Porsche Enthusiasts Club Forum
http://forums.tipec.net/

The C4S is very poorly
http://forums.tipec.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22860
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Gary Howard [ Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:02 pm ]
Post subject:  The C4S is very poorly

Seems the C4S has "engine damage" following the cut out just prior to the Silverstone Classic.
Will be heading to Silverstone Porsche on Saturday to hear the full low down ....

Already sounds expensive :(

Author:  Sean Smallman [ Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Ouch, I hope it's not terminal mate.

Author:  Gary Howard [ Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Sean Smallman wrote:
Ouch, I hope it's not terminal mate.


Seems it is .... engine has ceased apparently. Only had a phone conversation and haven't seen the diagnosis, but tech says its a new engine :(

Author:  Sean Smallman [ Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

That's unlucky mate, I feel for your pain.

Send it to Hartech

Author:  tr7v8 [ Thu Aug 17, 2017 11:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Sean Smallman wrote:
That's unlucky mate, I feel for your pain.

Send it to Hartech

I'd agree with this!

Author:  sam [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 9:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Might be worth considering a short engine from Porsche too, think they are available and may save some time if you need the car on the road?

Author:  tr7v8 [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

sam wrote:
Might be worth considering a short engine from Porsche too, think they are available and may save some time if you need the car on the road?

The problem with this is you end up with an engine with all the underlying M96/7 issues. Whereas the full Hartech option fixes the vast majority if not all of them, even some of the longer term ones.

Author:  sam [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Yes of course you may Jim, but I don't believe that Porsche will supply an engine under their exchange system now where the issues have not been addressed? may get expensive for them if they supply two duff engines for the same car!!

Author:  tr7v8 [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 1:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

sam wrote:
Yes of course you may Jim, but I don't believe that Porsche will supply an engine under their exchange system now where the issues have not been addressed? may get expensive for them if they supply two duff engines for the same car!!

Some of the issues are inherent, like bores going out of round. I also understand that a replacement will be close in age & build to the original, so could still have IMS issues which weren't designed out until 2009. Some of the issues Barry at Hartech has worked on & I guess Porsche wouldn't incorporate into a replacement engine, like flowing the water ways to give better cooling. And yes it has happened even when they were under warranty, the replacement goes bang as well.

Interesting in that they've said Gary's has seized. That is an unusual failure, generally it is IMS collapse or bore scoring.

Author:  sam [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 3:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

tr7v8 wrote:
sam wrote:
Yes of course you may Jim, but I don't believe that Porsche will supply an engine under their exchange system now where the issues have not been addressed? may get expensive for them if they supply two duff engines for the same car!!

Some of the issues are inherent, like bores going out of round. I also understand that a replacement will be close in age & build to the original, so could still have IMS issues which weren't designed out until 2009. Some of the issues Barry at Hartech has worked on & I guess Porsche wouldn't incorporate into a replacement engine, like flowing the water ways to give better cooling. And yes it has happened even when they were under warranty, the replacement goes bang as well.

Interesting in that they've said Gary's has seized. That is an unusual failure, generally it is IMS collapse or bore scoring.


I don't believe Porsche would sell you a s/exchange motor, with a warranty, fitted with the old style piston rings and dodgy IMS, some of the cooling issues and certainly the bore ovality have been caused by poor maintenance procedures and lube selection and changing intervals......................there are after all many thousands of those engines with several hundreds of thousand of miles with perfect bores? Think Gary said ceased rather than seized?

Author:  Gary Howard [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 6:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Thanks for all the support, comments and sharing of my pain in what is an obviously distressing time.

I did in fact not check the spelling, as I had tears in my eyes at the time but it has in fact seized according to the OPC tech. I too was wary of this and until I get in there I am not sure of the full diagnosis. It didn't feel like a seize, it felt like an electrical failure under hand, foot and arse.

One thing is for sure both options are gonna hurt the wallet but I agree, it needs doing once and once correctly. I agree Sam, a short engine is an option for a couple of reasons, mainly financial, and that is presently what OPC are suggesting as you would expect. For sure I want it warranted that historic and known engine issues. Im waiting for that option to be costed an then I can consider the Hartech route

All in all, not a happy place

Author:  tr7v8 [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

sam wrote:
tr7v8 wrote:
sam wrote:
Yes of course you may Jim, but I don't believe that Porsche will supply an engine under their exchange system now where the issues have not been addressed? may get expensive for them if they supply two duff engines for the same car!!

Some of the issues are inherent, like bores going out of round. I also understand that a replacement will be close in age & build to the original, so could still have IMS issues which weren't designed out until 2009. Some of the issues Barry at Hartech has worked on & I guess Porsche wouldn't incorporate into a replacement engine, like flowing the water ways to give better cooling. And yes it has happened even when they were under warranty, the replacement goes bang as well.

Interesting in that they've said Gary's has seized. That is an unusual failure, generally it is IMS collapse or bore scoring.


I don't believe Porsche would sell you a s/exchange motor, with a warranty, fitted with the old style piston rings and dodgy IMS, some of the cooling issues and certainly the bore ovality have been caused by poor maintenance procedures and lube selection and changing intervals......................there are after all many thousands of those engines with several hundreds of thousand of miles with perfect bores? Think Gary said ceased rather than seized?

Loads of documentation elsewhere (Barry has posted reams on PH) but oval bores are poor design nothing to do with oil or servicing, just high miles when they go. Scored bores are piston coating & localised over heating. There are fixes especially for the overheating (low temp stat) but Porsche don't approve. The IMS is difficult to fix, even the ceramic bearing from LN is not a 100% fix. It was only in 2009 when Porsche changed the whole design that it no longer became a problem.

Author:  sam [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Jim, I am not going to get into a debate with you over this, I simply don't have the time nor the inclination! Just on the oval bores, you are I am afraid talking drivel, the incidence of oval bores is, of course, a concern for the owners of those cars afflicted, but as I said earlier there are thousands of those engines with very high mileages that have perfectly round bores, and again some around 50 thousand miles with oval ones!...............................design fault???

Author:  tr7v8 [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

sam wrote:
Jim, I am not going to get into a debate with you over this, I simply don't have the time nor the inclination! Just on the oval bores, you are I am afraid talking drivel, the incidence of oval bores is, of course, a concern for the owners of those cars afflicted, but as I said earlier there are thousands of those engines with very high mileages that have perfectly round bores, and again some around 50 thousand miles with oval ones!...............................design fault???

My last post on this. You can call it drivel but sad to say it is fact. Go look at Barry Harts website. He now has a production line dealing with M96/97 issues, including banding the bore tops. Yup some go to astronomic miles my Boxster was at 93K when it went. That did have dual row IMS though. Others fail at low miles I know a 997 that was badly bore scored, treated with kid gloves, OPC serviced 38K!
I now have a Cayenne, quite a few of which have been written off because of bore issues amongst other problems. Hopefully heavier oil & no short journeys will stop it happening to me.

Author:  sam [ Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The C4S is very poorly

Jim, we have all seen Barry Harts work, and excellent engineering it is, the failure rate on those motors compared to the numbers produced whilst devastating for the unfortunate owners is relatively small, there are many many cars that have covered very high mileages, the engines of which are still perfect whilst there are a few which have failed at relatively low miles, some under 50,000, how come? are some manufactured on a Friday, maybe from better quality material, assembled by better quality robots? You suggested it was a design fault that the bores became oval, I am saying that the way some of those engines have been serviced and lubed, whilst broadly in line with the factory schedules have failed because the schedules may have been "stretched" a bit plus maybe the oil and coolant specs recommended by the factory were not as robust as they could have been, and I expect some just were not looked after well enough by their owners?
My suggestion to consider a factory service exchange short engine was based mainly on the fact that there could be a considerable delay for a resolution to an owners problem due to Barry's workload.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/