ConsumerReports: 996/997's undependable

[RF5BPilot]

In the April issue of Consumer Reports, although 996/997's score among the highest in owner satisfaction, they are not recommended as they score below average in dependability.

This seems counterintuitive. Other than quirks of specific model years, I've generally considered the 911's one of the most practical and dependable of the performance cars.

What am I missing? RMS issues? Tire replacement costs? (On average, they certainly hold up to track days that Camry's never see.)

[450knotOffice]

My guess it that because owners of these cars expect everything to be absolutely perfect all the time, they bring their cars to the shop more often for even the smallest nuisance issues, like squeeks, rattles, an interior light being out, etc.. Most owners of other cars couldn't bother with issues like that.

Most people that I know who own these cars love them but demand perfection from the cars at the same time, so they go into the shop for the smallest little items.

[earlyapex]

I love my car, faults and all.

[wolf]

Too much blown-up engines I'm afraid.

[450knotOffice]

The early cars had blown engine problems. Not the later ones (post 2001 - more than five years hence). The issue is more deep than that one simple problem which doesn't exist anymore for the cars still under warranty.