What are some of the most overhyped "issues" (ie: Forum myths and hype)

[chapo]

How about the dreaded swb handling compared to the lwb cars and how the front bumper weights are necessary?? Laughable. raced both, haven't noticed much of a difference.

[livi]

The myth that the SC is almost as fast as the 3.2

[jrolstin]

Originally Posted by livi

The myth that the SC is almost as fast as the 3.2

but..but... it is

[theiceman]

Originally Posted by livi

The myth that the SC is almost as fast as the 3.2

.. no .. the myth is that the 3.2 is as reliable

[thumbdoctor]

The hype, myths and misfortunes caused by MM...sorry, couldn't help myself, I'm going back into therapy and witness protection.

[911SauCy]

Originally Posted by jrolstin

but..but... it is

My '78 SC has run past 3 3.2-G50 cars in old school drag racing fashion...not inched past...made them look stupid kind of pass.

+1 on the Carrera Tensioner myth...seems very common to add on but in the time i've owned my car and been on this board for 3 years, can not recall a new thread stating tensioner failure.

Hopefully I won't be the first to post

[theiceman]

Originally Posted by 911SauCy

My '78 SC has run past 3 3.2-G50 cars in old school drag racing fashion...not inched past...made them look stupid kind of pass.

+1 on the Carrera Tensioner myth...seems very common to add on but in the time i've owned my car and been on this board for 3 years, can not recall a new thread stating tensioner failure.

Hopefully I won't be the first to post

It would be good to know how many still have the old tensioners on as a %age of the population. Mine was done long before i ever bought it. !!

[Hellraiser]

early 996 3.4 engines blow up frequently

[yelcab1]

Originally Posted by Hellraiser

early 996 3.4 engines blow up frequently

Only 5% of the time.

[CCM911]

Definitely 3.2 Valve guides. Mine are just fine in my 1984 with over 100K on the clock. As are most of my friend's 3.2 cars.

The rabid, foaming at the mouth debates over motor oil. For god's sake, just use a decent brand and change it often.

The very confusing "back-side" valve adjustment procedure. Sheesh! Just follow the Bentley and you'll be fine.

[Daves911L]

Top of the list:
Celebrity worship.................

closely followed by:
How much things are worth............(cars, parts, certain sales, auctions, etc.)

then more distantly:
AC questions. If you want cold AC, buy a Chevrolet.

Yeah, cup holders too. Something that simply does not belong in Porsche.

DG

[CCM911]

You hit THAT nail squarely on the head.

Originally Posted by Daves911L

Top of the list:
Celebrity worship.................


DG

[175K911]

3.2 rod bolt weakness.

I've had two 3.2L '86's. First one I bought new and after a year of street driving it became primarily a track car. Ran close to 10 years on the track running to a 7100rpm redline and never had an issue.

Current 3.2 had 192,000 miles on it when I bought it. Ran 3 years on the track with an original bottom end, same software that allowed 7100.

OK, Brad Penn changed every other track weekend, so perhaps it's not a fair comparison. But of the hundreds of people I know who have 3.2's, and track them, have never heard of a rod bolt failure that wasn't the result of a missed shift or some other cause.

[nicfranc]

Originally Posted by 911SauCy

My '78 SC has run past 3 3.2-G50 cars in old school drag racing fashion...not inched past...made them look stupid kind of pass.

+1 on the Carrera Tensioner myth...seems very common to add on but in the time i've owned my car and been on this board for 3 years, can not recall a new thread stating tensioner failure.

Hopefully I won't be the first to post

My car has 300,000 + miles with the original non pressure fed chain tensioners.
I did put safety caps on them though.

I do not track the car or drive it extremely hard.

[Charles Freeborn]

I'm going to go with the "myth" that chopping the fenders off and putting big flares and tires will make a narrow body handle better. Or for that matter any single "upgrade" that does not take into account the overall balance (engine/suspension/brakes) of the car.
-C

[lateapex911]

Originally Posted by CCM911

You hit THAT nail squarely on the head.

tripled...

[Reiver]

"Top of the list:
Celebrity worship................."

Now that's funny right there...."Not only are you handsome but powerful...."

[PushingMyLuck]

Originally Posted by CCM911

The rabid, foaming at the mouth debates over motor oil. For god's sake, just use a decent brand and change it often..

That's unfortunate. I am positive there is not a single documented case of engine failure from using the wrong BRAND of oil. On any car out there.

The best oil to use is..... new oil.

[RWebb]

define "engine failure"

[Ronnie's.930]

Originally Posted by PushingMyLuck

That's unfortunate. I am positive there is not a single documented case of engine failure from using the wrong BRAND of oil. On any car out there.

The best oil to use is..... new oil.

There are plenty of documented failures. For example, using Brad Penn in 911 Turbos has lead to sever oil coking and the coke particles plugged the cam spray bars = engine failure (at least in terms of destroyed cams and rockers). This has been well documented by posters in the 930 forum.