12 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHCoolant expansion tank
Leading reported evidence
Install roll
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 roll' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'failure' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Install roll' (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
sure i changed a couple under warranty whilst at opc ..
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 · Original poster
My car is in with the OPC at the moment to get the oil pressure sender replaced under the warranty.
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 have just had the coolant expansion bottle changed for £300 (opc) after the car smelling and using a tiny amount of coolant for ages - no obvious leak tho but it did cause a missfire when it got into coil packs.
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 suspect 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.
Suspected cause
From what I have read, this is the prime suspect failure that resulted in last weekends carnage at the ring.
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 have just had the coolant expansion bottle changed for £300 (opc) after the car smelling and using a tiny amount of coolant for ages - no obvious leak tho but it did cause a missfire when it got into coil packs.
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.
911uk: 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: 20261027T165639Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi all,
My car is in with the OPC at the moment to get the oil pressure sender replaced under the warranty. At the same time they have been investigating a leak of coolant dripping onto the rear passenger exhaust tip. Apparently this is the expansion tank that has cracked / split and this is quite common so I am told (and so I see after looking it up).
Now my issue is that the oil pressure sender is a warranty covered item but the expansion tank (a known issue) isn't covered. Can anyone confirm if this is correct and if Porsche have replaced anyone's expansion tank under the warranty or as a goodwill gesture?
Thanks
Depends on the model. 3.4's use a different coolant tank to 3.6's. The 3.4 tank is £143+VAT and the 3.6 tank is £63+VAT. (Porsche list prices - you can get them cheaper at Euro Car Parts). 'Book time' is an hour and a half to change the tank and bleed the system.
I have just had the coolant expansion bottle changed for £300 (opc) after the car smelling and using a tiny amount of coolant for ages - no obvious leak tho but it did cause a missfire when it got into coil packs.
I did buy one on ebay but its for a 03-04 shape C4 tiptronic Cab and it didn't fit my narrow early 996.
If you need a expansion tank complete with cap sensor and relief valve PM me... its just sat in the shed at the moment so for a tenner its yours...
easy but fiddly job. about £170-00 for the parts- yes thats £170 for a £5 molded plastic water bottle and a fancy lid.
any mechanic would do this job in around an hour.
Just so long as it is a decent (and not in any way botched) job. From what I have read, this is the prime suspect failure that resulted in last weekends carnage at the ring. [And that was so bad that - for the first time ever - I was glad I wasn't there].
When the toy is in for its 4 yearly next week I will be asking them to pay particular attention to making sure that the condition of this is flawless...
[Yes - the clock is now ticking. By some time next year, I will be relenting and taking my GT3 to its spiritual home. Fear and anticipation in equal measure, but it would be far too wrong not to].
We were having this discussion at the Ring last weekend and the concensus was that some of these cars are 9 years old now so hoses which flex should be expected to fail any time as should things like rads. I would have thought these were more likely causes of the accidents than an expansion tank. A plastic bottle (I would have thought) was less likely to fail in a catastophic way.
Perhaps all 996/997 owners should get their cooling systems pressure tested on a regular basis as a precaution.
I don't think a pressure test would prove too much honestly. I doubt you'd make a pressure test fail a hose the way mine went. That requires extreme duress (track work) and extreme heat. I think all 996 owners need to accept at this age they can expect their hoses to fail. There was also a recall on a hose on the GT3 which I suspect mine probably never got. I'm waiting on Dan to tell me what part number was affected as he has the paperwork.
If you pressure test it to 1.5 times working pressure, it should reveal any weaknesses. If it were me, I'd rather have to fork out for some hoses and rads than the liability of an accident.
