21 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHThe importance of the PPI...
Leading reported evidence
Inspect last week
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: 'Inspect last week' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Clean ppi, i need' (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 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
She took it, and my gamble paid off: clogged drivers side cat and the top end needed a good Seafoam flush - car ran like a bat from he** after that.
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'm hoping the 1 I looked at on Friday will have a clean PPI, I need to get with the seller still and get it scheduled...
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'd buy a Corvette any day of the week on just my own inspecting of it but the Porsche is a whole different animal.
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.
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
Could have been a good DIY'er willing to gamble - I test drove a 95' 993 once that was owned by a woman - when we drove it I took it up to about 5.5K rpm and she wen t nuts and said that she "never treated her car like that".
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.
21 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: 20261027T175704Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
It's funny how some people just jump in with both feet and others of us are a little more cautious...
I had a low mileage C4 inspected last week. Car came back with a leaky RMS (car is a tip so it's more $$ to change), bad driver's window regulator, bald tires, bad horn, potentially a bad rear wheel bearing, etc. Total cost to rectify all issues would have surpassed $4,000 (dealer estimate). I negotiated with the seller but couldn't really get him where I thought it made sense for me.
Anyway, someone came by the seller's house over the weekend, drove the car, and bought the car. No PPI.
I hope it works out for him!
Some people just don't want to know. They see that Porsche they have always wanted, and they buy it, no questions asked.
When I bought mine the PPI revealed about $2,700 worth of required repairs (as I recall), plus the need for new tires. I split it with the seller, and it has all worked out fine.
Sometimes I wonder if those of us who frequent this forum know just enough about these cars to be dangerous, and we obsess over things that don't bother other people.
But then again, I'm glad I got that PPI...
Sold the 40th because I thought I wanted a GT3. I drove a couple of them and realized that the fantasy was better than the reality for daily driving duties.
I like the C4 (or C4S) because my next Porsche will be a daily driver and I want to be secure in all weather (not that it snows much here but we do get VERY heavy rains).
Could have been a good DIY'er willing to gamble - I test drove a 95' 993 once that was owned by a woman - when we drove it I took it up to about 5.5K rpm and she wen t nuts and said that she "never treated her car like that". The car didn't seem to want to 'open up' in the higher RPM range, but otherwise ran and looked good. I gambled on a quick sale and negotiated her a deal on the spot. She took it, and my gamble paid off: clogged drivers side cat and the top end needed a good Seafoam flush - car ran like a bat from he** after that. Not a recommended procedure...
Anybody ever tracked or DE'd a C4 and 'liked' it - I read somewhere that they do ok. Maybe not quite as peppy or zippy as a 2wd, but a confident ride and deliver good mobility in the corners??? No hijak intended...
What you read was horse ****. People who put down the C4 haven't taken one to the track, or don't know how to drive them. Requires a slightly different braking and turn in strategy, but they are plenty "peppy and zippy".
See one in action: This video was taken by a friend so the C4 is the black
cab
# 218 right in front. Friend was driving a
race-prepped 996 spec
(2WD) and was practicing for a club race.
Eliminate the traffic, and the fact that we had prearranged to swap positions half-way thru, and you will see a C4 doing more than just "doing OK". He got caught up in traffic, so I had to
slow down
to let him catch up and swap positions. Notice that even after I let him by to take the lead, I never left his mirror. And even though he had an instructor on board, their total weight was way less than mine. And I'm no better a driver than he.
So why was I able to overcome the extra weight, the lack of rear weight bias, the understeer, the lack of rigidity due to being a cab, etc.? Simple: the differences are marginal, not dramatic. People who think there is only one configuration for going fast are usually just biased based on the particular car they decided to purchase. I drive a GT3 and a C4. As a GT3 driver, I can tell you that C4's are perfectly capable on the track.
http://www.vimeo.com/3181684
I like to turn a wrench myself but I firmly believe in getting a PPI. I'm just not experienced with Porsche. I'd buy a Corvette any day of the week on just my own inspecting of it but the Porsche is a whole different animal.
I'm shopping for my 1st Porsche and have passed on a couple because of issues...
I'm hoping the 1 I looked at on Friday will have a clean PPI, I need to get with the seller still and get it scheduled...
-Karl
it absolutely blows my mind that people buy cars without getting a ppi
but what gets me angry and totally flabbergasted is when i hear of people buying a house without getting an inspection
there are some very stupid/ignorant people on this planet
