14 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHOPC Extended Warranty !
Leading reported evidence
Check first
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
is it the most comprehensive warranty available - for that money you don't want any smart arse pointing out the small pribt should a claim be required :x my third party warranty is up in second week of jan so i'll need to decide in nextfew months, think i'll do the 111 point check first then hopefully they'll estimate what needs doing to get the warranty.
Leading evidence: 'Check first' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check first' (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
If it's true then what a shame, I guess this means no 111 point check possible as a pre purchase inspection?
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
worth seeing what comes from 111 point check then decide.....
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
I really do agree with you if that's the case, but it's things they'll want you to get repaired just to get the warranty that puts me off.
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.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Check first
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
is it the most comprehensive warranty available - for that money you don't want any smart arse pointing out the small pribt should a claim be required :x my third party warranty is up in second week of jan so i'll need to decide in nextfew months, think i'll do the 111 point check first then hopefully they'll estimate what needs doing to get the warranty.
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.
14 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: 20261026T113718Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Considering the new OPC Extended Warranty, who is now thinking of giving it a miss? Bear in mind they may want you to spend 2-3 grand on things that may really not need doing, plus the 1450 quid!
I wouldn't consider running my car without a warranty. The engine is too expensive to repair, but 2.5k for a 2 year warranty is a bit eye watering.
I'd go for the Hartech option, but am wrong side of the country. Would move to Camtune for warranty, but they exclude cylinder liners.
When you say 'new' extended warranty, have the terms changed recently? Is it still renewable up to the car's 9th birthday?
- Sorry, just read the other thread... If it's true then what a shame, I guess this means no 111 point check possible as a pre purchase inspection?
Hi Sundeep,
Just looking at the worst case scenario 10k for a new engine v £1450++ every year. In actual fact that makes it £8500 in the first year. That's if it can't be repaired for a lot less
Hartech is the way I'm going. AA plus straight to them !!
And don't forget this is the very worst case scenario.
2002 manual C2 (mint)
Hi Sundeep,
May have missed something but the information I have recieved from my OPC is that any non standard component will render the warranty void. I was told that putting an Avic Sat Nav would render the new warranty void.
So your manthey monster will certainly be exempt
if this is correct.
Bit of a bummer really.
Regards Alan.
GD
I really do agree with you if that's the case, but it's things they'll want you to get repaired just to get the warranty that puts me off.
You Know what they are like !!!!!!!!!!
By the way I have the old style warranty at the moment and swear by it ,but it's just maybe a bit much.
is it the most comprehensive warranty available - for that money you don't want any smart arse pointing out the small pribt should a claim be required :x my third party warranty is up in second week of jan so i'll need to decide in nextfew months, think i'll do the 111 point check first then hopefully they'll estimate what needs doing to get the warranty.
I've not spent anything like £1450 on repairs to mine in nearly 2 yrs.
Also, you won't be able to use an indy for service or repair which rules it right out in my book.
You will also have to pay to get the RMS fixed, which is almost certainly unecessary.
If the engine blows (which really is an outside chance), you can fix it for around £6k and take the opportunity to have it bored out to 3.8L 8)
What are the definitely options available? Can somebody make a list of the warranty options that we can consider? starting at 1. for OPC 2. Tescos etc.(im not sure if Tescos will cover my TT - do they?)
My OPC warranty runs out on 12 December and it needs a major service by 28th November. I am considering taking the car to Cardiff for the service, getting them to do that and nothing else then considering my options!! Would Porsche Cardiff fix anything that needed doing under the old warrantee bearing in mind it would have less than 2 weeks left before expiry? Or will they try and have my pants down?
Am quite annoyed by the 50% price increase and I clearly see this as a means of Porsche trying to make more money!!
Anyone got any bad things to say about Porsche Cardiff??
Tesco's did cover 911's initially and some have them on here but soon afterwards Tesco decided to exclude this model from the warranty. I think those who acted quickly will not be affected.
~ Maxie
Again the law of sod has applied to me!!
Are there not any other warranties that will cover a 996 TT? Surely somebody out there wants to lose some money??
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.