13 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHPacific Northwest Region Monthly Mag goes ONLINE!
Leading reported evidence
Run data
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 · Original poster
OH YEA - we had a tech session with that fella and he ran data on a handful of cars for us - it was brought up this year as a possible "re-visit" but from a tech session standpoint deemed too specific and took a long time - our members are not all 996 peeople so we opted to skip it - I can look him up if people are interested
Leading evidence: 'Run data' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Run data' (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.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Run data
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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 · Original poster
OH YEA - we had a tech session with that fella and he ran data on a handful of cars for us - it was brought up this year as a possible "re-visit" but from a tech session standpoint deemed too specific and took a long time - our members are not all 996 peeople so we opted to skip it - I can look him up if people are interested
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.
13 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: 20261027T082735Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Very nice and thanks for the intro for people like me that didn't know about it previously.
So is this copy a preview and does the online require a subscription moving forward?
That is a point of debate still - this being our first online version we will see how it plays out. Obviously getting this magazine is an important part of why some people are members to the club and so if they no longer need to be members to get it, that might cause membership numbers to drop...or maybe increase?
We hope to also increase advertising to help offset the costs associated with publication and of course having more viewers would be a plus for advertisers
It's all very fluid right now and will continue to be so until some data can be collected and anylized
right now this is the full version available to you
also add our region won some awards for this publication at Parade this year - one of which was 1st runner up (if i read that correctly) in the Betty Jo Turner Award under the banner Heinmiller Newsletter Awards
see links:
http://parade2012.pca.org/nationalawards.html
Whatever happened to that engineer from the NW that was conducting those vibration tests to determine if the you-know-what was about to go or not? That was an interesting write up in this magazine.
I remember that and I'm also curious. That seemed like an exciting concept.
Unless he's been quiet and busy trying to obtain some kind of patent first...
OH YEA - we had a tech session with that fella and he ran data on a handful of cars for us - it was brought up this year as a possible "re-visit" but from a tech session standpoint deemed too specific and took a long time - our members are not all 996 peeople so we opted to skip it - I can look him up if people are interested
If I remember correctly, there was some talk about him doing a tour around the country. I guess there wasn't enough interest.
I'd love to do it if he came to the southeast.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
