JasonStern

986 owners swap the 996 motors into their cars, so it is definitely possible. And if you get the same model year motor, you shouldn't need to replace the wiring harnesses. You will need to reprogram the ECU's fuel maps and retain the accessories from the 996, though. Basically, you would need to do the opposite of what is described here: http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarticles/Boxster_Tech/11-ENGINE-911_Engine_Swap/11-ENGINE-911_Engine_Swap.htm Do note that, unless you are doing the work yourself and you have access to the parts needed, by the time you complete the swap, you will likely have more money invested in downgrading your motor than if you replaced the motor with a salvage motor. I guess it could be worth it for fuel economy reasons, but if that is a concern, then you probably should look at other vehicles.

While not a 996-centric answer: http://www.tirerack.com/winter/tech/techpage.jsp?techid=168

Given the presence of a winter vehicle for winter driving, I would prefer all-seasons. But there's a saying that all-season tires are really no season tires, which has a lot of validity should someone own only a single vehicle. Obviously, I love driving my 996 significantly more than my Xterra, so I like to drive it as much as safely possible. While I have gotten along fine recently in Nevada with all-seasons and a second 4WD vehicle, my main concern is really the tires losing grip in low temperature situations. The obvious solution would be to avoid any spirited driving, but if I could do that, I probably would have bought one of those Honda Corollas people rave about. Regarding those Continental tires I actually run Continental tires on both of my streetbikes. While they lack the grip of the Dunlop and Pirellis they replaced, they more than exceeded the grip necessary for any reasonable riding on public streets, although they aren't confidence inspiring in the wet. Serviceable, even in one surprise flash flood level rain, but not confidence inspiring. I have no experience with them on cars, though. They seem rather expensive for what they are. Have you tried a pair? doodon2whls's comment in http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/who-is-the-best-tire-manufacturer-1170466144 honestly has me leaning towards Michelins, but I honestly suspect that having a rear-wheel drive, rear-weight oriented car slightly skews some of the street tire performance metrics and testing...

No, I did not. I stopped after the fuel pressure test as the fuel pressure reading was well within spec, and it seemed to me like the pressure would have to be either high (clogged) or low if there was fuel delivery problems, especially given that one bank is running richer than the other where fuel pressure should affect both banks. Weather depending, I might try that this weekend before taking it to the shop. The car is running fine, and it takes a while for the CEL to re-trigger, so I doubt it is a major problem and don't mind driving it a bit while trying to track down the culprit. Thanks for the idea!

The 15-20% reduction might not sound like a lot, but the difference is huge. The base 997 shifter isn't that much more expensive than the B&M shifter. If you opt for the GT3 shifter, you get metal bushings, which may be beneficial if you track the car. That said, the GT3 shifter is considerably more expensive. The installation is fairly straightforward. The only thing that bit me was popping the cables back in. I was expecting them to slide in effortlessly, and wasted a while trying to do that, before finally just pushing on them. The other important thing to remember is to take a marker and mark the cable end attachments. The base 997 shifter came with the alignment tool, but the markings were still nice for peace of mind. Also, the B&M shifter can be rather hard to shift in below freezing weather until the transmission fluid heats up. If you only drive in warm weather, it's a non-issue. But I had one in my Boxster, and the first time it was hard to shift in cold weather, I immediately feared a transmission rebuild was coming soon. Just something to be aware of.

Ignoring the dealer markup, this is a good example of why to try to buy from a private party owner. Even if everything checks out, you have no idea who the previous owner was, how they drove the car, etc. While the seller might still try to screw you over, at least you can be the judge instead of blindly guessing. Make sure to have them drive you for half of the test drive and pay attention to how they drive as well as all of the noises the car makes. Plus there isn't anything a dealership mechanic would find that a Porsche specialist wouldn't. In fact, it's more likely they would miss something. And finally, (at least the higher volume) dealers seem not to care about repair documentation, spare goodies (winter rims, hard top for cabriolets, original parts, spare parts, etc.). Some things to think about, at least. Best of luck finding another gold/burgundy 911!

+1 on that... unless the chirp comes from traction control being disabled. ;)

Hi all, In the colder months, I run a set of 225/40-18 front, 265/35-18 back Boxster S rims on my 1999 C2. I purchased them with Kumho Ecsta ASX all-season tires, which are the popular budget all-season Boxster tire option. The rears have worn down to a point where, while I trust them in the dry and light rain, I'm a little skeptical about their traction in heavier rain. I live in northern Nevada where the weather is mostly dry, but the temperatures get cold, so traction in the 10-70 degree weather range is important. The tires need to be able to occasionally handle moderate wet roads. As far as snow goes, I have a Nissan Xterra which I drive whenever the weather report predicts snow, but there is that rare time where a light dusting may occur while I am working that I will need to drive in. So far, that hasn't happened in my 911, but it did in my previous Boxster. That said, a majority of the miles put on the tires will be in 30-60 degree dry weather, and two major drawbacks that I have experienced in the past from winter tires are significantly reduced traction and tire life. The front tires still have good traction, and thus the rear tires would be paired with Kumho Ecsta ASXs in the front. I have been happy with the Kumho Ecsta ASXs, but given that tires are significantly cheaper than a potential accident, I'd rather pay more for a better tire as insurance should the better tire be justified. So, my question is whether to go with a winter tire such as the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-60, go with an all-season tire such as the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3, or less likely, stick with the "not broken" Kumho Ecsta ASX? Does anyone have experience with the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-60? If so, how is the dry weather performance and tire wear? Does anyone have experience with the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3? If so, how do they behave in wet weather and low temperatures? I'm open to other tire options, but would prefer that they be available through TireRack as their distribution center is twenty miles outside of Reno so I can support a local (to me) business, and they even drop tires off to my local independent Porsche shop that doesn't mark their prices up should they mount and balance them. And, yes, I should have gotten a C4 to begin with, but I love my C2 and I seriously doubt my girl will let me buy another 996 unless it's an automatic cabriolet. :( Thank you, Jason Stern

Another route to go is the shifter from the 997. While not as short as a short shift kit, it is still significantly shorter and makes the 996 shifter feel like the shifter from a semi. Plus, it bolts right in without any cutting or modification to the stock parts, so you can always return the car to stock form at a later date.

As I said, I'd check back in after a while. It took a couple hundred miles, but the check engine light re-triggered. Given the low mileage for the age, I'm inclined to believe it's a clogged injector or a failing O2 sensor. In either case, refurbishing six injectors and/or replacing four O2 sensors without completely identifying the problem is too expensive and too much work for my taste, so I'll take it to my local independent Porsche mechanic sometime shortly and have them properly diagnose the problem. I'll report back then with what they find.

Did you verify the spark plug gap prior to installation? "Gapped as set from [bosch] factory" might not be the factory specs or might have variances from plug to plug, despite them not being mishandled or dropped.

I think you are referring to the professional kit and not the enthusiast kit. If you own less than three Porsches, it is more cost effective to buy the enthusiast kit, which costs $287, plus likely just under $200 in shipping and customs fees.

Good to know. I checked soon after to ensure the light illuminates when the ignition is in the on position with the engine off, so I know the bulb didn't burn out. I just wanted to double check that the fault clearing itself is normal. So far I have put 150 miles on the Techron filled tank without the CEL re-triggering. I'll post again if the fault re-triggers and provides any additional information, or if it doesn't re-trigger, in a couple hundred miles with the future FRA and TRA values. Thanks, all!

Much appreciated (same to everyone who has replied). I drove it low on gas today, and the check engine light turned off without me resetting the code. I haven't verified that the code is still present, but is that possible? Or did the bulb burn out? It's not an AUDI so I doubt the light has been illuminated for that long... I did add a bottle of Techron concentrate at less than 1/8th of a tank and filled it to about 3/4th tank. So far, I put 110-130 miles on it and haven't noticed any problems. I will reattach the Durametric when I get a chance, or should the check engine light re-trigger, sooner to get additional information. Thanks again, all.

Since it took 90 miles for the fault to re-trigger last time, and since the car is running rich as opposed to running lean, and since everything else checked out, I will definitely give this a try. Well, that and it's so hot that I really don't want to spend hours in the garage tearing apart a near-perfectly running car... :) Thank you!

Since I just did this... Steady 14 in.Hg of vacuum 89'F ambient temperature 4800 feet elevation engine at operating temperature 680 RPM idle

Don't drive with one worn tire and one new tire. Even if no additional damage or wear happens to the car, the amount of grip the tires will provide is going to differ, causing a potential safety risk, especially in rain/snow/ice. If you cannot afford two new tires, check used tire stores/junk yards/craigslist/ebay for a matching set with the same level of wear, and have them properly balanced when mounted.

I'll try to contribute without repeating what has been already said: The biggest factor is the driver. No tires can compensate for a driver's lack of experience or bad choices made while driving. Porsche Stability Management should help significantly. I haven't personally driven a 911 with PSM, but I have driven rear-wheel drive cars in the snow with such driver aids and they help significantly when you are trying to correct a loss of traction. Traction control will help a little bit, especially if one tire has more traction than the other while you are applying power, thus potentially causing a slide. But traction control is nowhere near as beneficial as having the car be able to detect slip on all four tires and adjust brake biases dynamically. If you do plan on going this route, do yourself a favor and pick up a cheap, used set of Boxster S rims and put snow tires on those. The tires are narrower, so not only should they be cheaper, but you will have more weight concentrated on a smaller contact patch. The beneficial characteristics of front-wheel drive in the snow carry over with respect to better traction when starting and accelerating, as the weight distribution due to the rear engine puts more weight over the drive wheels. However, less weight in the front means less weight over the wheels that are steering the car. Add to this the, for lack of a better word, twitchiness of the 996 once traction limits are exceeded, and it is difficult to recommend a C2 as a winter car unless the driver is not only experienced, but also experienced with the handling characteristics of a rear-engine car. I know I still have the ill advised tendency to let off the throttle and countersteer when the rear-end slips. Everything said, you can get a beater car or truck for under $1,000 to drive in winter. I don't know what your insurance policy is, but for me that's half of my deductible. Even if Walter Röhrl asks you for driving advice, that doesn't make the other drivers on the road safe and competent. If you are unsure enough to be asking a forum, then there are probably worse investments than a throwaway car to use in adverse weather conditions. Just make sure to save $15 for a "My other car is a Porsche 911" license plate holder. :) I hate the phrasing on this, as not all three inches of snow are the same. Powder doesn't behave the same as packed snow, which doesn't behave the same as a light dusting of powder on top of a slippery sheet of ice, etc. I guess the real counter-question is how often do other drivers get into accidents in these weather conditions, and can you avoid driving when the roads are not yet maintained? It depends on the quality of the all-season tires, but in general, with the exception of stopping, no. The ability for the drive wheels to help pull the car in the intended direction facilitates both cornering and straight-line driving in low traction conditions, and the ability to have twice the drive wheels attempting to apply power on a start tends to outweigh a softer rubber compound when starting.

Do you have a short shift kit installed? It should be easy to tell as the stock 996 shifter has diesel big rig lengthed throws. If so, it might also be worth lifting the center console and verifying that the shift cables are properly calibrated. You might need to contact the kit manufacturer to acquire the alignment tool to correct. But, even without the alignment tool, you should be able to at least see whether one of the cables is binding/causing excessive tension. Short shift kits also make it much more difficult to shift when inclement weather causes the transmission oil to become very cold, but that would be more of a winter problem.

Durametric accepts orders directly and ships worldwide. You would still have to pay customs fees and, likely, a higher shipping and handling rate. But that would hopefully get you around the 300% markup that German importer charges.

Sorry for the delay in replying, but life has been a bit hectic. First, sorry but false alarm about excessive vacuum pressure earlier. When I converted my vacuum readings to BAR, I didn't realize that my vacuum gauge measures in in.Hg for vacuum but PSI for pressure. Thus, I converted BAR from PSI instead of in.Hg. In my defense, I did say I was a newbie in the topic of this thread. :) Attached are pictures from my Actron vacuum gauge with the 996 at operating temperature, as well as a reference image to show the base reading. As you can see, I get about 14 in.Hg (0.474 BAR - for real this time) of vacuum at idle at 680RPM. When the vacuum gauge is T'd into the vacuum line attached to the fuel pressure regulator, the vacuum measured drops to 12 in.Hg (0.406 BAR). That puts it within the 0.4-0.6 BAR specifications from that 986 diagnostic PDF Ahsai provided. Unfortunately, this means it is most likely leaky fuel injector(s). This makes sense, given the fact that one bank is running richer than the other, the low mileage of the car likely meaning it or its gas sat for long periods of time, etc. I'll talk with Reno Rennsport regarding options of having my injectors refurbished/cleaned, but should that be cost prohibitive or the injector be not salvageable, does anyone have any experience with Beck Arnley refurbished fuel injectors? Looking online, it seems like I can replace the whole bank of injectors with them for the price of one new Bosch injector. And since the fuel rail would be removed, I'd prefer to clean or replace all three rather than guess which injector is the problem based on the burn condition from reading the spark plug. Thank you!

Short term - yes. Long term - no. My dad is a huge 914/914-6 owner/enthusiast, and any time I mention "it would be nice to add ___ to my car", he gets on my case and points out this story that the factory radio in the 914s was God-awful, but the 914s that pull big money are the ones that are well maintained and all original. So my advice would be if you plan on keeping the car, do not make any modifications that cannot be undone. For example, I installed the 997 shifter in my 996, which is 1,000x nicer - literally the difference between a sports car shifter and a semi truck shifter, but I still kept the 996 shifter so the car could be returned to its factory original form should I ever sell it and the next owner be that anal of a collector/enthusiast. Something to think about, at least, as the used dash components have little value if you were to sell them.

Yes, and an incorrect amount of vacuum applied to the fuel pressure regulator would directly affect the amount of fuel being delivered, which is exactly the fault being generated. If there was no or little vacuum, then I would have a leak, and I could check for that. But what can cause excessive vacuum? That said, I T'd into the line going to the fuel pressure regulator as it seemed like I wouldn't want zero vacuum at the fuel pressure regulator. Was that correct? Or is it safe and was I supposed to take the fuel pressure regulator out of the equation entirely and just measure the vacuum on the line? If it is safe to run the car at idle with the fuel pressure regulator's line detached, and if the excessive vacuum pressure is reproduced with the warm motor, then I would to see if there is a difference with the fuel pressure regulator applied. If so, then maybe the problem is with the fuel pressure regulator...?

+1 on it being the starter. My BMW R1150R was making the same sound. Apparently, there was a high success rate of fixing the problem by disassembling, thoroughly cleaning, lubricating, and then reassembling. However, special tools would have been needed, and a new aftermarket replacement starter with a warranty was under $100, and I didn't want to chance being stranded due to a starter failure, so I replaced it and kept the noisy starter as a spare. Since new aftermarket 996 starters are similarly priced, I recommend going that route. But, if money is tight and you have access to tools, it might be worth disassembling, thoroughly cleaning, reassembling, lubricating, and reinstalling. A starter failure is more inclined to either stop turning over entirely or not provide enough torque/momentum for the engine to catch, whereas dirt clogging a starter or the starter lacking proper lubrication is more prone to making noises similar to what your car appears to exhibit. Worst case, you are just out some time, but again I only recommend that if money is tight. Whatever you decide on doing, if you do the work yourself, make sure to disconnect the battery before removing the starter. Safety first.

The car is a 99 and it appears to have the original air/oil separator, so I suppose it could be possible that the AOS is the culprit. But the car has no oil consumption, no smoke at start up, and a slight negative pressure with a rough idle when the cap is removed, so it seems like the problem is likely elsewhere. Yeah. I misread the PDF originally as conditions necessary to trigger the CEL as they were similar. :blush: The idle is higher than the diagnostic condition states when the the engine is cold, so that might have affected the reading. I'm surprised if it would be by that much, though. When I get some time, I will try to re-read the values with the engine hand-burningly hot. Presuming the vacuum is high, do you have any ideas of what might be causing that? The gauge is calibrated so that zero PSI when not connected. When I redo the vacuum measurement with the engine warm, I will provide a picture of the measurement for clarification. Thank you all!