It’s amassing to me how all the evil of the new world is paralleled by how Porsche all of a sudden turned from something noble into something very bad by a) introducing the 996 b) introducing the SUV, c) continuing to remain one of the last independent and profitable car manufacturers.

Unfortunately, I was too young to have knowingly witnessed similar discussions when the 901 was introduced over the 356. Or how about smaller milestones like doing away with carburetion or putting evil silicon chip-based computers into the engine…..Well, there wasn’t internet then, another of those new evil technologies.

I agree that a 996 is a totally different animal from the earlier cars. But it is fun to drive, nevertheless

Ingo

Jeez Wayne, where have you been? This has been discussed on this board a number of times already.

Just had a 996 TT in the shop the other day, and it was amusing to look under the car and see a 964 engine case staring back at me. The oil tank is separate, but attached to the side of the case on the right side. Seems you need a true dry sump in real racing.

Tyson, let me answer for Wayne to save him some time:

In Wayne's voice.

"You guys are really something. I don't spend 10 hours a day on this board checking every thread. I get on once and a while and I read what I feel is relevant or interesting, so I must've missed the earlier discussions on the 996 engine. After all I am running a company and writing a book. Sheesh."

Well ... having "stirred the pot" ....let me take a more centrist view and offer that ... "all is not lost"....

Certainly, if one looks at how the car may function in 90% of the situations encountered, one can argue that the 996 series is "better"..in that the car behaves much better at the limit, is easier to drive, has better ergonomics, better heater, functioning A/C, etc.

Using an extreme example....it's like comparing a new , throw-away razor with the elaborate , mechanical versions of yore, where you popped-in a blade and twisted a knurled knob on the handle to capture the blade. Today's razor ( with "comfort strip" !) will probably shave much better with less nicks, but there is no denying the mechanical appeal of the old razor...it's heft and it's mechanical "feel". And it's "permanent" nature ( not a throw-away). I think much of this comparison can be made between the 911/993 vs the 996. The newer item may "function" better in real world applications, but it does not give the same pride of ownership or feel. The thing that continues to upset me with regard to this example is that today's plastic throw-away razors are *not* priced as high as yesterday's mechanical device. Yet Porsche is pulling this right over our eyes....I'd be less angry if the 996 cost $35k, as it probably should if you look at it in a cold-light. Could some of this explain why the 996 depreciates like a rock..the first "911" series to drop that fast?

A further example on a car level might be this....a new Z06 might perform even better than a 996TT ( at closer to Boxster prices !)...but many of us, even the HP junkies....prefer a 911 ( of any type) over the plastic-fantastic tupperware car ! Why? Because of the many other factors that give you satisfaction in driving, like the size/shape of the car, the feel of the controls , the apparant build quality , reputation, etc.

I hope the coming 997 addresses some of these issues. Certainly, the more coke-bottle shape of the 997 will remind us more of the 993 instead of the 996. Hopefully, that car won't void it's warranty when fitted with slicks ...

---Wil FerchSmileWavy

Talking about depreciation, did anyone notice BA's Market Report regarding the 90-98 cars. The 993s seem to have taken a $10K drop in the last year alone! Even a 98s can be had in the low to mid $30s. Granted one in excellent condition comands a $10K premium.

And what does this have to do with the 996? The perception of the disposable car, the 996 (?), may hurt the earlier car in the public eye. While the 996 may actually increase the value of the earlier cars to the enthusist, it will effect the enthusist to the extent the market value and insurance companies will place a value on the earlier cars.

It has begun...The fall of an empire.....

SAVE US 997!!! SAVE US!!

my mechanic used to work at Porsche back in the seventies. Periodically, he complains about new parts, new designs, etc. His explanation paraphrased:

"When the bean counters took over the reigns from the gnomes of the Black Forest, it all went downhill."

Uhh, with all due respect, I don't think I'm confused. Well, if I am confused, then Bruce Anderson and Jerry Woods are confused as well.

The 996 is a wet sump engine, by definition. They do a lot of things to make it work like a dry sump (baffles to scavege and scrape the oil, etc.), but it still is a wet sump. The Turbo, and the 993, etc is a dry sump, and thus do have that familiar 964 case.

john_colasante - thanks! You guys must know me pretty well right now...

-Wayne

I don't know the answer, but I do recall reading an article and looking at a cutaway of the Boxster engine, and it was described as a "dry sump" system, but with the oil tank integrated into the engine block.

Here's how the factory describes the Boxster engine:

"Mid-mounted, water-cooled, horizontally opposed six-cylinder with aluminum alloy block, heads and pistons. Integrated dry sump lubrication, dual overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder w/VarioCam variable valve timing system."

And you haven't touched on the plastic interior yet. Even Excellence magazine feels the leather interior should be a standard over the cheapo plastic look.

I have never looked closely at all that 996 interior "chrome". Can someone tell me if it is real chrome on metal, or chrome finish on plastic? In which case it is going to look like poopie when it gets old and starts to peel away.

what chrome? Are you referring to the Aluminum doorhandles, shifter, shifter boot ring, emergency brake handle, etc? Well some of it is real others is painted from what I understand.

Ingo

A local guy bought one of the first boxters in '97 and then discovered track driving. At 15,000 miles, the tranny went out. Even though about 10,000 of those miles were on a track somewhere, not only was the tranny replaced under warrenty, but the factory wanted his old one to see where it failed. He was told that the car is a Porsche, and it better stand up to track duty.

I guess something has changed since then. Sad.

I'm not saying that the 996 is a bad engine or a bad car - just merely pointing out that it seems more oriented towards the street rather than racing.

Yes, I know that the factory calls this an integrated dry-sump system. Kindof a play on words if you ask me.

-Wayne

I don't want to get into a semantic argument, but, as you say, the factory calls it an integrated dry-sump system. That is the information I was using. In any case, your point about not using external oil tanks is valid.

ism
 

i am into porsheism i dont care for any other ism.

Hey I found a integrated dry sump for a SBC. ;)

Yes, they do offer true dry sump stuff too. It just costs a bunch more.


http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?part=4187&view=2047


What % of 986/996 buyers know they have a oil sump of anykind?

Re: Interesting thing I learned about the 996 and the track last weekend...
 

Can anyone elaborate on this? Are just the heads water cooled, like a late 935 or 962, or is there more to it?

Thanks,

Tom

I've stopped lusting for a new Porsche after the 993 for exactly the reasons posted. It looks like a Ford Probe at some angles (if you hide the 911 rear side window profile). The engine is not a derivative of a Le Mans winning racer (i.e. GT1 of late and last of it's breed). The only Porsche that carries on that tradition are their ultra expensive Turbos and GT2, GT3 which are not readily available for mere wage earning mortals (which the pre-993's were if you wanted a stripped down standard version). The Porsche warranty is revoked only if you blew the engine or other components by fitting race tires and/or suspension (specifically invoked in their owner's manual and warranty disclaimer (for those who read that kind of stuff!). I saw all those differences Wayne discovered and posted before the first 996 came on sale from reading carefully about the design specifications from Panorama and Christophorus in 1998-2000. The fact that the new 996 is a sales success was partly timing and capitalization of the Le Mans victories before Porsche stopped racing competition. Ruf who sells modified Porsche have always pointed out that the new 996/Boxter engines were built to a looser spec range (Horsepower would vary more than 3% car to car whereas for the 993 and earlier models that 3% was the standard variations in build quality!). Now in order to get a good proper Porsche you still have to avoid their lower priced products (if you can relatively acknowledge $90K 996 tarts to be lower priced than $125K Turbos). Finally, thank god there are lower priced pre-owned great Porsche for sale to give one the joy of driving in it's finest form!

I haven't seen a cutaway drawing of the 996 engine but if the "integrated oil tank" isn't open-topped and sitting below the crank then it is indeed a dry-sump engine.
While this design yields a manufacturing efficiency, it also eliminates another source of oil leakage (there's a lot of those on our 901/911/930 engines: crankcase seam, oil return tubes, oil lines, ect.).

In addition to the advantage of eliminating oil starvation in high-g situations and reducing oil foaming, the dry sump eliminates the windage losses caused by the crankshaft counterweights splashing through the oil of a wet sump. These losses can account for a 10-20 hp loss at max RPM, depending on where the redline occurs.

They obviously like to play with words and names. They call the 996 a 911 http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/...s/fork_off.gif