MVZ944T wrote: 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.
ben, lj wrote:MVZ944T wrote: 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 wrote:ben, lj wrote:MVZ944T wrote: 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.
sean996 wrote: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
rss996 wrote: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...
rss996 wrote: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...
...
Kim Crosser wrote: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.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 257 guests