Engine/gearbox disaster ??

[GOOFY]

Research:
45k miles Failed breather 2002 5yrs old
22k Engine failure 2002 5
26k Failed Wheel Brg 2003 4
19k Engine failure 2004 3
9k Engine failure 2004 3
24k Clutch
25k Electrical major 2005 2
26k Engine failure 2003 4
-- Engine failure (tappet) 2003 4
-- Brake failure (rustpipe) 2000 7

All engine failure because of intermediate shaft failure except one (broken tappet). This is very obviously a design/manufacturing fundamental fault and the risks the engine failure are I conclude as so:

High risk : low mileage (<30k) and age > 2 yrs
High risk mitigated: buy new and sell after 2years (you are very likely to have engine replaced- but warranty covers all).
Lowest risk : high mileage >30k, low age (high avg annual miles per year).

I recommend buy a s/hand Boxster cheaply with 40kmiles + and lowish age - at least the engine issues are likely to have been sorted.

My personal view is that Boxsters need to be driven regularly and more harm seems to be done by low mileage. May be the Intermediate shaft bearing/saddle needs regular lubrication and bedding in, and not left to stand idle for long periods at a time - I can only speculate as I'm no engineer !

BTW - above research taken from last 10 days posts.

 

[gdavison]

Soryy again []

IF I get this thought process right .. this is "research" based upon on 10 Boxsters ??? (In How many sold ?? ie how many said Nothing so No problem ,,,,,,,,,)also it was in a Specific Failure Mode thread ??

If I was to create a thread asking how many people got windscreen chips on the M4 I'd get a bunch of yes's.. And then would I be able to assume the M4 destroys Windscreens on Boxsters ???

 

[JCB..]

It's ok

 

[GOOFY]

ORIGINAL: gdavison

Soryy again []

IF I get this thought process right .. this is "research" based upon on 10 Boxsters ??? (In How many sold ?? ie how many said Nothing so No problem ,,,,,,,,,)also it was in a Specific Failure Mode thread ??

If I was to create a thread asking how many people got windscreen chips on the M4 I'd get a bunch of yes's.. And then would I be able to assume the M4 destroys Windscreens on Boxsters ???

Please tell me which Premium car manufacturer selling in the £30k-£40k has the highest % of engine failure on one model due to one issue , and one issue only over the last 10 years ? Why has a company outside Porsche recognised this and has invested in a specific engine rebuild & strenghten programme : "modified intermediate shaft with bigger bearings" £881.33, "Silsleeve cylinder block" £2203.13. Convince me that this is insignificant in terms of duration (10 yrs) , cause (intermediate shaft) , and price bracket (£30-£40k) with respect to other manufacturers, and I'll accept that these are all extremely rare ! However I will still say they are unacceptable !

 

[JCB..]

ORIGINAL: GOOFY

ORIGINAL: gdavison

Soryy again []

IF I get this thought process right .. this is "research" based upon on 10 Boxsters ??? (In How many sold ?? ie how many said Nothing so No problem ,,,,,,,,,)also it was in a Specific Failure Mode thread ??

If I was to create a thread asking how many people got windscreen chips on the M4 I'd get a bunch of yes's.. And then would I be able to assume the M4 destroys Windscreens on Boxsters ???

Please tell me which Premium car manufacturer selling in the £30k-£40k has the highest % of engine failure on one model due to one issue , and one issue only over the last 10 years ? Why has a company outside Porsche recognised this and has invested in a specific engine rebuild & strenghten programme : "modified intermediate shaft with bigger bearings" £881.33, "Silsleeve cylinder block" £2203.13. Convince me that this is insignificant in terms of duration (10 yrs) , cause (intermediate shaft) , and price bracket (£30-£40k) with respect to other manufacturers, and I'll accept that these are all extremely rare ! However I will still say they are unacceptable !

The issues you quote relate to the M96 engine series which is deployed across the 986/996/987/997 range -hardly one model.

 

[GOOFY]

The Boxster engine , even though based on M96, has differences to the 997's, 987'S - variocam (up to lyr) and other modifications -not just cubic capacity.

Be aware that the GT3 sets itself apart from the other 996 models "integrated dry-sump" flat-six engine. It is actually based on the original air-cooled 911's versatile 964 split crankcase design.

I wonder why ?

 

[Mark_Bennett]

It's not based on M96 - it IS M96, as are the 996/997/987

They all have little differences, but they are all the same basic design. Variocam differences are not internal to the block afaik, so I don't see where you are going with that one.

The GT3, 006/007 Turbo, and 996/997 GT2 are all based on a water cooled version of the 964 block, as you say. As they generate a lot more power, and in the GT3's case is intended for racing, the dry sump (a real one - not the "integrated dry sump of M96) is an expense worth investing (for Porsche). They are not immune to RMS leaks however, nor is any car come to that.

Having the bearings etc cast in to the block, rather than in a "cage" with the block probably makes it stiffer as well, but this is open to debate by engine designers. I can see a cage being easier on the bearings crankshaft etc as things heat up and cool down then a rigid block, thus absorbing any movement. Better? Who knows.

 

[berty987]

I think we would all sleep more comfortably if we knew from porsche just how many cars are potentially affected by this issue , and released some info on engine number ranges or build dates. Better still if Porsche stipulated they recognise the problem and will replace any engine shown to have failed as a result of the issue.

 

[jimso]

ORIGINAL: berty987

they recognise the problem and will replace any engine shown to have failed as a result of the issue.

In reality berty, they do appear to be doing pretty much that. There a good few posts here from owners that seem to have been treated quite sympathetically.

 

[JCB..]

ORIGINAL: berty987

I think we would all sleep more comfortably if we knew from porsche just how many cars are potentially affected by this issue , and released some info on engine number ranges or build dates. Better still if Porsche stipulated they recognise the problem and will replace any engine shown to have failed as a result of the issue.

Fat chance of that as they don't recognise the RMS as an issue. [&:]

 

[Guest]

so going back to the shaft bearing issue, am i right in saying that a 2000 year boxter s has double race bearings on the shaft?

 

[Tool Pants]

I use to know, but forget, when Porsche switched from a double to a single bearing. I had this discussion with one of the mechanics a few years ago. I'm going to say 2000 or 2001. When I asked him why, he said it was cheaper. Don't know if he was joking.

You don't hear about intermediate shaft failures on the 1997-1999 2.5 liter engines.

I took this picture last week. 2003 2.7 liter with an intermediate shaft failure. The cover for the shaft had been removed. I could see the ball bearings falling out of the hole for the cover. I asked one of the guys to hold one of the balls for the picture.

 

[Guest]

That looks like a double ball race to me

 

[mascanes]

Hey Goofy, I am also a great believer in using a car, and that low mileage intermittent use of an engine and associated mechanicals does it no favours. As an ex company car owner for some 27 years, most of my vehicles Vauxhall, Audi's Renaults' etc, completed 90k-120k miles during a it 3 years lease ownership. With the exception of the Alfa Romeo 156, which was designed to fall apart (only kidding) and even that surprised me at times. I had minimal problems with all of these cars. A local friend of mine has a 4 year old 14k mile Boxster and so far has had one engine replacement at 11k miles! He only brings it out at weekends, he's not short of money so it's not a cost of ownership situation. I have notice that in the Porsche world it seems that low mileage old vehicles are the norm "¦. Why?......... it's poor economics thinking you car is going to be worth more. I keep hearing that Porsches are to be driven and used, they are very strong cars. Lets use em "¦"¦.[8D]

 

[berty987]

The failures seem to originate from the nut on the shaft that holds it all together shearing off. Seems porsche have increased the size of the thread/ nut to try and strenghten the weak point. I beleive this mod is standard on all mid/ late 2005 987/997 cars and later .Certainly there are no reports of this problem to my knowledge on the cayman.

 

[JAOZZY]

ORIGINAL: berty987

The failures seem to originate from the nut on the shaft that holds it all together shearing off. Seems porsche have increased the size of the thread/ nut to try and strenghten the weak point. I beleive this mod is standard on all mid/ late 2005 987/997 cars and later .Certainly there are no reports of this problem to my knowledge on the cayman.

Having recently purchased a 2007 987 with 6000 miles on it I certainly hope this is the case! Any more info you have would be usefull.

I've had Honda S2000's over the last 6 years with no issues at all! Actually come to think about it I've been doing circa 40k miles per annum over the last 28 years in company cars and the only failure I've had was a blown head on a Rover engine.

The 987 is for weekend / occasional use only so fits the theoretical stereotype for a blown engine very well, now I'm worried!

 

[Black80XSA]

ORIGINAL: JAOZZY

ORIGINAL: berty987

The failures seem to originate from the nut on the shaft that holds it all together shearing off. Seems porsche have increased the size of the thread/ nut to try and strenghten the weak point. I beleive this mod is standard on all mid/ late 2005 987/997 cars and later .Certainly there are no reports of this problem to my knowledge on the cayman.

Having recently purchased a 2007 987 with 6000 miles on it I certainly hope this is the case! Any more info you have would be usefull.

I've had Honda S2000's over the last 6 years with no issues at all! Actually come to think about it I've been doing circa 40k miles per annum over the last 28 years in company cars and the only failure I've had was a blown head on a Rover engine.

The 987 is for weekend / occasional use only so fits the theoretical stereotype for a blown engine very well, now I'm worried!

search around the net - theres bthousands of pages of information on it - the info on Hartech website or Autofarm are useful too, just bear in mind things move on with time and improvements are made, so not all cars are afflicted, and not as many as eweb forums would have you believe. Havign said that don't expect Honda reliability or customer service either

Just enjoy the car

 

[mascanes]

I got the Porsche extended warranty as part of the deal when I purchased my used 987 from West London guys. It expires in Oct 2008, me thinks I will be renewing based on what I'm reading in all these threads!! even though mines a 55 reg you never know "¦"¦"¦[8|]

 

[JAOZZY]

Thanks for the advice, my local OPC seem ok to deal with, things ran very smoothly with the Honda dealer but then again I had no issues with the car!

I'll have a look at those web sites and hopefully put my mind at rest!