7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHWhat is a "PPI"
Leading reported evidence
Check rms - no sign of leak
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.
Leading evidence: 'Check rms - no sign of leak' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check boxes' (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
It was clearly an official form (as opposed to locally generated), and had check boxes for most of the "OK, NOT OK" items ....
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
I believe the Porsche dealer PPI checklist is the same list they use for CPO.
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.
7 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: 20261026T105141Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Pre Purchase Inspection.
It varies from model to model, dealer to dealer, mechanic to mechanic.
Basically a checklist of items to verify (leakdown, oil leaks, paintwork, necessary updates, belt/fluid/plug checks, brakes/rotors, etc)
Each model has specific quirks/personalities, so it's best to find a PPI list for the model you're looking for (there are some very good ones for the 944/968 family).
Costs generally vary, but typically $150-$300 for a decent PPI is standard.
They are NOT a guarantee, just a piece of mind. A passing PPI, along with a (service) history for the vehicle is the first hurdle to pass when buying a car (unless it's a CPO...Certified Pre Owned....vehicle, in which case has already been inspected and will come with a 6/100 warranty from PCNA)
That's what I figured. Did my own close inspection and have my CPO warranty until '09 or 100k miles. Not a bad way to go though, a PPI and an aftermarket warranty.
[QUOTE=ltc]It varies from model to model, dealer to dealer, mechanic to mechanic.
A Porsche dealership has (should have) a printed, standard, 2-page checklist for the PPI. I was given a copy of mine, along with a briefing on results. It was clearly an official form (as opposed to locally generated), and had check boxes for most of the "OK, NOT OK" items .... along with written remarks by the mechanic conducting the inspection and road test.
It went into such detail as:
trunk latch needs adjusting
front brakes at 40% life remaining
F / R tires mismatched
Cigar lighter and Hardtop tool missing
Checked RMS - no sign of leak
In the 18 months and 15K miles since that day, I have encountered nothing that was not mentioned on the PPI .... with the exception of a clogged drain tray under the top mechanism .... and I don't hold them responsible for not having run water over the car until they could feel the wet carpet.
Kim,
The PCNA dealer CPO checklist is a very good one, however it does address all models individual traits, especially on the 'older' models. You have to remember, some mechanics currently working at a Porsche dealer don't know many of the 'older' cars....some of which are older than they are!
For example, it would likely not cover a visual examination of a Variocam tensioner/pads/chain/belts on a 968, since it takes a bit of time to remove covers and check these items; no one would ever buy a 968/944 without knowing the replacement history or visual examination .
Similarly, I don't believe it would check for compliance against all TSB's/updates..for example the distributor venting kit necessary on all 964's.
IIRC, the CPO also does not check leakdown/compression, again due to the time necessary. IIRC, they do perform a DME readout for Type 1 and Type 2 overrevs, but don't provide that information.
A CPO definitely provides piece of mind.
A CPO definitely provides piece of mind.
It's the best deal that Porsche offers. For around the $1800 charge for a CPO Porsche, you get your car thoroughly checked and you also get additional warranty coverage: 2 yrs/100K miles.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
