Thoughts on low mileage 3.4 996 vs high mileage 3.6 996
Discussion
Still looking to buy a 996. It now seems you can get a low mileage 3.4 996 for about the same price as a high mileage 3.6 996. e.g 50,000 mile 2000 model or a 90,000, 2001 facelift model.
Assuming all other things are equal (condition etc), which to go for ? Car won't be used daily and I only cover about 5,000 miles a year.
Is the later 3.6 engine going to be more reliable than the 3.4 (Baz - are you there ?). Would other things, such as suspension be shot on a 90K miler ?
Your thoughts greatly appreciated.
Assuming all other things are equal (condition etc), which to go for ? Car won't be used daily and I only cover about 5,000 miles a year.
Is the later 3.6 engine going to be more reliable than the 3.4 (Baz - are you there ?). Would other things, such as suspension be shot on a 90K miler ?
Your thoughts greatly appreciated.
Definately 3.6 996, even if high miler. My '02 996, bought new in March 02, still feels totally solid even with 74000 miles, other than couple of oil leaks, had no work done other than the usual consumables. Several freinds have asked to buy it when the time comes, but it keeps running so well, keep putting the delivery date of the replacement back!
Although a smaller engine, I ran my Boxster to 75,000 miles. The day it left its engine was as strong as the day it was delivered.
Fantastic engineering.
If you are only travelling a small amount of miles per year definately go for the facelift. Within two years it will be an average mileager anyway.
Chiristmas spirit to you all
Fantastic engineering.
If you are only travelling a small amount of miles per year definately go for the facelift. Within two years it will be an average mileager anyway.
Chiristmas spirit to you all
I bought a low milage 996 C2 garage queen over 18 months ago.
looked the part, had lots of history and a 1800 quid service by JZM just before I bought it, didnt look into what they where all about just wanted one and this felt right.
anyways, just over 18 months on and its my daily steed, done an extra 35k miles on it and have around 10k worth of reciepts for service/repairs etc.
had everything one it replaced nearly.
my advise is to by a daily driver, NOT a low milage car, if its had new clutch disks brakes windscreen (ive had 3 so far) varioram adjusters etc etc etc then mabe its worth risking.
I was told by a specialist the week after buying mine that porsches dont like being sat around, they prefer to be used or things can go wrong.
I learnt the expensive way that miles dont matter.
and if I was to buy another id rather the high milage daily driver than a sparkling low milage garage queen, its less expensive in the long run.
looked the part, had lots of history and a 1800 quid service by JZM just before I bought it, didnt look into what they where all about just wanted one and this felt right.
anyways, just over 18 months on and its my daily steed, done an extra 35k miles on it and have around 10k worth of reciepts for service/repairs etc.
had everything one it replaced nearly.
my advise is to by a daily driver, NOT a low milage car, if its had new clutch disks brakes windscreen (ive had 3 so far) varioram adjusters etc etc etc then mabe its worth risking.
I was told by a specialist the week after buying mine that porsches dont like being sat around, they prefer to be used or things can go wrong.
I learnt the expensive way that miles dont matter.
and if I was to buy another id rather the high milage daily driver than a sparkling low milage garage queen, its less expensive in the long run.
DucatiGary said:
I bought a low milage 996 C2 garage queen over 18 months ago.
looked the part, had lots of history and a 1800 quid service by JZM just before I bought it, didnt look into what they where all about just wanted one and this felt right.
anyways, just over 18 months on and its my daily steed, done an extra 35k miles on it and have around 10k worth of reciepts for service/repairs etc.
had everything one it replaced nearly.
my advise is to by a daily driver, NOT a low milage car, if its had new clutch disks brakes windscreen (ive had 3 so far) varioram adjusters etc etc etc then mabe its worth risking.
I was told by a specialist the week after buying mine that porsches dont like being sat around, they prefer to be used or things can go wrong.
I learnt the expensive way that miles dont matter.
and if I was to buy another id rather the high milage daily driver than a sparkling low milage garage queen, its less expensive in the long run.
looked the part, had lots of history and a 1800 quid service by JZM just before I bought it, didnt look into what they where all about just wanted one and this felt right.
anyways, just over 18 months on and its my daily steed, done an extra 35k miles on it and have around 10k worth of reciepts for service/repairs etc.
had everything one it replaced nearly.
my advise is to by a daily driver, NOT a low milage car, if its had new clutch disks brakes windscreen (ive had 3 so far) varioram adjusters etc etc etc then mabe its worth risking.
I was told by a specialist the week after buying mine that porsches dont like being sat around, they prefer to be used or things can go wrong.
I learnt the expensive way that miles dont matter.
and if I was to buy another id rather the high milage daily driver than a sparkling low milage garage queen, its less expensive in the long run.
I totally agree. My OPC service manager said exactly the same. His exact words were "these are not ferrari's, they are designed to be driven and driven hard. Low mileage cars come through the workshop far more regularly than high milers"
Personally I'd go for the 3.4. If it's going to be a daily driver then you're going to end up with a car with over 100k on it in no time and that's where I see the depreciation really starting to kick in. I for one wouldn't buy a 996 with 100k miles on it and I think you'll find a lot of others like me.
thorny said:
Agree with Carrera2...
Edited by thorny on Thursday 14th December 10:10
So do I.
I bought my 2000 996 3.4 two years ago with 28,000 on the clock from OPC. It's now done 58,000 and aside for an RMS replacement (28,000 ago - it needed replacing after it sat in the dealers for a while... go figure...) and a minor electrical problem sorted under warranty it has been bulletproof, and aside from servicing and consumables it hasn't cost me a bean.... The more I use it the better it gets!
PS It's for sale if you are interested....! See profile.
Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Thursday 14th December 10:35
Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Thursday 14th December 10:36
As above , I bought my '99 with 43k miles last year , no problems with it in the last 14 months...
.. I don't think 5-6k miles a year is too low , it's keeping the car ticking over nicely..So what you have is a 3.4 with 50k that's nicely loosened up for you, rather than a 3.6 that's about to hit 100k. There's a reason it's cheap!!
..Having said all that , I would agree that it's doing the car no good if it's sitting around week after week .... I would be slow to buy a '99 with only 10k on the odo..
.. I don't think 5-6k miles a year is too low , it's keeping the car ticking over nicely..So what you have is a 3.4 with 50k that's nicely loosened up for you, rather than a 3.6 that's about to hit 100k. There's a reason it's cheap!!
..Having said all that , I would agree that it's doing the car no good if it's sitting around week after week .... I would be slow to buy a '99 with only 10k on the odo..
I personally prefer the 3.6 litre engine to the 3.4 - I have owned both and agree there is not agreat deal in it really but my 3.6 was defintiely a lot faster on the Autobahn.
Problem is, the flippin' speedo got moved over to the right dial (taken away from the REV counter) I find that very annoying.
I notice that Porsche put it back again in the 997.
Buy on condition not mileage as HenryF would say - and I could not agree more.
Problem is, the flippin' speedo got moved over to the right dial (taken away from the REV counter) I find that very annoying.
I notice that Porsche put it back again in the 997.
Buy on condition not mileage as HenryF would say - and I could not agree more.
diesel130 said:
Good point on the resale value after 100K. What are you going for, Vesuvius, when you sell yours ?
Depends if I can get a decent offer.
I want a 996 Turbo Tip.
I need to sell privately, I've been offered £26k by a dealer, but my car has a new Becker hifi with Ipod, four new tyres, four new pads and a recent service, plus thirteen months OPC waranty.
If I can't get very near to £30k then I'll just get it Zymolled in Spring and keep it. To be honest it's every car you ever need.
Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Thursday 14th December 14:40
Hi Diesel 130, We have had 3.4's and 3.6's break engines @ under 50K - so although few suffer a failure - low mileage doesn't neccessarily save you from sudden expense.
If I had not mnanaged to find a way to make the cylinder bores that have gone oval - round again - then I would advise the lower mileage 3.4 since the ovality could eventually scrap the crankcases = + £2,500 on the repair cost.
However I can now re-round those bores (although only on one of our test engines - and we need more miles on the clock before we offer this to the public) ovality may not be the long killer we thought it would become = a 3.6.
Perhaps you should look at it on these lines - compare a low mileage 3.4 with an engine perhaps needing to be rebuilt eventually (perhaps 100K) to a high mileage 3.6 and get the rebuild done soon rather than when it breaks - to avoid future problems.
Baz Hartech
If I had not mnanaged to find a way to make the cylinder bores that have gone oval - round again - then I would advise the lower mileage 3.4 since the ovality could eventually scrap the crankcases = + £2,500 on the repair cost.
However I can now re-round those bores (although only on one of our test engines - and we need more miles on the clock before we offer this to the public) ovality may not be the long killer we thought it would become = a 3.6.
Perhaps you should look at it on these lines - compare a low mileage 3.4 with an engine perhaps needing to be rebuilt eventually (perhaps 100K) to a high mileage 3.6 and get the rebuild done soon rather than when it breaks - to avoid future problems.
Baz Hartech
hartech said:
Perhaps you should look at it on these lines - compare a low mileage 3.4 with an engine perhaps needing to be rebuilt eventually (perhaps 100K) to a high mileage 3.6 and get the rebuild done soon rather than when it breaks - to avoid future problems.
Baz Hartech
Baz Hartech
Isn't it interesting that this is exactly what you'd expect to be doing with a 964 or 993 ...
I'm still not convinced that the 996 failures are percentage wise , any more prevalent compared to their predecessors ... I only know one guy personally who's got had his 911 engine go pop .. 'Twas a 993 BTW...
I also wonder whether the 3.4 engine is more liable to engine failure compared to the later 3.6. The last indie I talked to here in Dublin didn't think so ...
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff