KevinMac

That's exactly what I thought previous post. The reason I say for some time the areas that are wet are also caked which indicates oil and road dirt mixing over time. It would not surprise me the inspection was not thoughly done! It has been mentioned from others on this board. that these inspections depending on the dealer were not done to the full extent.

The good news is they certified it!

Thanks Kevin - perhaps you're right, but I was under the car a few days back from the same vantage I took the picture, and it looked "dry." I think you're just noticing the fresh oil mixing with the existing road scum. In any case, you're right about the warranty - and I'm keeping my hopes up that they'll do all the right things to get me back in action.

And just so folks know, this isn't a thread for me to ***** and moan about quality, etc. I understand the mechanical risk, particularly in buying a lower mileage car. I've also had plenty of things go wrong in the past with autos... This remains as one of the most fun cars in memory, and since I won't be robbing the college funds to buy a new engine (hopefully), I have little to complain about! If this happened out of warranty - I can't say it wouldn't put me off - but we'll have to wait to see the mechanic's diagnosis tomorrow...

I look forward to spending some time on the forum, and hopefully offering some helpful perspectives in the future. Thanks again for the insights.

Cheers - will post outcomes once I know more.

Well sorry it came down to such a dreaded situtation, but i am sure it will work out in the end. Keep up posted,and welcome! Much luck in getting this resolved!

If it was a loud banging noise then chances are it is a broken intermediate shaft (sorry).

So strange, because the car never lost power, and it was never running without oil... but it was pretty loud at idle for about a minute. If a broken intermediate shaft means they'll likely replace the engine (under CPO), then I should be pleased, right???

Thanks - appreciate the insights.

That's exactly what I thought previous post. The reason I say for some time the areas that are wet are also caked which indicates oil and road dirt mixing over time. It would not surprise me the inspection was not thoughly done! It has been mentioned from others on this board. that these inspections depending on the dealer were not done to the full extent.

The good news is they certified it!

Uh-oh! Guess it was a good thing I've been monitoring this noise - my local mechanic supposed it could be the pulleys/rollers making the odd clunk or tapping noise (he only gave me a quick opinion). I drove another 25 miles or so, then it got loud, very loud, about 1/2 mile from home. I coasted to the neighborhood - still thinking it was a pulley that gave out - and noting the temp was normal and oil pressure was normal - I went about 1/10th of a mile to my garage under power - the noise had subsided.

I got out of the car, and about 15 seconds passed before I heard the terrifying sound of oil freely draining onto the garage floor. Cleanup wasn't fun, a few gallons of oil - more importantly what happened???

I've gotta say, I've been driving the car somewhat hard for the past 2k miles over the last month (not bouncing the rev limiter or anything), and it was probably a bit of a garage queen with only 30k on the clock after 6 years - but still! All I can guess is that the RMS gave up, in a catastrophic way! Perhaps the intermediate shaft seals? I dunno - feel free to speculate. Here are some pictures of the aftermath.

It IS a CPO car, so I'm not crying in my beer, I can always hope for a new powerplant... but as a matter of interest and perhaps debate... Yes, I still love this car - just feeling fortunate that I have the warranty.

Looking at the last pic, it's been leaking for sometime!

White987s

Thanks! I just wish I could get my hands on the 5w-50, last oil change had to go to 5w- 40 Castrol Syntec. Only reason is SE Florida weather and wanted to stay with oil on the Porsche recommendation list.

Hope we can have more discussions in the future. :thankyou:

Happy motoring! Have a great week!

Kevin, you still have it wrong. You need to read through the link.

The 5W50 value is already converted at 4.22.

4.22 is lower than 4.35 (old match and new math!).

This is one of the well known pit falls of an oil with a large range.

No it's not, that's the problem the Mobil 1 spec sheet specs the 4.22 as non Cst! That's the error LN made! Check out the spec sheet!

BTW here is a synthetic lube fact:

High-quality synthetic oils do not shear back. They have natural temperature-resistant qualities, achieving multigrade

viscosities without the need for unstable polymeric thickeners.

Hence the concern having large spread vis with conventional oils. Can't apply the rule to synthetic.

Just got a response from LN: Here it is!

Here is my note:

Error in your assumptions and tables on your website. You are showing Mobil 1 5w-50 to have a lower HtHS @cst then Mobil 1 0w- 40. The problem is according to the Mobil 1 data sheet the spec for Mobil 1 5w- 50 is 4.22 non cst, not cST. You are comparing the 0w40 through conversion to have a higer HTHS @ cst. Which it does not. So based on the inputs to your conversion factor 5w- 50 has a higher HTHS @cST.

0w- 40

HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, ASTM D 4683 3.7

5w-50:

HTHS Viscosity, mPa-s @ 150ºC ASTM D 4683 4.22

You need to correct your table

Here is Charles response!

Thank you Kevin, next update I will make the necessary corrections.

Charles Navarro

LN Engineering

Aircooled Precision Performance

http://www.LNengineering.com

White 987S -

Since 5w- 50 is not on the Mobil 1 site the 5w-50 quoted above is from the same source you used. BTW the spec for the 5w- 50 is the same you quoted. The 0w- 40 which is wrongly cited by you is right from Mobil 1 spec sheet! Go to the Mobil 1 site and download the sheet! Stand behind it all you want! But I would ascertain that the Mobil 1 spec sheet for 0w- 40 is correct!

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS...bil_1_0W-40.asp

Kevin, did you read throught the link (long...I know!). Here is an excerpt from Mr. Navarro:

"I have included the HTHS viscosity - Mobil 1 0w40 is 3.7 cP (3.7cP * 1/.85 specific density = 4.35 actual HTHS in cSt; using the estimate of 14 * .322 yields an estimated 4.50 HTHS, which is off by only 3.4%). If there is a ~ in front of the HTHS, then it's estimated by taking the viscosity at 100C * .322 (this conversion has an R^2 value of 94%). If the actual HTHS was not available, I have shown the estimated value range for the HTHS. All the below oils have Porsche Approval and meet ACEA A3/B3 specifications. The Mobil 1 0w40 is shown for reference only and is not my oil of choice."

So, as you can see, there is a conversion factor that is used for the proper comparison. You are not using apples-to-apples data. This is where you are going wrong.

Well if you use the above formula take the 5w-50 @ 4.22cp *1/.85 = 4.96 actual HTHS in cST. So it still shows the 5w- 50 at temp to be higher. The higher the value of HTHs non cst based on the above formula will produce a conversion of a higher Cst rating.

So since the conversion factor is a constant the only difference going into the conversion is the non cST number which is what I have stated! The outcome is still higher for the 5w- 50. The problem is in the table LN lube stated. The HTHS @cST value of 4.22 for 5w- 50 L&N lube stated is incorrect! LN is saying the 5w- 50 is rated at 4.22 @cst, but the Mobil 1 spec sheet shows it as non cST, of which Mobil 1 specs 0w- 40 HTHS non cst. So the LN data seems to be incorrect.

Morale of the story be careful what you read!

I just sent an EMAIL to LN showing their error.

White 987s - Better go check the facts again:

The vis index at 100 deg C for 5w- 50 is 17.2, 0w- 40 is 14

0w- 40

HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, ASTM D 4683 3.7

5w-50:

HTHS Viscosity, mPa-s @ 150ºC ASTM D 4683 4.22

So my comments stand

No need to re-check. I stand by my comment too.

My source is Charles Navarro, LN Engineering, dated 7/26/08.

What is your source?

http://www.lnengineering.com/oil.html

White 987S -

Since 5w- 50 is not on the Mobil 1 site the 5w-50 quoted above is from the same source you used. BTW the spec for the 5w- 50 is the same you quoted. The 0w- 40 which is wrongly cited by you is right from Mobil 1 spec sheet! Go to the Mobil 1 site and download the sheet! Stand behind it all you want! But I would ascertain that the Mobil 1 spec sheet for 0w- 40 is correct!

http://www.mobil.com/USA-English/Lubes/PDS...bil_1_0W-40.asp

White 987s - Better go check the facts again:

The vis index at 100 deg C for 5w- 50 is 17.2, 0w- 40 is 14

0w- 40

HTHS Viscosity, mPa•s @ 150ºC, ASTM D 4683 3.7

5w-50:

HTHS Viscosity, mPa-s @ 150ºC ASTM D 4683 4.22

So my comments stand

[Not trying to start any kind of flame war here, But unless your car is leaking oil, changing to 5w-50 will most likely do nothing 5w-50 is thicker when cold, so less likely to leak, but is actually thinner when hot than 0-40, according to Mobils spec. I don't know for sure about the Castrol, but in general, you will always get inferior lubrication when you have a significantly higher spread between the cold & hot rating for viscosity, due to the increased viscosity modifiers that have to be added. I know your car is under warranty, but you will just have to break down and DO some investigative work (or pay to have it done). It's not magic, there are only so many places the oil can go. If you are burning that much oil, then you are poisoning the cats and O2 sensors, and an inspection will show that. Leakdown tests only prove there IS a leak around the valve guides, sets or rings when it fails, it unfortunately doesn't prove there ISN'T one when it passes. Inspect the TB, it's easy, fast & free and will eliminate the AOS for sure. What happens to your idle when you take the oil filler cap off AFTER the engine is totally warmed up and in closed loop mode? These are simple things that ANY competant 996 mechanic would do in an hour to at least get you SOME kind of place to start. Pull the plugs on the sooty bank. Compare them to one on the good side. Yada yada yada..the list is long, but easy.

Don't know where you got the info on Mobil 1 5w-50 it's not on their website

5w - 50 is more viscous than 0w-40 when hot and more viscous then 0W- 40 when cold.

I guarantee that the 50 oil in comparison to the 40 oil will have a higher viscosity index @ 100deg C.

viscous = Having relatively high resistance to flow

BTW - if a leak is evident with 0w-40, i can reasonably say it will also leak with with 5w-50

Jon: I found a US distributor in northern California and posted the info in the 996TT forum...he sells by the six-pak and is quite reasonable. Hope this helps you.

I'm going to go to the 5 W 50 on my next oil change. I believe Loren said that the Mobil 1 5W 50 is one of the Porsche approved oils.

Thanks--down the road, please post your results. I just noticed that Castrol Syntec 5W50 is also on the approved list. This is a little easier to purchase in MN (or on Amazon.com, for that matter!)

Best Regards,

Jon

As far as I remember, the lastest oil approval list I saw (here in Renntech) only has either 0w-40 or 5w-40. 5w-50 was NOT on the list.

I'm not saying 5w-50 will not work well but could someone please confirm whether it's on the approved list? Thanks.

Mobil 1 5W-50 has been on the list at least since 2006.

Porsche updates the list yearly (usually in March). We always have the latest update here in the TSB section for our Contributing Members (like you :D ).

Hi Loren,

Thanks for confriming! I see the 5w-50 now in the TSB, there are only two entries iof 5w-50 in that big table, which I missed.

For the wealth of knowledge here, the membership is one of best thing you can buy in life :)

Problem is Mobil 1 5w- 50 is not easy to get in my neck of the woods, in fact i don't see

Mobil 1 5W - 50 on the Mobil 1 list.

Yet I do see Castrol Syntec 5w-50 which does say meets European requirments.

Hi there -

I just purchased an '02 996 C2 with 30k miles about a month ago. Since then, I've put about 2k miles on it, driven it hard, and noticed two things today. 1) I'm hearing some sort of rattle, maybe bearing noise, somewhere lower in the engine. Could be alternator, water pump, but it sounds further forward than that - maybe something near the bell housing? 2) For the first time, in the month, I just found a bit of oil on the garage floor - so looks like RMS failure. It appears as though there's a bit of oil on the underside of the engine, just behind the rear sway bar - looks like a drip from the end of an exposed bolt right in the center? Is this indicative of the RMS leak?

So I had the car thoroughly inspected with a PPI, and the RMS was checked. Perhaps the prior owner was just too gentle on the car!

The good news is that it's Porsche CPO'd and I'm looking forward to having that peace of mind... the bad news is it can't help but make you paranoid when anything fails on a high-end car. Also, it's the simple pain in the *** of having to deal with it...

In a nutshell, I couldn't be happier with the car - it drives wonderfully, the options are great, the engine sounds amazing, especially hitting 6k or so at WOT, then dropping it into 4th gear - just awesome. The handling is unparalleled - I've been driving Bimmers for the past decade or so and I've always been a proponent of "balance" and neutral handling - but this car breaks all the rules, in such a great way. The traction is amazing... So - I'm not unhappy with my choice, the cost of having a used car is this kind of frustration, and the savings, well, of course I paid half of the sticker price with 30k miles.

I'm not sure what I'm looking for here - besides a few word of encouragement, and perhaps any suggestions on the rattling noise. Seems as though this started about the same time I saw some oil on the garage floor, the past 2 days. If nothing constructive - then no worries, and I look forward to being a contributor on the board in the future.

Cheers,

eDoug

:renntech:

You sure it's not the IMS, rattling could mean a broken Intermediate shaft

I have heard input shaft bearings that are going out do as you say! As you let out the clutch it puts a load on the input shaft.

I was stopped by a San Mateo Co. deputy sheriff on I-280 and he told me that the raised spoiler was a cop magnet. He didn't write me.

I pulled the spoiler fuse and now the warning light comes on at 75mph and won't go away until I turn the ignition off.

I did a search but didn't see how to specifically remove light bulbs. I'm not too mechanically gifted. Could someone give me some instructions. Also, the Low Fuel light doesn't come on at start-up. Is the spoiler light the same as the low fuel light?

Is there some other way to disable the spoiler besides pulling the fuse?

Thanks

bolobar

Maybe you should just slow down.

Still not sure why you think you have a mixture poblem. The codes presented point to O2 sensors. You may running up the wrong tree based on false assumptions.

Unleaded fuel will always leave black deposits on the exhaust pipes. They old grey was from lead. The unleaded fuel based on it's chemical makeup, specifically MTB, will not leave grey on the tailpipes. So if you are using this as an indication that it's running rich, you are not diagnosing correctly. You need a fuel air ratio count.

Pull the plugs and read the plugs, this should be a good indicator. Does the exhaust smell rich, are you seeing black exhaust?

I knew you would like the Bridges! Have fun!

Ya learn something every day... the alternator is referred to as the generator in the shop manual.

Answered question 4.

27 22 19 - Removing and installing generator - 27-3

What s the charging voltage?

The dealer is pretty much required to stand behind Porsche's recommendation of not using 19s. Of course there are a bunch of people running 19s without problems but its a CYA thing for dealers. If you're the one person in a million to have problems with 19s you can't turn around and blame the dealer.

Porsche recommends the 18 for a reason. It seems Porsche does tune suspension utilizing tire size. Based on the attached article I would not go to 19's. BTW in order to keep the same diameter and rolling revs per mile, you will have to go to a lower profile tire. Results will be a harder ride, and if you get a blowout, maybe a damaged rim.

Read this article and it may bring some understanding.

http://www.europeancarweb.com/features/epc...test/index.html

One would think a valid road test, and working the clutch to try and make it slip would have been done, since we are only talking a couple of weeks. Also They should have noticed a higher than usual pedal. These things grab pretty low. Unless of course you have a RMS leak whereas oil has gotten on your clutch disk. One would think that the dealer inspection would have found an RMS seepage.

A good way to see the condition of the clutch is to get it in high gear at slow speed and see if the clutch slips or the engine lugs.

What weight oil are you using? I noticed mine seems to do it a lot less after using the oil on the Porsche recommended list. I use Syntec 5w- 40 as per one on the Porsche recommendation list. Before I changed it I think there was 15W- 50 in it. I would get the lifter chatter for a few seconds and it would dissappear, just leaving it sit for a few hours. Going to the 5W-40, I hardly notice it anymore.

Any 3.6 liter muffler will work fine on a 3.4 liter car. (The reverse is not true).

I don't think the 40 year model got the sport exhaust - at least it does not show on the order guide.

Thanks Loren!

Anybody know if the 40 th anivesary mufflers are actually Porsche performance mufflers and if so will fit a 2000 996?

Well, As it turn out - the tires I wanted are not in stock until next week which doesn't give me enough time to beat them up a bit.

I am now going with Pirelli PZero Nero's instead.

My question is - has anyone run these and, if so, what's your take on them?

Please and thanks.

Do a search on tires here and you will find more opinions about every tire that will fit these cars than you ever wanted to read! I'm personally a fan of Michelin Pilot Sports. I think in terms of wet/dry traction, noise, wear and other key factors, these tires are as good as any.

Will

Go to the tire rack and look at the survey and test results. I just purchased a set of Bridgestone 960A pole positions. For the money they were among the top picks. BTW they have a 40K mile wear out guarantee, and have excellent performance marks. They are really quiet, and ride suburb and handle exceptionally well in the rain for a performance tire. You will not regret it.

My opinion on Michelins, they are way over priced and you can do better. You are paying for the name.

Pirrelli's had them and did not like them, they wear out pretty darn fast, are very noisy and get noisier s they wear, the performance is nothing to brag about.

I think Bridgestone is opening the gap between tire manufacturers.

Hey Darin, do you have a picture of these stock early 996 muffers split open? Like how they're designed inside?

Have you ever tried improving the internal design (?), like maybe removing a baffle?

I'm just wondering because the stock mufflers are kind of heavy, which was part of the attraction for me to try the bypass pipes (got on eBay from a shop in Santa Ana for $200 -- which was worth it just for the polished tips).

But it's really nice to get ~ 30 lbs off the rear of the car.....

Have you ever tried something like a "glass pack" with bypass pipes? Is that even feasible (?) to maybe cut them and modify a section like that?

I'd be fine if they could be quieted just enough to run at Laguna Seca where they have a kind of low db limit.

Thanks

Dave

Look at this:

http://www.fabspeed.com/996_GT3.html

Then go down click the following! Shows a cross section of the Porsche can.

PRODUCT VIDEO: 996 & GT3 & 997 Muffler Exhaust

If your car is a CPO'd, I'd keep hounding the dealership to replace the PSE under warranty. This was one (of the many) reasons I selected to add the PSE on my car last year. Because it would be covered with the remainder of the new car warranty, since I purchased it through Tequipment and was dealer installed.

It's not like there are a lot of "movingp parts" on an exhaust. So I wonder what could be damaged, and how it got damaged. Possibly one of the bypass valves (not sure the exact name) is damaged on that side.

What could cause damage? A backfire? Just throwing out other stuff to consider.

It could be the cats where as the elements loosened up, or the PSE mufflers themselves where as the baffles broke free inside, or the flapper valve.

Actually I think sometime ago I read an article in Motor Trend on long term 2003 or 4 Porsche Carrera test the only thing that became faulty over a period of time was the PSE exhaust. It rattled which required the muflers to be changed out.