I have a question.

It appears from the pictures the front "clip" and associated assembly along with the frame separated from the rest of the car. Is there a missing crossmember we're not seeing?

I ask because this break is ahead of the front wheels and suspension. In other words it isn't part of the structural box, but rather the attachment end. So how would this affect the steering, handling, alignment and braking? Or other welds were bad?

 

There is insufficient frame rigidity left without the bumper assembly connecting the frame rails. See pics below or check out a Pan body in white to see the frame exposed.





Pan having aluminum frame rails replaced after the rail cracked during a front end collision.



Engine, tran and suspension components dropped. Pan has NO other major frame components forming its structural box. The frame rails and the bumper assembly are the only major components to provide the frame rigidity needed for steering control and suspension function. There is only a small sub frame provides any cross supports between the rails. With defective welds between the frame rail ends and the bumper assembly, the Pan has a wet noodle for a structural box.




Engine dropped from Pan under repair showing small sub frame attached to engine.




My car is shown above being reloaded onto the wrecker after the catastrophic failure of the welds on the frame rail ends. I drove this car while those welds were beginning to fail. I can a thousand percent tell you without a rigid frame being provided from those welds the car darts, wanders, drifts, pulls, jerks, changes direction abruptly just due to going over small road imperfections, etc. etc. etc...

There is very strong reason manufactures of production vehicles and race vehicles make a frame as rigid as possible. It gives better control. Even an after market sway bar can help a car handle better, corner better, etc..

Given any version of Pan weighs over 2 tons, that is a hell of a lot of mass to leave to the small sub frame that is the only remaining cross structure left. That sub frame is seen in the exposed end of my car above and in the dropped Pan engine at its base.

I will be releasing a detailed video soon that covers this point and the story of my car. I'll post a link here when its ready if anybody is interested. It will also provide Porsche's testimony.

FYI: NHTSA has stated Porsche may not ship my car out of the country as they had planned to do- THAT is a big step in the right direction.

 

I see the crossmember in the pictures, essentially closing the box, answering my question.

Good luck.

 

Deuuuce,

You really think that tiny engine cradle your referring to provides enough rigidity for the steering and suspension to be able to control a 4,365 pound car????

As to question "are other welds bad"? Yes, per Porsche's expert, the welds that tie the rear of the structural box are the same and will have the same defect. So all four corners of the frame have bad welds.

My statement that the engine support shown is insufficient to hold the frame rails stable after the front welds break is based on the following supporting evidence:

• I spent 4 weeks driving the car with busted welds,
• I have since spent 3 years studying the issue in depth,
• the expert Ph D forensic automotive engineer I hired to assess the issues with the car stated the effect of the defective welds on its steering and handling would be severe and extremely dangerous AND

May I ask if as automotive journalists you have been previously paid by Porsche or otherwise received material benefit from the company?

 

I don't know what your problem is calling me out, I asked specific questions regarding your pictures, you answered, and I was satisfied with it. You didn't answer regarding other welds until after my first post which would have further satisfied the questions.

I've never been paid by a manufacturer, I take offense at the question due to your snap judgement, and the only manufacturer benefits I have received as part of my hobby is two driving schools, and neither were Porsche, unfortunately.

I'm not going to bother re-reading your original post. If the welds are bad, then why isn't this settled?

And quite frankly, your experience has no influence whatsoever on how I view Porsche nor will sway me from purchasing one in the least.

 

It is not settled because there are over 130,000 other Panamera owners. I have a conscious.

I have no opportunity to either recoup my significant expenses or to have Porsche make this right with me. BUT I do have the opportunity to maybe keep someone else from going through 3 years of hell, being injured or being killed.

Sometimes its about doing the right thing and trying to help others.

If you still want to buy one of these, your doing so with a lot more foreknowledge than I was provided- or that most other Panamera owners have been provided. Maybe you'll be lucky and get a good one. Its a shame for $100,000 its a roll of the dice.

 

It took awhile, but a video is now posted to Youtube that tells the story of my Porsche and the 3+ year (ongoing) battle for repurchase with Porsche Cars North America. It includes about 25 mins of Porsche's testimony at the Consumer Protection hearing held Sept. 2nd 2015.

The video's title is Moore v PCNA: The Defect in Porsche



It should help answer the question "Are there other Panameras with this same defect?". This is not only the question of the problem in the manufacturing process that produced my car, but why Porsche's quality control passed the car and allowed it to be sold.

Acting on one bad car is an easy decision for a QA/QC manager, but not so easy when faced with many bad cars having questionable welds. Welding aluminum is challenging and requires rigorous attention to detail. The specific problems that the experts concluded caused the bad welds in my car and other related defects are in the video.

Porsche has been given every opportunity to take the lead on this problem. They have refused to not only take the lead but to do anything whatsoever since 2012. I tried every way possible to handle this issue with Porsche in a cooperative spirit, with no legal proceedings and no public disclosure that I initiated. It just didn't work, they do not want to deal with this issue or even to deal with my car alone.

Though ordered to repurchase my car within 40 days of the decision being filed, Porsche has failed to do so. They again are dodging what their supposed to do and playing games with paperwork to delay the problem as long as possible.

 

Porsche reacts little to anything but public image and attention. The Georgia Dept. of Law included a $1,000 a day penality if Porsche failed to buy this car back. They don't care, Porsch3 does nothing but make excuses for failing to buy the car back or to begin their investigation and remedy into this defect. They don't buy it back because once they do its much harder for them to ignore the extreme danger this defect presents.

Porsche WILL notice the number of views on YouTube though. That will tell them Porsche customers care about getting a car that not only performs great, but is also well built and free of such major hazards.

Class action suits, etc. shouldn't be needed to get Porsche to take care of design/ manufacturing defects like the this, the IMS bearing failures, coolant line leaks, etc. etc..

YouTube views don't record reliably from embedded views such as on this website. SEND PORSCHE A MESSAGE- GO TO YOUTUBE AND WATCH THE VIDEO THERE, PLEASE SHARE THE LINK IF POSSIBLE.

The video ID number is: Fb85ITDQQ5E


https://youtu.be/Fb85ITDQQ5E


Each view recorded can make a difference and is greatly appreciated.

L. Moore

 

I've done this from several computers with different IP addresses but the viewed count didn't seem to increase - keeps saying 62. Maybe that number won't update until later. Again, thanks for putting the information together with such detail, and I really do hope for a positive conclusion to this.

 

Just curious if there were any further developments in this case?

 

Didn't they offer to buy the vehicle back from you?

 

Did you give up reading the thread? They were ORDERED to buy the car back after attempting to require the owner to agree to an uncertain set of terms that were not in her favor at all. Even though they were ORDERED to buy the car back, they have yet to do so, even with $1k a day penalty for delaying.


"Though ordered to repurchase my car within 40 days of the decision being filed, Porsche has failed to do so. They again are dodging what their supposed to do and playing games with paperwork to delay the problem as long as possible. "

 

Yes but tired of the attitude (and yours) so asking was the easiest method.

 

You seem like a real peach. Appreciate your laziness and lack of self awareness.

 

I found the attitude here **** poor, thanks for adding to it.