Pothole Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 Just now, Scubaregs said: You also said "you see a lot of those failing." Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 My personal thought, is like any problem in any car, the internet blows it out of all proportion as people tend to join forums for advice when they have an issue, that would never normally join, thus skewing the perception of numbers affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pothole Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 But do you agree or disagree with me? The point is that if you disagree with me, you have a stance. If you demand that I must prove my stance with facts and figures, you must have your own facts and figures if you are going to insist that my stance is wrong. That you disagree with me and demand things from me that you weren't willing to provide yourself is clearly unreasonable. My views, for the record, are not based on what car owners post on forums. They are largely based on factors including the actual technicalities of the engines involved (for instance, the 987.1 3.4 Boxster and Cayman having exactly the same engine), speaking to numerous people in the trade, the build numbers involved and so on. As it happens, I have discussed with someone in the trade the build numbers thing. They said they hadn't considered that previously and agreed that it may well explain why the Cayman has the worse rep for bore scoring despite having exactly the same engine in 3.4 form. The build numbers thing isn't something that's always taken into account. For the record, I take the view that the IMS thing was always overblown and for the reasons you mention - stuff posted on the internet. Scoring on the big M97 engines is a much, much more widespread issue than IMS failure ever was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 How many times? I have no stance. That does not make it unreasonable for asking you to provide data for yours as you clearly believe it to 100% correct. You can argue your points all day long, without hard data to back them up it is simply your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.I.T.T. Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 Ladies, get a room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, K.I.T.T. said: Ladies, get a room. Sorry, no threesomes.😇 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pothole Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Scubaregs said: How many times? I have no stance. That does not make it unreasonable for asking you to provide data for yours as you clearly believe it to 100% correct. You can argue your points all day long, without hard data to back them up it is simply your opinion. I do not believe I'm 100% correct. I have a view. Some parts of that view view I'm 100% certain of because they are facts, other parts I'm fairly confident of, others less so. I wish you would stop making things up. It's also clear you disagree with me. But you're not even reasonable enough to be honest about that. Ultimately, if you can't even play by your own rules, we're not going to get anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 All I've ever requested is numbers or data for your stance on the subject. Clearly you have none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pothole Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 I might have loads. But seeing as you can't even admit you disagree with me and can't provide any numbers of your own, why should I be your performing monkey. Just for a moment I thought you were going to be a reasonable human being. Clearly not. Afraid, it's clear you;re both unreasonable and clueless. I tried, but you're just another clueless crank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 Is that your answer, personal insults? You need to grow up a bit. You have no data, it is plain as day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulQ Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Scubaregs said: You have no data, it is plain as day. And the people who say the problem is not worth worrying about etc, yet no one questions them on how they got their data. You can't win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph007 Posted May 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 I am sorry I seem to have started a big debate, that wasn’t my intention just looking for some advice on a potential purchase. I appreciate there are wildly different views on the associated risks from both camps and think I have read a lot from different people, will do my upmost to mitigate risk and report back!!!!👍 Si Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagss2 Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 If I were in the 987.1 market I would buy either a 3.2 Boxster or a 2.7 Cayman. I have zero evidence or statistics to back this up, however nor do I have the b011ocks to invest in a M97 3.4 donkey. No offence intended toward any happy 3.4 owners... Cheers, Baggers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulQ Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 1 minute ago, bagss2 said: If I were in the 987.1 market I would buy either a 3.2 Boxster or a 2.7 Cayman. I have zero evidence or statistics to back this up, however nor do I have the b011ocks to invest in a M97 3.4 donkey. No offence intended toward any happy 3.4 owners... Cheers, Baggers. + 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocky Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 If only they’d put a golf engine in from the word go 😐 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red rocket Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Ralph007 said: I am sorry I seem to have started a big debate, that wasn’t my intention just looking for some advice on a potential purchase. I appreciate there are wildly different views on the associated risks from both camps and think I have read a lot from different people, will do my upmost to mitigate risk and report back!!!!👍 Si Don't worry about it. These sorts of spats are pretty rare round here but usually pretty entertaining when they get going. And at least one of today's protagonists seems to like them. 🤔 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckie66 Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 I’d say there’s a higher chance of it being stolen, crashed or over heating than ims or bore score. As well prices reflect the potential engine issues - which are small. So for the cheap entry price to 987’s take the small risk and just go and enjoy it!! if really concerned then go get a 2.7 or a newer 981, I’m sticking with my 987 3.4, cheap happy motoring 😀 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulQ Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Chuckie66 said: I’d say there’s a higher chance of it being stolen, crashed or over heating than ims or bore score Data please 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bally4563 Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 All b*ll*cks my 3.4 at 80k uses no oil or makes no noises in fact it as a smooth as a alpaca lined codpeice !! FFS !! Get a grip you lot, every car has its issues but not all whom ever manufacture, in fact I’m getting fed up to the back teeth now , next thing you know Porsche will be fitting four cylinder engines....god forbid!!😂😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubaregs Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, bally4563 said: next thing you know Porsche will be fitting four cylinder engines....god forbid!!😂😂 I believe it happened the same year you were born? No data, just from year of manufacture and the age you look.😇 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.I.T.T. Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 Nice Beetle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terryg Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 30 minutes ago, bally4563 said: All b*ll*cks my 3.4 at 80k uses no oil or makes no noises in fact it as a smooth as a alpaca lined codpeice !! FFS !! Get a grip you lot, every car has its issues but not all whom ever manufacture, in fact I’m getting fed up to the back teeth now , next thing you know Porsche will be fitting four cylinder engines....god forbid!!😂😂 I am not religious but I do believe it should be a capital 'G' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.I.T.T. Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Terryg said: I am not religious but I do believe it should be a capital 'G' Only in Ireland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terryg Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 1 minute ago, K.I.T.T. said: Only in Ireland. His forum name has Bally in it FFS, how much more Irish could he be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobbie Posted May 17, 2019 Report Share Posted May 17, 2019 The only fact I know about borescore on the 3.4 Boxster is that if you type it in a thread three times then Pothole and Toplad instantly appear and start arguing. Yes, I do have data🤣 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.