How would you rank 986/987 engine variants for reliability?
Discussion
Yup, looking around. Have a budget up to about £8k so mainly 986 but there are some 2.7 987 in budget.
Weirdly though I really would like a dark blue 986 with ambers...
Noticed that the early 2.5's command quite a premium, or maybe just optimistic by the sellers. Between £5-£7k there's pretty much every year and every variant of 986!
They're old cars now though so more looking on colours/options I want, condition, history and quality of seller. Oh and working air con. If it just needed a regas you would have done it, so let's safely assume you took it for a regas and it leaked straight out because the condenser and associated plumbing are borked.
Weirdly though I really would like a dark blue 986 with ambers...
Noticed that the early 2.5's command quite a premium, or maybe just optimistic by the sellers. Between £5-£7k there's pretty much every year and every variant of 986!
They're old cars now though so more looking on colours/options I want, condition, history and quality of seller. Oh and working air con. If it just needed a regas you would have done it, so let's safely assume you took it for a regas and it leaked straight out because the condenser and associated plumbing are borked.
The fact that there is a list in the first place will hinder and help people.
Telling people that they may need to spend thousands of pounds on a car that may explode at any moment is of course telling all the doubters that any problems that they say never existed was indeed a figment of their imagination.
In hindsight just buy any gen2 cars and nothing else, to protect yourself as much as you can.
Some people will not have the choice due to finance, so just buy something with a good reputation for reliability for the time being until you can buy something that is proven.
If you want to buy a risk, its up to you??
Good luck.
Gadgit.
Telling people that they may need to spend thousands of pounds on a car that may explode at any moment is of course telling all the doubters that any problems that they say never existed was indeed a figment of their imagination.
In hindsight just buy any gen2 cars and nothing else, to protect yourself as much as you can.
Some people will not have the choice due to finance, so just buy something with a good reputation for reliability for the time being until you can buy something that is proven.
If you want to buy a risk, its up to you??
Good luck.
Gadgit.
I have owned 3 examples of the 986 S to date and have covered approx 70k miles between them. Never had a problem with any of their engines. All 3 cars were well maintained examples from near the top of the market, but all superb. Would thoroughly recommend purchase of any well looked after 986. Plenty of oil changes always desirable on any high performance car.
The eyes open approach is a pretty essential commodity when looking at them. It seems to me that the best way to buy a 3.4 is with the knowledge available from regulars on here, have a slush fund, and just accept the possible consequences.
I couldn't do that and didn't. I'd have liked a Cayman, but just can't cope with the negative possibilities of the 3.4, neither from an enjoyment or financial outlook. That's largely thanks to threads like this, and I was grateful for them when I was looking around. I could have bought a 2.7 and had the relative peace of mind that would offer, but the 3.2 in the Boxster represents the sweet spot for me, and that was the compromise I made. Mine's a mid 2005 car, so there's the IMS question mark, but I regard that as a risk low enough to stomach. If they had made the Cayman with that engine, that's probably what I'd currently own, but I like the Boxster enough to go with it to get the engine I wanted. On the road, it's close enough in performance to the 3.4 not to make any real difference.
I'm not knocking the 2.7 at all, the only reason I stopped considering them was that, rightly or wrongly, I felt it may be a harder sell when I wanted out of if it, and my car status is pretty fluid, so having one that's potentially easier to sell matters. I'd agree from the information on offer however, that it represents probably the least risk engine wise, and maybe it'll become the more popular choice as that knowledge becomes more accepted.
I couldn't do that and didn't. I'd have liked a Cayman, but just can't cope with the negative possibilities of the 3.4, neither from an enjoyment or financial outlook. That's largely thanks to threads like this, and I was grateful for them when I was looking around. I could have bought a 2.7 and had the relative peace of mind that would offer, but the 3.2 in the Boxster represents the sweet spot for me, and that was the compromise I made. Mine's a mid 2005 car, so there's the IMS question mark, but I regard that as a risk low enough to stomach. If they had made the Cayman with that engine, that's probably what I'd currently own, but I like the Boxster enough to go with it to get the engine I wanted. On the road, it's close enough in performance to the 3.4 not to make any real difference.
I'm not knocking the 2.7 at all, the only reason I stopped considering them was that, rightly or wrongly, I felt it may be a harder sell when I wanted out of if it, and my car status is pretty fluid, so having one that's potentially easier to sell matters. I'd agree from the information on offer however, that it represents probably the least risk engine wise, and maybe it'll become the more popular choice as that knowledge becomes more accepted.
Anyone who is classing the single row bearing IMS as being the same risk as the dual is probably not someone with experience in inspecting/replacing hundreds of IMS bearings.
The figures from the class action were out of date when offered by Porsche to the court and are now even more dated. Aa everything that rubs against another part wears, so does the IMS bearing and the total figures would be higher by now for both bearings.
Does my experience with two cars have any weight? No, not much. Nor does yours. Statistical samples must have lots more data points to be meaningful. I know of cars that have had multiple IMS failures. I know of cars with 300k miles and completely original internals. The luck of manufacturing tolerances and maintenance habits.
I've been following this issue since before the first public removal of an IMS bearing and talking to bearing engineers, shop owners, kit providers, etc. So over 8 forums and probably the same number of years, I've read enough anecdotes to know that bearing failure is very real to those whose purse experiences it. And not so much for the lucky ones. But I have read enough to not dismiss it as low risk, even more as low cost impact if it does happen.
The figures from the class action were out of date when offered by Porsche to the court and are now even more dated. Aa everything that rubs against another part wears, so does the IMS bearing and the total figures would be higher by now for both bearings.
Does my experience with two cars have any weight? No, not much. Nor does yours. Statistical samples must have lots more data points to be meaningful. I know of cars that have had multiple IMS failures. I know of cars with 300k miles and completely original internals. The luck of manufacturing tolerances and maintenance habits.
I've been following this issue since before the first public removal of an IMS bearing and talking to bearing engineers, shop owners, kit providers, etc. So over 8 forums and probably the same number of years, I've read enough anecdotes to know that bearing failure is very real to those whose purse experiences it. And not so much for the lucky ones. But I have read enough to not dismiss it as low risk, even more as low cost impact if it does happen.
Ims failure would worry me more than bore score! When my ims failed on my 2003 986s at 4 years old and 13k bits of bearing made there way around the engine and the failure totalled the engine!Bore score can be more easily monitored before total engine failure! So if I was going m96/7 it would be a post 2006 car! But if funds allowed I would always go gen2!
Plate spinner said:
Chaps, really interesting reading, thanks!
So a 2006 2.7 987 is potentially one of the safer choices?
In terms of IMS, I think the safest option is pre 2000, 2.5 models. They have the dual row and they were made in Stuttgart, and shared same factory with 993, same engineers, same technicians. The way they have been put together, super-quality. (Imho). I have looked at many cars 6 years ago when I was purchasing the boxster, unfortunately could not find any low-miles 2.5 but the ones I test drove (2) they somehow felt more solid.So a 2006 2.7 987 is potentially one of the safer choices?
I've changed my IMS more than a year ago with my clutch (2000, 986 2.7). It was one of the worse IMS type, and after 60k there was no damage or no wearing. It was clean. We have upgraded anyway but my car is also not built in Stuttgart, its later Finland and I can tell you many parts have been put together in a bit more sloppy way. (Power steering, water pump, exhaust manifold and many more). luckily most have been adjusted during my ownership.
According to my indy and several technicians at OPC I talked to, this is mostly about manufacturing tolerances and sloppiness in addition to the driving habits. It's already a s
t-design and if some owners really push the car on track-days it might go. (having rear impact also affects I've been told)I've plan to upgrade my IMS again in 4 years, (hoping it won't die until than!
My experience with only two owned is statistically insignificant.
But from talking to several folks who have done many hundreds of M96 engine internals and IMS examinations/swaps, the manufacturing tolerances is significant. Other determinants are the load carrying ability of the bearing and the frequency/quality of the oil changes.
The 2.5 era first generation double row is good but those are 18 to 20 years old now and wear takes its toll.
The 2.7-3.2S second generation single row has both age, wear and design flaws against it. It can be replaced but a good IMS kit isn't cheap and the question arises if you should just play the lottery and take your chances (buy another if yours should fail). After all there are many other things that could take out the engine (wasn't it 28 at last count) or you could crash the car.
The third generation single row is far more robust than the prior generations. It can be replaced but the cost is enormous.
Every car, every engine, and every manufacturer has weaknesses that show up in quantity production but not in the prototypes. We love our cars and so obsess over them.
But from talking to several folks who have done many hundreds of M96 engine internals and IMS examinations/swaps, the manufacturing tolerances is significant. Other determinants are the load carrying ability of the bearing and the frequency/quality of the oil changes.
The 2.5 era first generation double row is good but those are 18 to 20 years old now and wear takes its toll.
The 2.7-3.2S second generation single row has both age, wear and design flaws against it. It can be replaced but a good IMS kit isn't cheap and the question arises if you should just play the lottery and take your chances (buy another if yours should fail). After all there are many other things that could take out the engine (wasn't it 28 at last count) or you could crash the car.
The third generation single row is far more robust than the prior generations. It can be replaced but the cost is enormous.
Every car, every engine, and every manufacturer has weaknesses that show up in quantity production but not in the prototypes. We love our cars and so obsess over them.
Is it possible for anyone to quantify the very low, low, moderate and high scores that cmoose gave in terms of percentage of models built?
For example if high means less than 1% of a particular variant of engine then it's a reasonably low risk regardless, even lower if you take into account the amount of failures caused by lack of maintenance and unsympathetic driving. However if it were to mean 30% then it's a much more tangible risk.
For example if high means less than 1% of a particular variant of engine then it's a reasonably low risk regardless, even lower if you take into account the amount of failures caused by lack of maintenance and unsympathetic driving. However if it were to mean 30% then it's a much more tangible risk.
Just to throw my opinion in......I'm with The Watch Bloke and agree with his point. Bad news will always get well reported whereas satisfied owners will say very little.
For what it's worth I've owned my 2006 3.4 Cayman S for over 8 years now and still loving every minute of it. No worries and no major issues whilst in my ownership. No faults indicated or reported by the excellent chaps at Redline Racing, Thornaby who look after it service wise. I doubt they put microscopes down the cylinders to check for scoring but then again why should they if the car runs fine?
I do not intend to disrespect anyone's extensive knowledge or expertise on the internet but sometimes you can study for years and find fault with everything and never make a purchase! Not every car is good and not every car will break. I owned some rust buckets in the 70's which cost more to keep on the road than my Porsche does!
Maybe I'm just lucky at the moment but if I had worried about issues like this way back in 2010 I wouldn't have had my 8 years (and counting) of fun with my Cayman and I'm sure I'm not the only one in this position
For what it's worth I've owned my 2006 3.4 Cayman S for over 8 years now and still loving every minute of it. No worries and no major issues whilst in my ownership. No faults indicated or reported by the excellent chaps at Redline Racing, Thornaby who look after it service wise. I doubt they put microscopes down the cylinders to check for scoring but then again why should they if the car runs fine?
I do not intend to disrespect anyone's extensive knowledge or expertise on the internet but sometimes you can study for years and find fault with everything and never make a purchase! Not every car is good and not every car will break. I owned some rust buckets in the 70's which cost more to keep on the road than my Porsche does!
Maybe I'm just lucky at the moment but if I had worried about issues like this way back in 2010 I wouldn't have had my 8 years (and counting) of fun with my Cayman and I'm sure I'm not the only one in this position
I have been on forums for years now however prior to that owned a 986 and 987 blissfully unaware of any ims/bore score issues.
I then started reading on here when I bought my 3rd porsche, a beautiful low mileage 987 3.2. It was perfect but I scared myself sh $tless reading ims horror stories so rushed to Porsche and put a warranty on it.
Did I get any value out of that warranty? No. Ive owned over 10 Porsches now over the last 12 years some with warranty some without and never had a major problem with any of them, good old internet!!!
I then started reading on here when I bought my 3rd porsche, a beautiful low mileage 987 3.2. It was perfect but I scared myself sh $tless reading ims horror stories so rushed to Porsche and put a warranty on it.
Did I get any value out of that warranty? No. Ive owned over 10 Porsches now over the last 12 years some with warranty some without and never had a major problem with any of them, good old internet!!!
I started with a budget of around 10k looking for a 2005 987.1 tip
Read all the forums, asked a few questions, including here and decided the 2.7 was the ‘safest’ option - but then thought if i’m Going to buy my first Porsche I want the most powerful I can get and ended up doubling my budget and purchasing a 987.2 3.4 S PDK - was it the right decision? Who knows but I for one would have the issues nagging in the back of my head if I bought a car in the ‘risk’ profile.
Read all the forums, asked a few questions, including here and decided the 2.7 was the ‘safest’ option - but then thought if i’m Going to buy my first Porsche I want the most powerful I can get and ended up doubling my budget and purchasing a 987.2 3.4 S PDK - was it the right decision? Who knows but I for one would have the issues nagging in the back of my head if I bought a car in the ‘risk’ profile.
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff