Driving along, no worries. Started to get a clanking sound from under the car. Sounded like it was coming from the exhaust. Drive some more, the sound changed and felt something in the gas pedal. Then it gets louder. I drive a little further and the sound disappears. I get home, park the car, walk away and as i look back i see oil seeping out of the car.

So, WHATS THE PROBLEM? Is it the rear main seal? Why would it go from perfect to horrible so fast? Why can it still start, and run fine?

Car is a 2003 Porsche Boxster S 986 with 37,000 Miles on it.

[/ducks]

1998 Boxster owner with engine problems.

About 10 years ago I was rear-ended by a Chevy Tahoe in an 11 year old Honda Prelude that was already rusting on the rear quarter panels. I was stationary at a stop-light and the Tahoe must have been doing a good 30+mph before hitting the brakes. Needless to say I am alive and living quite well to tell you about it today.

While 30+ mph is not 50mph I did come out of the accident with no injuries and a repairable car. I guess I lucked out because the force of the hit knocked my foot off of the brake while the car was in neutral. Nevertheless I was 100% fine after the fact as was my passanger.
That Prelude was one solid car. While getting a child seat in and out of the back was a hassle I did feel quite secure for my child in back surrounded by the doorless coupe structure.

Mid and rear engined cars can be quite dangerous in a frontal collision because the engine and drive wheels are still running fine with excellent traction, pushing the the front of the car and the passanger compartment further into the point of impact.

You might be missing the point with your praise of the Boxster’s design. There is a very good chance that your wife’s injuries could have been considerable less IF the the weight of the engine/transmission was not transfer forward during that crash. That “hollow box” of air provided by a trunk void and solid chassis might have simply cruppled as expected and absorbed the majority of the impact as opposed to getting slammed in the back by several hundred pounds of heavy metal.

Something to think about!

Stephan Wilkinson – From researching the IIHS and NHTSA crash test focus – we are only now making the rear end collision a larger focus and now testing for whiplash. Outside of the craze caused by the Pinto not much has been done outside of measuring costs of 5 mph rear bumper impacts and some simple whiplash tests. Most modern cars do not have sensors for rear end collisions – mainly a reason I see is that during a rear end event one car is either stationary or moving away from the object striking it reducing the potential for an impact [versus the headon impact exponentially increase the impact]. I see the current focus over front / side impact and rollovers due to the glut of huge SUVs driven by soccer moms on the road – where nothing is safe even the driver of the SUV (who has a false sense of safety).

Maybe I’m misreading your point as I’m really not sure of your comment of how an S2000 could/would fair worse than a Boxster in the aforementioned rear ender. Are you saying that the Boxster is safer car than an S2000 in that crash? There is an implied point that I am reading from your statement. I’m not sure as I do not think you are too at least until empirical evidence is established and it won’t for these older cars b/c of the late focus on rear end crash safety. I’d figure from Honda’s focus on safety not only to passengers but to pedestrians and their focus on ACE and other technologies that the S2000 would have fared just as well.

No one is claiming this (and who would?) but there is a difference between accepting responsibility for a mistake on one hand and just ignoring it on the other. This separates the companies with good long-term prospects (Honda) and those without (GM). Now where does Porsche fit in? (For the sake of gear-heads everywhere, I am hoping they stay with the former group.)

The partial information above is convenient but is deceiving in this case.

100k warranty? 5 speed Odyssey and MDX are not covered. Yes, these were some of the affected.

Don’t pretend that fixing something under warranty is as good as making a good transmission to begin with. Many Acura CL and TL owners needed multiple transmission replacements.

“Redesign oil circulation” DID NOT resolve the main problem which was the third gear clutch. The oil jet solved yet another problem. Many failed after this redesign.

Porsche looks like the inverse of most car companies, whose entry level cars are decently reliable and their flagships are nightmares. Maybe they’re taking after Mercedes and riding on brand equity. It’s working so far–I’d still like to drive a Porsche some day.

And to think I considered a 986 & 996…

But you still miss the point: I’m not talking about star ratings for front, side, front-oblique crashes or airbags, I’m talking about a catastrophic rear-ender.

My wife’s Boxster airbags never even deployed. The impact was in the wrong direction–from behind.

Anyway, engine accessibility is a tradeoff that some of us are willing to accept. In exchange, we gain trunk space superior to that of any other two-seater roadster (to my knowledge). This is rather useful to those of us who enjoy taking our cars on trips longer than a weekend!

I too think Porsche should step up and extend the warranty on these engines to something like 10 years/120K miles. Unfortunately I don’t see this happening anytime soon. And while the spectre of a grenading engine didn’t prevent me from buying a (used) Boxster this time around, when the time comes to replace the car it may not be with another Porsche.

The old Hondas are rust buckets and unsafe b/c they are so small compared to bigger cars argument is no longer valid. In fact of most cars on the road I consider them be the most complete package from mpg, fun to drive, safety, reliability / quality, resale value, etc.

As for all the crash ratings and size matters – ever see a 50mph head on crash between 2 body on frame suvs? It is catastrophic b/c there’s less safety built into them b/c they rely so much on their mass which only helps if they hit smaller things at a higher impact point (above the other vehicles bumper zone).

Amazing that Porsche further restricted engine access in the 987 over the ‘6. Or maybe not. As you say, more opportunity for dealer maintenance.

About 6 months after I bought the car, the electronic oil level gauge on the dash showed that the oil level was increasing. At the same time, the coolant level in the overflow tank was slowly decreasing. Souunds like coolant may have been getting into the oil, right? Well, there was no way for me to tell for sure. The changes in fluid levels were not enough to affect the exhaust smoke (whatever white smoke may have been there was obscured by the typical Porsche light blue haze of cold start-up oil burning). I had no alternative but to take it to the dealer.

The dealer confirmed that there was no way of telling what was happening except to drain the oil and physically inspect it (which revealed that there was no coolant in the oil, it was a slow leak in a hose, and the electronic oil level sensor was faulty and had to be replaced). The dealer confirmed that the only way to know the oil level for sure was to drain it, measure it, and re-fill it – which they happily did for $150.

If the car had a simple dipstick, I could have diagnosed the situation myself in 5 seconds, and for free, by just pulling the stick and seeing if the oil was contaminated. Oil level is different from oil quality. But that would not allow the dealer the opportunity to charge for a needless procedure.

As far as engine “access”, such as it is, the 986 also seems better than the 987. In the 987 series if you remove the rear mounting of the convertible top where it attaches to the car, then remove a panel under the top mount (about a 30 minute procedure), there is indeed a gunslit through which you can peer and see the engine, and even stick your hand in and touch it. But it is impossible to do any real work through it (unless you are a contortionist or have the apendages and dexterity of an octopus). A friend with a 986 showed me how he can remove the seats and then the interior panels on the engine bulkhead to gain access to the front of the engine, but it seems like a lot of work for what should be a simple process.

Anything is possible with enough time and money, but somehow, I still prefer the 5 second long procedure of popping the hood and having before me an engine bay that allows me to do anything on the engine, even changing the oil filter from above. The 5 seconds it takes me to open the hood encourages frequent trips to the engine, whereas my friend plans entire afternoons well in advance dedicated to accessing his 986 engine.

But then, having the primary engine access from below makes most engine work feasible only with a lift, which again provides the dealer with a nice annuity (the engine access in my old 914, X1/9, and even a mid-engine V8 Corvair was not great, but was good enough that I could work on them myself).

As far as crash test protection, the S2000 has NHTSA ratings of 4 star front, 5 star side, and 5 star rollover – the same as a Volvo sedan. The NHTSA website does not list crash test specs for any Porsche, but there doesn’t seem to be much room for improvement over 4/5/5.

That site also gives this cryptic, unreferenced statement:

“It is a known fact that the casting plant that made the blocks for Porsche was unable to keep up with demand and also experienced casting problems, turned to a 3rd party with a freeze-cast MMC (metal matrix composite) liner which was cast into the block.”

Can anyone here say they have been directly involved in these failures and what occured? I hope to keep living the dream but at 70-80 thousand here that is too much money to be taking risks with a blown engine.

Not to belabor the point, but I’m not just saying the base Vette is faster than the 911 Carrera S because of one test, I actually don’t think I’ve ever seen a comparison between the C6 and 911 Carrera or Carrera S where the Carrera/Carrera S was faster, either in a straight line or around a track. I highly doubt the base C6 is faster than a 911 Turbo in every instance, but it was in at least one case. At the very least, the base Vette can hang with 911s costing 50% more, which I find extremely impressive

Not that I’m apologizing for Nissan… I’ve seen too many broken gears and drive-axles in my time to have any illusions about them being bulletproof.