Porsche 911UK Forum

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Hullo, I have a Cayman

I would be getting my indy just to do a borescope and check if there is any scoring , if not then you can sleep again at night just keep using good oil and stay under 3k revs until its fully warmed up. love the car in the snow pics :thumb:
 
Bore scoring is extremely rare. Keep the servicing up, change the oil regularly and warm the car up for a few miles before mashing the loud pedal and you'll be fine. Just enjoy!
 
Whytar said:
Bore scoring is extremely rare. Keep the servicing up, change the oil regularly and warm the car up for a few miles before mashing the loud pedal and you'll be fine. Just enjoy!

Afraid, I cannot agree with you there. It's a widespread and common issue and much more worthy of concern than IMS ever was on the earlier lumps.

And while I always warm my cars up carefully as it is a generally sound approach, it won't make the slightest difference to whether these cars bore score.
 
pothole said:
Whytar said:
Bore scoring is extremely rare. Keep the servicing up, change the oil regularly and warm the car up for a few miles before mashing the loud pedal and you'll be fine. Just enjoy!

Afraid, I cannot agree with you there. It's a widespread and common issue and much more worthy of concern than IMS ever was on the earlier lumps.

And while I always warm my cars up carefully as it is a generally sound approach, it won't make the slightest difference to whether these cars bore score.

Pothole , We are all entitled to our own view on this and much depends if you are a cup half full or cup half empty type of person.

There is no doubt that Borescore exists with some of these cars and some versions of some models seem more susceptible to it than others. but remember how many hundreds of thousands of these cars were made versus how few suffer the issue.
The internet doesn't help as the tiny fraction of owners that have this issue shout all over the web, whereas the hundreds of thousands who don't have any issues don't say anything.
Borescore is not a catastrophic engine failure and the engine will carry on quite happily for many many thousands of miles just using a little more oil. with no loss of performance or enjoyment.
:thumb: :grin:
 
We are indeed all entitled to our views. Personally, I don't think it's glass half full or empty. It's a serious and widespread problem whatever your attitude.

One major engine rebuilder alone is doing hundreds in the UK annually. Many have been done under warranty at OPCs. Many other outfits are doing cylinder repairs - not just one or two, many. I speak to a lot of specialists and traders. You do not have to look hard to find examples of 3.4-3.8 M97 engines with bore scoring. They are numerous, unlike IMS failure which in my view was never as commonplace as conventional wisdom holds and is indeed pretty rare.

It is actually quite difficult to find examples of IMS failure. I only know of one failure that happened to a forum user in the UK in my years of Porsche ownership (roughly six years), forum trawling and people involved professionally with these cars. Bore score failure with 3.4-3.8 M97 engines are very easy to come by, by contrast. They are, quite frankly, everywhere if you care to look.

Moreover, the vast majority of these repairs do not get shouted about on the internet. They aren't mentioned at all. To be absolutely frank, my view on the larger M97 engines is that they all have bore issues if they have a few miles on them, it's just a question of how much and the rate of deterioration. Scope any of the relevant lumps and I will bet my house that with almost any example with some miles under its belt you will find more marking on pots 4-6 than the other bank. The suboptimal cooling management combined with the plastic piston coatings and high torque loads are only going to go one way.

That said, I agree that to a certain extent the saving grace is that it's not a binary failure mode. You might hit 100k with only minor marking / scuffing that has no real implications. Or you might have massive oil consumption and major scoring by 25k. Even if you do get quite bad scoring, the engine may run for a considerable period without any major downsides bar increased oil consumption. The performance of my car even with really bad scoring was fine.

So to clarify, by saying they've all got it, I do not mean they're all about to go tits up next week. Clearly they are not. It would seem some hit 100k+ miles (though examples of 3.4-3.8 lumps with truly big mileages on the original case are very, very hard to find - if you can show me such an engine with 200k+ I'll be very impressed, meanwhile there are loads of M96 cars around with huge mileages, and that's not just because they are older). But it's a fundamental flaw, not an occasional failure mode.

I don't want to make this thread all about bore scoring, but the reality is that it's the single most important issue for me with the car and it will be central to my decision re whether to keep it. Moreover, I sensed an implication in your post that contradicted your opening gambit re everyone being entitled to their views. I'm not sure you really believe that.

In any case, these are my views on the matter. I've really only expanded on them here in order to clarify that they are considered and informed, not hysterical. I absolutely do not insist anybody agrees with my views or even takes any notice of them. But there is a tendency to dismiss anybody who thinks the problem is widespread is automatically scaremongering and that is conspicuously unfair.
 
Pothole +1
How Porsche keep foisting these ***** engines for years onto us is criminal. It's not as though they have a huge model range with loads of engine designs. Porsche are a one trick pony that lucked out with a good body design 50 years ago. I'm lucky I have a old cheap 996, if I had a more expensive modern car with engine flaws I would be livid.
Actually they do make more than one engine, the super reliable lokasil one used in early Cayennes, that was a another horror.
 
Pothole - when you originally posted this thread, what did you want people to say?
I personally was trying to be supportive and obviously it's disappointing to us to hear of your issues, but listening to the language you use on the matter it's obvious to me that this has really messed with you, and I doubt ownership will ever be the joy it should be when owning a Porsche. That wouldn't do for me.

Maybe you are right. Sell and move on...
 
Whytar said:
Pothole - when you originally posted this thread, what did you want people to say?

Nothing in particular. But if you say bore scoring is 'extremely rare' and I take the view that's pretty much the polar opposite of the reality of the situation, well, I'd ask you what you want me to say?

I've been through the options and there is no easy solution. There really is no other car that suits me as well. Ultimately, if I want a quality (in terms of character) nasp multi-cylinder engine behind me in a usable package with a good chassis and primary controls, it's kind of going to be a Porsche sub £20k.

I could go Box, 996 or 987 2.7. But buying any used car is a risk and it's hardly obvious that swapping offers much more security when you factor in acquiring an unknown quantity. The example I have happens to be particularly nicely preserved, too, which puts me off swapping.

I probably should have bought a 2.7 Cayman in the first place, but like you at the time I probably took the view that the issue can't be that bad / common on the 3.4, can it? Well, I am now of the view that it really is that bad.

The thing is, if I was confident of getting 80k out of the new engine (I've put about 35k on it in 18 months or so) I'd be happy to stump up for a proper rebuild. If I have to do that any time soon, then I feel like I'll probably need another rebuild down the road. And so on.

It's unfortunate because the M97 is a very nice engine and it really would not have taken much to make it pretty darn reliable in this application. A little bit of frankly unnecessary penny pinching did quite a bit of harm.
 
This is all a bit moot really. Get it scoped and see. If it isnt scored then continue maintaining it the way you have and observe for change every year.

If it is scored then either continue to maintain it and observe for change, sell it, or rebuild it.

Naval gazing about an issue which is perfectly within your power to observe doesnt really achieve very much.

Just my 2p.

:dont know:
 
ragpicker said:
This is all a bit moot really. Get it scoped and see. If it isnt scored then continue maintaining it the way you have and observe for change every year.

If it is scored then either continue to maintain it and observe for change, sell it, or rebuild it.

Naval gazing about an issue which is perfectly within your power to observe doesnt really achieve very much.

Just my 2p.

:dont know:

I have to agree.
 
What, sell it advertised as scored? Or move it on without mentioning that it's scored?

Moreover, scoping is often inconclusive. The difference between a bit of scuffing and early scoring that's going to become an issue isn't straight forward. If it's bad enough to be unambiguous on the scope, you probably didn't need to scope it in the first place.

It's not as straight forward as you make out.
 
pothole said:
What, sell it advertised as scored? Or move it on without mentioning that it's scored?

Moreover, scoping is often inconclusive. The difference between a bit of scuffing and early scoring that's going to become an issue isn't straight forward. If it's bad enough to be unambiguous on the scope, you probably didn't need to scope it in the first place.

It's not as straight forward as you make out.

Yes it is to someone who is good at scoping them.

Anyway, now you are being argumentative and that is the end of my input.
 
ragpicker said:
pothole said:
What, sell it advertised as scored? Or move it on without mentioning that it's scored?

Moreover, scoping is often inconclusive. The difference between a bit of scuffing and early scoring that's going to become an issue isn't straight forward. If it's bad enough to be unambiguous on the scope, you probably didn't need to scope it in the first place.

It's not as straight forward as you make out.

Yes it is to someone who is good at scoping them.

Anyway, now you are being argumentative and that is the end of my input.

That I don't agree with you doesn't make me argumentative.

I've spoken directly with specialists like Hartech about scoping and the difficulty interpreting the images. That's what I am basing my views on scoping upon. That and first hand experience with my own car that proved inconclusive until dismantled.

To dismiss honestly held views that happen to diverge from your own as argumentative is a cheap tactic, frankly.
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,354
Messages
1,439,460
Members
48,711
Latest member
Silage
Back
Top