exactly why i'm not interested in PCA events
 

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 don't think porsche has a problem with pca Drivers Education events, but autocrossing could be viewed as competition. I feel bad for the guy, but just to play Lucifer's advocate here, look at it from porsche's point of view; the guy's asking for a buyback on the car which he has used in competitive motorsports events with documented DME evidence of type 2 over-revs. I can kind of see their point, if your going to do competitive motorsports in your (under warranty) car, can you really expect porsche to pickup the tab when something breaks?
I could be wrong, just bringing the other sides point of view to the table for arguments sake, don't flame me just look at the total picture then make up your own mind.

This is the point you missed "2 RMS's so far" We know they have a problem, they know they have a problem... I think 2 RMS is excessive for a car under warranty to go through... then to have the problem come up a third time. Cars that hardly leave the garage have suffered RMS leaks. In San Diego I would say close to half of the cars at the AX were late model cars. If these event void your warranty they need to tell you that up front. I think it is BS to tell again that goes to a Porsche sponsored event where they know exactly what is going on, that we can't accept a warranty claim because you attended the event we put on. It is convenient for them to pull this card when it will cost them money.

A 'good friend' of mine had 2 RMS before his car was ever on a track.

I think three RMS leaks justify a new motor, not a new car. RMS leaks have zero to do with track use.

I agree he should not get a buy back granted, however he should get a New crate motor installed. Because obviously the dealer is not installing the part properly. Or there is more going on in that engine that it would be considered a lemon.

The crankshaft is probably way out of tolerence, he needs a new/rebuilt motor.

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, Ive often wondered about those cars when resold. I asked Hurley about it while I was down there , he said bc they are so 'well maintained' they feel secure in offering a full warranty. Interesting.
Chris

I agree. Since we don't know all the details, we don't know who's trying to screw who. PCNA could conceivably be in the right here...or maybe not. :(

Yeah, I've heard their party line, but there's no denying they're doing something strictly prohibited in the manual for warranty. "Maintained". Yeah, right. IOW, they change the oil, tires and brakes (and probably clutches) when they need it. How else do you better "maintain" a 996? Don't we all replace the tires, brakes and oil when they need it?

I'm told that they're refurbished before getting shipped off to the dealers. I saw an instructor car (it's got the Tip & aero kit) at the dealer once and it looked brand spankin' new (cosmetically at least).

Why anyone would buy one of those is beyond me. The student cars get beat on by dozens of different drivers with varying skill levels and I'm sure the instructors push their cars hard too. So why buy something that may have been abused to save a few bucks? Doesn't really make sense to me.

yeah, they respray them where necessary, put on new tires, brakes, and maybe clutch. that doesn't address any of the drivetrain or suspension issues supposedly affected by tracking. there are a multitude of things which undergo excess stress during a track only life that are not included in their "refurbishing". again, during the discovery process records would illustrate just what is and is not done to these cars before they are peddled to the unsuspecting (and those the unsuspecting eventually sell to).

This reminds me of the Autoweek article in which a Mitsubishi EVO owner had his warrantee canceled because he participated in SCCA autocross's. At the time, Mitsubishi denied searching the internet for car abusers. Our PCA autocross series allows competitors to sign up under an alias.

The best part about the DE cars, is that they're usually marked at what, "executively driven", or some garbage like that? hahahahah
RUN!!!!