Is the 996 engine prone to blowing up?

[Guest]

Hi Carrera4boy - re: warranties

I bought my car from an independent and went for an RAC 5 Star cover which I got from an Independent for about £500 for 2 years cover. When I recently suspected RMS (no problem it transpired) I checked the clauses in the contract and they seemed pretty realistic. If you (anyone else) wants let me have your email address (actually I have your's already) and I can scan and send you a copy.

Cheers

 

[carrera4boy]

FAB, thanks mate, send it over. £250 per year to cover the engine from blowing up, means I'm going to put my foot down hard next weekend at The Ring.

Simon
996 C4

 

[steve lyden brown]

Hello NicD,
I am sorry to learn that I cause you problems. I had thought that our recent exchange of emails had largely sorted any difficulties I may occassionally inadvertantly cause. Mind you, and I don't intend to make a big deal about it, but I cannot do other than correct your comments about my alleged use of abusive language. I have not been abusive, but I am frequently critical........and why not, when I was a member I saw that as my entitlement. If by "abusive" you mean that my language is salty, yes I will agree, but since all non acceptable words are seemingly automatically edited, then what problem does that cause anyone ?
Cheers,
Steve Lyden Brown.

 

[steve lyden brown]

By all means deny me the oxygen, and you are more than welcome to my share of it ; after all, are you not confirming what I have been stating ?...merely that 996/Boxster engines are not anywhere near as inherently reliable as we would like !
SGLB.
P.S. Is it not just a tad odd, to be denying oxygen on the one hand, but then throwing bucketfuls of petrol on the flames with the other ? Never mind, it is at least highly innovative !

 

[carrera4boy]

SLB [Awaiting Approval]

VERY FUNNY....

By all means deny me the oxygen, and you are more than welcome to my share of it ; after all, are you not confirming what I have been stating ?...merely that 996/Boxster engines are not anywhere near as inherently reliable as we would like !
SGLB.
P.S. Is it not just a tad odd, to be denying oxygen on the one hand, but then throwing bucketfuls of petrol on the flames with the other ? Never mind, it is at least highly innovative !

Steve, we shall give you sufficient oxygen so long as you use it in the correct manner!
We know there are issues with the engine on a minority of Porsches. Mine has an RMS problem but it's perfectly fine to race and generally drive. I have my quibbles with the OPC, but I have spent more on my wife's Ford Galaxy in the past 12 months than the Porker and ive done more miles.

Porsches are very reliable cars considering the hammering we do to them. I think you were lucky to drive to France and back in the DB7 unscathed. I've done 15,000 miles without so much as an oil top up.[] Good luck with your purchase though.

 

[burrow01]

Now I'm really holding my breath to see what is under the [Awaiting Approval] blanket...what is going to happen when the moderators go on holiday []

 

[burrow01]

Hi Steve - split personality syndrome - on the one hand I agree with you that there is an inherent design problem with the 996 engine, that Porsche are not being forthcoming with the facts to allow people to make correct judgements, and that it is all unsettling for 996/Boxster owners.

On the other hand I cannot believe that someone would buy an Aston Martin over a Porsche for reliability reasons, make comments about your experience within PCGB -

ORIGINAL: steve lyden brown

You are right-my age and seniority has no relevance/influence on facts, but if, as I see to be the case, you have been a PCGB member for a mere 2 or 3 Winters, and I have closely observed mails both before and since the conception of the 996, then I'd say I would cut it as a witness of some significance, whereas you'd be trailing along as an also ran.

And then not acknowledge the fact that you did not know about the RMS survey - which I, even as a mere stripling of 1 years membership, had read []

 

[Guest]

ORIGINAL: oliver

Berny,

I've followed your threads and, like most readers, I have total sympathy for your situation and feel that Porsche AG and Porsche GB have made an error of judgement in not trying to reach an amicable resolution.

However, and correct me if I'm wrong, but was your car a personal import (ie the car did not come into the UK via Porsche GB)?

Oliver: Correct. My 996 is a c16 import. But it was manufactured by the same people and in the same place as yours and everyone elses. Furthermore, it is as much an import as any other Porsche. However, although not sourced from the Porsche GB network my car has been serviced entirely by them (apart from the last service a few weeks back), so they have made their money out of it. The issue is this, if Porsche GB would just agree to change my engine (which BTW they have in principal by offering me 50% good-will towards cost, with a cost to me of £4,500), then Germany will re-stock their spares dept with the engine that is used to replace mine FOC. So in essence the issue is over the fitting labour which I have said I would pay. But even with that Porsche GB refuses to do it even though it would cost them nothing to fix up my car and have a satisfied customer. Their resononing is beyond me.

ORIGINAL: burrow01
On the other hand I cannot believe that someone would buy an Aston Martin over a Porsche for reliability reasons, make comments about your experience within PCGB -

One of my previous cars was a DB6. I had it 2 years and never once had an engine or gearbox problem. I did however, experience a faulty diff. The folks at Newport Pagnell replaced it FOC without questions and there was no warranty. It was as I used to call her "Mrs. Reliable". But it was a terrible car to drive and handled awfully. Made a great profit on selling her though [] If I had the money I would definitely be looking at the AMV8 though.

 

[NicD]

Berny,

serious questions.
1. How do you know this is true? "then Germany will re-stock their spares dept with the engine that is used to replace mine FOC. So in essence the issue is over the fitting labour which I have said I would pay. But even with that Porsche GB refuses to do it even though it would cost them nothing to fix up my car ". In addition. how do you know what follow up costs may result from this precedent?
2. Why dont you go to the people who sold you the car and made the sales profit, as surely they owe you the satisfaction , rather than Porsche Cars GB who owe you nothing in particular?
Are you not confusing Porsche Cars GB with Porsche AG, which although a wholly owned subsidiary, they are not the same entity. It may seem like splitting hairs but if AG wanted to, they could easily instruct GB to take care of this. There must be a reason why they dont and less likely to do with you as with anyone who would follow on behind.

 

[Guest]

Nic, heres my answers (lengthy):

1: The first RMS fault was diagnosed only weeks out of warranty along with the gearbox noise at about (I recall) 27,000 miles. It was supposedly fixed the first time at a cost to me of £237. But of course it wasn't fixed at all. All others after the 1st RMS have been replaced at no charge to me. It wasn;t until about the 5th RMS that Porsche owned up and said they can't fix it and the only remedy is a replacement engine. By this time almost two years had passed. After lengthly conversations with Reading (Porsche GB) I finally got them to agree to a good will claim on my gearbox (at a cost to me of £2,700) and I got it done under the provisio that the engine would be replaced without any charge to me. The person I spoke to at Reading (Phil Hattam) said that because of my "rare" situation with both gearbox and engine problems, they would almost definitely replace the engine FOC if I where to go ahead with the gearbox change although he could not guarantee it since all decisions are reviewed on a case by case basis and the board would have to review my case to make that decision. But he said that if I had both gearbox and engine changed together it would be cheaper to do so this was the best time to do it. However, he said that I must agree (in principal) to get the gearbox done first before the review board would revisit my case in the hope of getting the engine done FOC as a gesture by Porsche GB in sympathy for my particular rare problems. I agreed to this because the tone of voice Phil Hattam used inferred to me that he could not say for certain "yes" but it was very highly likely given my situation and case history that they would. We joked on the phone but in reality I just knew that Porsche would not let me down on this one. As Phil Hattam said it was as good a case as any he had dealt with so I should not have any problems (although he could not say for definite that I would get the engine FOC). Eventually when I got the money together for the gearbox (some months later) my OPC in Liverpool removed the entire power unit from my car (gearbox and engine). I was expecting to get a call to say the car would be ready (with new gearbox and engine) in 3 days time. But instead they rang me up and said there was a problem with payment as they were instructed to do it at 50% cost vis-a-vis good will and not FOC. I called Reading on the bounce and they said that they had decided that they could not do the engine FOC despite my car being in pieces in readiness for it. Phil Hattam had moved on so I could not get to talk to him. Basically I was at a loss. At that point I just had my OPC replace the gearbox and put my car back together (while doing yet another RMS change under my instruction since the gearbox was out). At this point I was at my wits end and decided to call Germany direct. I was given a phone number for Annette Barbara-Wilkie (the worldwide service manager) in Germany (I won;t say who gave it to me but suffice to say it was a PCGB member). I called her and explained my predicament. She was very understanding and sympathetic and said clearly that in such a dire case as mine with 7 RMS's and gearbox fault to boot, and the fact that my car had been serviced entirely by Porsche UK network, that there should be no question in replacing the engine FOC. Furthermore, she said that she didn't understand why Porsche GB were questioning it because the engine would be shipped back to Germany and Porsche GB would be given another for replacement stock. According to her, all engines that were sent back were replaced, unless they are specifically sent back to be rebuilt because of malicious damage (stage 2 over revs etc) which mine was clearly not. She also said that it was normal practice to change repeat RMS plagued engines warranty or not so long as the vehicle has been serviced accordingly by Porsche. At least this was the stance and policy of PAG anyway (makes sense as this is the same policy adopted in the US too). So she could not understand what the issue was with Porsche GB. But she did state clearly that Porsche GB not Porsche AG had the last say in the matter in relation to any warranty or good-will claim that I was making. Porsche GB's decision is final and she could not and would not overrule it. Although my car is out of warranty, this particular case would be treated as a warranty claim. Annette Barbara-Wilkie said she would call Reading and spoke to them. When she called me back she simply stated that there was nothing she could do as Porsche GB had made the decision not to replace my engine FOC. She didn't know the detailed history of my car so could not make any further judgment but said that all I could do was to go back to Porsche GB and ask them to reconsider. I gave up trying.

2: The company I bought my car from (Khan in Bradford) did give me £1500 towards costs of the replacement gearbox. So it only cost me £1200 in the end. And this was at least a year after I bought the car from them. As for the RMS problem they would not help me with it. They said that this is a manufacturing fault that Porsche should cough up for since the car has been serviced by them. Indeed the car had only just had its 24,000 mile major service done prior to me buying it. At 27,000 miles my gearbox was whining and the engine was leaking through its RMS. As our American friends would say "go figure?".

The way I see it is like this: Porsche GB have reviewed my case. My OPC has had the gearbox out 7 times to replace the seal and all but £237 of it was payed by Reading. So they have lost a lot of money on my car and don't want to lose anymore despite the problem really being nothing to do with the business economics but really due to faulty workmanship, bad design or bad manufacture. In essence the car has an inherent problem in the design and the only way that Porsche, be it Porsche GB or Porsche AG can recoup the cost of it all is to lay it back on the customer.....in this case me!. That's where the problem lies. If Porsche really do value their customers then this RMS problem would be clearly swept under the carpet. The RMS would be fixed no questions asked and repeat RMS problem cars would get a new engine, no questions asked. And just in case you think I am wrong, that's the policy taken up by Porsche America......and they get 4 years warranty to boot! All I know is this, there was once a time when Porsche would go out on a limb trying to help their customers. If you had a problem, Porsche would put it right no quibbles. I even saw this mentioned in a video I watched the other night "Porsche Victory By Design". But nowadays it's a money machine. They don;t give two tosses about their customers, their cars or their residuals. Just to prove my point, I even said to Annette Barbara-Wilkie that I would be happy to drive my car to the factory in Germany if they would replace the engine. She said that I could not do this since Porsche GB had made their decision. So I can;t figure what else I can do but just drive it in the hope it will all be alright and it's just a little tiny leak. After all, it runs smooth and doesn;t use any oil and seems reliable......Spain and back no problems.

 

[944Turbo]

I understand about the warranty business and why some people may want to take one out for as long as they own their car irrespective of failures. What I do not like is the fact that the engine appears to have very little margin before failure.
There is little profit in new cars these days (though more here than most other countries).I believe a lot of the income comes from warranties / parts and servicing. If the 'safety margins' have been reduced to cut costs with the added bonus of increased warranty sales / servicing as a deliberate move then I do not like it.

With modern engine management that if you have a certain number of combinations (3,100 rpm for 2 minutes on the first monday of the month at 09.45 say) the managment forces a cylinder to run lean and detonate taking out the engine. I do not believe this is happening but you could generate a random engine failure for no obvious reason you then have control over your warranty business no more than 10 percent have this 'mod' and only one percent of them happen to meet the conditions at the appointed time. These random failures scare people into increasing your warranty business.

As I said that is rather an extreme view and I do not believe that is the situation. However random engine failures and scare stories are not going to harm your warranty business.

In my view if a modern engine is properly designed and maintained with quality fluids, filters and parts then they should last for at least 200k. It would seem to be the case that with the 996/boxster unit it may fail even with correct maintenance. This is what concerns me, the reliability we have come to expect seems to have faded in the search for profitability.

Whilst I cannot deny it affects other manufacturers (BMW) there are others with massive safety margins that seem to take abuse Nissan skylines producing double the output reliably on standard components, Turbo supras with massive outputs and standard internals, Honda Vtech enngines etc. Opel/vauxhall units (properly serviced, cambelt failure can be messy)

Back to Porsche, the Turbo, GT3, GT2 units that produce higher specific outputs do not use the crankcase descibed as flexy, Why? has there been a single Turbo, GT3, GT2 RMS failure? Does the higher purchase price allow for more costly engineering?

I also feel that many of the current owners do not drive their cars anywhere near the limits, I tend to be hard on my vehicles whilst maintaining them to high standards and driving them gently from cold, could I rely on a 996 / boxter to take it? not that I am really bothered as they would both be slower than my current car [&:] so not really considering it.

Tony
Without any K series engined cars []

 

[Mark_Bennett]

ORIGINAL: 944Turbo

has there been a single Turbo, GT3, GT2 RMS failure?

Yes.
I know one owner that posts here. (Turbo, with RMS failure).

 

[steve lyden brown]

Other than I wouldn't wish to stifle others, so please do feel free to continue commenting on the matter of Porsche unreliability, I personally really do think that I should make this message my very last utterance on the subject, subject only to the proviso that I may well be forced to comment further (1) if my mails continue to so be so poorly misread and misunderstood by members, or (2) I am prompted to comment by the messages submitted by some members who are clearly in need of some enlightenment in their erroneous views.

In closing, though, let me please say that, albeit within the family, I do still keep and drive a 996, a car which despite it's ever increasing reputation for unreliability, continues to provide me with enormous amounts of fun, enjoyment and sheer driver satisfaction. Other than normal servicing it has never required a minutes spannering. I fully expect to keep it as part of my collection until such time as I am steering off towards "The Great Tuning Shop in the Sky" ! I should also say that when I borrowed a DB7 last year ( it was an elderly, 4 owner car with nearly 90,000 on the clock ), I did more miles in that car ( always consisting off high speed driving within Italy, Germany, Holland and France ) than I have done in 911's during the past 5 years. It ran straight as an arrow and as sound as a bell.

One last thing, despite the imputed comments of others, it is not my intention to malign or abuse the PCGB. I have expressed my opinion of that body by resigning membership after many,many years.
I have no wish to to take any other action against it.
Steve Lyden-Brown.

 

[steve lyden brown]

Hello Burrow01,
Thanks for your input in which you make the valid and telling point about my seemingly not knowing about the RMS survey. By way of reply, I can only state that whereas I have kept virtually every email on the subject, firstly because I was considering taking on as clients anyone who wished to initiate any sort of legal action, and,secondly, because I foresaw the prospect of my own 996 having problems of this sort, it was because my own car HAS NOT had any problems of this type that I merely collated the information rather than read every piece of it.

My own Astons ( a DBSV8 and a DB6 Volante) never cost me anything more than the normal servicing (which admitedly DID cost huge amounts of moolah). The V8 never ran well, but it ALWAYS ran. Moreover, having paid £10,000 for the DB6 in 1977, I then sold it for well over £100,000 ten or so years later, so even if it had of been screamingly unreliable,my profit margin would have covered no end of expensive repair work. Whereas, I paid £43,000 for my 996 two years ago, and what is it worth now ?................don't tell me, I don't want to know !
Cheers,
Steve.

 

[NicD]

Berny,

thank you for such a detailed reply and I must aplogise for only a few words as I have to race off for a train and will be away till Monday evening - sorry SLB.
Maybe you answered this and I missed it or not, but did Porsche GB import the car to the UK? If yes, then I am with you on this, but if not, then I see their point in not wishing to be too generous on goodwill (as opposed to warranty) since it would not be in their business interests to sort out a competitor importer's problems. Now I recognise your case as a severe one and did my best to intercede on your behalf with not much result, sorry. But I wonder if this is the reason that AG would not intervene either?
Anyway, if you lose only two drops a month, then maybe not much of an issue, but of course, that could change anytime.

 

[DavidO]

(2) I am prompted to comment by the messages submitted by some members who are clearly in need of some enlightenment in their erroneous views

If by that comment we can assume that all views which differ from yours are erroneous, then I guess we can look forward to many more posts then []

 

[Guest]

More RMS than Blown engines but:

I stand to be corrected here, but in the US, aside from a FOUR year warranty (since 1999), engine replacement (FOC) is the norm in the event that repeated RMS seal replacement proves to be unsuccessful. This compared to a TWO year warranty in the UK, after which if the RMS fails then well... go forth and multiply squire; unless of course you've bought the warranty.

I don't know about anyone else, but I personally find this disparity hard to swallow.

And my point is, I believe if we had a similar deal here in the UK, there would be considerably less consternation over the subject and with it the likelyhood of reduced deppreciation. Of course, after four years you're on your own....as is the case with most cars.