Menu toggle

Is the 996 engine prone to blowing up?

Beaky

PCGB Member
Member
A friend of mine (non member) is thinking of upgrading his 993 to a 996 but wants to know what the truth is behind the myth that 996 engines are prone to blowing up.
Does thes effect all 996 models or is it within a certain a rmodel or year, etc
 
There has been endless speculation, horror stories and photo's of "blown" engines hidden behind OPC's premises on previous threads in this forum. The actual truth is very hard to prove either way. My local OPC has seen a few examples, but very low volume compared to number of cars they deal with. My advice is get the Porsche warranty and forget about it.
I predict that Scouser will be adding to this thread very soon. Just wait a little while.
 
I'm with Geoff on this one.
If you have the OPC warranty, there isn't much soul searching to worry about
 
As above.

Probably a few failures, exaggerated on various forums. Was it slipped liners on early 3.4s? But my experience, and that of other 996 owners I know, has been pretty much total engine reliability (apart from the odd oil seal).

And yes, for security, the Extended Warranty is worth having. It's about ÂŁ725 pa and is pretty comprehensive. If 996s were unreliable it would cost a lot more. Porsche expect to make a profit on these warranties.
 
My 'youngster' has done 66,000 miles without a hitch, and there was mention of one that sold recently with 142,000 on the clock. The failures are, as has been said, very rare in comparison to numbers sold. I don't believe there are any more problems with failures (RMS excepted) than you would get with any other high performance car. Don't be put off by high milers - these engines seem to thrive on use.
 
Hi it was mine that I sold recently with now a 143k on the clock. I used to worry about it too and asked my local independant and in there words they are very rare even the oil seals considering the number sold. For example I read that Porsche sold 3000 cars in the six months Jan to June compared to just 136 Maseratis. I have taken the OPC warranty but of course it is not available to cars with over 125k miles but I have to say if my new car is as reliable as my old one then I shan't be needing it. BTW I was quoted ÂŁ1400 for a non Porsche warranty compared to the offical ÂŁ725 so I reckon there is no point not going for the real one.
 
Early 996 engines are p*ss poor ![FONT=verdana,geneva"] [FONT=verdana,geneva"]Mine was a 99 plate 38k just had the f*cking major service done at ÂŁ1.8 grand! 700 miles later intermediate shaft went! New f*cking engine![FONT=verdana,geneva"] [FONT=verdana,geneva"]The new engine from Porsche is an 'improved' 3.4 lump with a larger intermediate shaft. Cost ÂŁ8.5 grand ![FONT=verdana,geneva"] [FONT=verdana,geneva"]Goto to Rennlist.com and see how many blown engines there are there. Or speak to any Porsche specialist and they will tell you how many new engines they fit! [FONT=verdana,geneva"] [FONT=verdana,geneva"] [FONT=verdana,geneva"]
 
I am astonished to read the above emails and others like them ! From my reading of the very many mails posted on this subject over the last few years, I can only say that my impression as to the alarming regularity with which RMS problems have occurred is quite, quite different to the above messages. Have you not seen the many pictures of the piles of 996 type engines stacked outside the rear of various OPC's throughout the country ? Have you not read of the many examples of owners who have had more than one engine fail ? To blithely dismiss this problem as superficial, whilst at the same time advocating the purchase of an OPC warranty is the biggest example of "head in the sand" since dear old Neville Chamberlain flew back to Croydon Airport after his meeting with Adolf and waving his little bit of paper in his hand. The widespread occurrence of reported RMS failures has been so great as to now cause me to defect to Aston Martin and give my 996 to " 'er Indoors". Let her run it on her company and bear all the grief and expense of having a knackered engine !
Marlin.
 
SLB am I missing your point?
Surely, to ignore the available evidence (damning or otherwise) and blithely purchase a 996 without warranty could be considered "inserting a cranium in the dunes"
However, even after taking the evidence into account, I chose to purchase a 996 (with OPC warranty) on the grounds that if the engine blows, the nice people at Porsche will simply install another one; on which basis the issue in question becomes fairly low down in the order of life's little conundrums.
 
Thx for the advise folks, I'll forward it on to my mate and check out Rennlist for further debate on this subject
 
David,
In the circumstances, if someone such as yourself is determined to buy a 996, then, of course, the purchase of a warranty year after year at several hundred pounds a time, will give you peace of mind............at least until the mileage of your car prevents you from being able to obtain a warranty.

As a lawyer, I take the view that a product, especially when it is a very expensive, prestigious car with a hitherto well established reputation for reliability and longevity, must, at the very least ,be made, supplied and being capable of being used in a manner that is fit for the purpose. From my understanding of the matter ( and if this doesn't get me finally banned from the Forum, then nothing will ! ), there is a very good bona fide case for believing that the manufacturer is liable for RMS faults. Thus it follows, that my first course of action would be to avoid buying one of the bloody cars in the first place, or if I had (which is where I find myself), then, secondly, in the event of it failing due to RMS problems, open legal proceedings aided by Tranding Standards against the manufacturer. Quite why no-one appears to have done this in the UK yet, is well beyond my understanding. I would do so at the drop of a bloody hat if it happened to me ! Personally, with a low mileage on my car, I am hoping it won't happen to me, but who knows ! Watch this space-----------unless the plug is pulled on me, of course !
SLB aka Marlin.
 
Steve

In order for your posting to have any possible credibility one needs to know

1) The actual percentage of 996 Engines that have suffered RMS failure
2) The number of those RMS failures that have resulted in a total engine failure
3) The number of owners that are disatisfied with the rectification procesess

I suspect that it will equate well with any other car manufacture - Particularly those manufactured by Ford based in and around Newport Pagnell in terms of customer satisfaction

My opinion based upon my experience of 996's, and I have had 2 of them, the current one of which is highly tuned is that they are pretty well bullet proof, and yes I am aware that the 996TT is a different engine
 
When I collated the 996 RMS Survey, I had a handful of owners tick the "Engine Failure" box but gave no other comments. So for the moment, I discounted this as a misunderstanding for RMS failure. There were very few cars with more than two RMS failures (Scouser is a famous exception) BUT its still early in the life of these cars and they do change owners so this mye give an under reading.

So, in conclusion, the 996 does suffer from RMS, but no alarming statistics for repeat RMS or for engine failure.

As for a court case, I am still waiting to be told about one
 
ORIGINAL: steve lyden brown
I am astonished to read the above emails and others like them ! From my reading of the very many mails posted on this subject over the last few years, I can only say that my impression as to the alarming regularity with which RMS problems have occurred is quite, quite different to the above messages. ..........................
.........
The widespread occurrence of reported RMS failures has been so great as to now cause me to defect to Aston Martin and give my 996 to " 'er Indoors". Let her run it on her company and bear all the grief and expense of having a knackered engine !
Marlin.

A) There are thousands of us that haven't had any problems - It's those who shout loudest that get heard.

B) The way I read this is that you passed your car on to your wife not because you had problems, but because you heard other people had problems? And you bought an ASTON for reliability?
 
.

The thing that i find strange is why pass it to your wife if you are that negative about the car, unless you don't get on with her.

And I would not say that an Aston is more reliable than a 911?

Phil
 
"Those that shout loudest that get heard"............you surely cannot take me for a shrinking violet ?

Yep, I did pass the 996 on to my wife. Whilst I did it partly as a sweetener to keep her off my back when I write out the six figure cheque upon the Aston's arrival, I do also need a car that is as reliable as can be obtained. That is why I have had 911's for the past 30 plus years. But last year I was loaned an elderly DB7 for several months, during which time I gave it several autobahn thrashings and ran down to my farmhouse near Sienna in Tuscany twice. It did not miss a beat and used hardly any oil.
I also remember my DBSV8 and DB6 as being similarly reliable, although nowhere near as much fun to drive.
Ciao,
SGLB
 
Gaxor,
Could it be that I have been reading the Forum longer than you ( until recently I have been a member for donkey's years, certainly decades longer than the arrival of the 996 ) ?. If so, then I probably have a wealth of accumulated experience reading many, many messages about the subject of RMS failure messages.
Insofar as your other point about the need for an accumulation of data is concerned. I had rather hoped that the Club would have done that, but if so then that is news to me. Had they have done so, then I would have continued as a member, subject to the factory and the club not getting too much into bed together, a matter that even now causes me some disquiet.
However, let it be said that if the pendulum has now swung the other way, and that now we are awash with members singing the praises of 996's and pouring cold water on the shock stories of RMS failures, then no-one is happier than me, since apart from these "alleged" failures, I have nothing but respect and happy memories of the 996 as being a bloody good car !
Steve.
 

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Back
Top