Condenser Rads - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

I own a 718 Spyder, it is a Dec 2019 car that I bought in September 21, the car had 2500 miles on the clock when I bought it. I took the car into my local OPC in July just before taking it to France as it had a high pitched whistle which I wanted checking out before taking the car abroad. The OPC came back and stated that the issue was the condenser radiators which were leaking due to debris in the bottom corners around the radiator. I was told that Porsche had recently notified all OPC's that Rads would not be covered by warranty going forward and I needed to find £1200 to replace the rads. I asked my local OPC to raise a complaint with Porsche UK as in my opinion a car still under new car warranty and with correct OPC service history should be covered. The car at this time had covered just short of 10k miles and was 2.5 years old. My opinion was that the rads were not fit for purpose as they should not wear out (rot) in such a short time period / mileage. I pointed out that the Spyder is fitted with mesh covers so I as the owner could not clean out any debris that got through the mesh. The car had been serviced on time but it was not a service item to remove the PU and clean out around the Rads. I maintained that the cost should be covered under warranty. Porsche UK reviewed my complaint and came back with a percentage offer, which as I wanted the car to go on holiday I reluctantly accepted on the understanding I would pick this case up directly with Porsche UK on my return. I have since emailed Porsche UK and outlined my opinion and stated that the full cost should be covered as I as the owner cannot get at the debris to clean it out, therefore if it rots in such a short space of time it is not fit for purpose. Porsche have now responded saying they will not cover the full cost and that is their final decision, if I don't like it to take it to the Motor Ombudsman. This to me is not about the money as that resulted in being only a small amount but the principal, what is a warranty worth if Porsche can just take a view not to pay out when it suits them. Condenser Rads have been a Porsche problem for years and is a well known issue, I would have some sympathy if the car had open exposed rads, had done a reasonable mileage or was a few years old but in this instance I feel it is just wrong and if applied to me will have an impact going forward with a number of other owners who also have no alternative but to pay. Am I being unreasonable ? Has anyone else had a similar response ? Does this also apply in the States ? I have an excellent relationship with my OPC and they have been very helpful in trying to resolve this issue but their hands are tied and `I don't expect the OPC to foot the bill. I bought my first Porsche in 2005 and this car is my 13th so I think I can consider myself an enthusiast of the brand. I love the cars but think Porsche UK's stance is unreasonable.

I don't think that's unreasonable at all Geoff, I'd be expecting the same. Someone needs to test this with the Ombudsman at some stage, if you have the time and inclination then it would be great to hear what they think about this. Rads shouldn't fail so easily.

Unfortunately, they've failed due to an external influence (debris) not a faulty part. From Porsche's perspective it is justifiable to refuse a claim on this basis. In the past I believe Porsche have covered these claims but it seems they're getting more strict on the exact details of the warranty cover. Anecdotally, this seems to tie-in with what seems to be a more profit based approach I'm seeing from Porsche of late. A sign of the times I guess.

Twinfan said: Unfortunately, they've failed due to an external influence (debris) not a faulty part. From Porsche's perspective it is justifiable to refuse a claim on this basis. In the past I believe Porsche have covered these claims but it seems they're getting more strict on the exact details of the warranty cover. Anecdotally, this seems to tie-in with what seems to be a more profit based approach I'm seeing from Porsche of late. A sign of the times I guess. While I don't disagree with your point Dave what can I do to ensure my rads don't fail in the first 3 years ? or should Porsche reposition the rads to avoid the close proximity to the corner of the PU or maybe even manufacture the rads from thicker material. If I'm contributing to the problem I'll contribute to the cost. Maybe all cars with mesh covered rads should be garage queens ?

I think you just have to clean them out Geoff, or get someone to do it for you. My GT4 is certainly no garage queen but fortunately I've not had the issue appear on my similarly aged car (touch wood). I agree you shouldn't have to do it but I don't think there's any other option.

If Porsche are indicating that the area needs to be kept clear of debris then the grilles fitted need allow a normally competent user to do this, without recourse to the tool box or visiting an OPC to be charged for the pleasure. Similarly they seem happy to blame debris for puncturing the condensers on models not fitted with the grilles. They need to resolve this ongoing issue which has been widely reported. So, as you may have guessed, I don't think you are being unreasonable.

Geoff39GL said: Twinfan said: Unfortunately, they've failed due to an external influence (debris) not a faulty part. From Porsche's perspective it is justifiable to refuse a claim on this basis. In the past I believe Porsche have covered these claims but it seems they're getting more strict on the exact details of the warranty cover. Anecdotally, this seems to tie-in with what seems to be a more profit based approach I'm seeing from Porsche of late. A sign of the times I guess. While I don't disagree with your point Dave what can I do to ensure my rads don't fail in the first 3 years ? or should Porsche reposition the rads to avoid the close proximity to the corner of the PU or maybe even manufacture the rads from thicker material. If I'm contributing to the problem I'll contribute to the cost. Maybe all cars with mesh covered rads should be garage queens ? It is a design weakness that allows debris to collect around the rads and it needs sorting out by Porsche. It is not acceptable for a failure to occur so early in the cars life and simply to say it should have been cleaned out. A reasonable expectation based on the cost of the vehicle has not been met.

Front bumper removal and clean out + waxoil refit takes all in a hour . Learn to do it .Plenty of u tube vids . While “ in there “ waxoil the front cross over pipes joints .You can see them once the front wheel well liners are out .Grease all the fixings . Save your grief .Treat it as a Sunday hobby hands on thingy.

Fiammetta said: Front bumper removal and clean out + waxoil refit takes all in a hour . Learn to do it .Plenty of u tube vids . While “ in there “ waxoil the front cross over pipes joints .You can see them once the front wheel well liners are out .Grease all the fixings . Save your grief .Treat it as a Sunday hobby hands on thingy. You really think that is a reasonable expectation for all owners of GT cars ?

Geoff39GL said: Fiammetta said: Front bumper removal and clean out + waxoil refit takes all in a hour . Learn to do it .Plenty of u tube vids . While “ in there “ waxoil the front cross over pipes joints .You can see them once the front wheel well liners are out .Grease all the fixings . Save your grief .Treat it as a Sunday hobby hands on thingy. You really think that is a reasonable expectation for all owners of GT cars ? Yes Mr Google’s your friend .Learn from it . Don’t be that guy who does sod all them comes on here to whinge about a entirely preventable issue .

As an owner you are required to have the car service by an authorised agent to maintain the warranty. This service schedule is designed to ensure the vehicle survives a full life ... which for a car is many times the duration of the warranty. If Porsche insist that the rads require periodic cleaning out to avoid corrosion, why is this not included in their stated service regime ? Since the car has a full OPC service history and it is within warranty, why not take it to the Ombudsman ? Within the EU if a product is found to have a known issue, the warranty on that issue is extended to five years .... making a fuss of this could set the ball rolling on a more comprehensive outcome than they imagine ?? My 2p ....

Fiammetta said: Geoff39GL said: Fiammetta said: Front bumper removal and clean out + waxoil refit takes all in a hour . Learn to do it .Plenty of u tube vids . While “ in there “ waxoil the front cross over pipes joints .You can see them once the front wheel well liners are out .Grease all the fixings . Save your grief .Treat it as a Sunday hobby hands on thingy. You really think that is a reasonable expectation for all owners of GT cars ? Yes Mr Google’s your friend .Learn from it . Don’t be that guy who does sod all them comes on here to whinge about a entirely preventable issue . Why be difficult when with a little effort you could be really offensive ?

ChrisW. said: Why be difficult when with a little effort you could be really offensive ? I do find Fiammetta really offensive - this is a legitimate issue and this style of comments are best reserved for twitter or similar.

ChrisW. said: As an owner you are required to have the car service by an authorised agent to maintain the warranty. This service schedule is designed to ensure the vehicle survives a full life ... which for a car is many times the duration of the warranty. If Porsche insist that the rads require periodic cleaning out to avoid corrosion, why is this not included in their stated service regime ? Since the car has a full OPC service history and it is within warranty, why not take it to the Ombudsman ? Within the EU if a product is found to have a known issue, the warranty on that issue is extended to five years .... making a fuss of this could set the ball rolling on a more comprehensive outcome than they imagine ?? My 2p .... Thanks Chris I might just try the Ombudsman and at least establish his position regarding influence on manufacturers. I have a few mixed feelings as I don't want to upset the relationship with my OPC and its not about the money as I've only ended up paying out £300 but the principal of warranty and the ends an owner can reasonably be expected to go to in looking after his motor car. In my view removing body panels is outside of reasonable.

The bumper is designed to come off real easy and further more re locate exactly.It’s got quite clever locating tabs and clips . I tend to remove mine every 2 yrs . A similar issue in terms of warranty repairs etc exists for a lot of cars .Ever increasing complexity increases the risks .Take the roof drains on pan roofed Macan ….another grey area of who should clean them , or owner does nothing expecting OPC to pick up the tab .Some do some don’t . If you do it clean them and regularly check patency then it never becomes an issue , but it doesn’t stop folks making threads . So what’s the bottom line with Porsche rear engines AC condensers . They are a consumable item , outside the std body corrosion warranty. As are your coolant pipes , they start to weep past the O rings .O ring rubber looses its shape and seal like all rubber .Also water ingress externally twixt the joint and fixing clip .Do nought and wait for a leak ….it’s gonna happen or proactively wax them to protect the metal collar . The AC condensers are fitted about 1 cm in front of the main cooling ( engine ) rads there’s a gap . They have a cowl to direct on coming air through.Ie no escape route .This means leaves and debris eventually accumulates , starting at the bottom then gradually filling the gap between the two .You can eye ball the lower corner debris but not what’s festering in between . Bumper off you can get i between and clean out . It’s the ONLY way . It’s not difficult. Extends the life of the components that’s are destined to fail and drop into serviceable item . U.K. is not in the EU , so not sure how far the guy suggesting take it to the EU to warrant it for 5 yrs would get . As said by the time you have finished composing emails wasting your life bickering with officialdom , just whip the bumper off - job done .Your AC condensers and front x pipes ( if you are bothered ) will last longer lavished with attention . Or ask an Indy to do it .You can’t tell they have been off such is the clever design, that’s a compliment to Porsche . Or ask the OPC “ is there anything else that needs doing / cleaning “ at its service . Eg the roof drains on a Pan roofed Macan , or the gap between the AC rads and main rads on rear engined cars . I guess a lot on here are on “ monthlies “ so as long as it makes the end of the contract you are not bothered , just after that stamp and N rated tyres . You roll the dice .

Fiammetta said: I guess a lot on here are on “ monthlies “ so as long as it makes the end of the contract you are not bothered , just after that stamp and N rated tyres . You roll the dice . And what has that to do with whether a product is fit for purpose or not? That's a very dismissive and presumptious way to look at things. For what it's worth, my Spyder is owned outright, bought with cash and I have no plans to ever sell it. I can't be bothered spending my weekends lying on my back doing maintenance - I bought a new car as I wanted to drive it, not tinker with it. I have other cars I tinker with but I didn't want that with this one. Either the cleaning should be done at each service or it's a warranty item IMO

Suggesting that we should remove our bumpers to clean them is laughable. You may be able to, Fiametta, but my mother certainly couldn’t. Should she be excluded from the warranty? They should be cleaned at service or fall under warranty..

Unfortunately I think most people are looking at it from a practical and subjective point of view, not a letter of the law point of view. Warranties cover failure of parts due to defects. A warranty won't cover a condensor that has rotted due to debris sitting against it. The design of the front bumper is the issue in that you can't easily clean them out. It's like a stone chip that left alone causes the body to rust. The issue wouldn't have occurred without the stone chip, and it's the same with the debris. Porsche have been generous in covering a lot of the cost which they potentially didn't have to do. Personally, I'd take that as a win and move on.

Why does this issue not happen with (AFAIK) the Ferrari 360 or 430? Same location of intakes. I can't understand how such a simple design error continues to be made on successive Porsche models

Twinfan said: Unfortunately I think most people are looking at it from a practical and subjective point of view, not a letter of the law point of view. Warranties cover failure of parts due to defects. A warranty won't cover a condensor that has rotted due to debris sitting against it. The design of the front bumper is the issue in that you can't easily clean them out. It's like a stone chip that left alone causes the body to rust. The issue wouldn't have occurred without the stone chip, and it's the same with the debris. Porsche have been generous in covering a lot of the cost which they potentially didn't have to do. Personally, I'd take that as a win and move on. I agree with your letter of the law point of view but disagree with your stone chip analogy. I can get access to the stone chip and easily touch it up, it is reasonable to expect me to do something about it. I cannot get at the rads and really cannot see the corners to even know if there is debris around the corners of the rads. in my opinion it is not reasonable to expect me to be responsible, I maintain in reality the design is not fit for purpose. It should be quite easy to resolve either make the grilles removable, change the position of the rads or make cleaning out a service item. Getting worked up about this is not going to do me any good, if I upset Porsche GB there will only be 1 loser, I have a great relationship with my OPC, I have one car on order and am looking at placing another order if / when I can get a slot. BUT right is right and wrong is wrong and rejecting a claim in these circumstances I feel is wrong. Nothing to do with the money as I have had a good allowance but maintain it should not be a cost to me for something outside my reasonable control on a nearly new car

All fair points Geoff, we'll have to agree to disagree If you decide to push further, good luck

john_1983 said: Why does this issue not happen with (AFAIK) the Ferrari 360 or 430? Same location of intakes. I can't understand how such a simple design error continues to be made on successive Porsche models They sit the smaller AC condenser behind the larger gen coolant rads , or site it independently. It was on my Testarossa the rhs extra intake , mind the main rads were in those massive grills aside the engine . I had a 360 for almost a decade and like my current 308 ( 70;s carb ) it sits behind the main coolant rad The air is forced through via the cowling / ducting etc the face of the main rad . No debris get can past the cowling and lodge in between the two . You still have to occasionally clean crap out , same on a Testarossa, those signature side strakes on the doors ( same to a smaller extent on 348s ) we’re to meet US regs , something about the reduced risk of a small child entering the duct. How ever you could reach your hand in or see the rad in the engine compartment. on a 360 , a normal one you could reach a small hand into the egg create grills . I think the optional mesh we’re screwed in btw . Bentley GT is another example, the oil cooler is a smaller rad in front of the main engine rad . Again do nowt and get a big bill for galvanic corrosion or as I have outlined with the rear engined Porsches ….be proactive and clean and apply your preferred anti corrosion wax . Think of the Pork AC condensers as a semi consumables ….the length of change out time i between depends on how proactive you are . How ever I will reiterate they couldn’t have made front bumper removal and re fit any easier . I think that points lost . Removal of a 360/430. Rear bumper to fit a sports exhaust is a nightmare in comparison. Thank you Porsche ……but why ? Why so easy ?

Geoff39GL said: I agree with your letter of the law point of view but disagree with your stone chip analogy. I can get access to the stone chip and easily touch it up, it is reasonable to expect me to do something about it. I cannot get at the rads and really cannot see the corners to even know if there is debris around the corners of the rads. in my opinion it is not reasonable to expect me to be responsible, I maintain in reality the design is not fit for purpose. It should be quite easy to resolve either make the grilles removable, change the position of the rads or make cleaning out a service item. Getting worked up about this is not going to do me any good, if I upset Porsche GB there will only be 1 loser, I have a great relationship with my OPC, I have one car on order and am looking at placing another order if / when I can get a slot. BUT right is right and wrong is wrong and rejecting a claim in these circumstances I feel is wrong. Nothing to do with the money as I have had a good allowance but maintain it should not be a cost to me for something outside my reasonable control on a nearly new car Where would it stop / end ?The manufacturers responsibility to replace AC condenser due to accumulation of damp salt soaked leaves rotting them ? Tyres , brakes , wiper blades, clutches. It’s the line between the owners responsibility and manufacturers…..it’s fine I know for AC condensers . If it’s a keeper not” hired “ by any modern finance agreement…..then you are gonna need to read owners forums like Boxa.net and jump on stuff .

If it is a user serviceable item then it should be in the user manual on how to remove the bumper. Along the same lines as how to change a wheel.

Fiammetta said: Where would it stop / end ?The manufacturers responsibility to replace AC condenser due to accumulation of damp salt soaked leaves rotting them ? Tyres , brakes , wiper blades, clutches. It’s the line between the owners responsibility and manufacturers…..it’s fine I know for AC condensers . If it’s a keeper not” hired “ by any modern finance agreement…..then you are gonna need to read owners forums like Boxa.net and jump on stuff . Again the items you mention above can be addressed for responsibility. Tyres - You can see them, you can check around them and usually it is clear if its a manufacturing fault or damage or suspension set up. Brakes - Again you know how you use your brakes, you can check the pads, see the discs, callipers etc. Wiper Blades - Consumables, warranty not applicable and again you can easily see them. Clutch - More difficult this one, the OPC would need to strip it out and the average owner would have to take the word of the OPC as to the cause. I guess you could get a 2nd opinion as no driver will admit to abusing the clutch. You must be aware that Condenser rads have been a problem for Porsche for many years and until recently they have accepted warranty claims. This would not have been a problem if the OPC had carried out the repair before the recent instruction from Porsche UK. As I mentioned before if the car had open PU so you have easy access it is fair to expect the owner to clean the debris out. My point is 2 fold, 1) You do not have easy access to the rads and 2) 9k miles and 2 years while under manufacturers warranty you should not expect them to be leaking irrespective. Check the other posts everyone else seems to generally agree they should not have failed in this time frame. The purpose of the thread was to understand the general consensus and to establish if I was being unreasonable in my expectation which has been answered. I don't expect everyone to agree we all have our own opinion.

Geoff39GL said: Again the items you mention above can be addressed for responsibility. Tyres - You can see them, you can check around them and usually it is clear if its a manufacturing fault or damage or suspension set up. Brakes - Again you know how you use your brakes, you can check the pads, see the discs, callipers etc. Wiper Blades - Consumables, warranty not applicable and again you can easily see them. Clutch - More difficult this one, the OPC would need to strip it out and the average owner would have to take the word of the OPC as to the cause. I guess you could get a 2nd opinion as no driver will admit to abusing the clutch. You must be aware that Condenser rads have been a problem for Porsche for many years and until recently they have accepted warranty claims. This would not have been a problem if the OPC had carried out the repair before the recent instruction from Porsche UK. As I mentioned before if the car had open PU so you have easy access it is fair to expect the owner to clean the debris out. My point is 2 fold, 1) You do not have easy access to the rads and 2) 9k miles and 2 years while under manufacturers warranty you should not expect them to be leaking irrespective. Check the other posts everyone else seems to generally agree they should not have failed in this time frame. The purpose of the thread was to understand the general consensus and to establish if I was being unreasonable in my expectation which has been answered. I don't expect everyone to agree we all have our own opinion. I agree they shouldn’t have failed for you . It’s just so common and preventable as well .Wether you should or shouldn’t, or use the excuse it’s not in the handbook ….remove the bumper makes no difference to the outcome . Those that will not remove it in a timely manor will succumb to AC condenser leaks . I mentioned it because it’s really easy and as I said Porsche have thought this one out .It will hopefully help others .Every rear engines Porsche is in the same predicament. BTW just out of interest did you see the leaky rads ? It’s unusual for both to go simultaneously and when they go they leave a oily witness mark from the AC oil .They go first in the bottom outside corners where leaves accumulate, but also you need a torch to really see I’m that dark corner . Did they show you the parts or at least take a “ Porsche cam “ and email you for authority before starting the work ? The nearside one collects most debris and goes first . But they may have adopted a “ while we are in there “ with the bumper off attitude and advised you do the other as it wouldn’t have been far behind .= hence raise some £ out of you as technically the none leaky wasn’t bust . Another ( while we are discussing rear engined pork AC ) is the high pressure pipe from the front to the rear under the drivers cill .It corrodes from water condensation from the inside out on 90 degree bend adjacent to the Jack pad .Pin hole leaks start .Cumbersome jacking by say a tyre multiple not using a Porsche hockey puck can distort an already corroded pipe and bust it . Again you will oil mist adjacent to the Jack pad seeping through the undertray gaps . It’s the lowest point in the plumbing water accumulation from winter condensation sits there in un used cars in cold garages . That’s gonna go at some point . As I said they are complex cars , the days of your grandfathers Morris thou or Marina mechanicals are over . Edited by Fiammetta on Friday 16th September 19:01

Just to put some perspective on this matter. I have a 987 S where the AC stopped working about six months ago. A friend who works at Porsche obtained a quote for new condensers, air dryer and O-rings with 10% discount they were an unbelievable £777.00! I always do the work on my Porsche. I sourced a good quality pair of condensers, (did not renew the air dryer) from my reputable motor factor. Cost was £150 including VAT. I could’ve had a cheaper pair for £100 or thereabouts but decided to go with his recommendation. As stated, easy to remove front bumper, (YouTube videos abound) in about 30 minutes, (first time I have done it). Was amazed at not just the leaves in front of the condensers but the general debris inbetween each condenser and the water radiator behind. This is fairly incredible as they have a plastic surround closing the gap inbetween them. Long story short, condensers renewed and bumper replaced in about two hours. Then, a short trip to my local garage for a re-gas for £60.00 all in and job completed for a total of £210 Point is, it’s a really easy job and shouldn’t be £1200.00. Also, if anyone wants to attempt removal of leaf debris themselves, it is easy for the DIY car fiddler. That is a picture of the water radiator which was behind the condenser. You can see the debris there. If these are original then that is after 86K miles. It has always been Porsche serviced so I have no idea whether anyone made an effort to remove debris before.

The pink residue suggests you may be back there soon phazed; is that an engine coolant leak?

No. That is dye that is put in with the refrigerant. It is highlighted with an ultraviolet torch which I have. Good spotting.

Really interesting thread, having had a 987 that suffered this issue (which is clearly down to poor design by Porsche that they are obviously not interested in solving) I thought having a Spyder that has the grills fitted as standard would be better than say a GTS that doesn't. Perhaps a rethink is needed. Back to the original post, of course the whole cost of repair should be bourn by Porsche, I accept for a keen DIY owner the bumper may come off easily but if that is required it should be part of the regular service. I'd be disappointed too if I'd spent £80K on what most of us think is a quality product and it failed within warranty.

You only have to look at the amount of corrosion on the underbody fixings of modern Porsche cars and compare this to equivalents from others at a similar age ... OPC additional maintenance guarantees a circuitous additional revenue stream ... By comparison to Porsche BMW M series cars still need a running-in oil change and annual services ... a little care and costs to prevent bigger bills ? I appreciate that in 1992/3 Porsche were close to going bust, but they aren't now ...

phazed said: Just to put some perspective on this matter. I have a 987 S where the AC stopped working about six months ago. A friend who works at Porsche obtained a quote for new condensers, air dryer and O-rings with 10% discount they were an unbelievable £777.00! I always do the work on my Porsche. I sourced a good quality pair of condensers, (did not renew the air dryer) from my reputable motor factor. Cost was £150 including VAT. I could’ve had a cheaper pair for £100 or thereabouts but decided to go with his recommendation. As stated, easy to remove front bumper, (YouTube videos abound) in about 30 minutes, (first time I have done it). Was amazed at not just the leaves in front of the condensers but the general debris inbetween each condenser and the water radiator behind. This is fairly incredible as they have a plastic surround closing the gap inbetween them. Long story short, condensers renewed and bumper replaced in about two hours. Then, a short trip to my local garage for a re-gas for £60.00 all in and job completed for a total of £210 Point is, it’s a really easy job and shouldn’t be £1200.00. Also, if anyone wants to attempt removal of leaf debris themselves, it is easy for the DIY car fiddler. That is a picture of the water radiator which was behind the condenser. You can see the debris there. If these are original then that is after 86K miles. It has always been Porsche serviced so I have no idea whether anyone made an effort to remove debris before. A four post lift in your garage

Actually a 2 post. Fortunate I have plenty of room. Also cheap as cheap as chips. Less than £1200 7-8 years ago. Brilliant piece of kit!

One of the advantages of living in the sticks.

Having recently bought a 2004 986 I guess I need to have a look at these. As an interim measure is there a way of getting a long, thin pipe on a vacuum cleaner in there?

You can but it is limited. Getting back to the original post. Unbelievable as I paid less for my half a ton of steel and hydraulics then it cost to have a couple of tiny aluminium radiators fitted by Porsche.

What prep did you have to do to the floor where it bolts down or was the concrete thick enough (unlikely in a domestic garage?).

Skyedriver said: Having recently bought a 2004 986 I guess I need to have a look at these. As an interim measure is there a way of getting a long, thin pipe on a vacuum cleaner in there? That's what I used to do with the Cayman R etc ... but the GT4 was a little more tricky ... I used the jet-wash but maybe I have just blown debris in ??

David W. said: What prep did you have to do to the floor where it bolts down or was the concrete thick enough (unlikely in a domestic garage?). We built the garage from scratch and therefore put the roof in high enough. As for the floor, it was a new reinforced slab which was about 12 inches thick from memory. If you are putting one of these in and the slab isn’t thick enough, it is easy to break away a few square metres and cast in thicker areas. If a car is lifted evenly, there is very little lateral force on the columns.

Slippydiff said: As I recently said to someone “behind the scenes” that had also been following this thread. I’ve run three BMW 3 series diesels over the past 14 years, between them they’ve clocked up close on half a million miles in all weathers, they were all carefully parked up in god’s garage every night I leave the aircon on come rain or shine. I’ve never replaced an A/C condensor in any of them, nor A/C pipes/seals of dubious quality, ditto brake discs due to corrosion on their inner faces, likewise I’ve never replaced a radiator. The brake lines haven’t corroded to the degree they had to be replaced to ensure the car passed an MOT, and the coolant hard lines weren’t made from a material that corroded and caused them to fail. Go figure ... “Maintenance” is : Check oil, check coolant level, check washer fluid, check tyres, check lights. It does not constitute pulling the front of the car apart to clean out debris that cause premature failure of substandard (for which read cheap) parts due to poor design, and to suggest otherwise because you like nothing more than doing a bit of Sunday morning DIY, is more a reflection on you than the other 99% of owners. That this problem afflicts their modern cars in EXACTLY the same way as the cars they built nearly 25 years ago, shows a simply staggering degree of arrogance on Stuttgart’s part. But that shouldn’t come as a big surprise, t’was ever thus. Anyone want to debate the merits of 996 M96/997 M97 engine bore scoring and IMS bearings for proof of the contempt Porsche have for their customers ... ? Thought not. Off course the OP could invest in some superior heat exchangers at considerable cost : https://csfrace.eu/collections/porsche AND wax them to provide additional protection against their poor/questionable positioning, but I imagine that when he plonks them on the service receptionists desk, they’d refuse to fit them because they’re “non-standard parts”, or if they did agree to fit them, they’d void the warranty on the car when the time came for him to make a claim on some completely unrelated part of the car that’s failed ... When I was working I also had 3 x 330d BMW company cars each covered over 100k miles in around 3 years and other than routine servicing not a spanner on any of them nothing failed. A great work horse.

The last I heard Porsche would cancel the warranty on any Boxster/Cayman that had aftermarket mesh fitted in front of the radiators! Now it seems mesh is fitted as standard on Boxster derivatives and they are still refusing claims. I wouldn't be surprised if they were to cancel the warranty if it was found the owner had coated the condensors or the vulnerable stupidly expensive aluminium coolant pipes with waxoyl or similar due to “unauthorised modification”. Just a cynical wallet rinsing exercise typical of the VW group in general.

Fiammetta said: Yes Mr Google’s your friend .Learn from it . Don’t be that guy who does sod all them comes on here to whinge about a entirely preventable issue . Fiammetta, that is a really unhelpful answer, this is not some 20 year old car it’s less than 3 years old. It would be an entirely preventable issue provided Porsche had got the design right in the first place, normal preventative maintenance of a £100K+ Porsche should not require dismantling sections of bodywork.by the owner if it does then Porsche would have stated that in the owners manual of all 911s as they all have this problem. Nowhere is this documented in the owners manual and that is based on my ownership over the past 10 years of four various 991 models and now a 992 GT3.

Lord Nelson said: Fiammetta said: Yes Mr Google’s your friend .Learn from it . Don’t be that guy who does sod all them comes on here to whinge about a entirely preventable issue . Fiammetta, that is a really unhelpful answer, this is not some 20 year old car it’s less than 3 years old. It would be an entirely preventable issue provided Porsche had got the design right in the first place, normal preventative maintenance of a £100K+ Porsche should not require dismantling sections of bodywork.by the owner if it does then Porsche would have stated that in the owners manual of all 911s as they all have this problem. Nowhere is this documented in the owners manual and that is based on my ownership over the past 10 years of four various 991 models and now a 992 GT3. Wasn’t meant to be unhelpful.If you do a bit of due diligence “ Porsche AC condenser problems “ or indeed [ insert modal ] Porsche problems , at least you can see what’s coming over the horizon. That’s helpful ? Also as I said it’s not difficult in fact straight Fwds to remove the front bumper .It refits thus easily an OPC will never know . Pulling a huge positive out of this . If it needed specific tools , know how a zillion pipes + wires to disconnect, and once refitted panel gaps all over the shop from 20 feet , then it’s would be no no agreed . Those reading still on OEM have two choices as I and others outlined . 1- do nothing despite as you correctly say there’s nothing in any hand book . 2- carry out some prophylactic cleaning and preventative treatment .DIY . As said u tube and owners forums / club are awash with AC condenser rot issue . Might be worth if anyone is worried exactly what’s covered with P warranty , to list the stuff the internet turns up and put that list to your OPC . I am running a Macan 6 months into its 3 yr warranty and an 987.2 from 2009 ( summer cab ) with zero warranty on 90 K . Had about 7 pieces of pork , in / out over the past 35 yrs . Take the Macan .Shed loads of stuff to watch for .The drains on the pan roof are similarly a grey area .Blocked and the carpets + poss sensitive electrical stuff gets wet .But you can easily ( sun AM job ) clean them .OPC charge , ie add on a hr or two on a service if they need cleaning . Like the AC condenser issue in rear engined , there’s no mention in the Maca hand book of how to clean the PAN roof drains or if they should be cleaned . Owners forums are the first port of call to read about all the Gottchas .

Skyedriver said: Having recently bought a 2004 986 I guess I need to have a look at these. As an interim measure is there a way of getting a long, thin pipe on a vacuum cleaner in there? A length of garden hose with gaffer tape around one end wound around it until it fits snugly in the end of the hoover hose. Works a treat. But no substitute for removing the bumper and getting in there.

Fiammetta said: Lord Nelson said: Fiammetta said: Yes Mr Google’s your friend .Learn from it . Don’t be that guy who does sod all them comes on here to whinge about a entirely preventable issue . Fiammetta, that is a really unhelpful answer, this is not some 20 year old car it’s less than 3 years old. It would be an entirely preventable issue provided Porsche had got the design right in the first place, normal preventative maintenance of a £100K+ Porsche should not require dismantling sections of bodywork.by the owner if it does then Porsche would have stated that in the owners manual of all 911s as they all have this problem. Nowhere is this documented in the owners manual and that is based on my ownership over the past 10 years of four various 991 models and now a 992 GT3. Wasn’t meant to be unhelpful.If you do a bit of due diligence “ Porsche AC condenser problems “ or indeed [ insert modal ] Porsche problems , at least you can see what’s coming over the horizon. That’s helpful ? Also as I said it’s not difficult in fact straight Fwds to remove the front bumper .It refits thus easily an OPC will never know . Pulling a huge positive out of this . If it needed specific tools , know how a zillion pipes + wires to disconnect, and once refitted panel gaps all over the shop from 20 feet , then it’s would be no no agreed . Those reading still on OEM have two choices as I and others outlined . 1- do nothing despite as you correctly say there’s nothing in any hand book . 2- carry out some prophylactic cleaning and preventative treatment .DIY . As said u tube and owners forums / club are awash with AC condenser rot issue . Might be worth if anyone is worried exactly what’s covered with P warranty , to list the stuff the internet turns up and put that list to your OPC . I am running a Macan 6 months into its 3 yr warranty and an 987.2 from 2009 ( summer cab ) with zero warranty on 90 K . Had about 7 pieces of pork , in / out over the past 35 yrs . Take the Macan .Shed loads of stuff to watch for .The drains on the pan roof are similarly a grey area .Blocked and the carpets + poss sensitive electrical stuff gets wet .But you can easily ( sun AM job ) clean them .OPC charge , ie add on a hr or two on a service if they need cleaning . Like the AC condenser issue in rear engined , there’s no mention in the Maca hand book of how to clean the PAN roof drains or if they should be cleaned . Owners forums are the first port of call to read about all the Gottchas . Whilst lacking empathy, this does at least ridicule the latest warranty decision by Porsche ... are they still a company to be admired and followed ? Or are they a business that is forgetting how they got to where they are ?

Spevs said: Really interesting thread, having had a 987 that suffered this issue (which is clearly down to poor design by Porsche that they are obviously not interested in solving) I thought having a Spyder that has the grills fitted as standard would be better than say a GTS that doesn't. Perhaps a rethink is needed. Back to the original post, of course the whole cost of repair should be bourn by Porsche, I accept for a keen DIY owner the bumper may come off easily but if that is required it should be part of the regular service. I'd be disappointed too if I'd spent £80K on what most of us think is a quality product and it failed within warranty. I was wrong, 981 Spyder has factory fitted mesh, 718 Spyder's don't, another backward step IMHO.

Spevs said: I was wrong, 981 Spyder has factory fitted mesh, 718 Spyder's don't, another backward step IMHO. Not easy to see in that pic, but the 718 Spyders have grilles from the factory:

Is that from factory.........?

That's a press car, so yes. Here's the EVO review, so another press car: https://www.evo.co.uk/reviews/22887/porsche-718-bo... Best pic of the grilles:

Anyone know why they only fit these at the factory on Spyder's and not the GTS. They both have more or less the same bumper and that goes for the 981 or 718...........

Geoff39GL said: I own a 718 Spyder, it is a Dec 2019 car that I bought in September 21, the car had 2500 miles on the clock when I bought it. I took the car into my local OPC in July just before taking it to France as it had a high pitched whistle which I wanted checking out before taking the car abroad. The OPC came back and stated that the issue was the condenser radiators which were leaking due to debris in the bottom corners around the radiator. I was told that Porsche had recently notified all OPC's that Rads would not be covered by warranty going forward and I needed to find £1200 to replace the rads. I asked my local OPC to raise a complaint with Porsche UK as in my opinion a car still under new car warranty and with correct OPC service history should be covered. The car at this time had covered just short of 10k miles and was 2.5 years old. My opinion was that the rads were not fit for purpose as they should not wear out (rot) in such a short time period / mileage. I pointed out that the Spyder is fitted with mesh covers so I as the owner could not clean out any debris that got through the mesh. The car had been serviced on time but it was not a service item to remove the PU and clean out around the Rads. I maintained that the cost should be covered under warranty. Porsche UK reviewed my complaint and came back with a percentage offer, which as I wanted the car to go on holiday I reluctantly accepted on the understanding I would pick this case up directly with Porsche UK on my return. I have since emailed Porsche UK and outlined my opinion and stated that the full cost should be covered as I as the owner cannot get at the debris to clean it out, therefore if it rots in such a short space of time it is not fit for purpose. Porsche have now responded saying they will not cover the full cost and that is their final decision, if I don't like it to take it to the Motor Ombudsman. This to me is not about the money as that resulted in being only a small amount but the principal, what is a warranty worth if Porsche can just take a view not to pay out when it suits them. Condenser Rads have been a Porsche problem for years and is a well known issue, I would have some sympathy if the car had open exposed rads, had done a reasonable mileage or was a few years old but in this instance I feel it is just wrong and if applied to me will have an impact going forward with a number of other owners who also have no alternative but to pay. Am I being unreasonable ? Has anyone else had a similar response ? Does this also apply in the States ? I have an excellent relationship with my OPC and they have been very helpful in trying to resolve this issue but their hands are tied and `I don't expect the OPC to foot the bill. I bought my first Porsche in 2005 and this car is my 13th so I think I can consider myself an enthusiast of the brand. I love the cars but think Porsche UK's stance is unreasonable. Aahhh, the wonderful Porsche 'customer services', they rank alongside Virgin Media & Three. The Ombudsman will rule in their favour, but go via them as it is a requirement if you go via the small claims route. They not only don't abide by their warranty they don't believe the Consumer Protection Act applies to them either. I've finally submitted a claim for damage caused by a faulty (recalled) part, they wouldn't entertain paying out for any resulting damage. Good luck, but expect nothing from them.

Spevs said: Anyone know why they only fit these at the factory on Spyder's and not the GTS. They both have more or less the same bumper and that goes for the 981 or 718........... Spyder and GT4 bumper is completely different and I would imagine they fit grilles to these as they are 'expected' to be track weapons. I've got Zunsport grilles fitted to my 4.0 and will take them off when it goes in for a service. I do however, use an air blower to blow out anything that may have collected by the rads.