Type 2 over rev values and warranty

Anyone seen values for the type 2 over rev? If so, at what miles/hours . . . Mine had a value of 127 at around 450 hours which Porsche is claiming confirms abuse . . . 127 engine firings over red line (if I'm understanding this right) . . . that's only .35 of a second at 7200 rpm . . . Info . . . anyone . . . Please! Sean

What is type 2? Is that on a downshift?

yep . . I don't think type 1's are an issue?

Type 1's are not an issue. I don't think a few fractions of a second once should count as abuse. Unfortunately, the definition of "abuse" is up to the Porsche dealer and regional rep. Even a microsecond of type 2 can be classified as abuse if they so desire. And there lies the rub. Dealer input counts a lot. If they insist it's abuse, your only recourse is either to threaten or actually file a lawsuit.

Better not rev these cars up to high or else your warranty will go bye-bye!

Revving your car and putting it into too low of a gear are pretty different things. Type twos are bad news. Obviously they design the engine with a RPM limit in mind and when you're hitting range two, you're past the mechanical limits of the engine. You're engine isnt going to explode if you hit some range twos but stress on the engine is exponentially greater when you're increasing rpms past the tolerance of the engine. Out of curiosity, I wondering how many range 1's this guy has, and why hes at the dealership in the first place.

he had a type 2 reading of 127. I think that is one occurance per an expert in our club. He was at dealership because his car billows smoke out of its tailpipes after a hard run at the autocross....2 RMS's as well.....smoking issue is what Porsche is denying and claiming is from abuse!

Go to another dealer!! No question..

Yeah but how many range 1s? If hes got a ton of range 1's you could imagine why they would be cautious.

Would putting in the clutch at WOT trigger a type one or two, always wondered about that, kind of like missing a shift?

that wouldnt trigger anything because the RPMs would likely DROP Type 1 is when you rev the engine to the redline and the fuel cuts off (if i recall correctly, dealers don't really care about this too much, UNLESS you have a few type 2s) the software cuts the fuel off before any damage can be done, no harm no foul, but dont do it TOO many times. Type 2 can only happen when you downshift to a gear thats too low, and the mechanics of the drivetrain force the engine to a speed thats HIGHER than redline, this is called an overrev and can serverly damage the engine over time.

Is the dealer the only service center one can test his/her car for the two types of Codes. I wonder what my car reads on the computer.

2 thoughts: 1: A missed downshift from 5th to 2nd can blow an engine in a heartbeat. I've done it with modest catastrophy in my Kurtis (a known problem of a clutch-less 4-3 downshift in a Jericho trans can beat the linkage and get 1st) and my son experienced this in my Lotus Super 7 in a driver's school when a weak centering spring allowed a 3-1 downshift when he wanted a 3-4 upshift acclelerating up the straight. That cost $10,500 in a fraction of a second when the flywheel separated from the crank after shearing every bolt. PHP, the race engine builder didn't stand behind that, and I didn't expect them to. 2. Why can't we routinely get that (overrev) information when buying a used car, especially from the dealer. Wouldn't you want to know if the previous owner downshifted into the wrong gear, and how often? Can private shops read the DME to extract this info? Lastly, isn't the main issue that Porsche now won't stand behind cars that are tracked? That is a complete change of philosophy, and is offensive to me. The used to imply "Our cars are so tough, you can take them form the showroom to the track" Now, the sell you on the basis of performance engineering, but if you try to use the car that way, they say "You can't use our car that way- only we can for advertising purposes" What's the point of advertising performance if it voids your warranty to experience it. It's like a dinner you can only smell but not taste. I know there was some phrase single guys use for girls who kind of do the same thing. What was that phrase? Something with "tease" on the end, I seem to recall. I may buy a Cayanne, but not likely another new Porsche I want to take to the track, until this philospohy goes away. If we stand together on this issue, maybe our collective voice will be heard. Sorry for the rant. AS

Alexander, you are right on....If i'de have known they will use my PCA club events against me, I would have purchased an old 911 and fixed it up and beat the crap out of it for far less than 80k! The new Porsche's are basically highly engineered grocery getters in Porsche's eyes now. Sad but true. If you track a new Porsche, be ready for the repair bill if Porsche wakes up on the wrong side of the bed! I still love my new car but will miss the autocross events!

http://www.renntech.org/forums/index...t=0&#entry5243

Hmm What color is the smoke? White smoke = water vapor Blue smoke = oil burn black smoke = fuel burn So which color is it? I would think a over rev would cause valve damage. A would not leak down test show valve damage? I look at it this way. Valve damage + Over-rev indication in the DME = driver over rev = busted valves = driver errror not PCNA. If the valves are fine, but it is just burning oil (valves good).. then what frig does overreving do? Should be nothing! If there is oil in the heads well.. That is Porsche's problem as oil should not go into the heads no matter how hard you drive it.

Tool Pants, Do you think a on track downshift 4-3 at a corner would trigger a type 2.? I remember that happening to me at the track, but didn't go above 8k. BTW, a computer wiz I know erased his DME on a sl55, so I bet it could be done on the P unit as well.

They are not using PCA Club events against you, merely working to avoid the application of a mechanical/driveline overrev, which puts any engine outside its design limits. Beating the crap out of any car in this manner will result in engine damage, Porsche or not. There is no need to abuse any Porsche in this manner, new or old. I disagree. The car is doing exactly what you are telling it to do by screwing the pooch on a downshift. From Porsche's perspective, one could argue that the cars are, in some cases, being driven by individuals who have yet to learn proper shifting (up AND down). Porsche has no problems with tracking your car, as long as it is done properly. The inclusion of a Type 1&2 overrev counter merely assists them in determining the stresses applied to the car. If anything, they have been fairly consistent in this regard; something quite different from a 'waking up on the wrong side of the bed' business position. You should still enjoy your car at any PCA driving event. Perhaps a DE would be an avenue to explore.

The type 1 overrev is BS. If the engine can't handle that RPM then they should lower the rev limit!! If you have a type 2 overrev and the valves are not damaged, then why would that make a difference? These are all just excuses for the dealers and Porsche to not have to put money out to fix problems. They are no longer the same company and everything is about profit now.

Not true!! My dealer raised hell about me taking the car to even 1 PCA DE and say that it technically voids my warranty!

To get into range 2 it has to be a high rpm. The mechanics I have asked do not know the threshold and in all the technical publications I have read I have never seen a published number. I'm sure they know the number in Atlanta and Germany. There are cars with range 2 and they run fine. We had a tech seesion and about 12 cars were hooked up to a PST2 and it was interesting. One guy claimed he never missed a shift but when confronted with the range 2 reading for his car he confessed. There is no function on a PST2 to erase range 1 or 2, but I'm sure there would be a market for suck a service if the computer wiz could figure out how to do it on a Porsche. This information is stored in the DME. If the engine is replaced the DME is not reset to zero. It picks up from where the original engine left off.

Darren, I am curious, on what basis did your dealer make this statement of fact? If the dealer said that failure to change the oil, wash the car, etc voided the warranty, would they be making a (legally) correct claim? For better or for worse, there are laws governing warranty and refusal thereof. Just because a dealer said so doesn't appear to meet any minimum standard. There are different laws/standards regarding auto insurance, but that is a topic for another day. If you chose to take your new car to the track, wear out a set of pads in a weekend, return to the dealer and demand new pads to replace the 'obiviously faulty worn in one weekend ones', you would not be covered (as is the case for most all consumables). If you go to the track, never hit either rev limiter/counter, have you voided your warranty? If you go to an autocross, never hit either rev limiter/counter, have you again voided your warranty? If you take your car to a drag strip, never hit either rev limiter/counter, have your again voided your warranty. I am guilty of not having read my 996TT owner's documentation front to back, but exactly what activities are listed as being legal grounds to void a warranty these days, according to PAG or PCNA?

Hey Itc, I sat there and watched the words come out of the Porsche reps mouth...."Tracking the car can void your warranty"....He said they encourage club events though to teach people how to drive properly. Need any more proof?

Tool Pants, It is entirely possible. But it would take a lot of effort. There aren't too many electrical/computer engineers around that have enough experience with fuel computers, but it could be done... The other problem is how you would even get an extra few DMEs to fuss around with. I am sure the cost is pretty high. That and you could get your *** handed to you for reverse engineering their storage scheme. Do any of you guys know the model number of the DME etc... I am assuming it is a bosch unit like everything else. On something this high end, they can use a very good chipset and so they can use good encryption schemes, unlike for instance my 951.

Robert, I responded to you on the 997 forum, so I will be brief. The Porsche rep could sit there and claim/state that he is from Andromeda and by driving your car in the rain you can void the warranty. He can strip naked and run around the room claiming that the sky is falling. That does not make him LEGALLY correct; hence the need for arbitration/ruling from a judge, in full compliance with all written contracts, implied and otherwise, in accordance with applicable state/federal laws. Sorry, degrees in engineering and law make for a somewhat different view of things I'm afraid.

A good rule of thumb...always know what gear you are in, even if it means resorting to counting them in your head... 1...2...3...4...5...4...3...2...

What are you talking about? Type 1 IS the rev limiter. The reason they count it is so they know if you suck at driving and bang the engine off the rev limiter at every stop light.

whoever asked the question about what range qualifies as a type 2, common sense would conclude that a type 2 overrev is anything that is above the limiter that creates a type 1.

The rev limiter is there to prevent you from doing damage by overreving the engine. The limit of the rev limiter should be at an rpm that is safe assuming you just blip it and are not riding the redline for 10 minutes. If you blip the redline you aren't doing damage -- if it does do damage at that limit then its set wrong. What they look at is not so much the number of times that you hit the redline, but the overall amount of time that you spend on redline. The dealer checks this as the number of "pulses" that you hit the redline.

I think it would be easier and cheaper simply to say your DME was stolen, get a new one, and use the old one for tracking. Put the new one in for regular driving.

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Void warranty and track use became apparant with PCCB introduction. To avoid replacing $12,000 disc pairs, Porsche said "Used on track, not covered" despite the fact the brakes were advertised as racing-derived and ideal for track use. This philosophy has subsequently been applied to other claims. If you track a car, you are going to experience Type 2 overrevs, since the downshift-under-braking is a variable event IN THE REAL WORLD. Despite all ideal scenarios, the driver does not invariably begin braking at the very same point and the very same speed. One half second longer on the gas can cause an overrev when downshifting for a corner. That happens when you are passing someone, or trying to lower your times. Therefore, if a Type 2 voids the warranty, you can't aggressively drive on track without throwing away something you paid for. Since the warranty has a finite value, I guess Porsche could offer a partial rebate. Like, if you are void after 15,000 miles, get Xdollars back, since they are doing nothing to earn the value of what has been sold after the 15,000 mile point. Why should the owner have to screw around changing a DME after using the car in a fashion intended? Why do we need to become deceivers? If Porsche has totally changed its philosophy (and it seems to have done so) just say it up front, so owners can make that fact a part of their decision when buying. If you go to talk to a dealer today, they will still tell you how great the cars are on track as a part of the pitch. The problem is that it's a Catch 22 for the buyer. AS

i believe the point of this discussion is porsche's warranty/legal department being at a completely opposite and quite conterproductive standpoint from their advertising/marketing. which is a quite decieving and a very bad way to conduct business, very unethical. and the lengths they go to screw customers...

Can one ask the DME memory to be read as part of a PDI? I can see where this information would potertially go to the value of the car, not just be a warrantee issue. I can see the ads now: " pristine car, no type 1 or type 2 over rev recordings, only driven to the market..."

Now you guys are getting it! My friends arbitration verdict will be in by tuesday! I think it might have something to do with ones dealer getting pissed off and trying to make an example out of you! Whatever the case is it is sure disgusting and sad!

Just Curious- Why would a dealer ever not want to do warrantee work? Arn't they paid for it by PCNA? It seems they would to do it not only to make the customer happy but to keep their mechanics working as well. I think PCNA is the problem not the dealer, they seem to be selectively controlling their warrantee losses by using the DME data.

I think that's it. (PCNA) As tracking gets more common, and parts get more expensive, PCNA had a light bulb go on. Their "highest margin in the industry" was at risk. It doesn't take too many PCCB discs to wipe out the profit on a whole bunch of sales. Ergo, the hidden benefit of the Cayanne which will never be maximally stressed by 99.999% of buyers. The 996 is the first example of the priority of low manufacturing cost over design excellence. Otherwise, why wouldn't all 996"s have a race-derived block, and no RMS woes. I have no sour grapes over parts quality, as my ttX50 has been very solid, and in 2002 my dealer stood behind a set of Pirellis that suffered belt shift after track use. This policy shift reared it's noxious head in 2003 (at least in my experience). In part this was also fueled by tt enthusiasts aftermarket mods and their desire to have waranty coverage apply to the rest of the drivetrain- kind of pie-in-the sky in my opinion. The end result will be a lot more for-the -boulevard engineering. Why they put a lap timer in the 997, i fail to understand. Maybe that hooks to the DME too. If you record a good time at a known track, that's abuse too (joke-not too funny). I loved the toughness of all Porsches since the first 356 I had a ride in (a 1955 coupe). Of course, it was easier to be race-tough with 50 hp, and today's street cars rival the performance of prepped trans am racers of the 60" and 70"s. I hope they right this ship. AS

If the decision on your buddy goes against him, I don't believe it will be because he takes it to the track. That would a too subjective of a decision on Porsche's part. However, having the type 2 overev is proof positive that the engine was abused at least once and they could stand behind that as being a reason to decline service. Again, I doubt that Porsche would ever deny warranty service without proof positive that the car was abused and tracking a car does not prove that.

right on, type 2 over rev once could happen anywhere. For them to link his track days-auto -x only, to the rms leaks by date is absurd! Also, the billowing smoke has nothing to do with the type 2 revs...this is what they refused to fix and said was from abuse and type 2 revs....go figure. I hope the arbitrator rules in his favor.

That smoking sounds like rings or valves, either 'could' be linked to over-revving. If you've ever blown a racing motor you know what I mean.

Ok, just out of curiosity, i called my dealer for the question of tracking the car, any DE event ect., to see what the implications on warranty are. His exact quote was "Any tracking of the car voids the warranty."

Lots of questions. The range 1 and 2 thing can be displayed with a PST2/PIWIS - if it is important to you. If the engine runs fine range 2 would not bother me. Range 1 means nothing to me other than the rev limiter is doing it's job When a dealer does warranty work they are paid by PCNA. The replaced part is sent back to Atlanta. If Atlanta determines there was no reason to replace a part or if the part was "abused" then they do not pay the dealer. Guess who eats the cost? You all own what is sold as a street car. Read the warranty booklet. Yes, that is not how Porsche markets their products. If you want a race/track car with a warranty then good luck trying to find one. http://www.autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=100378

Tool Pants- A great name BTW, wish I thought of it. I think you are right on, I wouldn't want to warrantee track induced drivetrain damage if I were PCNA. It's just a new thing, in the olden days one took a Porsche to the track and nothing happened very often so nobody cared. The drivetrain was pretty bullet proof. Now with the reduction in quality in Porsche cars compared to past vehicles, damage occurrs at a high enough incidence to be of concern to PCNA's bottom line. So here we are worried today about taking our new Porsche to the track where the bill for damages may be overwhelming....a new Porsche experience.

When you look at the profit Porsche makes and the quality of the cars, you know where they save costs. They are also selling VW SUV's with a different decal on them - oh, I shouldn't have said that.

Ask him to put that into a written document, signed and dated, on the Porsche dealership letterhead. Tell him you will drive down and retrieve the document. I'd be willing to bet they would not comply with your request.

Why would he do that? Better to take your chances and then deal with it after there is a problem. If you ask them to put it in writing they will, and they they won't fix the car for sure. Tool Pants -- yes if the car is abused then the warranty shouldn't cover it. The grey area is around whether tracking my car could cause the radio to fail, etc... Where do you distinguish between what could be abuse from tracking the car and what is a manufacturing defect? For instance, my car (as I've mentioned) blows clouds of wafting smoke occasionally on the track. This is with a new/rebuilt motor that I got from PCNA after several RMS problems. My old motor was just fine, great in fact, it just leaked oil. Under warranty they replaced it with this hunk of crap rebuild. Now they are saying that the rebuild could be messed up because I tracked the car. BS!!!! I would never buy stock in a tobacco company, its immoral. Porsche is becomming very shady, and as much as I like the car, I'm not sure they deserve my money anymore. My vote for the jump-the-shark moment was making 1/2 of the 996 and the 986 the same car.

Sorry it's not that easy. The DME is programmed with a code that the imobilizer must see to start the car. The imboilizer has remotes programed to it that have transpoder codes that it must see to allow a connection between the DME and imobilizer. You would a matched set of all and then hope that transfering didn't interupt anything or you'll need a hook to get home.

considering i just bought my P-car, i am not going to bother trying to get it in writing. Enough said that they will void the warranty if it is tracked. I will just not risk blowing something up, accidentally downshifting or similar, on my first try at tracking it to watch this car go down the toliet. Not worth it just to track.. though i must admit, i was SERIOUSLY looking forward to playing on a track with it.

Sorry it's not that easy. The DME is programmed with a code that the imobilizer must see to start the car. The imboilizer has remotes programed to it that have transpoder codes that it must see to allow a connection between the DME and imobilizer. You would a matched set of all and then hope that transfering didn't interupt anything or you'll need a hook to get home. I didn't know that. I learned something new. Thanks.

How long were the warranties on these old 911s that never had a problem under warranty?

if you think this philosophy is bad, just wait until you get a cayenne if it is nearly as crapily built (and designed) as our turbo one is. ya gotta love over 100 TSBs on the POS for barely two model years so far (03s were very short production)! and this is just on the street, i wonder how bad it would fall apart on the track!

wow theres already been 104 cayenne TSBs... haha most of them are pretty serious issues too cayenne is plagued with problems, little to big, i'd avoid it like the plague.

OT: Since folks are sounding off... I've had no real problems with my CS (5/03 build), PCNA took care of the little ones. It's the best SUV I've ever owned and I use it as a truck. Just my .02

must be lucky Torags, i just had a cayenne loaner a few weeks ago, the squeaks, rattles, etc drove me crazy. dont even get me started on all the things wrong with the transmission/drivetrain.

I read through the warranty book last night. Technically, they can refuse to fix your car under warranty if you speed. The book says "It is the owner's responsibility to operate the vehicle on reasonable road surfaces and within the speed limit"...

Maybe that is next,,,,,car tells porsche tech that you hit triple digits and the outside temp was over 100 too, and they refuse to fix your leaking coolant tank............. Never know!

I think the warranty on my 90C2 cab was 3yrs/36,000. I was invited to track that car at a sponsored Porsche event with only a $100 dealer inspection before the event. My only problem with that car was a leaky fuel neck that allowed fuel to run under the left rear tire on hard right corners. That was interesting, but covered under warranty. It will be interseting to see Chevrolet's position on the new ZO6. I'm betting they will stand behind everything except "wear" components (brakes, clutch). AS

Oh sure, NOW you tell me

It will be very interesting to see the position Corvette takes on warrantee issues. The driveline of the Z06 has been strengthened and there are both transmission and differential oil coolers not on the normal Corvette so Chevy is planning for some hard use. Vipers are regularly tracked and the ASC version was a specific track car, are Viper owners being denied warrantee due to track use?

Any indication Porsche is less uptight about GT3s being tracked?

It occurrs to me that many of the Cayenne warrantee issues may be related to the sophisticated suspension and drivetrain technologies designed for off road use. The irony is the average owner does not *really* drive their Cayenne off road and therefore doesn't even begin to exploit these technologies, so both Porsche and average Cayenne owner would be better off without the complex systems!!!

Cupcar, Interesting observation regarding offroad use. My local dealer told me that 50% of the Cayennes are ordered with the factory tow package, yet less than 10 % of those ever tow anything. (I'm in the minority as the Cayenne is my tow vehicle....unless my bride lets me use her Excursion) I wonder how Porsche would react to a 'towing related' warranty claim; perhaps they would say I towed TOO much with the Cayenne.

A "Be careful what you wish for" situation!!!

Actually the suspension has not been the problem (but it does add weight 800- 1000 lb) In order to tow you need steel gears (front AWD) in contrast to the AWD in the 911's (front - fluid pressure - Subaru style). Lewis is right & so are you regarding owners who tow oroff road. Treg had a hugh screw up upon launch. They had the Treg tow a house trailer (to market to that crowd) and the narrater said it was a better idea. A guy bought a Treg to tow that exact trailer. Problem was it had an 800 lb tongue load (150lb overload) and the auto leveling device put the guy all over the road (it couldn't level the car.) He sued & VW made a CBS award for stupidity.. He got his $ back, quickly.

Self-leveling suspension for towing doesn't work well on my Lexus LX470 either, but does on our company Denali. Here's a paraphrase of something I read. "Ethical advertising is using the truth to mislead your customers, Unethical advertising is using lies to mislead your customers" Between track use and towing, where do you think PCNA stands?

I'VE READ ALL 5 PAGES HERE AND HAVEN'T SEEN THE ONE QUESTION THAT WOULD MAKE THE DECISION IN MY MIND AS TO WHETHER THIS WAS A WARRANTY ISSUE OR NOT.WAS THE CAR SMOKING BEFORE OR AFTER THE AUTO-X EVENT?(IF IT WAS SMOKING BEFORE MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE WHY TAKE IT TO THE EVENT WHEN THERE WAS AN OBVIOUS ISSUE?) JUST PUTTING IN MY 2 CENTS.

My 2 cents is what arrogance it is for you to expect a company to pay for parts and sevices when the car was used in a way that it was not designed for. If you want to play, you have to pay. So I guess if you wanted to use your car for offroading, you would expect Porsche to pay any repair bills? When you commit your car to the track, you have waived you right for some warranty coverage from Porsche. Obviously it depends on your relationship with the dealer. Porsche specifically staes in their warranty policy: "Warranty does not cover abuse, accident, acts of God, competition, racing or track use". So unless you cannot read, you voluntarily chose to void your warranty. Stop looking for someone else to pay for your mistakes and get on with your life. Ahhh.soooo provacative.

I think it would be easier and cheaper simply to say your DME was stolen, get a new one, and use the old one for tracking. Put the new one in for regular driving. __________________ 1999 Artic Silver C2 Supercharged 20% SSK GT3 Aero Kit Full Leather Interior Last week, we had the suggestion of gaming the system by swapping out DME's. This week, we are very holy. The point is that this type of driving is the purpose for which the cars were intended. At the time of purchase, no dealer has said, "under no circumstances take your car to an autocross". In fact, my dealer has always encouraged it. No poster has said that a huge driver error should be fully covered by warranty. However, I do feel that every Porsche owner I know expects their car to be track-worthy, and anticipates the possibility of exploring that at some future time. If you downshift under braking, sooner or later you will wind up over the redline. (Only a paddle shifter or full auto can avoid this.) Hopefully not by much and not often. But if even one Type 2 voids a warranty, nobody can learn the limits of the car with warranty coverage. Automobile passion is not about common sense. Common sense dictates "Don't try to take your car to the track, don't learn to downshift under hard braking, don't learn the limits of your car, because one mistake voids your warranty" That isn't what caused me to buy 5 Porsches. It will cause me not to buy another Porsche sports car. Abuse is far different than enthusiastic driving. Some are being penalized for the latter. AS

Let's reiterate - the 'friend' in question is not asking for warranty repairs and/or service; he's asking PCNA to buy his car back, presumeably w/ no usage fees (after all, the car's obviously been unusable and parked due to these catastrophic oil leaks & exhaust smoke). Sounds fair & reasonable to me...

Then buy another car. Every car manufacturer specifically states the same things that will void warranty. I am not without sympothy for those who track there cars and have a totally unrelated probelms that is not covered by waranty. However, Porsche specifically told them that if they take their car to the track, do not expect us to pay to repair any probelms you have. They can't be any more specific then that, can they? If you choose to under insure your car for accident coverage and total your car, are you going to run to the insurance company crying that they have to pay beyond your limits? I suggest you also read your insurance policy as most specifically void coverage for track use and a policy specific to the use of the car needs to be purchased. A

Porsche, thru its sales staff did not say, "if they take their car to the track, do not expect us to pay to repair any probelms you have". Every time I have been in the showroom, the discussion is about taking the car to the track, the next track day available, and taking the car to DE events. Recall, no customer gets the warranty book until after the car is delivered. Sure, you can ask for it before, but after you've bought previous Porsches, and it's been the mantra of the company to track, it's not anything most buyers will do. In reality, this change of heart occurred after many had purchased their cars, and while these cars were under warranty. It coincided with PCCB failure to withstand the very use for which it was intended. When the ads depict cars on tracks, when PCCB's are sold as race proven, and the entire identity of the car is tied up in images of tracks and competition, it is somewhat disengenuous to hide the disclaimer within the warranty. The unfortunate fact is that the cars are no longer engineered or built to withstand the rigors for which they are touted. As I said, it will cause me to buy another car, probably a ZO6, when the spirit moves me. I hope that same spirit moves enough other enthusuasts so that Porsche reevaluates its position, engineers in the durability now missing to withstand high-performance use, and adds back value so we are rewarded with more than just mystique. 99/996, I guess you don't care to explain why it was acceptable to suggest DME duplicity in one post, and then get very holy with "My 2 cents is what arrogance it is for you to expect a company to pay for parts and sevices when the car was used in a way that it was not designed for. If you want to play, you have to pay". Should not common sense suggest that the latter post contradicts the prior? So, was it hypocritical or just an absence of common sense on your part? AS

I didn't suggest a DME switch, but simply said that I thought it would be cheaper. As far as the warranty issue. Where have you been? Do you always fall for what people tell you in a sales office? It is unfortunate that some sales people lie to potential custoimers, but that's the real world and it's "buyer beware". The fact is, the contract specifically states that there are no inferred warrantties beyond the written agreement. I understand what you are saying, but Porsche has done what they needed to do legally and ethically to explain their warranty. If you have a problem with an individual salesman, then you should yake it up with him. Like I said before, those of you who track their cars hoping that your normal car insurance will cover collision and liability , better check carefully. You could lose not only the car, but everything you own if you hurt someone and find out there is nothing protecting you. Many companies require a special policy to cover tracking.

"I think it would be easier and cheaper simply to say your DME was stolen, get a new one, and use the old one for tracking. Put the new one in for regular driving." Followed by "My 2 cents is what arrogance it is for you to expect a company to pay for parts and sevices when the car was used in a way that it was not designed for. If you want to play, you have to pay. So I guess if you wanted to use your car for offroading, you would expect Porsche to pay any repair bills? When you commit your car to the track, you have waived you right for some warranty coverage from Porsche. Obviously it depends on your relationship with the dealer" Followed by, "I didn't suggest a DME switch, but simply said that I thought it would be cheaper. As far as the warranty issue. Where have you been? " I too am tired of this issue, but don't you see just a tiny bit of confusion in your three posts? I think most would catagorize your initial "switch" post as a helpful bu misguided suggestion. The second "found religion" post sounds like a reformed hooker. The third is positively Clintonesque. Clearly we are in the presence of a master. I am humbled. AS

I love to read this stuff. Opinion's are great!! Alexander I don't know you. Do you own a Porsche and if so what is it? Just curious. You sound to me a little jaded with Porsche. Porsche is quite simply not going to maintain your track car. Period. Either you accept that or not. Porsche has built many race cars and not a single one has EVER been sold at a dealer. Ever.

In my experience Porsche will try to weasel out of repairs because of the smallest modification. It is a hassle every time I try to get something fixed that should be under warranty and my car does NOT see the track. Are they going to tell me the residue underneath my front hood was caused by my aftermarket airfilter and there is no coverage for that? They are basically trying to deny coverage on the underneath of my hood that has a pink tint to it! Really the car never sees rain snow of bad weather always garaged covered etc. Bottom line after this one is gone, I WILL NEVER BUY ANOTHER Porsche.. Sad but true as I really do love P-cars. Folks vote with your dollars..

A pink tint, paneraiwatches? Carryinb bodies there?

Hi Chris, I'm a 56 year old infectious disease specialist with a life-long passion for sprots cars. I'm not jaded with Porsches in the least, just unhappy that their philosophy has silently changed. My current cars are: 05 Audi A6 02 ttX50 99 Lexus LX470 99 Boxster tip 94 BMW CSI full Dinan 99 Elise 190R 73 Lotus Super 7 Vintage racer 53 Stude La Carrera competitor/vintage racer 53 Kurtis La Carrera winner/vintage racer My best previous car was a 69 Lola T163 Can Am (Gary Wilson car) that I vintage raced til the mid 90"s. I.ve had 3 previous Porsches (80 SC, 90C2Cab and 91 C4) and a bunch of other good stuff. My perspective is from when Porsce encouraged you to take your car to the track. They even paid Derek Bell and Vic Elford to show you (one on one) how to drive on the track. I've won events at many amateur levels (auto cross, club, vintage from 850 cc thru Can Am) and regret that cars you could once take to the track with full factory blessing tolerated that then, but 10 years of progress later, no longer do. Porsche is resting on its laurels, we are the unwitting victims of its silent change of direction. I like my X50 A LOT. I just won't track it any more, which means I can't use 90% of its capabilities. Literally, you use 10 per cent of the car's capability in usual driving. That's a shame. AS

Oh NO! Another self proclaimed VICTIM of this cruel cruel wolrd. I sure hope you're not contagious, cuz I sure wouldn't want to catch your attitude. If you eat BRAN on a regular basis, you may become less ****.

For a guy who uses his oil pressure guage to check his oil level, I'm gusesing you knew your blood pressure was up by the reading on your rectal thermometer. Have a nice life, common dense. AS

As....you fell off your meds again. You are toooo predictable.

99/911 Your wisdom, wit, and commonality of sense have rendered me speechless. And I suspect will result in the moderator ending this thread, none too soon. I'm sure you must know a lot about something, otherwise how could you have developed your extraordinary attitude? Tiptronics are always slower, gas laws applied to fluids, swapping out DME's and a sense of humor, all in one judgemental but ignorant package. I will await your next retort which will probably come off a pack of bubble gum. AS

Boys, boys settle down this isn't 6speed ya know!

You guys are funny....My friend who posted this thread should get his arbitation decision any day!

HEY,WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS PROBLEM?JUST WONDERING WHAT THE ARBITRAITOR DECIDED.

You mean you're looking forward to the resolution of the query that started the thread? Shame on you! Don't you know it's more important to show one's: Income Ability Knowledge Base Ability to type quickly Self defined level of wit... Oh - and how much better "things" were, or are, elsewhere. I too await the posting of the resolution, but I fear that we may never know. J

CALL IT A SICK CURIOSITY!?KINDA LIKE BEING A AUTO TECHNICIAN,GOTTA BE A LITTLE OFF IN THE HEAD!

yeah, no kidding. i thought they were mailing out the result a week ago

hmmmm.... maybe, just maybe, we were only hearing one (slightly skewed) side of the story here. And maybe, again just maybe, the arbritrator in question has a shred of common sense and decided that perhaps this 'gentleman' was not entitled to a free ride after all. Pure conjection on my part, but the righteous indignation-turned-to-silence does make one wonder...

HERE,HERE:BUT AN ARBITRAITOR WITH COMMON SENSE!?COME ON NOW!HAHAHAHA

I JUST READ ON 6SPEEDONLINE ABOUT A CASE VERY SIMILAR(I THINK IT IS THE SAME VEHICLE).THE OWNER LOST HIS ARBITRATION IN THAT CASE.

My friend lost his case and just like Skip, he has stayed away because he is so pissed off at Porsche and the local Dealer. Basically all I can say is the arbitrator claimed Porsche proved he abused it and therefore sided with Porsche as to not buy the car back. The car smoked since new and this is total crap in my opinion. The local dealer sales rep goes down to the autocross and brings a brand new Boxster...Lets people rip it up for fun and it is not even broken in. The fact that the local dealer sponsors these events and then turns their back on him is crazy. He is an instructor for the club for goodness sake...do you think he is some yahoo who is out their grinding gears etc. All I can say is you better kiss your dealers butt in regards to your warranty and never show them you know more than they do when it comes to their own product. They said the smoking is normal and that they could not fix it...2 RMS's later they claim abuse and throw him under the bus........... Buyers beware...if you track your car and miss one step you could be out of a warranty! Robert

IF YOU MAKE THE MISTAKE WHY SHOULD PORSCHE FOOT THE BILL FOR THE REPAIR?IF YOU WANNA DO DE EVENTS THATS FINE,BUT AUTOCROSS EVENTS ARE COMPETITION,AND YOU SHOULD BE WILLING TO FOOT THE BILL FOR REPAIRS.JUST BECAUSE THEY ADVERTISE THE CARS WITH THE RACING HERITAGE DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY ARE RACE CARS.I AGREE THAT IT IS WRONG BUT THE OWNERS SHOULD TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY WHEN THEY MAKE A MISTAKE(RANGE 2 OVERREV).WERE THE OVERREVS AT A TIME CLOSE TO THE DEALER DENYING THE CLAIM(WHAT WERE THE OPERATING HOURS WHEN THE CAR WAS IN THE SHOP,AND WHEN THE OVERREV OCCURED)?

It's real simple, the car was brought in shortly after it was bought but well before it's first autocross for the smoking issue! Further, while Sean was #1 in the autocross competition, rss996 was #3 and neither his nor any other 996/7s in the club exhibit this trait. How come the PDE cars that are POUNDED day in and day out ON THE TRACK at the limit (and beyond) from brand new on don't exhibit this trait and how come they are peddled to the unsuspecting public fully warrantied as would be any other street 996/7?

Yeah, Hammer you are missing the point (and the caps lock key). My car was fine until they replaced the motor because of the RMS. Now my motor smokes on the track and they say it�s from track use and they won't fix it. BS, this happened on the first few laps of the first run session that I drove the new motor. After 20+ track days on the old motor I never had a problem. I followed the break-in procedures religiously. The point is NOT that these people are abusing their cars, the point is that Porsche is playing dirty and making excuses for low quality. It's a business and all they care about now is money (sounds like my ex). If more people drove their 996/986's the way we do (street and track), this would be a bigger issue. Most people put them in their garages, drive them a few thousand miles a year, and never rev over 4000 rpm. Those are Porsche's most important demographic because those people pay way too much money for brand new C4S's and never drive them, so they never have problems. We are the exception my friends, and we are being left behind. I'm beginning to think that as more 996's go out of warranty and more peoples' warranties are cancelled, we will hear about class action lawsuits. Some lawyers specialize in making class action lawsuits for frivolous complaints. In our case I think we have legitimate complaints, and it�s relatively clear who is at fault.

Incidentally, Sean is on his third failed RMS in a year.

In reading all the posts, until we hear from Sean himself,( the story, so far as reported is a little sketchy) the error he made was accepting delivery on a new car that smoked and then taking it to the track, with the knowledge of the dealer. Generally, if a car is billowing smoke, you probably shouldn't track/ax it, you're just giving them ammo. The type 2's were just icing on the cake for Porsche. JMO

Darren I think you're right on. Additionally state attorney generals might be interested in persuing disclosure requirements. PAG would have to disclose this to every new buyer and get a sign off on it. What do you think that would do to sales?

Doesn't seem too sketchy to me. The car didn't smoke RIGHT after he took delivery but shortly after and before AX'g it. He decided to AX it because the dealer told him the smoking was "normal". After several people asked him at AX if his car was on fire owing to the plumes of smoke pouring from it, he became more adamant it wasn't "normal". There was a single low rev type 2 not 2"'s".