12 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHReading over revs - is this # acceptable?
Leading reported evidence
Replace engine
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: 'Replace engine' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check borescoring' (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 just ran the report on my car recently and it has 1 type 2 from about 2,000 hours ago.
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
But I would do a full invasive PPI and check for borescoring before purchasing.
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.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
When I blew my motor, I had 172 in range 2, still not a ton, but it's all about how bad the over rev is.
I suppose any amount of ignitions in range 2 is not acceptable but was curious about what you guys thought. This is data I received after scan on a potential car:
Range 1 - 5713 / 2773.5h
Range 2 - 47 / 2100.7h
Operating hours - 2776.6
The car has a total of about 77k miles. Engine was replaced at Porsche at about 21.5k
My understanding is that each count is for 1 revolution, so 47 will happen in the blink of an eye. I just ran the report on my car recently and it has 1 type 2 from about 2,000 hours ago. I suppose as long as its been sufficiently long ago and the car runs well then you should be in the clear.
It could only be a concern when you go to sell. But I think you are right about it should not be an issue since it was so long ago.
I never red line it, I guess I am missing out on something. I back down around 6k.
I believe there is nothing wrong with red lining the engine - Range 1. Rev limiter is there for a reason. I'd usually shift right at 7k rpm and not something I'd do all the time. Range 2 is something that would have the engine go beyond the rev limiter, like a bad downshift. It also seems like it happened for a second or less, if I'm calculating this correctly.
Since it was so long ago, I would not worry about the range 2. When I blew my motor, I had 172 in range 2, still not a ton, but it's all about how bad the over rev is. Our cars only have range 1 (hitting rev limiter), and range 2 - which could be mildly bad to really bad. In my case, I went from 4th to 1st while doing 100 (on was on the track). While only 172 ignition cycles, it was really bad.
The newer cars go up to range 6. I just scanned a car that had many many range 1-4 over revs, but also a handful of range 5s. That motor had just imploded on the track. The last range 5 over rev came about an hour before the car blew up, but there were range 5 over revs at the same time the car turned off. Guessing the range 5 did the damage and it was holding on, and the final range 4s were the nail in the coffin.
It was 676 hours ago, those Range 2 (7900 RPM or higher). It�s not great, but it was long ago, so probably not a big issue at this point.
The last Range 1 was only a few hours ago.
That's how my math worked out too! Looks very minor too me and not really an issue.
TexSquirrel - I'm having one done as we speak with Vortex in Tampa. So far Bob has been great to work with and sounds like they have plenty of experience with these cars as they also work on many race and cup cars there. Should be getting bore scope photos soon. Was told there was a tiny bit of wear but no noticeable scoring or gauging. It's a lifetime Florida car so I'm optimistic.
