12 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHPaying twice
Leading reported evidence
Install late 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: 'Install late last week' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install late last week' (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.
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.
12 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: 20261027T044418Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Ok, need some advice
Just had my ssk installed late last week. Found out it was the wrong unit, the shop who installed it was clueless as well. Now the shop wants another 150+ to have it uninstalled. Is it just me or do you guys think they should do it free of charge?
-screwed again
If the shop had no decision in getting the parts for you, then it's your responsibility. If they got you the part, then I agree they should not charge you for either ther install or removal.
Sorry to hear that Redduck but I agree with the other posts. What shop did you take it to that did not catch the wrong ssk for your year? Is this the ssk that has to be installed under the car?
Yeah its the B&M ssk for the under carriage unit. I took it to "AutoBahn" They did a good job installing it but lied when they said they have installed one before..
I think they should have realized that the unit I brought in was not made for my vehicle.
Sorry buddy...you honestly can't expect them to know every part that is out there. Even if they had installed one before it would not be out of the question for later models to look different.
Maybe you can get them to compromise and meet you half way?
Barry
yeah guess you guys are right.. I'll bite the bullet..
They guy that sold me the unit said it was for a carerra 996.. I guess I have to be really skeptical the next time I buy anything from anyone and make absolute sure i'm getting the right part..
Hi RedDuck,
What made you decide to get the under-car unit instead of the in-car unit? Just wondering. I've heard mixed things. I've heard that the under-car unit is less notchy and more precise but my mechanic at InterSport Performance in Tysons/Vienna told me that they have seen several Bimmers with synchromesh problems because of the B&M under-car short shift kits.
Have you checked out InterSport? They're on Spring Hill road in Tysons behind e-Citie Cafe a block down from Porsche of Tysons (HBL).
I'll check them out..HBL is where I take the car in and eCities was where I partied when I was single.. hahahah But i've heard the same things you have.. Its an easier install, you can revert back to stock no problems. Not as notchy...
During the uninstall today I notice one of the cable guide was not straight.. Thats probably what cause the stiffness in shifting. THe part I got was definitely the wrong part for my MY03. After he changed it back to stock, the connection from the cable to the joint was straight as an arrow..
I'm going to call brandywine to see when they plan on getting the under car unit in stock.. If i can't get it then i'll have to go with the in car version..
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
