Re: and furthermore, Boxtaboy!!!

Hey out there-

I'm brand new to this forum; I'm up in Seattle, currently own a slightly ratty 1999 Boxster with ~103k on it. Here's the deal: I can buy my brother's very low mile 1997 Boxster for about the same money as what I'd get for my '99. The difference is that his is dead mint-well under 20k, well maintained, and my '99, though it runs quite well but for the possible need for new tensioners and eventually the DOF, is going to require paint with some light body work, new seat covers, that sort of stuff. I know-garage queens are more likely to have IMS failures, so that would have to be dealt with, but the rest of the car is really, really nice. Please let me know your thoughts. I think I know the answer-sell the '99 and buy the '97, but I'm checking here to see what you guys think. Thanks.

Both 2.5L , truly gen1, rev1 cars.

As you know the early cars had some issues with block liners. Typically once they had enough mileage on them, the likelihood of a failure goes to near zero.
The low miles says your brother's car may not be out of the woods so to spoeak. But the advanced age says otherwise.

Aside from that I always go with the better maintained model, and low miles is *generally* good.

Now as to "generally". Was the oil changed annually? Did it get run often enough, and hard enough, to boil all the water and acids from the oil and crankcase? Tehre are downsides to cars that get 20000/19 years = <1100 miles a year (<22 miles a week!). 22 miles week if its all in one 22 mile trip is actually awesome. If its in 10 x 2.2 mile trips, all running rich, none warmed up, all with (enriched running) gas dumping into the oil, then not so awesome.

I think the answer is in fact get your brothers car. I'm just giving you things to look for and think about.

Ase from that I know no reason why there is any difference between a 97, 98, or 99.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

... we hope you visit often and post some pictures of your '99 as well as your brother's '97.
I think you answered your own question.
The differences between the '97 and '99 Boxsters are very small.
The '98 and '99 have reinforced strut mounts so you can use 18" and larger wheels, not so on the '97.
The '97 may have a physical door lock on both doors (depending on build date). The '98 and newer only have a physical door lock on the driver's door.
Because the '97 has only been driven an average of 1,000 miles per year I would seriously consider doing the DOF with a new IMS bearing.
Whatever you decide, you'll enjoy.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

I think both Grant and Pedro have given you good advise, so I won't bother repeating any of it.

I hope you keep us in the loop and let us know what you decide. We'd love to see pictures of both your current and your brother's car if you decide to get it.

Good luck with your decision.

1997 Base introduced

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional

Originally produced in Stuttgart. 11th digit of VIN is S. Later produced in Finland. 11th digit is U.

See note in red below.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1998 Base

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional

18” wheel option with rear chassis reinforced to accept new wheels. Rear body structural change included redesigned wheel wells and coil spring mounts, lower engine compartment bulkhead, rear wall crossmember and rear axle mount reinforcements.

Side air bags standard (not available in ’97.)

Satellite navigation option.

See note below.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1999 Base

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional.

Litronic headlights option.

Small storage compartment between engine compartment lid and the convertible top.

Larger & redesigned fuel tank and venting system including a fuel tank differential pressure sensor

Note: There were an unusually high number of catastrophic engine failures in 1997-early 1999 Boxster engines and these engines were often totally replaced very early (<first 10k miles)in their life. A replaced engine is not a bad thing in a Boxster as the Boxster is a car to be driven, not collected. A dealer should be able to tell if the car you are looking at has had its engine replaced if you give him the VIN

Thanks a lot, all of you. You know, if it works out that I can get the '97, I definitely will. When I bought my '99, I had no idea my brother was planning to sell his. The story is, two years ago he had a very serious stroke (any stroke is bad-this one woulda killed him but for his wife being right there to call 911), so the likelyhood that he'd ever be able to drive it again is very slight. Even so, for reasons of tact I never would have asked him to sell it to me-he suggested it.

So when I got the '99, it had mismatched tires on it, so I put a set of Michelin Super Sports on it-my personal faves-and bought an row030 suspension kit which as yet I haven't installed. I didn't know that about the 18" wheels...and I don't know if the kit will fit the '97. So it might be that I should pass. Except that his '97 is in such perfect shape. Dang it. Had I any idea when I bought the '99 I would have held off, but it was cheap ($5900) and it runs really well, despite the mileage. I'm a car nut without a lot of money-my other "toy" is a '93 Mazda fd3 (RX7) that is in excellent shape, slightly modified with a street-ported motor, Ohlins coilovers, 18's w/ the perfunctory Michelin SS's, etc...it's a rocket and I love it, but it's brutal compared to the civility of the Boxster. My daily is a '97 Volvo 850 R...I got the gearhead bit bad, I know...fortunately for me, I have an incredible wife, too.

All that said, the info you guys have provided-PLUS Pedro's incredible 20 minute video that gave the best explanation of the IMS dilemma I've yet heard-will really help me. Pedro, if you read this, thank you! Having read numerous bits about the "IMS solution", including an incredibly long (and what I thought was self-incriminating) diatribe by one provider describing a bad situation with a low-mile used engine put in a wealthy doctor's race car that narrowly escaped a complete grenading (due to what I consider stupid shortcuts, hence the self-incriminating thing), you (Pedro) laid it out with total clarity. To me, it makes NO SENSE that Porsche would use a sealed bearing if they had any idea there would be failures...it had to cost them a huge amount in replacements, their reputation, owner loyalty, et al. No one else has said it like you did, Pedro, and I thank you. A bit of history-in 1971, I took my driver's test in my father's '66 912-back then, just a "funny l'il furrin' car to most-so I go back a ways with these fine cars. He had owned a '60 356 Convertible D prior to the 912! Wish I had THAT now...ah, well. I raced air cooled VW's in the late '70's-foreign stock cars, a semi-pro 22-week season; the second year of competition we were season champions. We never lost an engine, perfect attendance. We built them-we didn't have budget, let alone the bread to buy an Autocraft or Gene Berg motor. Plus, we knew how, and did it. I mention this ancient history just to say at 61, I've been around Porsche designed products most of my life, but the Boxster is new to me. And all the negative "press" on the 'net has made it one of the very best deals ever in used sports cars. Anyway...now I'm the one guilty of a long diatribe!!! Thank you, Pedro. If you could just explain to me why in the name of Zeus' b*tthole one would replace an oil-fed ball bearing with an oil-fed plain bearing, life will be even closer to being complete!

Stress come snot from the wheel size, but from g-loads acting on the lever arm that is the radius of the wheel/tire combination (mostly).

Since people track 97s and make them into spec cars, i seriously doubt that driving with 18" wheels makes any difference. That said, aside from aesthetic preferences, i don't see any benefit except that they cost more and weigh more. Oh wait, those are not benefits :-)

While I'm no fan of $3500-5000 "solutions" to a marginal "problem", note that a) the original is not oil fed (that's in fact the problem) and the oil-fed bearing in fact returns to the air cooled designs which in that regard were bulletproof. Admittedly, an oil feed on any solid bearing is the cheapest most elegant solution.

Buy it and enjoy. The supersports are indeed excellent street tires.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

is to not use 18" wheels.

is the chassis problems were detected in cars that were using 18" wheels on the track.

Well, I searched out there for technical papers on 18's on '97's and the hazards therein...found nothing. I thought it was a mechanical fitment issue. So, you can't put racing tires on a '97 either, then, huh? Because a racing tire is going to allow the car to generate far more G-force cornering & braking, as well as allowing faster transitions, which in turn would put more stress on the strut mounts-far more than simply changing the wheel diameter, provided that the overall wheel diameter is the same, and approximately the same track width.

I guess I shouldn't get the '97. I definitely want to do some auto crossing with it, maybe a bit of track time. Also, I have a brand new unopened 030 suspension kit I bought for my '99. That would definitely put more stress on the strut towers and the rest of the unmodified suspension. Oh, well. The '99's gonna take some work, but I guess it'll be better in the end....
Really????!!

I'd sure like to see some tech papers from Stuttgart explaining this, because I've heard of guys racing '97's with slicks or 100-rated "street" tires with no issues. I must say, it sounds like "eye of newt, wing of bat" physics to me without corroboration. Did all the chaps running '97 Boxsters on the track reinforce their strut tower mounts? Maybe so...please give me some technical paper links, if you have them. And please let me know if the 030 kit's alright on the '97. Frankly, if it is okay, I'm going to have a very difficult time believing that an inch bigger wheel with the same o.d. is going to cause any trouble. Would a strut tower brace be sufficient, then? I don't mean to be contrary here, and I apologize if it seems like I am-knowing what I know, and with my physics background, without some hard, cold data I'm having trouble understanding it. Thanks, guys.

Here's a thread on it, but not sure how much it helps...
[www.renntech.org]

Its all about loads on the suspension. This is pretty hard to argue.

The chassis doesn't know if the force is a 17" or 18" wheel so long as the overall radius is the same.
And yep, hot 17" slicks put WAY more force than 18" streeties, even excellent ones like PSSs

Pedro might know how many 97s are used as spec cars.

Get facts rather than fuzzy reports from 20 years ago, from the factory that brought us the IMS. (cheap shot at Porsche, but they are not infallible)

I think its vry good to be careful here - a failure would ruin your whole day, but I just don't see the logic.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

issue to some extent. 18" wheels were not approved for '97's. They were approved for '98's and newer and were standard for the S model in 2000.

The rear of the car received extra strengthening. In some Porsche literature I came upon the details of what was changed but I don't remember exactly. It involved strengthening the chassis/tub is about all I (think) I remember and which the Bentley manual somewhat confirms. The Bentley lists: Wheel well with spring mount; Lower engine compartment bulkhead; Rear-wall cross-member; Reinforcement for the rear axle mount.

Porsche doesn't sanction race tires on these cars either but it not out of concern for the lack of strength in the car for this no race tire rule is in effect for every model year. I think in the case of race tires Porsche is concerned more about oiling issues.

These cars are not intended for track use. If you are going beyond auto-crossing and will be running at high speeds with high cornering forces with or without race tires you need to consider some engine mod's to help the engine continue to receive sufficient oil under these conditions.

For the ROW suspension you can use this in any MY for which it was intended. If this includes a '97 model that's fine unless ROW requires 18" wheels and then of course we are back to the restriction against using 18" wheels in the '97 MY.

As an aside, when I asked about installing ROW in my 2002 -- to refresh the suspension -- the techs talked me out of it. Said while it was ok on the track the ride was too harsh for street use, which is where I spend all my time. But again for the track I think it is the setup to have.

Not to put too fine a point on it but is you that is engaging in accepting questionable physics by assuming that just because some owners have gotten away with doing what is clearly not sanctioned by Porsche that makes it ok. I do not like people who get away with things by good luck turning around and then making recommendations to others to do the same thing that requires these other people to have the same good luck.

My advice and counsel always stays within the Porsche guidelines. I am not qualified to overrule Porsche regarding fitting 18" wheesl to the MY's that it says not to. If you choose to do otherwise using whatever you like that gets you to the decision you have already made that is I guess your prerogative.

I also need consistent logic and facts - not blind faith in Porsche, which occasionally proves unfounded anyway.
Beyond the rare errors, they have been very secretive - we often don't know the real reason.

The idea that the core problem is oiling (per your note), yet Porsche's MY1998 changes affect the rear tub strength, is inconsistent.
Tub strength does not impact oiling.

Second, none of these cars -- 1997 --> 2008 at minimum, oil perfectly under loads above maybe 0.9 Gs.
But the solution, or the improvement since its not a complete solution, aside from (corner slower) is a deep sump, not 17" wheels.

If the issue is tub/subframe strength, the solution might be a techno-brace, which distributes the forces much better across both sides.

So i don't buy that this is a deal-breaking concern. especially for occasional track use, which generally means well under 1G.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2016 03:38PM by grant. (view changes)

Quote
grant
I also need consistent logic and facts - not blind faith in Porsche, which occasionally proves unfounded anyway.
Beyond the rare errors, they have been very secretive - we often don't know the real reason.

The idea that the core problem is oiling (per your note), yet Porsche's MY1998 changes affect the rear tub strength, is inconsistent.
Tub strength does not impact oiling.

Second, none of these cars -- 1997 --> 2008 at minimum, oil perfectly under loads above maybe 0.9 Gs.
But the solution, or the improvement since its not a complete solution, aside from (corner slower) is a deep sump, not 17" wheels.

If the issue is tub/subframe strength, the solution might be a techno-brace, which distributes the forces much better across both sides.

So i don't buy that this is a deal-breaking concern. especially for occasional track use, which generally means well under 1G.

Grant

Not all my faith is blind. Porsche has a proven track record of building exceptional cars, safe cars, reliable cars. And I didn't buy the 1st MY Boxster either. I waited until 2002.

Core problem is your label. The problem is the car is not intended for the track. The tub/chassis was strengthened not for concern about track safety -- since Porsche is already on record regarding track use -- but for concern about street use.

The facts are Porsche doesn't authorize use of 18" wheels/tires on the earlier Boxster models. For those model years it does authorize use it is reported to have strengthened certain areas of the car. To then decide this is not a deal-breaking concern for occasional track use, which you believe "generally means" well under 1G, is blind faith or worse.

Look, I just post the best info I have regarding the Boxster. I don't make this stuff up. If someone wants to ignore what Porsche has to say on this subject, Porsche being the only authority that doesn't require blind faith, and run his early MY Boxster on the track or even just the street with 18" tires/wheels disgregarding Porsche in this matter that's his business.

... has a section about "track use". Implicit endorsement if you ask me. Interesting.

Heard this from an owner who had a 3rd gear failure. Apparently somewhat common.
The manual prohibits (or suggests against or???) racing slicks.

Grant

on topic, i only bring up track as the logical extreme -- with lots of available anecdotal data -- of the need for a stringer tub/sub frame. I strongly suspect their lack of endorsement is simple warranty and liability avoidance. Understandable except for how they advertise their cars.

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

18” wheel option with rear chassis reinforced to accept new wheels. Rear body structural change included redesigned wheel wells and coil spring mounts, lower engine compartment bulkhead, rear wall crossmember and rear axle mount reinforcements.

Thanks, Marc. So you have seen the paper from Porsche stating that 18" wheels shouldn't be used on a 1997 Boxster? If so, where can I find this paper?

As far as the Boxster not being intended for the track, as far as I know, no street production car is intended for the track. Even the new Shelbys with the "track pack" would be found lacking for any serious track application. It would make sense that oiling might become an issue, as (again, second hand info) Porsche eliminated the full dry sump setup common to the air cooled engine for a sort of "hybrid", to reduce production costs, supposedly.

I don't have the factory manual that came with my '99, so I'll have to try to find one second hand. Is the Bentley manual sanctioned by Porsche, or is it a third party manual? I thought they were a third party publisher, like Haynes or Climer. I don't yet have my brother's '97 which I know has the official manual. Does Porsche state in the owner's manual that 18's shouldn't be used? The thing is, documentation of stuff like this-bona fide documentation from the factory-is what I feel most comfortable accepting. I went to the Renntech forum, found nothing but a dead link to the Porsche Club of America that supposedly was a paper discussing the 18"-1997 issue. From what I've been able to find out in the past few days of searching is that several people claim to have run 18's with no issues. Furthermore, no one has come forward saying-"Yes! It will damage the unibody-I've seen it!" And a lot of people are asking why. Also, if the Euro suspension kit, the row030, is supposedly okay on the '97, then what gives? That would put more stress on the unibody than any set of 18" wheels would, provided a person then used the car to its capabilities.

What I'm hearing here is basically that the Boxster is a pain in the ass-oiling issues, IMS issues, weak unibody issues, coolant/oil mixing problems, and do on. If this is all true, Porsche hasn't fallen-they have plummeted-into the abyss. A sports car that shouldn't be driven hard or modified in any way, except perhaps to try to ameliorate some glaring flaws that Porsche included as standard equipment along with a really hefty sticker price. Oh-except that it's less likely to have IMS issues if revved hard...and that the track cars (which the Boxster isn't, according to the factory) don't ever seem to have IMS issues!! That's really friggin' great. Say it ain't so, Joe!

Ok, as it seems you have to hear it from Porsche themselves, Maurice (1schoir) points out in the below thread citing Porsche TSB #4407, dated March 4, 1997: " Eighteen inch wheels are not approved for use on Boxsters. Use of eighteen inch wheels on Boxsters under severe conditions may result in structural failures of the body and/or suspension". You can probably view the TSB directly if you are a paid contributor on Renntech. This doesn't prevent people from still throwing on larger wheels, but hey, at least you know Porsche's stance on the issue.

[986forum.com]

Thank you, Boxtaboy. It probably means the 17" option with the bigger skins puts too much stress on the unibody, too, but Porsche doesn't want to open that can of worms. Seriously, the difference in physical stress between a 255/40-17 and a 255/35-18 isn't gonna be that much. HOWEVER- the difference between a 225/40-17 (225/40-18) on an 8" rim and a 255/40-17 on a 9.5" rim (or a 255/35-18) is gonna be a LOT greater than the stock '97 setup, which was 205/50-16's on a 6" rim up front and 225/50-16's on a 7" rim in the back. Not only from cornering and braking stress, but unsprung weight as well. Without listing a lot of figures, a 255/40 (35) on either a 17x9.5 or an 18x9.5 is going to weigh about 10 lbs. more than a 225/50 on a 16x7, and the front would be similar.

Now it all starts to make some sense. Well, shucks. Nice as my brother's '97 is I think I'll stick with my tatty '99 and fix it up. Another stupid thing for Porsche to skimp on. Geez.

Thanks again, Boxaboy...now, has anyone actually tweaked their chassis out of true with the 17" optionals???

....the number of the TSB, 4407, allowed me to search and find it on a site called "The Porsche 986 Boxster FAQ" , 986faq.com. Apparently all aftermarket wheels, wheel bolts, spacers, etc. are verboten as well. The 18" wheel caveat is at the bottom. And dollars to dognuts I'll bet Porsche was keeping their fingers crossed about the 17's with sticky rubber.....
I wonder if a picture exists of a wheel-tire twisted Boxster in the annals of Stuttgart...maybe they were running one flat out on Nurburgring with slicks and lunched the frame! Cool!

Thanks yet again, Boxtaboy.

No problem. Honestly, I think if you aren't going to track her much, you should be fine. There's a decent difference between a car that has over 100K+ miles and one with as little as the miles on the 97 you're contemplating. I mean, in some places, you can see 70s Impalas riding on 22" inchers. I doubt those big arse wheels are approved for safety as well, but hey, people do it, albiet they prob don't track their cars either.

... out of a mole hill.
Put the 18s on the '97.
Unless you go off-roading you won't have a problem.
Porsche has to cover their @ss so they get overly cautious.
There are a bunch of '97 Boxster Spec Racecars with no modification, running R-compound on 17" wheels in very tough tracks such as Sebring without issues.
I you want to be overly cautious, get your brother's '97, sell the 18s and buy a nice set of 17s.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

Thanks, both of youse. It is interesting that Porsche put such relatively narrow wheels on the Boxster in the beginning. In the '70's and even '80's, we would have thought a 16x6, 16x7
combination was quite enough...and quite exotic. 16's were unheard of back then, unless you had a truck. Let alone 17's, 18's, et cetera. And the diminutive 13's and 14's-it's hard to even get any decent rubber on them now.

Pedro, if you were to do the IMS direct oil mod mod on either of these cars, which bearing do you prefer?

Thanks for all the input.

I remember my 86' BMW 3 series came with 14" wheels...pretty good for that time, and from what I remember, handled and rode pretty well. I could go over huge potholes and not have to worry about bending a wheel. Not so these days with these low profile tires and big wheel combos!

As you can see any time you visit a wheel repair shop. I had to get one of mine repainted and, since the shop was 50 miles away, I happened to arrive before the shop started work. One of the guys let me wander through the shop. All sorts of exotic huge wheels. Looked expensive. When I asked about them, he explained that those were from the cars the local pro team members drove. Then he mentioned the price and it was well into 4 figures EACH and that was probably 10 years ago.

My $100 repaint was chump change (and perfect).

Quote
GoMan
Pedro, if you were to do the IMS direct oil mod mod on either of these cars, which bearing do you prefer?
Thanks for all the input.

We only instal an OEM (steel-on-steel) bearing together with the DOF.
Happy Boxstering
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

Hey Pedro-

Just saw your second video-the one I didn't know existed, but suspected it must! All my questions were answered in that installment. You said you only use stock
Porsche bearings... Then the question that was plaguing me was this:if you use a stock bearing that is sealed, how do you oil it? Simple-pull the seal off the side that has oil sprayed on it!

Again, thanks for all your input, and your common sense. The whole theory of replacing what the Porsche engineers thought was more than adequate didn't make any sense to me-especially the provider with the plain bearing-yeah, let's increase the frictive surface to the entire width of the bearing!! No? Well, it worked for the covered wagons, those plain bearings! Ball bearings are weak! Some solution.

So...whether I buy my brother's '97 or keep my '99, I'll definitely get your kit and have Aker's install it up here. Oh-and nice physics lesson, too, about the heated air in the intermediate shaft! PV=NRT, baybee, now and forever!

Great, wonderful, fantastic explanation, Pedro. One really good thing about all this is that Boxsters are now very affordable by the average guy because of "IMS panic", and with what you've figured, very fixable to be extremely reliable. Thank you, Pedro. Thank you very much! When I come to Florida, I'd gladly buy you lunch!!

The 1999 has door airbags, while the 1997 does not.

1997 Base introduced

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional

Originally produced in Stuttgart. 11th digit of VIN is S. Later produced in Finland. 11th digit is U.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1998 Base

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional

18” wheel option with rear chassis reinforced to accept new wheels. Rear body structural change included redesigned wheel wells and coil spring mounts, lower engine compartment bulkhead, rear wall crossmember and rear axle mount reinforcements.

Side air bags standard (not available in ’97.)

Satellite navigation option.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1999 Base

2.5Litre engine 201 HP.

5 speed manual transmission, Tiptronic 5 speed optional.

Litronic headlights option.

Small storage compartment between engine compartment lid and the convertible top.

Larger & redesigned fuel tank and venting system including a fuel tank differential pressure sensor

IIRC, these were taken from some literature Porsche provided its dealers.