Sunnydays Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Hey all, so still in the market for a 987 and have been reading around regarding reliability. 2005 3.2 - IMS issues 2006 3.2 IMS uprated. Is this for all 2006 cars or for a certain build date? 2007 - 2009 3.4 gen 1 - bore scoring issues 3.4 gen 2 -out of my budget. From the above list a car from 2006 seems the best bet. Am I correct in thinking so? Even then is an 06 car guaranteed to have the new ims design. How likely are these issues to occur. Reading over forums online it seems to have occurred a considerable amount All advice appreciated Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobbie Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 What about the 2.9 from about 2008/9, no IMS issues or bore scoring. 255 bhp which is virtually the same as the older 3.2S. Someone else may know the cutoff dates for the worst IMS, but one option is to buy an early 987s and have the clutch/IMS done when you buy it. The chances are the clutch will be pretty well worn on a 2005 car unless it's been changed already. With the later 987s with the updated IMS, there is still a small failure rate, (maybe 1% from what I've read) but you can't easily change that IMS. Of course you need to put it in perspective for a 10+ year old secondhand car, where depending on how it's been treated, the engine could blow a head gasket or have some other rare but catastrophic failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyspin Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Don't forget double road tax from april 2006 - might not seem like a lot, but £500 for nothing once every year is not something I'd want to have to pay on top of insurance and servicing etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M12MTR Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 ^^^^Second for the 2.9...... mine sounds wonderful and still very very fast.... fast enough for me and on the roads. I also preferred the interior and styling of the 987.2. I test drove many - including 3.4 S's and although slightly quicker the extra wasn't enough for me to justify the extra cost and tax / insurance. But if the 'right 3.4' had appeared for the age / spec / mileage / condition I was after I would have gone for it. But he 2.9 one owner car I found, in the right condition, was that right Boxster for me - and it was Guards Red - this was my no1 wish. Good luck in your search - this is part of the fun :good: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunnydays Posted June 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 34 minutes ago, M12MTR said: ^^^^Second for the 2.9...... mine sounds wonderful and still very very fast.... fast enough for me and on the roads. I also preferred the interior and styling of the 987.2. I test drove many - including 3.4 S's and although slightly quicker the extra wasn't enough for me to justify the extra cost and tax / insurance. But if the 'right 3.4' had appeared for the age / spec / mileage / condition I was after I would have gone for it. But he 2.9 one owner car I found, in the right condition, was that right Boxster for me - and it was Guards Red - this was my no1 wish. Good luck in your search - this is part of the fun :good: Hi thanks for the response. After just looking through auto trader the 2.9 gen 2 is unfortunately more than I would like to spend. Ideally I wouldn't like to go much above 12, for that sort of price I'm seeing an 2006 3.2S with 40k miles. And 3.4 07's with around 60-70k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menoporsche Posted June 22, 2016 Report Share Posted June 22, 2016 Bore scoring is only for the 3.4 newer car, not the 2.7. And in 6 years here I think I've heard of 5 IMS failures and 2 instances of bore scoring, but they were both Caymans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosh Posted June 23, 2016 Report Share Posted June 23, 2016 2007 2.7? £290 road tax and 245bhp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Joseph Posted June 23, 2016 Report Share Posted June 23, 2016 17 minutes ago, Bosh said: 2007 2.7? £290 road tax and 245bhp If it's a: Five-speed manual: 222g/km CO2, Band K and £295 road tax. Six-speed manual: 229g/km CO2, Band L and £500 road tax. Tiptronic: 242g/km CO2, Band L and £500 road tax. https://www.gov.uk/calculate-vehicle-tax-rates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Joseph Posted June 23, 2016 Report Share Posted June 23, 2016 I should have added that any Boxster first registered before 23rd March 2006 is automatically classified Band K, even if its CO2 emissions exceed the Band K 225g/km upper limit. Hope this is helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fat haggis Posted June 23, 2016 Report Share Posted June 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Bosh said: 2007 2.7? £290 road tax and 245bhp yup that's what i pay and mine a late late 2007 2.7 987 im having a 7 theme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
987Matt Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Don't be put off by the IMS issues, it seems to me overblown on the internet forums. I recently bought a 2005 3.S and was more concerned with getting a well looked after example with decent mileage and spec, and if your still worried budget the money to upgrade the IMS as said above. There is a really good sticky on the IMS issue, so have a good read of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich H Posted June 26, 2016 Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 There is a note in the paperwork of my 2005 2.7 987 that it has had a complimentary IMS bearing change. Mine can't be the only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyspin Posted June 26, 2016 Report Share Posted June 26, 2016 44 minutes ago, Rich H said: There is a note in the paperwork of my 2005 2.7 987 that it has had a complimentary IMS bearing change. Mine can't be the only one. Interesting many more details, like who did it? Who paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiller Posted June 29, 2016 Report Share Posted June 29, 2016 I went 2006 here 3 yrs ago as a best bet. More tax, but extra is well under £1 a day. Easy ways to make that up quickly.. like refusing to pay £3.50 for a coffee in costa/shyatebucks etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordlee Posted June 30, 2016 Report Share Posted June 30, 2016 But the 3.4 is a better engine and the extra pace is certainly noticeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason986S Posted June 30, 2016 Report Share Posted June 30, 2016 £500 a year VED is a hefty price to pay, that's double my insurance, on top of my insurance! I would say it's justifyable on a super-car, but a sports car, maybe a bit greedy of the tax man. With supercar funds, the VED is considered pence anywho (I guess). If I was in your boat (and could stomach the higher road tax). Id go for the newest 3.4 I could afford in the best condition I could find. Simple as that (ironically). I wouldn't overly let colour or spec dictate the car too much either as that really narrows the market. I bought my car on credentials ignoring the colour/year/factory-specs, just on model and condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickemo Posted July 5, 2016 Report Share Posted July 5, 2016 12K will see you into a very nice late (2007 MY >) 987.1, the 2.7 5 speed manual model is not to be sneezed at and is prob fast enough for most driving situations and VED costs a lot less too, almost pays for the annual service at a decent indie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fat haggis Posted July 5, 2016 Report Share Posted July 5, 2016 7 minutes ago, mickemo said: 12K will see you into a very nice late (2007 MY >) 987.1, the 2.7 5 speed manual model is not to be sneezed at and is prob fast enough for most driving situations and VED costs a lot less too, almost pays for the annual service at a decent indie. your quoting my car and it's my 3rd boxster i love the 987.2.7 its as fast as the rest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickemo Posted July 5, 2016 Report Share Posted July 5, 2016 9 minutes ago, fat haggis said: your quoting my car and it's my 3rd boxster i love the 987.2.7 its as fast as the rest Ay, my first Boxster was a 2008 2.7 and it was superb & plenty quick enough to get into trouble with the long arm of the law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerobat Posted July 15, 2016 Report Share Posted July 15, 2016 A 2006 3.2 is not guaranteed to have the larger IMS bearing. You may think it does - but without having a look there's no way to be sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.