16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHFactory Aero Yes or No
Leading reported evidence
Install after the fact always seem
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
The ones installed after the fact always seem to have a gap between the chassis and the side skirt.
Leading evidence: 'Install after the fact always seem' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install after the fact always seem' (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
Even with the factory parts, the side skirts never look as tight on the chassis as the factory installed ones (IMHO of course).
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.
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.
16 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: 20261026T133652Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Looking at a 2002 which owner says has Factory Aero kit and no non-OEM parts. From everything a can tell from research, this doesn't seem to be factory. I know the wing is optional, but don't they all have the side skirts?
I see a rear wing but no side skirts or front bumper.
I believe the aero kit would look like this:
http://www.nrauto.com/product_body.a...Porsche&type=2
And if he claims it came from the factory with the aerokit, there will be the appropriate option code on the sticker under the front bonnet.
Hard to tell from the picture but it might be a Porsche wing which was sold as an option. Aerokit would include front bumper, skirts and a rear wing. It would look like a GT3.
This is the wing I'm thinking about
http://e-partssales.com/Merchant2/me...Code=POTE996EX
That's not the hole kit.
When I see the word "kit" I want the hole damn thing
Should be using the word piece or pieces
Edit: I have not talked to this guy about his car, but if he was trying to sell it with the word kit I would be a little worried that he knows nothing about his own car or he's fibbing about other stuff. IMHO
Well, it isn't even the OFFICIAL aero kit as this is the carrera wing not the GT3 wing but I still wouldn't let it bother me if they are indeed factory parts installed correctly with good paint. My .02.
Really who cares, if you like the car and the wing looks great, I dont think it matters if the dealer installed it or Porsche did, The owner is mistaken in telling you its a Factory " Kit" but he could be idiot and doesnt know what options his car has. Buy it, drive it and enjoy it.
XAA is the option code.
Even with the factory parts, the side skirts never look as tight on the chassis as the factory installed ones (IMHO of course). The ones installed after the fact always seem to have a gap between the chassis and the side skirt.
