month summarising the IMS with comments from Hartech and Autofarm on the topic. Basically For the 911 changed to a sealed bearing for the IMS. So with wear in a small% you get faster wear of bearing without lubrication from engine oiling. This leads to imbalance, more heat, friction perpetuating cycle till failure and secondary total engine disaster. People reckon 5-10% of engines may have this problem. Porsche redesigned bearing, shaft, securing lug several times in life of 996 but never fully fixed it until the mark 2 version of 997. Theory is that higher mileage cars less likely to have IMS failure as sone wear allows oil in to lubricate and cool. Best prevention according to experts is warm up engine properly before >3000 revs, use 5/40 oil rather than 0/40, once warm don't be afraid to use whole of rev band rather than lugging around all the time at low revs. Regarding the cylinder liner problem, cracking this also tends to be overestimated, again 5-10% maybe. Thinking is that with water cooling and thinner walls, uneven heat , and due to minor flex in block. Once again same advice re IMS and make sure oil levels allows ok. Don't be put off by scare stories they are cracking cars

The biggest problem with low mileage cars is the familarity and/or mechanical care taken of them. If you jump from one toy to another and can't remember or don't care what it should sound like or feel like and you hammer it from cold 'cos its just a toy, not a passion. Then your car will die. Any car, not just a Porsche.

Find an example that has been owned by an enthusiast with mechanical sympathy and understanding, that has been loved, treated with respect, looked after, cared for and no expense spared and you won't go wrong.

The C4 is idiot proof, has (slightly) better weight distribution, heavier feel and more stable steering, stronger front chassis/bodyshell (which is why the GT3/GT2s use the C4 or Turbo shell) and less than a tank of fuel heavier. Most of the time the split is 95% RWD and 5% FWD. Rising to a maximum of 60/40 RWD/FWD.

Read Autocar's review of the C4 here (halfway down):

http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=57277

Not convinced about the balance of that Total911 article, given its remit. Afterall, a paper on how cancer kills you is not balanced unles it covers how often you don't get it. Particularly if the quotes are from the two biggest annti-cancer drug companies.

I have great admiration for both Autofarm and Hartech and have spoken at length to both Robin and Barry, but that article was possible edited for space, if not effect.

I am not sure who these "people" are who reckon the failure rate is between 1 in 20 and 1 in 10 996s and Boxsters exploding! Half of London would have been at a standstill!

All Porsches, and especially 986/996 are subject to continual improvement. From 986/996 onwards development was subject to a formal Kaizan process. Most revisions occur at MY change over, however, priority engineering revisions can occur immediately the change has been authorised and the line or supplied part spec modified.

Because of this IMS design has changed many times during 996.1, 996.2 and 997.1 life-cycles. Of course the 997.2 avoids these issues by not having one.

The IMS engine failures for the 997.1 are estimated at lower than 0.005% at five years.

Many commentators moan that Porsche just doesn't care about the IMS, but their continual development and final total re-engineering (even given the last IMS iteration's relatively low failure rate) is testament to the fact they were not going to ignore it or be beat by it.

The suggestion that "Theory is that higher mileage cars less likely to have IMS failure" is strongly anthropic.

That's like saying the oldest people have not died yet. Everyone who survives to not yet be dead has also lived every other previous age. Those that die young will only have reached a lesser age. Until every 996 dies we don't know the overall failure distribution is.

It's almost counter-intuitive. If there is a running 19k miles 996 for sale now, it still works. Who's to say it won't reach 200k miles with careful use.

The distribution of a finite set looks odd whilst you are in the middle of it.

If human's had only existed for 30 years would we suggest (wrongly) that most people die young as the only people who have died have never been older than those still living.

As any engine increases in mileage it will wear, give the low mileage more use and they will wear the same. Howvever, all things being equal, the IMS will need lubricating in proportion.

The next point re: Mobil 0w40/5w40 is effectively contradicted the previous IMS lubrication theory. If you want oil lubrication by "leakage", 0w40 is your man. So thin at cold, even Porsche can't stop it escaping when they want it to stay in place!

There were specific casting failures with batches of early 986. Although rumoured, these never impacted the 996. The failure rate is again a long way from the suggested 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 (which between just these two issues would imply as many as 1 in 5 911s would die of engine failure!).

The issue with the M96 design is with cyclinder 6, specifically, is under-lubrication and over heating due to under-lubrication.

Get an X51. With additional cooling (centre rad) and lubrication upgrades (high-G sump baffles, second oil pump and additional oil line to bank 4,5,6). Those two otions are almost worth the entry ticket alone: going someway to mitigating the seizures.

Water cooling was specifically chosen by Porsche to allow even and uniform cooling. Pumped water if far more controllable and stable than air cooling. There is no way Porsche could extract either the power or under regulatory threat, the emissions and economy (due to air cooled inefficient burn) they have did with the M96 engine onwards.

In total contradiction, thin walls (with low specific heat capcity and little insulating propeties) and water cooling allow for the removal and control of hotspots.

If air-cooling was so great, how come only Porsche and Trabant (outside of other industries with specific small scale engines or aero applications) were the last companies to use air-cooling?

The best advice ref: cylinder 6 is mechanical sympathy. Fully warm the engine by driving at less than 3,000 rpm or lower (I drive at less than 2,000 rpm until warm - that's still 50+mph in sixth) until the oil pressure at idle drops to at most 2 bar. Then have fun.

Never let the oil level drop outside of range (ideally keep topped up little and often if required). Porsche advise post run-in, normal "early-life" usage at 1L per 10k miles. AFAIK mine uses nothing between services.

On the aircooled/water cooled subject, it not quite as clear cut as the 993/996 interface.

The very first Porsche water cooling was back in 1978 with the 935/78 or "Moby Dick"

1054253544_fb7a7083d8.jpg


The water cooling was done for many of the reasons as the 996 (re)volution, packaging compactness and more importantly, performance.

In order to either facilitate or safely maintain high power per litre it is first necessary to develop a an environment where temeprature may be consistently controlled (for best burn) and it is necessary to carry away excess heat much more efficiently or else you will heat fatigue diffrentially across the engine.

Additonally, water cooling is pretty much the only efficient way to cool multivalve heads efficiently. The only reason the 996 could go multivalve (for emmisions and power) was water cooling.

Next up on the water cooling front was the 1979 "Interscope" Porsche IndyCar racer: (note the rear-mounted water radiators, in front of the rear wheels)

112_0711_05z+rennsport_reunion_iii+interscope_indycar.jpg


Next up was the 1980s, with the TAG-Porsche partnership Formula 1 cars:

McLaren_TAG_Porsche_F1.jpg


The 1986-1989 959 was a watercooled hybrid (see 996/997.1 GT3 and Turbo below)

Porsche-959-Silver-SA-Speed-1024x768.jpg


More recently there was the GT1:

Porsche%2098%20911%20GT1%20-%201024x768.jpg


It was only a year ago (2009) Porsche finally stopped (partially) air-cooling.

The ALL 996 GT3 and Turbo and 997.1 GT3 and Turbo were all "hybrids", being both air and water cooled (the multivalve heads are water cooled as are the cylinder sleaves, the block/crankcase is air cooled).

THESE AREN'T AIRCOOLED (finally):

Porsche997GT33.8_01.JPG


997-Turbo-White_A.jpg
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,350
Messages
1,439,433
Members
48,707
Latest member
race911turbo
Back
Top