Boxster catastrophic engine failure - only 2.5l?

Hi, I'm considering buying a first generation Boxster - probably one with the 2.5l engine. However, I have seen a large number of reports of catastrophic engine failures. Most of the failures seems to happen to 2.5l engine models, and for some reason most of them happen to cars that are driven in the US. I remember that a generation of BMW V8 engines had problems with US gasoline, so this migth not be as far fetched as it first seems. So, I have two questions:

  1. Are the 2.7l engines less likely to fail?
  2. Are cars driven in the US more likely to fail?
Reply to
Ottar Holstad
Loading thread data ...

I probably should mention that the reason this is important, is that about half of the second-hand Boxster in Norway are imported from the US

Reply to
Ottar Holstad

"Ottar Holstad" wrote

Yes. Allegedly, the 2.5L engines had poor oil seals and fittings, which contributed to most of the engine failure reports. Porsche changed things in 2000 when the 2.7L appeared.

No. AFAIK the engines are identical, although the emissions control differences probably mandate ECU and other minor mods.

FYI, the BMW engines failed for completely different reasons than any other set of engine failures, and are unique to BMW. If you want the whole story, Google for "nikasil". There were also failures in their six cylinder engines: BUT ONLY IN EUROPE!

FloydR

Reply to
Floyd Rogers

Hmmmm, so if I check the oil-level really often, and fill it up if necessary, I should be OK?

Reply to
Ottar Holstad

"Ottar Holstad" wrote

No, because if a seal fails or oil line cracks, you can lose oil pressure and the engine will be toast in seconds.

FloydR

Reply to
Floyd Rogers

I thought it was because of poor engine castings and that something less than 3% of the 2.5l cars were affected.

Reply to
The Dead Senator

Yes, when searching the 'net for Boxster engine failures, poor engine castings seemed like the most frequent cause. When you say that less than 3% of the 2.5l cars were affected, does that mean that less than 3% of the cars had a poor engine casting, or that all of them had poor engine casting but only 3% of them led to engine failure?

If only 3% og the cars had a poor engine casting, would there be any way to tell if a given car is one of them?

Reply to
Ottar Holstad

Oh, sorry. It was that 3% of the 2.5l motors had actual poor engine castings. I believe they tended to fail early on in their life...don't know if one with a porous engine casting would still be running. Perhaps if it were a low miles garage queen so that it had not yet had a chance to fail.

Methinks the seller could have some sort of verification done with a dealer to use as a selling point, if necessary.

DS

Reply to
The Dead Senator

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.