15 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996 Convertible
Leading reported evidence
Replace keys if they did
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
a similar thought occurred to me - but they must have replaced both keys if they did!
Leading evidence: 'Replace keys if they did' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace keys if they did' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
15 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T194705Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
What!?!? :wtf:
Ok..
Not ALL 996's appear to have this functionality then :sad:
It seems that there is an extra option NOT to have it:
533
No convertible top operation from remote control
So does your key have three buttons? :?:
Mine also controls the roof from the key. I wonder why anyone would 'opt' not to have this function.
Worryingly the roof seems to respond to the remote even when the hardtop is on.....
That panicked me.
My Car is a yr 2000 Cab.
I have a 3 keys, but the two main keys have two buttons (one above the other). The top main button is bigger and cycles lock / unlock. The second smaller button below it has an image of the roof and operates the roof remotely. There isn't a button that operates the front luggage bonnet.
Never use the button to operate the roof remotely, completely pointless as I can drop the roof once in the car.
Seems that the are a number of key variations.
Seem's typical Porsche then - you pays your money and you takes your choice!
Presumably, the three button option will be more costly, both to purchase the fob and to code it to the car to operate three separate commands?
Perhaps that's why the local OPC's want £325+ for a 'new' 3 button key?
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
