Driver has a lot to do with it. I have seen new Sti's and Evo's at the track running low 15's. Does this mean they can never run a 13? No, just that the drivers babied them and launched horribly. Driver makes all the difference.

Actually 118 is about the max for a 996tt stock. I have seen between 114 and 118. Times for stockers from the magazines have varied from 11.92 best to about 12.4. Depending on the launch. . That is about a full second faster than an Evo IX. The M3 is a great car, but it is hampered by weight and it has less torque than the 996TT in stock form. All of which makes it slower. The best time for the new M3 I have seen in mags is 12.6, which is great but not as good as the best times for a 996tt.

 

I've driven both stock, the TT will pull a bit harder.

I love M3s (my daily is a M3) but if I was looking at a new M3 or used 996TT, I'd go for the 996tt....

 

I have JMA, and as I've mentioned, I've saved around $3K on various issues. Granted, none were over $2K individually (around $1300 for replacing radiator fans, $500 for a new microswitch for a window, and around $1500 for replacing the power steering reservoir control valve). My dealer has a pretty good relationship with the JMA rep, so each time the issue came up there was no problem with getting it covered under warranty.

Obviously with different companies/dealers/shops, YMMV. I've been pretty fortunate, all things considered.

Not that this is what we're talking about, but interestingly enough my Turbo S had its engine replaced at 18000 miles. I didn't own it then, but apparently it was due to an undiagnosable problem - some type of drop in performance for which they couldn't figure out the reason. After the dealer spent numerous hours investigating (about six weeks in the shop altogether) Porsche finally said that they would just ship out another X-50 engine. That didn't cost a the owner a thing since it was under the factory warranty. Who knows if that would be covered under an aftermarket one? Chances are it might not be, but you never know. I submit that coverage depends on your warranty company/dealer/shop, and of course whether or not it's a valid claim (i.e., not due to abuse, detected mods, etc.).

 

I have easycare. Doesnt matter which warranty company..they will dig to the bottom of it if they have to pay 30k for a motor, esp in this economy.

 

LOL 996 turbos trap 118 stock. A 997 traps 120-121. You must be smoking some good ****

 

no you are troll.

 

Motor Trend ran a 11.86 @ 119.9 in a stock 996TT X50 package. Article here (scroll to the bottom): http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...x50/index.html

How's that foot taste?

 

 

I don't disagree with your statement. I just don't agree that your statement means that they will never honor the warranty terms for a $30K engine replacement. Digging to the bottom may mean they'll do everything they can to avoid paying, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll resort to non-compliance of their contract with you.

Like anything, there is a wide spectrum of quality for aftermarket warranty companies. Not all of them break their contractual agreements. The key is proving a situation is covered by the contractual arrangements.

 

I have an E92 M3 and I'd say that for the average driver around town: no, put them on real track and the better driver will win.
Although the E92 M3 has amazing handling you don't have the same torque low-end and since it's a high-rev engine the power is at the top. A lot of people like that, somewhat similar to the GT3 engines in the 911.

If you're choosing between the two the performance in stock form is the least concern, I think, due to the following reasons among others:
- Relatively cheap to mod the 996TT to ~500HP crank, or beyond at relatively reasonable costs.
- Most 996TT are mostly out of factory warranty vs. E92 M3 will have warranty
- You can actually have 4 adults sitting in the M3 comfortably ( if you use a proper driving position with proper reach of the steering wheel, not laid way back)
- The stock suspension in the M3 is quite decent for street use , while in the 996TT the norm is to swap for PSS9/10 and add sway bars to dial-out understeer.
-Most importantly the 996TT is AWD. Where I live it's not sunny 365 days per year, therefore I cannot use the power of the M3 every day due to limited grip.

At the end of the day if you don't need the practicality of the E92 or the factory warranty since you want to mod it anyway, go for a 996TT. That's why I'm looking for one. However if you do want a practical daily driver with no service concerns (since it's covered), there are some amazing deals on the M3s in the states now.

 

"thekid" ..all i can say is you are an idiot! come back with some facts.

 

I agree. Its possible that some companies cover big $$$ expenses. My experiences have led me to believe the opposite. Its all good. In my situation i did not have the RMS leak when i purchased my car , but was still denied stating that it was pre existing. I could have gone to small claims court...but just dont have the time to deal with that. My car is modded anyway.

 

I've only had the 996TT for a few months and really haven't driven it enough to give a comprehensive impression (still has only 4500 miles). I'm picking it up tom. morning from the shop b/c it had a bad diverter valve. I'm looking to track it soon and that'll give me a better impression of its capabilities. I will say that I love the e92M on track, but the Turbo would simply smoke it on a straight.

In my opinion as of now, these two are cars for different situations. The e92M with NA and RWD just gives me thrills the 996TT doesn't. That being said, I'm definitely growing to love the 996TT, b/c in the wet (and its wet often in Houston, TX) the thing is amazing. Holding the 996TT in a controlled slide in wet conditions is a lot of fun. The 996TT is also a lot easier to heal-toe in, the M just doesn't have very good pedal placement for that.

 

That's really a shame. Even more of a shame since it can be more hassle and/or money than it's worth to go after them in court.

Interestingly, I'm awaiting a callback from my dealer's service manager who's investigating a situation I'm in. With an X-50 engine, I should see 0.8 - 0.9 bar of boost at max acceleration whereras I only see 0.7 (which is what the base engine would have). The first thing I did when talking to the service manager yesterday was to verify that the engine replacement at 18K miles was with another X-50 and not the base engine - he confirmed it was. I guess I was that paranoid, cause if it wasn't an X-50, then the dealer sold me a TTS without it having one of the key aspects of the S - talk about contractual violation. Anyway, if it turns out that I need to have some work done on the engine, I'll be needing my warranty company again (assuming it's a covered issue).

 

One point here, you may already know this. As far as i know there is no X50 engine, its the turbos and think Intercoolers that are different in a X50 car. The X50 cars have a k24 turbo and the non-x50 cars have a k16 turbo.

So in your case when they said they replaced your engine, there is only one engine they can replace. Most likely you are fine.

Now i am not totally sure about the boost on a X50. But I am sure you have done your research there.

If its not making enough boost that could be the turbos/boost leak,wastegate settings or something else like programming. Not the engine in my opinion. I am not the expert , please post here your issues, I am sure you will get a ton of help here better than any dealership can provide.

Hope it all gets sorted out soon. Gl.