Arsène Devos Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 This thread has been done over and over again with the 987.1 3.4 vs 987.2 2.9, and we all know the answer to that, any 987.2 is more reliable than 987.1. I am wondering what the reliability difference would be between the Cayman S and the Cayman of the same generation (II). If I recall correctly, I saw someone say that the 3.4 has more reliability problems because a 3.4 really "pushes it" regarding the limited mid-engined air intake/cooling. Is he correct? What's your take on it? I personally prioritize reliability much more than those extra horses and pounds, I owned an A6 Allroad 272 hp figured that a 2.9 265 hp in a lighter and more aerodynamical car would be more than enough to have fun with both on the road and on the tracks (like nurburgring, if you don't agree youtube "miata nurburgring"), though if the reliability is exactly the same I wouldn't say no either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Founder Beanoir™ Posted September 6, 2020 Founder Share Posted September 6, 2020 Welcome! I don't think there is much difference in reliability at all between the 2.9 and 3.4 Gen II engines, the 3.4 certainly doesn't have any issues to speak of. The cars themselves are fundamentally the same otherwise. I'd say if you wan't a 3.4, then get one and don't look back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlosRich Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 The only difference is the 3.4 is DFI direct injection, so there may be carbon build up issues, but I've not heard of any tbh. The 2.9 is port injection. It's certainly rapid, depends what your used to though. Mid range could do with a bit more punch, a diesel BMW will leave you behind. I guess the 3.4 has the extra punch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extanker Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 38 minutes ago, GlosRich said: The only difference is the 3.4 is DFI direct injection, so there may be carbon build up issues, but I've not heard of any tbh. The 2.9 is port injection. It's certainly rapid, depends what your used to though. Mid range could do with a bit more punch, a diesel BMW will leave you behind. I guess the 3.4 has the extra punch. this about covers it........i would just add the 2.9 is a poster child for the adage ......porsche over priced and under powered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briggy Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 I wanted the S as it's more powerful. No evidence that I've sacrificed reliability for power. I've had the car almost 4 years and don't recall any discussion on any of the 3 Porsche forums I use about reliability comparisons between the 2 models. Cheers, Bryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post GlosRich Posted September 7, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted September 7, 2020 The oldest ones are 11 years old now, so you would think we would hear about some 9A1 engine issues if there were any. Shame the rest of the car isnt as good as the engine lol... Coolant pipes, aircon condensors, worn bushes, gearchange cables etc... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extanker Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 6 hours ago, GlosRich said: The oldest ones are 11 years old now, so you would think we would hear about some 9A1 engine issues if there were any. Shame the rest of the car isnt as good as the engine lol... Coolant pipes, aircon condensors, worn bushes, gearchange cables etc... add paint and interior to the list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now