Warning to Porsche buyers...warranty issue and PCNA

[MVZ944T]

Well, warranty issues are the last thing I need to worry about on either of my Porsches, but I would say that any warranty work done on a car that is tracked on a regular basis would be a gift. My personal opion, but I think in this sport you pays your money and you takes your chances, as the old saying goes. I would be willing to bet that if you bought a Ferrari and tracked it and had a problem, the dealer would not be too generous with their warranty work. I read last year in one of the car mags, that in Germany if you alter your wheels from stock they will void your warranty, on all brands! That's harsh!

Another thought, if you buy a cup car, does it come with a warranty? If it is raced?

[ben, lj]

I would be willing to bet that if you bought a Ferrari and tracked it and had a problem, the dealer would not be too generous with their warranty work.

Actually that's not true. As well, GM is taking a position on the new C6 Z06 that occasional track use won't void the warranty. Then again, GM and Ferrari actually race.

[Jad]

I would be willing to bet that if you bought a Ferrari and tracked it and had a problem, the dealer would not be too generous with their warranty work.

Actually that's not true. As well, GM is taking a position on the new C6 Z06 that occasional track use won't void the warranty. Then again, GM and Ferrari actually race.

From what I am reading (all second hand info only), it is not only Porsches position to support AXed cars, but they are standing behind the warranty. The problem is, the customer seems to want his money back after racing the car for ~ 1 year. From what I read, he doesn't want the rear main seal fixed under warranty, just the car bought back as it smokes at start up. The issue seems to be whether the smoking is caused by abuse or manufacturer defect, not whether the warranty is void. There are MANY examples of Porsche fixing possible defects on tracked cars under warranty. I really doubt GM or Ferrari would repair a car damaged while racing either, the problem for both sides is proving what caused the problem.

It sounds like there is valve train damage, and I have no way of knowing if it was caused by over-revving and mis-shifts or poorly seated or a mis-manufactured valve train. If it is the first, I don't think Porsche should cover it, but if it is the latter they should repair it, but not have to buy the car back.

Honda S2000 have LOTS of engines exploding as people shift from 5th to 2nd, but the manufacturer doesn't buy them new engines and it doesn't matter if they are track cars or street cars.

Just my $.02.

[ben, lj]

I would be willing to bet that if you bought a Ferrari and tracked it and had a problem, the dealer would not be too generous with their warranty work.

Actually that's not true. As well, GM is taking a position on the new C6 Z06 that occasional track use won't void the warranty. Then again, GM and Ferrari actually race.

The problem is, the customer seems to want his money back after racing the car for ~ 1 year. From what I read, he doesn't want the rear main seal fixed under warranty, just the car bought back as it smokes at start up. The issue seems to be whether the smoking is caused by abuse or manufacturer defect, not whether the warranty is void. There are MANY examples of Porsche fixing possible defects on tracked cars under warranty. I really doubt GM or Ferrari would repair a car damaged while racing either, the problem for both sides is proving what caused the problem.

It sounds like there is valve train damage, and I have no way of knowing if it was caused by over-revving and mis-shifts or poorly seated or a mis-manufactured valve train. If it is the first, I don't think Porsche should cover it, but if it is the latter they should repair it, but not have to buy the car back.

First, the guy wasn't "racing" but messing around with cones in the Qualcomm parking lot. Second, Pioneer (PCNA) has told the customer they can't or won't fix the smoking. This has left him no alternative EXCEPT for the lemon process. He would be very unreasonable if asking for a new car after one year instead of having Porsche fix or replace the smoking engine, and I think he knows that. The only thing I wonder is if the 996 is so shotty without dry sump that the AX g's caused the smoking. It's pretty hard to believe a few "laps" around the parking lot spaced by much rest in between should be acceptable damage for a car costing this much and being marketed as it has. How come none of the other usual suspects at these local club events with 996s have experienced this? If the AX'g itself caused it owing to the lack of dry sump, why is he alone with this problem. Porsche marketing material (as well as the PDE cars) are highly hypocritcal. However, if the overrev did indeed cause valve damage and the smoking about which he complains, then by all means Porsche should say "too bad".

Today was supposed to be the day he got the decision from arbitration. I wonder how that worked out.

Incidentally, GM is on record publicly as regards the permisability of "weekend" and "occassional" track use. Ferrari, while not this braison with it's public marketing, follows the same policy.

[ben, lj]

Actualy, it only got to the buy back stage because they won't replace the engine or do anything for the smoking, but they'd replace the engine if the RMS diamater was out of spec . . . otherwise just replace the seal and on my way . . . no addressing the smoking.

Sean

Did they check it after the 2nd RMS in a year was replaced? What happened with the arb decision today?

[rss996]

I have not heard about the decsion, i will call him tomorrow....

Jad,

The issue is not him just wanting the car bought back without trying to repair. The car has done it since new and they cannot fix the smoking. The RMS has been done twice but is a whole different issue...

Ben
Autocross here is a fast track with speeds up to 80 mph and a mile track...I think we have a much different autocross than other clubs...

The fact is that Porsche should market the Wet sumpers as an everyday car and not eceive people with the whole" Integrated dry sump" on the window sticker. These engines are not meant to be driven like the GT3's and they should just admit it!

I bought mine to daily drive and truly love my 997! I don't care about wet sump/dry sump because I know I wont make it to the track---lack of time- 3 kids and my own business makes it unrealistic for now!

I'll let Sean speak for himself once he has an answer....

As the world turns.....

[ben, lj]

Autocross here is a fast track with speeds up to 80 mph and a mile track...I think we have a much different autocross than other clubs...

wow, that's 5 mph higher than the legal AZ speed limit traveled by Kia's, Ford Fiesta's, etc

[rss996]

[bryanearll]

AH, but I am actually weighing the brand new GT3 vs. whatever I want in older cars.

I asked a couple of dealers about the GT3 997 version:
1) Taking $2500 deposits
vs.
1) The 997 version of the GT3 has not been announced, there is no current engine planned to replace the current GT3 version. If they do release a GT3 based on the 997 body it will probably have the current GT3 engine.

Now, a current 'cup car', is in and about the same price range. The difference is my wife. Sweet baby can see the long term radiation burn of a boy who wants to run on a track vs. a fine trackable new car. For ole B, it's about the warranty. Nope, it was about the warranty. I think it's probably easier to say; "I have 'X' many disposable dollars that I'm willing to indulge myself in whatever I'd like to do." (Sweet...)

I race a Seven road bicycle. If a weld broke they would fix the bike or send me a new one. Since I've been in 3 major accidents (not that you would know) if a tube fractured they might write it off to stress. On the other hand if I had a new bike on order do you think they would begrudge me a tube or a weld?

Sorry, I digress...
b

[rss996]

Bryan,

Don't forget the GT3 has no sunroof..............much better option than a dry sump........

[bryanearll]

IMSA ANNOUNCES GT3 CUP CHALLENGE PRESENTED BY MICHELIN

Braselton, GA - The International Motor Sports Association (IMSA)
announced today, in conjunction with Porsche Motorsports North America
(PMNA) and Michelin, the creation of the IMSA GT3 Cup Challenge
presented by Michelin, a series designed for Porsche GT3 Cup race cars.

The series will allow amateur and semi-professional drivers, those who
do not make their living in motorsports, to compete in a professional
environment, similar to many other GT3 Cup series around the world and
will run as part of the American Le Mans Series weekends.

"IMSA is delighted to announce the formation of the GT3 Cup series,"
said Tim Mayer, IMSA COO. "As an organization we are dedicated to the
promotion of motorsports at all levels and the GT3 Cup has proven
worldwide to create great racing for the fans and for the competitors."

As part of the announcement IMSA announced that Michelin has agreed to
be the title sponsor of the series. Michelin will be providing the spec
tire for all competitors.

"As part of our racing heritage Michelin is proud to be a part of the
first GT3 Cup Challenge in North America," said Amanda Head, Michelin
Motorsports Marketing Manager. "Michelin is associated with the GT3 Cup
worldwide as part of our commitment to high-performance tires. The
tires used in the series reflect the quality street car tires that we
are pleased to offer our customers."

The purpose-built race cars, based on the Porsche 996 body style, will
have sealed engines and transmissions, providing for close racing where
the driver's talents are exemplified. PMNA will provide technical
support for the series with personnel, parts and expertise both away
from and at the track.

"There are over 100 of these cars already in North America," said Uwe
Brettel, Porsche Motorsports North America President. "Last April,
during Porsche's Rennsport Reunion at Daytona, we had more than 65 cars
entered in the Cup class, and we think a lot of these competitors will
be interested in running this new series."

"We are thrilled to be working with Michelin and PMNA to bring this
type of exciting racing to North America," said Mayer. "With support
from manufacturers like Michelin and Porsche we are able to deliver
professional racing to all competitors. I would also like to thank the
Porsche Club of America and the Porsche Owners Club which have been
very supportive as we launch this series."

The 2005 series schedule includes races at the Grand Prix of Atlanta,
Apr. 15-17; American Le Mans at Mid-Ohio, May 20-22; Portland
International Raceway, July 29-31 and two other races, one on the east
coast and one on the west coast, to be determined at a later date.

IMSA is an approved FIA, ACCUS club that has been sanctioning motor
racing events since 1969. IMSA, based in Braselton, Ga., currently
sanctions the American Le Mans Series, the Star Mazda Pro Series and
the Panoz GT Series.

[Jad]

The issue is not him just wanting the car bought back without trying to repair. The car has done it since new and they cannot fix the smoking. The RMS has been done twice but is a whole different issue...
...

I am now more confused? If it has done it since new, how is the dry sump an issue? Obviously it wasn't the ax-ing that caused the problem if the problem occured before ax-ing it? Also, lots of 996 race/AX without the problem, so it isn't just a blatant design flaw. Plus, from what I have read, keeping the oil level completely full+ fixes any starvation problem just like on a 944. But again, if the car did it since new, none of this matters.

Is Porsche saying:

1) There is no problem,
2) There is a problem, but the warranty is void because of racing,
3) There is a problem caused by abuse, and thus not covered,
4) There is a problem and they will try again to fix it, but won't replace the car,
5) or something else?

It will be interesting to hear the ruling.

[Kim Crosser]

ben, lj - very funny about the Kia's etc.

However, our tracks ARE faster than many regions (Lone Star Region says their AXs are between 25 and 45 MPH and never exceed 60, and many other regions state that "AX is a LOW speed event"). Our tracks sometimes exceed 80 MPH - occasionally even hitting triple digits for the real high-powered cars, and unlike Kia's on a highway our cars are taking sustained high-speed turns at maximum G forces.

When you add oversized and/or sticky tires and then push to the limits of adhesion during sustained cornering, you are probably exceeding the design parameters of the "street" cars. This can lead to the sump being unable to properly scavenge the oil, followed by oil starvation, followed by really ugly stuff happening in the cylinders. Obviously, the faster drivers are putting more sustained G forces on the oil sump than the slower ones, so unfortunately your standings (and relative times) in our AX's may well be used against you...

This is a known issue with a number of Porsche engines, including the 996, and there are aftermarket kits to baffle the sump and provide additional oil capacities. Of course, these kits almost certainly void the warranty you are trying to protect...

What isn't clear to me is the cause of the smoking. Has a visual inspection of the cylinders and valves been done? If any of those are scored or otherwise damaged, then Porsche may have a valid claim that tracking the car caused the smoking. Otherwise, I would think they should be trying harder to fix the smoking problem.

[ben, lj]

ben, lj - very funny about the Kia's etc.

However, our tracks ARE faster than many regions (Lone Star Region says their AXs are between 25 and 45 MPH and never exceed 60, and many other regions state that "AX is a LOW speed event"). Our tracks sometimes exceed 80 MPH - occasionally even hitting triple digits for the real high-powered cars, and unlike Kia's on a highway our cars are taking sustained high-speed turns at maximum G forces.

When you add oversized and/or sticky tires and then push to the limits of adhesion during sustained cornering, you are probably exceeding the design parameters of the "street" cars. This can lead to the sump being unable to properly scavenge the oil, followed by oil starvation, followed by really ugly stuff happening in the cylinders. Obviously, the faster drivers are putting more sustained G forces on the oil sump than the slower ones, so unfortunately your standings (and relative times) in our AX's may well be used against you...

This is a known issue with a number of Porsche engines, including the 996, and there are aftermarket kits to baffle the sump and provide additional oil capacities. Of course, these kits almost certainly void the warranty you are trying to protect...

What isn't clear to me is the cause of the smoking. Has a visual inspection of the cylinders and valves been done? If any of those are scored or otherwise damaged, then Porsche may have a valid claim that tracking the car caused the smoking. Otherwise, I would think they should be trying harder to fix the smoking problem.

Hey Kim, that's definetely true about cornering Gs, especially when you add stickier tires. That said, it's still a little sad that this sort of driving (far from "racing" and true track day type stuff partially owing to it only being a few laps at a time, etc) is more than the 911 can handle given the way the car is marketed along with Porsche's gratuitous association with the days of old when they used to really race. I think Porsche's strategy is to satisfy the enthusiast contingent with the GT2, 3 and CGT while marketing primarily to the poseur with the modern day other 911 variants . The new C7S (Boxster coupe) would have been a great AX'r and occasional track car, but it's gonna have the same "street" motor all Boxsters and non TT, GT2 & 3 911s have which will apparently render it unreliable in those settings. The enhusiast has become such a smart part of Porsche's customer base (witness the V6 SUV) these days, I don't think they need worry much about losing them.

[sean996]

[/quote]

Did they check it after the 2nd RMS in a year was replaced? What happened with the arb decision today?[/quote]

Yeah, it was .010" different between the 6 and 12 o clock positions . .. the max allowed is .016".


Sean