starting with the first water-cooled 911, what are the big evolution milestones? as in, "OMG if you're considering a 2005 (just an example), you should look at a 2008+ (again just an example) because thats when they redid the fetzer valves (again just an example) for greatly improved reliability (again just an example)."
within the next couple years, this could be important to me. right now it's just a daydream.
They improved with newer generations?
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:starting with the first water-cooled 911, what are the big evolution milestones? as in, "OMG if you're considering a 2005 (just an example), you should look at a 2008+ (again just an example) because thats when they redid the fetzer valves (again just an example) for greatly improved reliability (again just an example)."
within the next couple years, this could be important to me. right now it's just a daydream.
Ill give a brief summary as far as drivetrain reliability goes:
1) 996 - they all were susceptible to various major engine issues like the IMS/RMS/AOS going bad, as well as bore scoring and cylinder d-chunking
2) 997 - The 997.1 was susceptible to the same stuff as the 996. The 997.2 I think managed to escape a lot of that but I have heard they do bore score (but not as much as the old ones. hard to tell since they were a smaller sample size since a lot less of them were sold). 997.2's are also stupid expensive.
3) 991 - These seem to be a lot better in terms of livability because of NVH and they got bigger, but the thing people hate the most is the EPS. The 991.2 supposedly improved the EPS but also lost the non turbo motors.
The 996 prices seem stable at 25-30k for desirable well maintained ones. 997s seem to be appreciating to ridiculous amounts as the last "mostly analog" hydraulic steering 911. The 991's seem to be at the bottom of the depreciation curve right now. I've been eyeing a 911 for awhile and it seems sort of hopeless for now. LOL.
D-chunking? I don't know what that means, but it sounds uncomfortable.
gearheadE30 said:D-chunking? I don't know what that means, but it sounds uncomfortable.
Cylinder fails and a d-shaped chunk falls into the cylinder.
In reply to RyanGreener (Forum Supporter) :
Agree with all of this. I want to like the 996/997 but that engine just has too many issues. The engine codes are m96 and m97 if you want to get more into the technical details, but it's the bore scoring that appears to be unavoidable without a complete overhaul.
If you bring any of this up online with a group of owners you'll get stockholm syndrome level denials. Can the engines be made reliable? Maybe! Swaps are 25k from LN Engineering.
CrustyRedXpress said:In reply to RyanGreener (Forum Supporter) :
Agree with all of this. I want to like the 996/997 but that engine just has too many issues. The engine codes are m96 and m97 if you want to get more into the technical details, but it's the bore scoring that appears to be unavoidable without a complete overhaul.
If you bring any of this up online with a group of owners you'll get stockholm syndrome level denials. Can the engines be made reliable? Maybe! Swaps are 25k from LN Engineering are about 25k.
I absolutely love the '99 996 but I just cannot fathom dealing with those expensive fixes. It makes me a bit sad but that's the way it goes. I've been spoiled by things like my 500$ B20 that I had in my Integra, etc.
The 987.2 Boxster/Cayman and 997.2 911 (2009-2012) is where Porsche moved to the 9A1/MA1 engine which managed to shed a lot of issues with the older M96 and M97 engines, such as the dreaded IMS failure and D-chunking.
However because of the 2008 financial crisis, 2009-2012 cars are low in supply as the market was very soft, and they are also incredibly desirable to enthusiasts as the last really "analog" feeling Porsches that have a significantly more reliable drivetrain than the older water-cooled cars. So they will usually set you back a pretty penny if you can find one.
IMO, the smart money for GRM types is a 987.2 base (non-S) Cayman; the only way you could get the "good" engine with cast pistons (no bore score) and port injection, and they have a relatively low buy-in because everyone wants the S or a 911.
Note: if you are looking at the turbo cars or a GT3, those use a different engine that does not have the same problems.
It seems like you guys are talking about newer cars, but there was a show out a while ago, which I really have no idea what the name is, that compared the 911 through their development in terms of driving. Starting in the 60's and going through the modern cars, the basic conclusion was that the earlier cars gave far more of a connection to the car and "driving experience" while the later the car, the more comfortable and less connected you felt to the car.
Some of the significant change I know of, but don't know the exact years, was the change to the rear suspension that made them a bit less tricky to drive (something with bushings, toe?) that was sometime in the 70s? The 70's engines (2.7 liter?) engines tended to pull case studs, but I would suspect there are very few of those left that have not been rebuilt. Then of course the change of the transaxle (901 to 905?), that was in 1986?
I may be mistaken about the rear suspension thing, but I remember reading somewhere there was a small change in the original suspension design. Perhaps it was just more toe or toe gain to try to save less prepared drivers or something?
In reply to aircooled :
OP specifically asked about the water-cooled cars, which started in '99. The air-cooled stuff is a whole different ball of wax!
pointofdeparture said:The 987.2 Boxster/Cayman and 997.2 911 (2009-2012) is where Porsche moved to the 9A1/MA1 engine which managed to shed a lot of issues with the older M96 and M97 engines, such as the dreaded IMS failure and D-chunking.
However because of the 2008 financial crisis, 2009-2012 cars are low in supply as the market was very soft, and they are also incredibly desirable to enthusiasts as the last really "analog" feeling Porsches that have a significantly more reliable drivetrain than the older water-cooled cars. So they will usually set you back a pretty penny if you can find one.
IMO, the smart money for GRM types is a 987.2 base (non-S) Cayman; the only way you could get the "good" engine with cast pistons (no bore score) and port injection, and they have a relatively low buy-in because everyone wants the S or a 911.
Note: if you are looking at the turbo cars or a GT3, those use a different engine that does not have the same problems.
Yes, I have been mostly eyeing 987.1 base models and they do look reasonable but a lot of people say they're not much of a difference from the NC2 Miata I just bought. Hopefully can see/test one some day.
In reply to pointofdeparture :
Ohhhhh..... duh.
pointofdeparture said:In reply to aircooled :
OP specifically asked about the water-cooled cars, which started in '99. The air-cooled stuff is a whole different ball of wax!
I am amused by a rear engined car that has power steering, hydraulic or not 
pointofdeparture said:Note: if you are looking at the turbo cars or a GT3, those use a different engine that does not have the same problems.
That's a really good point. I think if I was looking at a 996 a turbo would be near the top of the list.
RyanGreener (Forum Supporter) said:CrustyRedXpress said:In reply to RyanGreener (Forum Supporter) :
Agree with all of this. I want to like the 996/997 but that engine just has too many issues. The engine codes are m96 and m97 if you want to get more into the technical details, but it's the bore scoring that appears to be unavoidable without a complete overhaul.
If you bring any of this up online with a group of owners you'll get stockholm syndrome level denials. Can the engines be made reliable? Maybe! Swaps are 25k from LN Engineering are about 25k.
I absolutely love the '99 996 but I just cannot fathom dealing with those expensive fixes. It makes me a bit sad but that's the way it goes. I've been spoiled by things like my 500$ B20 that I had in my Integra, etc.
Hah. Can confirm-Honda ownership spoils you.
I originally started looking at the 996 because I have a 92 NSX but need a backseat for my 4 year old. At this point it's looking like I'll get a Phoenix Yellow ITR instead.
In reply to CrustyRedXpress :
IIRC those Mezger motor cars have some issue where the coolant ports (?) can separate from the block, but it's fixed with some kind of pin retrofit that is orders of magnitude less of a headache than the IMS stuff/D-chunking/etc.
But overall, yeah. As far as bang for the buck goes...seems like if you want a quasi-modern Porsche with a more classic driving experience, get a base 987.2, and if you want the supercar experience, get a 996 turbo.
Buy this one......no finicky Porsche engine issues.....Marketplace - 1999 Porsche ls1 swapped 911 | Facebook
You were oddly close in your made up example. If you want budget friendly, get the cheapest 996 you can find and be prepared to walk away from it when the engine blows up. If you're looking to spend real money on a car to keep for a while there's not much point to looking at anything before the 997.2 which started in model year 2009. As mentioned the exception is the GT3 and turbo which have always had the "good" engines in one form or another. Well, the 991.1 GT3s have some issues but it's well documented and those cars ended up with an extended warranty I believe. The 996-997 GT3/turbo engines do have the coolant pipe issue but it's really only a problem if you're going to be doing a lot of track driving. We have four years of autocross on a 997.2 GT3 and it hasn't had any issues. In addition to the reliability improvements, the engines also get more powerful with every generation. 991.2 and beyond switched to forced induction smaller displacement engines which are a bit love/hate with people. They are still six cylinders though so they still sound pretty good unlike the four cylinders in the 718.
Other than the engines:
Manual transmissions: 996 and 997 not much changed other than gear ratios, all six speeds. 991 (non GT3/turbo) got the seven which I believe I've hears some less than inspiring review of. The GT cars and I believe the turbo kept the six speed (well, 991.1 GT3s are PDK only).
Auto trans: 996 and 997.1 had the awful traditional auto (tiptronic is the official name). You don't want that. 997.2 and beyond got the dual clutch PDK. They have some mixed reviews with track reliability but are overall pretty solid. I don't think much changed between generations.
Interior: 996....I'm pretty sure you've seen it by now. 997.1 is a huge improvement but still a bit outdated at this point especially the radio/infotainment. 997.2 is a somewhat subtle but pretty substantial improvement. 991.1 is another major step up, much more modern and luxurious feeling, though at the cost of maybe making the interior feel a bit cramped. Porsche really likes their a la carte options so despite the modern looking infotainment system, things like navigation and real bluetooth integration still weren't standard equipment. 991.2 I don't know much about, I think it's mostly subtle changes, possibly some inclusion of the aforementioned optional features that really should be standard.
pointofdeparture said:In reply to CrustyRedXpress :
But overall, yeah. As far as bang for the buck goes...seems like if you want a quasi-modern Porsche with a more classic driving experience, get a base 987.2, and if you want the supercar experience, get a 996 turbo.
Some variant of 911 is the only correct answer for me. I have no doubt that the Cayman is great at being a Cayman. Perhaps I'll be in a position to ask "Why not both?"
In reply to AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) :
Totally get it. Every car guy wants a 911 in their garage at some point, whether they admit it or not.
I just mention the Cayman because if you don't care about the label, most agree that they channel more of the classic 911 experience than the newer 911s do. (A Cayman is probably in my near future but god damn it I still want a 911 too, so I truly get it...)
Most of the basics are covered well above. Every generation they get bigger, heavier, faster, and fancier.
We can probably shortcut much of this, whats your budget and how are you planning to use this 911?
Olemiss540 said:We can probably shortcut much of this, whats your budget and how are you planning to use this 911?
When it happens, budget could be $150k, but let's say $75k just for grins.
4-season daily in MI, occasional track day. I won't make the purchase unless I can afford the usage.
Are you coming to the 2024 Challenge (I assume yes)? If so, we can go for a drive.
If you have the means, buy a 996 Turbo. They're the best. Period. Yes, the coolant pipes can pop out. The fix isn't really a big deal, you either reglue and then pin them into place, or have a good shop weld them into place. Hard to predict when, or even if, it'll ever happen. Failure rates are lower than the IMS issue on the regular 996's. It hasn't been proven/shown that tracking the car makes them fail any more than just regular street use. I've been tracking mine the last 5 years and it's fine. I find that the 997's are much more clinical feeling, at least the turbos. I'd be wary of buying any of the early 996/986's if you plan on tracking them. If not, then game on.
You'll need to log in to post.
