10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAgeing rear window seal replacement problems
Leading reported evidence
Use #9
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: 'Use #9' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'right part' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Fill hole up' (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
I used 3M weatherstrip adhesive to stick it back down.
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
So, Moe Money says he used 996-545-521-04 (sealing frame) and Dan189 says he used 996 545 545 02 (Trim Frame)...
Use 996-545-521-04 (sealing frame) and dan189 says he
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
So, Moe Money says he used 996-545-521-04 (sealing frame) and Dan189 says he used 996 545 545 02 (Trim Frame)...
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 suspect a cause
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.
Suspected cause
I even asked the dealership if it was the right part!
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: 20261026T113718Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
So I�m restoring all aspects of my 996. The rear window seal was coming up in the bottom corners. I decided to buy a new seal and payed $72 at the Porsche parts and service center in Beverly Hills.
I had read it was an easy �take of the old insert the new� kind of job. Unfortunately it wasn�t.
After removing the old seal, the new one didn�t fit and probably had 4 inches of slack. The service team was nice enough to help me out and they gave me a container so I could try to shrink the seal with hot water from the coffee machine. They told me they had never changed a rear window seal on a 996 but in the older cars (993 and older) it was a bitch.
I was able to shrink the rubber about 2 inches. In the end there was a large hole on the bottom left corner of the window. My attempt to restore the seal for aesthetic reasons ended up giving me a worse result. Had to fill the hole up with silicone until I find an alternative option.
Have any of you changed the rear window seal on a 996?
what are your thoughts?
Yes, I've replaced mine.
I had the same issue, went around and then had a bunch of slack left. I even asked the dealership if it was the right part! I tried to return it but it was out of the packet and they said no... So I tried again, no hot water needed.
You need to spread the slack across the entrie section.
It does fit correctly.
For me I assumed that because the old one came out in the correct shape the new one would go in as easily as the old one came out. Not the case, not sure what you've done to the new one but it sounds like you've shrunk it too far! Could try and stretch it out or just buy another one.
Thanks to your input I went back and carefully removed the seal and carefully went inch by inch fiting it inside it�s channel making sure it didn�t stretch at all. Result is perfect now! I removed the silicone we used and it looks perfect now. Thank you so much! That�s why I love these forums.
Today I also had my headlights refinished by a mobile headlight restorer Clear-Cut Headlight restoration in LA and the results are also perfect. My car looks great!
What's the number of the part you used? There are 2 different part #'s that I see... #8 & 9 in this diagram
http://www.autoatlanta.com/porsche-p...section=805-00
Did you do both or just #9 ?
I think i'll just pay to have someone do mine. Mine has been messed up ever since I purchased the car and has been on my list for quiet sometime. MoeMonney, how much did you pay to get your headlights restored?
The part number is 996-545-521-04. It superseded the part ending in 01. To me it looks like this part is thicker in general than the original seal. Beverly Hills Porsche price matched the part to 72 dollars to what I found on the internet.
The pro headlight restoration cost $195 dollars.
So, Moe Money says he used 996-545-521-04 (sealing frame) and Dan189 says he used 996 545 545 02 (Trim Frame)... Hmmm... Which is the "right" part? We are talking about the rubber surround on the rear glass correct?
