from another poster

rss996
Journeyman


Reged: Mon
Posts: 15
Loc: Calif Warning to porsche's under warranty!!!
#77230 - Fri Feb 11 2005 03:19 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply



Better be careful of attending track and club events!!!

If you have an engine problem you will be in for it if you end up in arbitration.

I went today with a friend and PCNA produced every autocross he went to , his final year end class finish, web site printouts of his times and even club magazine that showed him in 1st place.

All this to claim he abused his car and to try to avoid a buyback of the car which pours white smoke after driving it hard and 2 RMS's so far.....

I can see them saying the DME showing his overrevs but to bring all that PCA club data to the table is unreal!!!

Buyers beware!

 

I have knowledge of this happening here in Oz as well, they also send reps out to various tracks when they know that there is a open day for Exotic cars.

 

Here in the US one of these days someone is going to have Porsche try to screw them and they are going to inquire about these cars (note how interesting the web-site as relates Porsche links, etc):

http://www.porschedriving.com/the_cars.asp

which are driven hard on the track from the day the are put in service (adherence to break in would also be interesting given the pre-break in mileage on the ones I drove while attending), and then sold through Pcar dealers with full warranties remaining. That sure seems a bit disingenuous since the implication is that driving a 911 in a DE (much less all out track duty every mile of it's life possibly without recommended break in) is somehow harder on the car and therefore reduces the life expectancy of some of it's parts. Heck, the manuals even have specific language with regards to tracking them and warranty claims. I wonder if the subsequent buyer who buys from the original buyer who bought from the Pcar dealer (PCNA really) immediately after being thrashed (er: tracked hard from the day it was born), arguably by PCNA, is frauded by the reduced life expectancy?

All the literature for the classes is very Porsche like including liberal use of all logos on trophies, paperwork, items sold there such as hats and t-shirts, etc. We know Porsche would sue anyone over such use if not licensed. That licensing (or the lack thereof) along with Porsche's approval of that use together with all the other things Porsche (from Porsche itself) on the PDE website would leave PCNA and PAG (unsuccessfully) squirming to extricate themselves from the relationship and subsequent actions with repect to these cars being peddled through their own dealer network no less. Anyway, I'm sure a little discovery and a creative lawyering on this subject would make Porsche a little more amiable about standing behind their products.

 

Ben,

Do you know how Ferrari treats it's customers that track their cars? Specifically say a 360 CH car? You have really got me interested. I'm going to call a friend who is one of the principals at my local F-car dealership. If I get a square answer I will post it. If I get a lawyer answer I won't. It really stinks that we have to carry an attorney in your back pocket wherever you go!!!

I'm signed up for two two day events next month with my local PCA

 

Why am I not surprised...........

 

The problem here is that these cars are derived from Race cars and they are sold to enthusiasts for spirited driving, yet we are told to go to the track for not only our own safety, but the safety of the general public, yet and not so suprisingly, when you attend an event organized by Porsche or a Porsche club you are subjected to this dis-loyalty from the manufacturer in the event of a problem.

On top of this, and again it may be different in the U.S, we are advised to remove our number plates from the car when on the track so Insurance companies that come out and spy on us can't make a record of who was on the track.

 

This is a dealer specific issue....my dealer organizes track days.

 

Definately not letting Porsche off on this, but putting it in context, today's Pcar "products" are a tad different than a few yrs ago......certainly not over-engineered .....more like 'just-enough-engineered'.....they are purpose built to be priced & marketed to a differnt, broader demo.
White clouds & RMS are 996/997.........the 996 (and M96) is not "derived from" any Race car.

 

My buddy had an Mitsubishi Evo8 and ran the one lap with it. Somehow Mitsu got his VIN and refused to warranty the engine when it went to hell after 8000 miles. I don't remember the specific problem, but it was not breakin or over-rev related.

It's funny how these companies market these cars with their "race heritage" but drop you like a hot brick if you have any fun with it and encounter problems.

 

I've been told they stand behind their cars at the track.

 

No, it's not. PCNA has to authorize quite a few repairs for the dealer to get paid - engines and trannies for example. The dealer here also organizes or sponsors quite a few PCA things here but has a salesman who is an officer of the club and is at most things (coincidentally he is also the club photographer!!!). This particular dealer denied a guy's master cylinder claim simply because of an inference of tracking based on blue brake fluid.

 

Great news!!! Guess it's better to buy an off warranty beater to track than a nice & shiney in warranty car. Perhaps doing events not sponsored by PCA is the way to go...From what I can tell, PCA events sponsored by big regions like NNJPCA are hard enough to get into anyways. Sounds like getting drilled at the dentist would be more pleasurable. Guess my first event will be a PDA event unless somehow they give Vin's to PCNA....

 

I have a huge rant about this subject, but didn't post it because it's too damned long and frustrating to vent without a solution in mind. I agree with the protest, especially in the face of Porsche marketing their cars with PDE, where you'll "learn how to put all that speed and power to proper use" on track. PROPER USE. Perhaps there's a solution, but at a cost. What about the auto manufacturers and insurance companies offering a higher warranty and insurance coverage level to purchase that includes riders, just like comm'l insurance does? This way, if a buyer intends to autocross or track the car, he pays for additional coverage, and the manufacturer doesn't have to sift thru cases to determine "abuse" VS "normal use"?

The safety and education aspects of autocross and DE are, in my opinion, completely necessary. Not just for owners of sports cars, but ALL cars. People damage cars in DE's and in autocrosses. Some don't, some do, that's reality. The fact is, it's a controlled environment where one can not only enjoy the performance of their car, they gain important driving skills that can save their lives.

But, in the face of increasing costs and market segment challenges, manufacturers must lessen their liability and exposure for product consumables as one factor in keeping product pricing competitive. This doesn't preclude them from engineering a product that performs as advertised. It means they can't pay for use and wear of the product beyond "normal" legal street driving, since they are, in fact, selling us street transportation, and not dedicated race cars. If someone wants to subject a street car to high performance driving beyond normal street driving, someone has to foot the bill and handle the liability for damage and wear. Those who race dedicated track cars are familiar with this. It's when a street car is taken into off-street situations that the lines begin to blur. I race and am aware it's incumbent upon me to secure crash damage insurance and cover consumables. I'd be willing to buy an additional warranty and insurance rider to take a new street car on track. It's the only solution I can think of that's somewhat fair and doesn't create need for more sophisticated judicial reviews of warranty claims and escalating product pricing. There may be other solutions of course.

In the big picture, Porsche has heritage rooted in racing, and markets sports cars for the public roads reputed to fulfill their promise of "dynamic handling, high performance, emotive styling, and individuality in a high-quality, superbly engineered package." The engineering and quality levels are issues they must be accountable for, no question. But again, these are street, not dedicated consumable race cars.

From the Porsche annual report: "It is our firm conviction that companies seeking to be successful in the long term have to create trust and identity. This means establishing an environment in which our employees (but also our customers and shareholders) feel that they belong."
http://www2.us.porsche.com/english/u.../default_2.htm

This trust and identity with the brand should be pursued through respect for needs of and solutions for the intended market segment. Auto manufacturers and enthusiasts have struggled with sports car warranty issues for many years, this is nothing new. It's time to embrace the market's excitement for sports cars that offer so much, and create a solution that supports performance driving, makes liability clearly understood and fair, and some communication between the maker and consumer to improve the success of the product and marketing in general. This would only foster the Porsche goal of an environment wherein customers feel that we "belong". Otherwise, some unhappy customers may stop believing that "There is no substitute".

Oh crap, this is too long...sorry!

 

This issue is really hot right now. Mitsubishi, Subaru (WRX) and many other manufacturer's are marketing their cars for track events but then actually spying on customers (from web sites and track days) to absolve themselves from warranty claims.

I was VERY encouraged though that at the introduction of the new Corvette Z06, GM made a specific point of stating that occasional weekend track use will NOT affect warranty issues. They are prepared to cover, under warranty, issues arising from actually tracking the car. I'm hoping that this is a new trend that will start being adopted by other manufacturers.

 

the problem for porsche though is that with the advent of the boxster and 996/997, they stopped building cars which would handle this sort of thing without breaking down.