Another Porsche Boxster engine failure..

[ITP]

So you're feet would start itching instantly then!!

[Vesuvius 996]

ITP said:

So you're feet would start itching instantly then!!

Certainly yes, because £2k is stupid.

I'd transfer to Hartech's Lifetime Maintenance Plan, as that would mean I just have to pay for parts, which is a different way of hedging the same risk.

[HRG]

eowen said:

Vesuvius 996 said:

Sorry but that's nonsense. I've run a succession of BMWs and then a Porsche for the last seven years in total, and I've ALWAYS had the warranty. Because I don't want to end up like you have.

As for not seeting anything about engine problems, did you miss this?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Twenty six pages and a STICKY FFSso it's always at the top of the list. Google for 996 engine failure and this is the first thing you see! It has all engine failure statistics right there.

At the end of the day, I bought a car I can't afford really. I bought my 911 from Porsche and if the engine blew (or indeed the gearbox broke) I'd be utterly and completely financially ruined. So therefore I spend £15 a week on the warranty to insure me against it.

I am genuinely very sorry to hear you've got a problem, but quite why you think that Porsche should gift you a new engine on an eight year old car which you didn't even buy from them is a mystery to me.

How many miles has the car done? If it does indeed have a full Porsche history then they might possibly give you a contribution under goodwill, but they're not obliged to give you anything at all. People like us with our nine year old high mileage cheapies mean NOTHING to Porsche unless we pay them for warranties and pay their expensive service costs.

What they will say is that you could have spent a little more and bought a car from their dealer network. If you had, then you'd have your new engine in a crate on the way over by now.

Sorry, you took a risk and it didn't pay off. No such thing as a cheap Porsche - you pay upfront or you risk paying later.

+1

-1!

I've run Porsches for six years and am in my second year with a Griff. That's £6,800 I've got in the kitty for major mechanical failures. The best thing is my warranty will always pay out regardless and if I don't claim I get to keep the "premium".

Yes, it's a calculated risk but I never warranty anything and with the money I save I am prepared to take a hit. Sure, I won't be happy if something fails but in the long run I believe it's cheaper not to warranty goods.

Back on topic for the OP... Contact Baz about getting it sorted

[anonymous-user]

900T-R said:

Deva Link said:

The car is *eight* years old FFS - that's the economic life of many cars these days.

Can you point me to those cars, then?

The average age of a cars on the road in the UK is just over 6 years

[ITP]

Certainly seems wise to have some kind of warranty on expensive cars like these, just have to hope Porsche don't bump up the price. Didn't BMW do a similar thing on M cars, upto about £1500 or something for over 60k miles? Out of interest just renewed the warranty on my 330i (£427)and it is going in for 2 new Xenon lights this week, £1800 !! Its not just engines remember....

[Deva Link]

HRG said:

-1!

I've run Porsches for six years and am in my second year with a Griff. That's £6,800 I've got in the kitty for major mechanical failures. The best thing is my warranty will always pay out regardless and if I don't claim I get to keep the "premium".

Yes, it's a calculated risk but I never warranty anything and with the money I save I am prepared to take a hit. Sure, I won't be happy if something fails but in the long run I believe it's cheaper not to warranty goods.

Thank you!

[900T-R]

fbrs said:

The average age of a cars on the road in the UK is just over 6 years

So? The average age in the UK could well be 39 years or so, but the life expectancy will be IRO 75.

Plus the UK have bought lots of new cars in recent years - I expect the current economic climate will serve to put the UK average more in line with the Western European 9.4 years average.

[paddyhasneeds]

I think an important point in the "Play the odds" game is that if someone doesn't take out an OPC warranty and is lucky enough to have, let's say 4 years, of trouble free motoring, how likely is it that said person has hands-on access to £4k if/when something bad happens in year 5?

I'm guessing most people don't actually put the money they save into a rainy day fund?

I've got a 987 Boxster just coming up to 2 years old, I've enough in the bank that if it went "BANG" I could cover any bill.

However will I be chancing it or buying the OPC warranty? I'll be doing the latter because for £15 a week it's just not worth the risk.

Everyone here is focussing on major issues like engine failures, but if you have no warranty pretty much stepping over the OPC threshold is what, £100 maybe more for an hours labour?

Incidentally - are Hartech able to cover 987's yet or just 986's?

[1]

900T-R said:

fbrs said:

The average age of a cars on the road in the UK is just over 6 years

So? The average age in the UK could well be 39 years or so, but the life expectancy will be IRO 75.

Plus the UK have bought lots of new cars in recent years - I expect the current economic climate will serve to put the UK average more in line with the Western European 9.4 years average.

Ironically I suspect it will start to go the other way, as people are tax out of high polluting cars and technology makes them less economic to repair when something goes wrong.

[900T-R]

Hmmm, the rise of electronic content in cars as a proportion of the total cost of a new car has been happening over the past 10-15 years already and the average life expectancy of cars is still rising (the median age of cars getting dismantled being somewhere between 17-18 years right now) and frankly, how high would car taxes need to be to offset the thousands of pounds a year of depreciation cvars are suffering early in life? For people on an average income - especially given the credit crunch, local council taxes going up, up and away, stagnating or falling house prices etc - how viable is it to budget several hundreds a month for car depreciation anymore?

Edited by 900T-R on Monday 28th July 18:11

[900T-R]

Anyway, this is getting beyond the point - which is to suggest that a 2000 car which represents a value of mid/high teens still and wasn't especially expensive/exotic when new is nearing the end of its economic lifespan, is simply laugheable. If I bought that car at the going rate I'd expecti it to be of high quality and reliability - what's the point otherwise when the same kind of money would have bought vastly more exotic/exciting cars (for which one would have to assume a certain risk factor)?

[anonymous-user]

900T-R said:

fbrs said:

The average age of a cars on the road in the UK is just over 6 years

So? The average age in the UK could well be 39 years or so, but the life expectancy will be IRO 75.

Plus the UK have bought lots of new cars in recent years - I expect the current economic climate will serve to put the UK average more in line with the Western European 9.4 years average.

my point was simply that if the average is 6, 8 could reasonably be considered "old" as per your example... 39+ is old!

the second bit you just made up; new car sales peaked in 2003 and have been falling since. ('06-'07 may have been a gain not sure). infact new car sales are now more or less the same as they were in the late 80's
http://www.autoindustry.co.uk/statistics/sales/ind...

im not defending porsche. i think the m96 is a disgrace.

Edited by fbrs on Monday 28th July 18:24

[900T-R]

fbrs said:

the second bit you just made up; new car sales peaked in 2003 and have been falling since. ('06-'07 may have been a gain not sure)

OK, recentish years. Fact is, the UK have been taking far more new cars per capita than other European countries during the '00s which I don't remeber to have been the case historically - I think that trend started somewhere in the 90s (OK, this is more to do with dropping numbers over here, peak in The Netherlands was 1999...).

Edited by 900T-R on Monday 28th July 18:22

[Deva Link]

900T-R said:

Anyway, this is getting beyond the point - which is to suggest that a 2000 car which represents a value of mid/high teens still and wasn't especially expensive/exotic when new is nearing the end of its economic lifespan, is simply laugheable.

I didn't day the Boxster was, but if you went to court and whined that your 8 year old car (even a Porsche) broke, then you certainly would be laughed out of court.

I think your estimate of the car's value might be a tad on the high side too. :rollseyes:

[900T-R]

Deva Link said:

I think your estimate of the car's value might be a tad on the high side too. :rollseyes:

Well in that case TVR Speed 6 depreciation isn't that bad at all!

[bcnrml]

vesuvius996 said:

As for not seeting anything about engine problems, did you miss this?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Twenty six pages and a STICKY FFSso it's always at the top of the list. Google for 996 engine failure and this is the first thing you see! It has all engine failure statistics right there.

You might like to note that he asked questions on here before that sticky was placed on there (April 2007 vs June 2007). I discovered the M96 problem in 2005, and was surprised that many on this forum refused to accept this problem existed then.

DrS said:

However, I have to agree with the general sentiment in the other posts. The OP did NINE months of research but did not see any posts on engine problems and the advice to take out a warranty to be on the safe side as about any second post on here suggests (and all but the ones on bringing your own oil from Veswink). In that case I wonder what type of reserach the OP has actually done.

Poorly researched by my standards, with no dig intended at him. But if you look at the threads on here in 2005 and 2006, when I was lurking, most contributors refused to accept a problem existed despite the growing evidence. He made a series of errors of judgement and took a risk based on enthusiasm and a very reasonable expectation of an engine staying together for 100k miles or more. Worthy of sympathy (even though I think he may have offended a few in previous postings).

RSJ said:

Think of it like this
If they need to give you a warranty on it when its new and untouched with no wear then how could you possibly not need a warranty on it when people have thrashed it around for years...You need it more than ever before..its just obvious.

And if they will guarantee for only two years and expect you to pay nearly 1,000 a year thereafter, caveat emptor. My view is that such behaviour means they do not trust their own engines (and other components) on reliability. Great!

RSJ said:

I know there is an argument that why do these engines go wrong and people shouldnt have to pay £900 a year to cover for that and i agree with that 100%,its not right.

Wanta996Gotta said:

it tells a whole story in iteslf that this car cannot be trusted to run without a warranty.

Wanta996Gotta said:

It has paid for itself over other items that are common problems with the 996 but obviously not as expensive to fix as the engine blowing like the radiators,RMS,ignition coils and the air-con.

2 year warranty is a bit of joke though - If Lamborghini can offer 3 years then what are Porsche scared of??

And still, some people will come on here stating that these cars are reliable! Conceptually, such statements are not dissimilar to the OP stating he did his research and found nothing.

900T-R said:

FFS the 1995 Citroën ZX at my parents' which has done close to 150,000 miles is perfectly serviceable with not a spot of rust and all the major machanical components including the clutch are still the originals. The last MOT cost them all of fourty quid. That's nothing special - people have come to expect this kind of reliability and durability on cars that are worth a few hundreds at best - let alone one for which a five figure sum has changed hands fairly recently.

Welcome to the world of enthusiasm where denial as a coping mechanism is so well entrenched doubters are considered mad to think these cars are anything but reliable, and they're treated with misplaced and patronising derision for reasonably expecting reliability with longevity....

Deva-Link said:

but if you went to court and whined that your 8 year old car (even a Porsche) broke, then you certainly would be laughed out of court.

You missed the point. This is an eight year old car with a promise of reliability. There's no need to go to court. A website as the OP has described, if properly done, could be very effective and devastating. Especially so for all Porsche owners. So your ownership experience of pork may well be compromised by what the OP - and others - decide to do, especially with respect to publicity.

Finally, I leave this thread with a reminder from our man across the pond.

fbrs said:

im not defending porsche. i think the m96 is a disgrace.

[Deva Link]

bcnrml said:

Deva-Link said:

but if you went to court and whined that your 8 year old car (even a Porsche) broke, then you certainly would be laughed out of court.

You missed the point. This is an eight year old car with a promise of reliability.

Promise by whom?

[bcnrml]

Deva Link said:

bcnrml said:

Deva-Link said:

but if you went to court and whined that your 8 year old car (even a Porsche) broke, then you certainly would be laughed out of court.

You missed the point. This is an eight year old car with a promise of reliability.

Promise by whom?

Porsche. Clue: Brand values.

If you disagree, ask Porsche (UK, GB, AG, whichever you like) the following questions:

1. Are Porsches reliable or not?
2. For how long should a Porsche engine last without suffering a catastrophic failure (especially if it has been maintained by the OPC network)?

I welcome your posting their written responses on this forum (or audio record the conversation and upload it somewhere, providing us with a link to it).

Thank you.

Edited by bcnrml on Monday 28th July 20:35

[Deva Link]

bcnrml said:

Deva Link said:

bcnrml said:

Deva-Link said:

but if you went to court and whined that your 8 year old car (even a Porsche) broke, then you certainly would be laughed out of court.

You missed the point. This is an eight year old car with a promise of reliability.

Promise by whom?

Porsche. Clue: Brand values.

If you disagree, ask Porsche (UK, GB, AG, whichever you like) the following questions:

1. Are Porsches reliable or not?
2. For how long should a Porsche engine last without suffering a catastrophic failure (especially if it has been maintained by the OPC network)?

I welcome your posting their written responses on this forum (or audio record the conversation and upload it somewhere, providing us with a link to it).

Thank you.

I'm confused why you would think I should have the slightest interest in doing that?

[NJH]

Well perhaps there is a very long time lag effect here with peoples perceptions of a brand. If one goes back a generation then you didn't expect a Ford to be anything other then in the scrappy at 10 years and 125K miles. At the same point in history Porsche built cars like the 944 that would do 1/4 million miles without being taken apart. Maybe nowadays things are reversed? Consumers now expect that any car will be good for at least 150K miles without to much trouble and shouldn't have any rust at 10 years. If we are being realistic then I don't think a modern Porsche is any better built or more robust then any other car on the market and this is the problem since there is a public perception that Porsche make cars with reliability like or better then a german or japanese family hatchback.