Stefan

Actually, the purpose and function of a fast idle cam and the idle control valve are quite different.

A fast idle cam reduces air coming into a cold engine to make a richer mixture when the engine isn't hot enough to efficiently vaporize fuel. When the engine is warm, the fast idle cam ceases to function.

The idle control valve allows air into a (hot or cold) engine whenever the throttle is closed. The reason the ICV has its name is that the amount of air it lets in is regulated by feedback from the engine speed in order to maintain idle at a specific RPM.

eGas replaces the ICV and all Boxsters 2000 or later have eGas.

eGas cars have a computer-controlled throttle (as opposed to a throttle that is connected to the gas pedal via a wire). Because the computer can hold the throttle slightly open to allow enough air in during idle, the car doesn't need a separate valve for that.

Cleaning the throttle body will likely solve your problem.

While you're ordering parts don't forget to get replacement bump stops and bellows. They don't come with the kit.

(Parts #8 & #9 in attached image)

I can't find the original pics for this but this writeup seems to be solving the same problem in almost exactly the same way.

http://rainydaymagazine.com/wp/2014/04/28/boxster-hardtop-fix/

Good luck!

Your comments are rife with incorrect information but since it is completely devoid of relevance I don't need to address any of it.

1) I am making very specific technical (non-personal) points which have not been refuted.

2) I discourage the use of all magnetic drain plugs, not just from some manufacturer

3) I do not and never had an axe to grind with either of these two manufacturers

4) Your points are based solely on fallacies (ad hominem attack, irrelevant authority, appeal to spite, appeal to fear)

5) Having a bias does not mean you're wrong. But it does mean that you have a motive for believing/reporting inaccurate or incorrect information.

--

If anyone is interested in understanding more about why JFP's arguments are invalid, here is an industry-standard paper which describes why every point he has just made is fallacious (http://records.viu.ca/www/ipp/pdf/42_fallacies.pdf).

I'd be happy to discuss the technical merits since this conversation is not about people but about cars.

No problem for me. Let us know how it works out.

This is what we have oil filters for. There is nothing a magnetic drain plug would pick up that the filter wouldn't stop. It is trivially easy to check for metal particles in the filter when you change your oil. And if you want to be super anal you can check for sediment in the drained oil. To make things worse, many of the drain plugs (LN, for example) use a harder-than-stock metal for the threads, which is exactly what you don't want. The material on the stock part is deliberately soft so that any misthreading will sacrifice the $1 drain plug and not the hundreds-of-$ drain pan.

Hence, all magnetic drain plugs are a worse complete waste of money; they are a risk. I have never heard of a single credible unbiased report that suggests otherwise. Most positive reviews are from people who profit from their sale, people who want to justify a purchase they've already made, or people parroting those other people.

Caveat emptor.

Sounds like your starter bendix is sticking. If that's it, take out the starter and lube the bendix and you'll be good. No need to replace anything. Common problem.

If you're going to regularly replace the bearing then why not just use the stock one? It's cheaper and many more people have used it than LN.

The electrical potion is widely available, just not from Porsche. It is $8.65 on AutoHausAz.com (part #4A0905849B), for example.

Try pushing down on the oil filler cap while it's hunting and see if the problem stops.

Lie under the car with your feet towards the front of the car, chest under the bleeder, head behind the bleeder. Reach up from behind and it is easily accessible.

It's the ignition switch. It could be either the $8 electrical part on the end (about 5-15 minutes to change with a small screwdriver) or the $120 mechanical part (about an hour to change with a couple of wrenches).

Anyone considering signing some agreement with a far-off person in an attempt to recover their money should first have a local trusted lawyer go over the contract with a fine-tooth comb. There are ways they could make you forfeit your right to recover your money if they "try" and fail.

No offense intended to anyone involved, just be careful folks.

Go to the local auto parts store and have them read the code for free. Post it here and it will be easier for us to tell you where to look.

The "upgrade" is a waste of money. It is not proven and it is not guaranteed. If you're really worried, ask your insurance company if they will write up a policy just for IMS failure and it will cost less and it will give you peace of mind.

The electrical portion of the ignition switch on the Boxster is notorious for breaking. The part is about $8 (from AutoHausAz) and it is possible to change out in less than 30 minutes (actually, some people have reported changing it in 5 minutes).

In my case, I had the exact symptoms you report and the problem ended up being the mechanical part. I replaced the whole thing and the problem is completely fixed. The part is $120 and the design was updated at some point (my car is a 1999, not sure what year it was updated).

If you search on this site you will find detailed instructions on how to change either one.

If the stock 185° thermostat is fully open at 200° (by your previous statement) and the fans turn go on low at 206° then both thermostats would be fully open before the fan came on. So with the exception of sudden temperature increases (not typical of stop-and-go traffic), if the fans are going on with the stock thermostat, they will also go on with the 160° thermostat.

The one thing we do agree on is that we disagree.

For those who don't want to slog through the entire post, I will summarize my position:

This device is worse than stock and the vendors have concocted invalid, biased, experiments that mislead people into believing that it benefits them. It attempts to solve a non-existent problem and offers no real-life benefit other than to lighten your wallet.

The whole thing reminds me of monster cable for which nobody has claimed a longstanding independently offered $1 million reward to prove its superiority.

Caveat emptor.

data loggers, which were left in the test cars for periods ranging from five days to two weeks in order to observe how the vehicle's baseline temperatures responded in "real world" driving conditions

The issue with this test is that you are comparing the data collected with likely relevant differences (external temp, humidity, barometric pressure) in driving conditions. Additionally, it is a normal phenomenon for people with recently modded cars to drive differently to "test" out the mod and that itself skews results.

no one ever implied that a cooler thermostat was going to prevent a vehicle from overheating

That is true. I just wanted to point out to the casual observer that if their car tends to run hot, this part won't do anything to remedy that.

we employed a laboratory magnetic stirring hot plate and four liter glass beaker for our bench tests

Ironically, this test fails to determine the truth almost for the opposite reason the first one does: by eliminating possibly relevant variables found in real-world testing you also invalidate the test results. Such relevant variables are difficult to predict but they could possibly include non-uniformity of heating of coolant or the part itself, other external forces, vibration, turbulence in the fluid flow, etc.

several owners have commented that they feel the car is warming up "more quickly"

While this is interesting, the reports of biased people cannot be used as reliable scientific evidence.

the manufacture was asked about this observation, they confirmed that "It is a normal observation" for the 160F stat to be observed as warming up to running temps more quickly due to increased warm water flowing sooner

I'd like to hear more about the theory of why it would warm up more quickly. Increasing the cooling capacity of the system earlier should dissipate more heat early, which should cause the temperature to rise more slowly.

none of the cars, my own included, has demonstrated any problems passing state emissions testing

State emissions tests are done at full operating temperature at which time the 160 deg thermostat performs identically to the stock thermostat. So this does not surprise me. It is during warmup I am suggesting the emission will be higher.

---

What this all amounts to is that it is really tricky business to design a test that gives meaningful results. Trained scientists make errors doing this all of the time. That is why we read that X causes cancer then later that X prevents cancer. While I appreciate carefully thought out experiments I just do not see the above as demonstrative of a benefit.

I use both on my Boxster and they make a noticeable improvement in crispness of handling. But they also increase the harshness of the ride. I can't imagine that the front of the 996 is much more rigid than the Boxster given that it uses almost all of the same parts.

Common problem.

Here's a workaround: http://www.ppbb.com/phorum/read.php?6,1509504,1509504#msg-1509504

And a true fix: http://www.ppbb.com/phorum/read.php?6,1526423,1526423#msg-1526423

I agree with the above commentary that suggests the 160 degree thermostat is ineffectual. It would be nearly impossible to perform a controlled experiment that demonstrates that it is effective as there are too many variables that cannot be controlled. I think everyone is in agreement that it won't prevent your car from overheating as the stock thermostat opens fully before that happens.

Additionally, note that the 160 degree thermostat makes the car take longer to warm up which decreases fuel economy and increases emissions.

The moral of the story is that if your car is running at normal operating temps, the stock thermostat is fully open and you're getting 100% of the benefit that at 160 degree thermostat would give with none of the ill effects.

The rhetoric that suggests the stock thermostat doesn't actually open when it is supposed to is based on similarly uncontrolled experiments, whose results are worse than incorrect, they are misleading.

Save your money on the thermostat install and instead take your lady out to a nice dinner. You'll get more mileage that way.

Several of us have fixed this exact problem by lubing our starters. Mine got to a point where it was screeching on nearly every start. Now 2+ years after lubing it the problem is still gone.