15 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHPossible Flood Damage?
Leading reported evidence
Check corrosion
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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
You can also check by pulling a couple of relays in the fuse box and checking for corrosion on relay terminals.
Leading evidence: 'Check corrosion' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check corrosion' (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
1) Check the interior and check the trunk, is there a musty or funky smell to either?
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
1) Check the interior and check the trunk, is there a musty or funky smell to either?
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.
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
4) Check underneath the spare tire well for signs of silt or water incursion.
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.
15 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: 20261026T183130Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm going to look at a 911 to buy this Monday but the Carfax said it was registered in Alabama during Huricane Katrina. The car was then sold to somebody else 3 months later. It makes me very suspicious, although it does not have a Flood or salvage title. What should I look for and where should I look to determine that nothing severe happened? I will probably take it to the Porsche dealer for a PPI. Would that be enough to make me feel secure?
Thanks.
Walk...my friend. Never, EVER consider a car with a flood history. Accident damage can be evaluated to some degree. But, Flood damage risks the potential for constant electrical issues. Unless you plan to gut the car and turn into a track beastie, walk ....actually
RUN AWAY!
Where in Alabama? That state goes from the Gulf to the mountains. I would say anything above Montgomery would fine. Does it list flood issues or are you just concerned? I mean, I live in South Carolina. There's a hurricane somewhere in this state practically every year!
The Carfax says it is guaranteed to not have flood damage, but warns that it was registered in a county that was declared a flood disaster area. Tuscaloosa, Al. Then sold 3 months later. I just thought that was a little fishy.
I would think it's worth a look see. Flood disaster just gets a county federal funds. I mean, 5" of rain, and the Govener's going to ask for disaster money. I don't know this car, but if it were me, I'd keep looking at it.
I was looking at a BMW M3 recently that was in New Orleans and CarFax had the same warning. it seems that any vehicle that was registered in NO during Katrina carries the same warning also.
Alright, if you're going to go look at it, you could try to look for evidence of flooding but it's important to point out that the untrained eye may not pick up on things. What you can pick up on are only obvious things. I tend to stay away from these cars because other buyers are likely suspicious as well which makes it a hard sell later on.
1) Check the interior and check the trunk, is there a musty or funky smell to either? Has the owner used a lot of air freshners suspiciously?
2) Remove the floor matts and look under the carpetings. Look for evidence of water line or water exposure. On black carpets it may come across as a grey film or discoloring with a distinct line.
3) Perform the same exercise for the trunk liner
4) Look at the interior components, does the level of wear match the mileage? If the interior has been swapped with another one, it can sometimes mismatch in terms of wear. Either too little or too much.
5) Check that electricals all work, look for removed fuses from fuse box which may be done to hide certain problems.
It's unlikely you'll find much evidence under the car or in the engine bay so the interior is your best shot. Anyone smart would have totally steamed clean the engine bay and underside.
Thanks guys. I think it is worth looking at. It's only a 3 hour drive each way. Worth it for a 911, right? There are a couple over there to look at, so I'll make it a productive trip.
I'll let you know how it goes.
I lost a car to a flood. It filled up over the ashtray. Totalled of course. Here are some things to look for as evidence of flood damage:
1) The mildew smell. It's very hard to get rid of and it permeates everything in the car. Is the interior heavily scented to try to disguise the odor? Smell the carpet and headliner up close.
2) Take a flashlight and small dental mirror and examine underneath the seats. Look for signs of silt or mud and corrosion around any metal or wiring. Especially seat springs, rails and electrical harnesses. Check underneath the carpet.
3) Take the light and mirror and check up underneath the dash and footwells for evidence of water damage. Do the electrical connectors look shiny?
4) Check underneath the spare tire well for signs of silt or water incursion.
5) Look for condensation inside headlights, turn signals, interior lights and gauges.
6) Has the entire interior been replaced? Do the carpets, seats or other trim seem too new or mismatched?
I bought a flood car about 12 years ago and regretted it from day one.. well, maybe day two. Was a happy day when I finally sold it, at quite a loss I might add.
Why not look at it and inspect it carefuuly with the inspection tips given BEFORE you actually commit to buying it. No harm to look and assess it on your own.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.