10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHDE impact on warranty?
Leading reported evidence
Use ones
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
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 performed work without a confirmed outcome
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.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
there are used ones on ebay but it all takes time to deal with.
Leading evidence: 'Use ones' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Repair bills (also tied' (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.
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 · Original poster
As the number of my DE events per year goes up so do my maintenance and repair bills (also tied to car age).
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.
10 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 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: 20261027T053112Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I think most of us recognize that the wear and tear our cars experience during DE events is beyond the typical daily driven car. As the number of my DE events per year goes up so do my maintenance and repair bills (also tied to car age). Lately I've been giving a little though to picking up a new car. Since I've always been a proponent of avoiding depreciation, I've never owned a car under factory warranty. If I were to pick up a new 911 or Cayman and tracked it regularly (10 events/year), is there any reason my warranty wouldn't be honored if I had a part fail? This is assuming no modifications and/or misuse (e.g. over-revs).
-Shawn
"PCNA, it is important for me to volunteer I is was in turn 3 when I had this failure." Why tell them? I still think it would be under warranty, though.
And I'd go the opposite way for a track car - used.
Not definative here, but the guys that have the GT3/GT3RS' have routinely said that if Porsche finds out the car was at the track, then they do not cover the "situation" under warranty. Personally, I think that is crazy. Porsche builds a GT car, touting the heritage, performance and increased everything, always showing the cars' track capabilities, then when they (owners) use them as advertised (anticpated) and something happens under warranty, they are somewhat S.O.L.? I don't get it.
In your case, why would they (dealer) need to know about your track events........
BTW: is this a CPO warranty question or an after market extended warranty???
you can research this topic on 997 forum. warranty implications are usually related to overrevs (money shift from 3rd redline into 2nd gear instead of 4th and hits above rev limiter if you do not know how to heel&toe properly) so if you get range 4+ overrevs it will void your claim in engine/tranny goes.
if yo will get into modding and will flash ECU and it wilbe discovered - engine warranty is gone. track damage is usually off warranty, so, it engine goes - tow car toyour garage first, then call dealer to send you a tow.
i had plenty of CPO warranty work done on my car while it was on RA1 tires and covered with track marks, never had an issue but not all dealers are same.
again, critical issue for you is a decision on a coverage for engine death issues - those are granted by PCNA, not by your dealer. dealers send stalled engine and ECU for review to PCNA and if you altered both or had significant overrevs within last 50 hours of engine life - there is a good chance for warranty to be void.
and never call porsche tow assist phone number from a track. they will record that into the database and after that no one will be able to help you. track damage is not covered by any warranty.
plus if you plan to track car seriously - start putting aside money on regular basis to be able to cover any issues out of pocket. research price of all car parts and decide what is within your budget. gt3 cars are a lot of fun, but gt3 engine price is nowhere near to m96 engine, right now a guy in 997 gt3 forum got his engine destroyed - new one frmo dealer with no core replacement is close to $60k. there are used ones on ebay but it all takes time to deal with.
The warranty booklet says if you track - no warranty. They specify Driver's Ed events!! On a practical note, Porsche covers failures even on track unless there is evidence of abuse.
To each his own with comfort levels. Warranties, RMS's, IMS's, this place is full of opinions on all sides (not passing any judgment) but you need to do what works for you and your level of comfort. Older cars will need more, and the track will increase those expenses even greater. As previously mentioned, if you do the regular, proper maintenance and keep a close eye on things, your car should last you for a long time...but you will need to build in a slush fund for unexpected repairs, not just upgrades. As you have no doubt seen at the tracks, there are plenty of "older" cars that look great, run well and out-perform some of the newer cars.
The amount of money that you would spend to "upgrade" to a newer (warranty) car could certainly provide plenty of track time and a few repairs/consumables/events along the way. In the end, you need to be happy with your comfort level. GL with the decision, an enviable "dilema" but, not a "bad one" to have to make. Either way, more track time means more enjoyment, happy motoring, GL with the decision.
I'd didn't realize it was spelled out in the warranty manual. Thanks for clarifying! Now I'll go back to keeping my 2001 on the road/track and quit daydreaming of a life without maintenance.
I think others made a good point that for the price of a new/newer car I could probably easily afford to do quite a bit of maintenance on my car. I just wish my pride would let me take to a shop rather than doing everything myself. I may need to reconsider that...
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.