seems like a lot of car for the money!

[EARLY911ZOO]

what makes these cars so...affordable so to speak?? and why not drive it til the wheels fall off if the value goes down the drain like this??
you cant even buy a decent running T for that price, and here you got a 12 plug beast with all the creature comforts of a modern car...
looks like a lot of bang for the buck IMO

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/CD-RO...orcev4exp=true

[Jules Dielen]

You will not be able to drive it untill the wheels fall off because of all the gremlins in the 996. And then the engine will blow up a 3rd time for the IMS issue they never fixed. Add $15k. ka-ching. Old cars are so nice

[Frank Beck]

This is usually the cause of the "bang".
A small sampling of IMS assemblies that we have removed over the last 9 months. We've done 45+ LN IMS bearing upgrades over the last two years because of this issue. Not a perfect solution but certainly helps reduce the risk considerably.

It's not the cover charge to the party that's expensive; it's the drinks once inside that can cost you.

[EARLY911ZOO]

So the car is stigmatized if there's such a word... are you saying that even once fixed this a recurring problem with no real lasting solution? what a shame if so. A disposable Porsche

the stigma that the 2.7's with thermal reactors have, is still a cause of worry to this day but we all know that by now most have been removed/repaired.

[jaudette3]

There's also the ugly front-end and the el cheapo interior to put up with.

They have been stigmatized - rightfully IMO. Shameful chapter from Porsche's history as they have never manned up regarding the IMS issues.

JohnA

[Frank Beck]

So the car is stigmatized if there's such a word... are you saying that even once fixed this a recurring problem with no real lasting solution? what a shame if so. A disposable Porsche

the stigma that the 2.7's with thermal reactors have, is still a cause of worry to this day but we all know that by now most have been removed/repaired.

I would say the IMS retrofit bearing is a solid 95-99% measure toward solving THAT problem. Then all you're left with is heads and cylinders that crack. But there is hope: After a re-sleeved block, proper IMS mod, and other preventative corrections, oh... and $15-$18k, you've got a decent motor.

[Jules Dielen]

So the car is stigmatized if there's such a word... are you saying that even once fixed this a recurring problem with no real lasting solution? what a shame if so. A disposable Porsche

the stigma that the 2.7's with thermal reactors have, is still a cause of worry to this day but we all know that by now most have been removed/repaired.

The nice thing about a 2.7 thermal reactor car is that you can plunk in a running 3.0SC engine for a couple grand and have TONS of fun. Not so much with the 996, just a band aid to hold a band aid. The 2005 997 got a bit better rep, but it wasn't 'really' fixed until 2006/2007.

Does not make for a nice comfy feeling when driving through the twisties. You just know it is a matter of when, not if, it's going to say 'bang'.

996s pretty much suck, that is why they are so cheap; those who know won't touch em. You'd be better off buying a higher mileage SC or 3.2 carrera in that price range and just enjoy it. SCs really run until the wheels fall off (or burn so much oil CHP/DPS pulls you out of traffic).

Best ad I saw for one of these was a couple of years ago. Car had 24k miles, and new engine from porsche at 14k miles (guess what... with the same crappy IMS, and all the other issues so it was about to blow up a second time). No thank you. Pass

[EARLY911ZOO]

I see what your saying, this one you can not plug and play with other engine configurations, really sucks!

The nice thing about a 2.7 thermal reactor car is that you can plunk in a running 3.0SC engine for a couple grand and have TONS of fun. Not so much with the 996, just a band aid to hold a band aid. The 2005 997 got a bit better rep, but it wasn't 'really' fixed until 2006/2007.

Does not make for a nice comfy feeling when driving through the twisties. You just know it is a matter of when, not if, it's going to say 'bang'.

996s pretty much suck, that is why they are so cheap; those who know won't touch em. You'd be better off buying a higher mileage SC or 3.2 carrera in that price range and just enjoy it. SCs really run until the wheels fall off (or burn so much oil CHP/DPS pulls you out of traffic).

Best ad I saw for one of these was a couple of years ago. Car had 24k miles, and new engine from porsche at 14k miles (guess what... with the same crappy IMS, and all the other issues so it was about to blow up a second time). No thank you. Pass

[72targa]

For the un-informed and if only for my reference, what are the years manufactured of the 996 models in question?

[Jules Dielen]

all of them. 1999 thru 2004. And the 2005 997 was prone to have the same issues.