9 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHTransmission rebuild from hell
Reported or suspected cause
transmission
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 report identifying a cause
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: 'transmission' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'transmission' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Repair from a reputable transmission shop' (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 · Original poster
Last week I brought the transmission in for repair from a reputable transmission shop.
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.
9 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: 20261027T031046Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Oops, mis-posted this in the 997 forum.
This is about a 996 C4S transmission rebuild.
Just wanted to post an advisory.
I had my transmission rebuilt by Vertex.
Upon receipt, I requested a return authorization number.
After months of excuses, I finally gave up.
Last week I brought the transmission in for repair from a reputable transmission shop.
Here's an excerpt from the email I just received:
There is also evidence that this tranny has been worked on before, and the prior rebuilder did not do the proper repairs...example, the shift rod has been messed with before...the roll pins holes were not round, and the dog ring had been welded back on (this should never be done in this way). The part and the extent of the weld show that the part should have been replaced. The pieces have been broken for quite a while...the little tiny pieces have done other damage to the rest of the tranny and the diff.
Hope Vertex isn't a Rennlist sponsor...
Sorry to hear that. But if you are going to name one vendor, then you should also name the other one (the one that wrote the letter).
You never said what the problem was, just that as soon as you received it, you requested a return authorization. Was it visibly bad looking at it on the pallet or had you installed it and noted that it was not operating correctly?
I don't have a dog in this fight, don't know Vertex from anyone else, but seeing this post from a User with a low post count (I'm a User too) can't take it too seriously without a lot more information. Hopefully you can provide more.
It was pretty evident something was wrong when I got it back (turn corners sharply and the transmission would stick in whatever gear it was in). Seemed like bits were floating around locking up gear changes. You wouldn't believe the excuses I got back! Basically, "it can't possibly be the transmission". Turns out it was the transmission. I haven't contacted Vertex to see if I can get my money back. What a laugh that would be...
You haven't contacted the
Vendor ?, you just decided to
Use our forum as a Poison Pen ?
I agree you need to lay out a better argument for your grievance
