2000 base with a 2004 engine

[jjflash]

Here's a car that has got me thinking seriously. It's a 2000 base with about 95K miles on it. I haven't seen it in person yet, but it looks very clean. The intriguing fact on this one is that it had a brand-new factory replacement engine dealer-installed in 2004. So new engine has only about 35K miles on it.

It's not my favorite color, nor is it a tip, nor does it have a hardtop--all of which are things I'd like to have, but the new engine is very enticing.

Questions: what, if any, changes were incorporated into the factory engines by 2004? I take it they still haven't fixed the IMS problems, but is there a point when RMS (or any other) problems were engineered out of the design? And am I correct in assuming that a factory-replacement engine installed in 2004, was, in fact, a 2004 MY engine?

TIA for any pointers.

[Wayne 962]

That's not exactly how it works. The 2004 Boxster engine is a 3-chain motor, which means it has the updated vane-cell adjusters for the camshafts. As such, in general, it's not a plug-in-play for the 2000 cars, because the Motronic version is 7.8, whereas the 2000 motors were 7.2.

I have an updated 996 factory-rebuilt 3.4 motor in my Boxster right now. The motor has some updates (intermediate shaft, seals, etc) that are compatible with the 1999 model year, but in general, it's mostly a 1999 engine, not a 2006 engine (when the engine was rebuilt). So, this motor is probably a 2000-style / core engine, with a bunch of good updates...

Hope this makes sense,

Wayne

[racer]

Some one is anxious for a Boxster, eh?

Its my (misguided?) belief that ALL M96 based motors are potential victims of IMS and RMS issues. I believe it isn't till the current 987/997 GEN II motors that problems were fully corrected. Improved perhaps, but not completely resolved on the earlier motors.

I would think that your "2004" motor is actually a rebuild/reman 2000 spec motor.

[mikefocke]

No, the current 987 engines ('09-'10) are not IMS engines.

As for the prior ('97-'08) M96 engines...

The RMS problem is a oil leak, not the biggest deal in the world. Not liable to take an engine if it happens. And well cured with Porsche's latest parts. Most that leak have been fixed within warranty. Mine was updated long before I owned it...maybe 7 years ago.

The IMS can be replaced by a longer lasting bearing and lubrication assembly from LN engineering. There are now hundreds running around and I have yet to hear of a single failure.

So I wouldn't say all Boxsters or Caymans are susceptible to these failures...many aren't and those that are can be upgraded to not be. And those that could experience them...a small percentage. Compared to the percentages for other performance engines known to be problem plagued, not a big percentage.

[jjflash]

Originally Posted by mikefocke

No, the current 987 engines ('09-'10) are not IMS engines.

As for the prior ('97-'08) M96 engines...

The RMS problem is a oil leak, not the biggest deal in the world. Not liable to take an engine if it happens. And well cured with Porsche's latest parts. Most that leak have been fixed within warranty. Mine was updated long before I owned it...maybe 7 years ago.

The IMS can be replaced by a longer lasting bearing and lubrication assembly from LN engineering. There are now hundreds running around and I have yet to hear of a single failure.

So I wouldn't say all Boxsters or Caymans are susceptible to these failures...many aren't and those that are can be upgraded to not be. And those that could experience them...a small percentage. Compared to the percentages for other performance engines known to be problem plagued, not a big percentage.

Hi Mike,

I think I understand the IMS and RMS situations now and the available "fixes" for them. FWIW, the engine in the car for sale suffered from re-occurring RMS failures and the dealer finally just installed a "new" "factory" engine. Seller says it was not a rebuilt/remanufactured unit, but this may be a matter of semantics since a CURRENT (2004) and NEW engine wouldn't even be a bolt-in swap for a 2000 MY car. (See Wayne's comment above.)

I'm willing to roll the dice on a higher-mileage car if the right one comes along and I realize that the IMS failures are still a relatively small % of the total number of cars out there. Nevertheless I would budget for an LN "upgrade" to the IMS and do it as soon as I could. And all else being equal I'd love to find a car with a previously replaced engine, even if based on the superstition about lightning not striking twice...." Even though my buddy has a 996 that had a FACTORY REPLACEMENT engine grenade on him 20K miles after install ;-). I just hope I can find and appease the Porsche gods and pick out a good one when the time comes.

My ideal car:

"S-model" or at least a 2000 + base.
White, Polar Silver, or Arctic silver with a black full-leather interior.
Tiptronic
Hardtop


Now excuse me while I start chanting, burning incense and looking for small animals to sacrifice.

[jjflash]

Originally Posted by racer

Some one is anxious for a Boxster, eh?

Yep.... Our LA home just sold and we'll be moving to New Mexico in a couple of months. I've got the 924S daily driver up for sale ( 1988 924S--90K miles--$2,900 )
and all things considered, I'd like to have a replacement car before I leave L.A. So I'm more motivated to get this under way. If the 924S sells, then all I'll have is the pristine '88 S4, which is a lot of fun, but not something I want to drive every day. In fact, I'm considering passing that along as well, as I'm pretty sure there won't be much a 928 "community" as there is here.

Bottom line--lots of stuff to do!!

[Wayne 962]

Originally Posted by racer

Its my (misguided?) belief that ALL M96 based motors are potential victims of IMS and RMS issues. I believe it isn't till the current 987/997 GEN II motors that problems were fully corrected. Improved perhaps, but not completely resolved on the earlier motors.

The *BRAND* new 2009+ motors don't have an intermediate shaft bearing. I think the 987 and 997 cars are too new to see problems, but I predict that they might experience them in the future. The design that incorporates that bearing just isn't really proper for that type of operating environment. We'll have to wait and see...

-Wayne