When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The mufflers do not HAVE to be removed for access on a 997.2 but does make the job a lot easier. I had my cylinders scoped by Porsche during its last month of CPO coverage and they just loosened them and pushed out of the way. OTOH, another Porsche dealer told me removal was required to change the plugs. Go figure.
The mufflers do not HAVE to be removed for access on a 997.2 but does make the job a lot easier. I had my cylinders scoped by Porsche during its last month of CPO coverage and they just loosened them and pushed out of the way. OTOH, another Porsche dealer told me removal was required to change the plugs. Go figure.
Trivial but wanted to clear it up.
Thanks. We're all about the trivial here!!!!!
When the bolts are corroded, loosening the mufflers would present the same problems as removing them. And I believe in order to swing the mufflers out of the way the center muffler would still need to be fully disconnected. This implies all of the bolts would have to be removed.
I've changed plugs on the 997.1 and left the mufflers in place. Fussy but doable. And definitely less work than removing the mufflers.
On the .2 cars, the mufflers are entirely different. For the back cylinders, by the time you loosen the mufflers, it takes less time to remove them than bend them back and work around them.
Both your sources are right, but it's splitting hairs.
In the meantime, as Groove says, he has no experience on the 997.2. I agree with him in that I'd bore scope any .1 car I might be looking at, but, given the odds, I would not bother with a .2 car.
Sometimes I wish there were two 997 forums; one for each generation given the different engines. Too much misinformation, threads being derailed, or just general distraction of thought when procedures or solutions for one generation are put forth for an entirely different engine family.
On the 997.2 scoping... given the disassembly and re-assembly (removal oil pan and more) required to properly scope a 997.2 I, as a seller, would more than likely never agree to one. Too much risk something isn't put back together or sealed correctly and now I am potentially stuck with a new problem that didn't exist prior to the scope. Simple risk vs. reward doesn't add up for what is very likely a non-issue on a .2.
Sometimes I wish there were two 997 forums; one for each generation given the different engines. Too much misinformation, threads being derailed, or just general distraction of thought when procedures or solutions for one generation are put forth for an entirely different engine family.
On the 997.2 scoping... given the disassembly and re-assembly (removal oil pan and more) required to properly scope a 997.2 I, as a seller, would more than likely never agree to one. Too much risk something isn't put back together or sealed correctly and now I am potentially stuck with a new problem that didn't exist prior to the scope. Simple risk vs. reward doesn't add up for what is very likely a non-issue on a .2.
How about a separate forum for those who continue to preach about having to do Bore Scope Inspection through the oil pan on a car with over 50K miles??
A 997.2 with over 40K miles-50K miles can certainly be scoped thruogh the spark plug holes. At that mileage or more, scoring will certainly be evident somewhere on the top 80% of the cylinder walls which the spark plug method will show.
^^Also I now remember (after prairiedog post above) that the 997.2 mufflers DO NOT need to be removed in order to do a Spark Plug Bore Scope Inspection. Previous 997.2 owner explained this when the topic arose last year.
Perhaps 997.2 owners can climb down from their crystal towers and face the reality that the 997.2 engine does show lower % of scoring, it does happen - 997.2 engine are not a protected class .
......And PDK owners understanding their transmissions pose issues more so than the Manual Transmissions. ------>PDK owners argue it to death.
*Saw another PDK owner passed out on sidewalk by my Porsche Indy shop being assisted by health care staff after receiving his PDK repair bill - He finally came to and I suggested a Gofundme:
Last edited by groovzilla; 11-16-2023 at 02:40 PM.
How about a separate forum for those who continue to preach about having to do Bore Scope Inspection through the oil pan on a car with over 50K miles??
A 997.2 with over 40K miles-50K miles can certainly be scoped thruogh the spark plug holes. At that mileage or more, scoring will certainly be evident somewhere on the top 80% of the cylinder walls which the spark plug method will show.
^^Also I now remember (after prairiedog post above) that the 997.2 mufflers DO NOT need to be removed in order to do a Spark Plug Bore Scope Inspection. Previous 997.2 owner explained this when the topic arose last year.
Perhaps 997.2 owners can climb down from their crystal towers and face the reality that the 997.2 engine does show lower % of scoring, it does happen - 997.2 engine are not a protected class .
......And PDK owners understanding their transmissions pose issues more so than the Manual Transmissions. ------>PDK owners argue it to death.
*Saw another PDK owner passed out on sidewalk by my Porsche Indy shop being assisted by health care staff after receiving his PDK repair bill - He finally came to and I suggested a Gofundme:
If I understand it correctly, while you can scope through the spark plug holes on a 997.2, it could provide a false positive if the scoring has not yet reached that far up. There is no guarantee of what mileage scoring will occur.
Removing the mufflers is not what would give me pause about scoping from the bottom. It's the removal and reinstallation of the oil pan that would.
And no arguments from me about PDK. 6MT till the day I die, which is why I'd take a base 997.2 6MT over any 997.1 save a GT3
If I understand it correctly, while you can scope through the spark plug holes on a 997.2, it could provide a false positive if the scoring has not yet reached that far up. There is no guarantee of what mileage scoring will occur.
Removing the mufflers is not what would give me pause about scoping from the bottom. It's the removal and reinstallation of the oil pan that would.
And no arguments from me about PDK. 6MT till the day I die, which is why I'd take a base 997.2 6MT over any 997.1 save a GT3
From what I have learned reviewing the topic for past 3 years as well as perfoming Bore Scope Inspections when hunting for my 997 purchases, Chances are Bore Scoring isn't limited to the lower 15% section of the cylinder walls once the engine has over 40K miles. Therefore a Spark Plug Holes Inspection is adaquate.
Is it a 100% foolproof method - Certainly not, however it makes the most sense and really the only logical method because most sellers would never allow removing of oil pan/seal/etc...Just too invasive.
IMO, spending an extra $250 to have the Spark Plug Bore Scope seems like the logical way forward.
Lets not forget, Bore Scoring can appear later in the engines life due to cold climate, poor warm up methods, poor oil choices/etc.
As a buyer, we try to inspect all possible issues when purchasing and my method of Spark Plug Hole Inspection has saved my *** 3x during my 997 search over past 3 years.
The ugly truth:
During my search for 997.1 in 2021----> A 997"S" w/85K miles - Cold weather Canadian car
Bad scoring on left and crack in cyliner on right #6 cylinder:
Scoring looking like road with sidewalk on 997.1 997"S" engine w/79K miles which lived in cold weather climate(Montana) and PPI revealed poor idle associated with the scoring:
Last edited by groovzilla; 11-16-2023 at 03:38 PM.
From what I have learned reviewing the topic for past 3 years as well as perfoming Bore Scope Inspections when hunting for my 997 purchases, Chances are Bore Scoring isn't limited to the lower 15% section of the cylinder walls once the engine has over 40K miles. Therefore a Spark Plug Holes Inspection is adaquate.
Is it a 100% foolproof method - Certainly not, however it makes the most sense and really the only logical method because most sellers would never allow removing of oil pan/seal/etc...Just too invasive.
IMO, spending an extra $250 to have the Spark Plug Bore Scope seems like the logical way forward.
Lets not forget, Bore Scoring can appear later in the engines life due to cold climate, poor warm up methods, poor oil choices/etc.
As a buyer, we try to inspect all possible issues when purchasing and my method of Spark Plug Hole Inspection has saved my *** 3x during my 997 search over past 3 years.
The ugly truth:
During my search for 997.1 in 2021----> A 997"S" w/85K miles - Cold weather Canadian car
Bad scoring on left and crack in cyliner on right #6 cylinder:
Scoring looking like road with sidewalk on 997.1 997"S" engine w/79K miles which lived in cold weather climate(Montana) and PPI revealed poor idle associated with the scoring:
Not doubting your methods when it comes to 997.1. I'd say you are the SME (Subject Matter Expert) on the 997.1 bore scope issue. But, again, this thread is about 997.2 engines which are an entirely different animal and I'm not sure the same methods can be applied to the 997.2 cars.
Not trying to be flippant but plastering 997.1 bore score pics and theories in 997.2 threads confuses the issue for folks.
How about a separate forum for those who continue to preach about having to do Bore Scope Inspection through the oil pan on a car with over 50K miles??
A 997.2 with over 40K miles-50K miles can certainly be scoped thruogh the spark plug holes. At that mileage or more, scoring will certainly be evident somewhere on the top 80% of the cylinder walls which the spark plug method will show.
^^Also I now remember (after prairiedog post above) that the 997.2 mufflers DO NOT need to be removed in order to do a Spark Plug Bore Scope Inspection. Previous 997.2 owner explained this when the topic arose last year.
Perhaps 997.2 owners can climb down from their crystal towers and face the reality that the 997.2 engine does show lower % of scoring, it does happen - 997.2 engine are not a protected class .
......And PDK owners understanding their transmissions pose issues more so than the Manual Transmissions. ------>PDK owners argue it to death.
*Saw another PDK owner passed out on sidewalk by my Porsche Indy shop being assisted by health care staff after receiving his PDK repair bill - He finally came to and I suggested a Gofundme:
@groovzilla, climbing off my 997.2 tower (for just a moment): do you just like to write nonsense to amuse yourself? I hope that is not the case, but that is how it is coming off.
If not, perhaps you could just edit each of your off-topic posts on this thread (please re-read the title: Looking at a used 997.2 - questions on Carfax) with "I have nothing to add to this discussion" (or something like that) so those that have provided the OP with guidance, and are trying to help educate the community, can continue to logically share their deep knowledge for the next person that comes along with similiar questions, comments or concerns.
Thanks so much for taking the time to do that; that will be a super gracious action to take!
PS @850tgull: I agree (and many of us have discussed this over the years) that either .1 & .2 models would benefit from seperate forums but IB does not have the interest to do so and for certain technical & marketing reasons, that actually makes sense. Another option would be to insert model designation ("997.1" or "997.2") in the thread title so users could quickly identify threads of interest and keep the topic on model: that was suggested long ago and was doomed from the outset. Going back in time and and adding model designation (where possible) is not cost-effective in the short term, but I bet that there is an AI solution to whip the archive into shape. I'm blown away at all of the knowledge here but it really is poorly indexed and archived and just a fraction is truly easily accessible / useable.
@groovzilla, climbing off my 997.2 tower (for just a moment): do you just like to write nonsense to amuse yourself? I hope that is not the case, but that is how it is coming off.
If not, perhaps you could just edit each of your off-topic posts on this thread (please re-read the title: Looking at a used 997.2 - questions on Carfax) with "I have nothing to add to this discussion" (or something like that) so those that have provided the OP with guidance, and are trying to help educate the community, can continue to logically share their deep knowledge for the next person that comes along with similiar questions, comments or concerns.
Thanks so much for taking the time to do that; that will be a super gracious action to take!
PS @850tgull: I agree (and many of us have discussed this over the years) that either .1 & .2 models would benefit from seperate forums but IB does not have the interest to do so and for certain technical & marketing reasons, that actually makes sense. Another option would be to insert model designation ("997.1" or "997.2") in the thread title so users could quickly identify threads of interest and keep the topic on model: that was suggested long ago and was doomed from the outset. Going back in time and and adding model designation (where possible) is not cost-effective in the short term, but I bet that there is an AI solution to whip the archive into shape. I'm blown away at all of the knowledge here but it really is poorly indexed and archived and just a fraction is truly easily accessible / useable.
David---> Lots of these Threads in 997 Forum derail. Carfax issues or other Thread questions posted by new buyers lead down long path to eventual PPI questions and Bore Scope questions & on and on.....Lots of these thread morph into other subjects.
With lots of experience buying Porsche's over past 37 years, I contribute to these Thread accordingly - Most new buyers appreciate my input and many wind up walking away due to PPI concerns that arise after I have given my input.
One recent example in this Thread would be a 997.2 owner claiming the mufflers have to be removed in order to do a Spark Plug Hole Bore Scope Inspection. That's not true and it was corrected. Had nothing to do with a Carfax question? I believe all this information is relative and important especially to a new buyer.
I receive many PM questions all the time from new buyers asking for my input and always glad to help when I can. I have given out my phone number to some new members with buying question in an attempt to help them.
And as far as an occasional PDK or similar joke, it is all in fun and what I've been doing from time to time for the almost 17 years I have been a member.
Hope that is a sufficient answer.
Last edited by groovzilla; 11-16-2023 at 09:01 PM.
Hey Guys, I'm in for a twist. The owner went to the shop I had the PPI done and quoted up the work. He priced in the work that needs to be done, some more for the PPI & Scope/Compression and revised his quote to, $47k.
I'm firm on the 44k now, more than ever because in the owner's reply to me, he seems to be discounting the damage a bit. He does so by noting that the car has ran symptomless for 11 years, and that inspections have more or less come up clean, when it comes to determining any damage. I suppose that's a good thing, meaning that the damage must have been insubstantial and the shop that corrected the damage did a great job. Also, In all fairness, the dude is probably not a "Porsche guy", and doesn't understand the "challenging" private market for NA 997 cars but purchased the car when he was presented the opportunity - and that's totally cool.
That said, i am pricing in the unknown-ness of the damage, and the lack of any meaningful documentation, which reduces my ability to sell the car in the future. I'm fine with those unknowns at 44k, but not at 47k. I'm going to counter back stating that i'm firm at 44k and, work in some language that heightens the severity of the documentation-less damage.
Hey Guys, I'm in for a twist. The owner went to the shop I had the PPI done and quoted up the work. He priced in the work that needs to be done, some more for the PPI & Scope/Compression and revised his quote to, $47k.
I'm firm on the 44k now, more than ever because in the owner's reply to me, he seems to be discounting the damage a bit. He does so by noting that the car has ran symptomless for 11 years, and that inspections have more or less come up clean, when it comes to determining any damage. I suppose that's a good thing, meaning that the damage must have been insubstantial and the shop that corrected the damage did a great job. Also, In all fairness, the dude is probably not a "Porsche guy", and doesn't understand the "challenging" private market for NA 997 cars but purchased the car when he was presented the opportunity - and that's totally cool.
That said, i am pricing in the unknown-ness of the damage, and the lack of any meaningful documentation, which reduces my ability to sell the car in the future. I'm fine with those unknowns at 44k, but not at 47k. I'm going to counter back stating that i'm firm at 44k and, work in some language that heightens the severity of the documentation-less damage.
- Damien
Damien - Time to do some sucking up due to his $47K counter.---->Maybe go $44.5K - A little closer to $47K and $44.5K sounds better. These negotiations et psychological and $500 can mean a lot more to some.
In your reply/offer, mention winter is here, Porsche market slows as well as selling opportunities and you will take good care of his Porsche.
Last edited by groovzilla; 11-16-2023 at 09:56 PM.
Damien - Time to do some sucking up due to his $47K counter.---->Maybe go $44.5K - A little closer to $47K and $44.5K sounds better. These negotiations et psychological and $500 can mean a lot more to some.
In your reply/offer, mention winter is here, Porsche market slows as well as selling opportunities and you will take good care of his Porsche.
That's fair. I'm also going to press on the documentation issue regarding the damage. That's a huge element on the 44k figure. If that all takes me to 44.5k - i'll take it.
11-15-2023, 05:40 PM
.
