Anybody got through hartech's new Section 5 yet?
Discussion
Took about two hours to get through at 54 pages long, very interesting stuff though. It explains why the 2002> M96/7 engines used in the later 911/Boxster/Cayman cars have cylinder liner failures more commonly than the older engines (almost countering the much improved design of the IMS over earlier cars), and what can be done to prevent this. Some of the new technology coming along sounds pretty good too.
So has anybody else waded through the document? Any thoughts?
Edited by 911p on Wednesday 4th January 17:10
You want to try writing the bl**dy thing, attaching photos, checking spelling and grammer, worrying to avoid anything that could result in any litigation, thinking about how to answer the many challenges that will inevitably result before they happen (to try and save weeks of rows and answers) etc!
Baz
Baz
OK - I confess
Sadly, I actually enjoyed reading every word of it! Better than a Haynes manual any day.
I doubt that many engine repair specialists are prepared to go this public with their findings and I applaud Hartech for doing so.
I believe that the production line design and many of the engineering processes were put out to tender at the inception of the 996 series and that Toyota were responsible for much of it. This may be the reason that Porsche moved away from their evolved engine design to one that lead to the flawed open deck cylinder block.
If I still had one of those engines, it would definitely be in their workshop having all of Porsche's design faults rectified. The rest of the car is an excellent piece of kit and its a great shame that so many of these engines wont survive into old age!
In view of the Sale Of Goods act I am surprised that the presence of these "inherent faults" have not sparked justifiable litigation. I suspect that Porsche entertain claims right up to the 6 year time limit if the case is watertight?
I have just had a 3 year old laptop replaced due to SOGA and there must be enough evidence world wide to put Porsche under the spotlight.
Anyway, must go and get my anorak pressed and the bobble hat laundered.
Sadly, I actually enjoyed reading every word of it! Better than a Haynes manual any day.
I doubt that many engine repair specialists are prepared to go this public with their findings and I applaud Hartech for doing so.
I believe that the production line design and many of the engineering processes were put out to tender at the inception of the 996 series and that Toyota were responsible for much of it. This may be the reason that Porsche moved away from their evolved engine design to one that lead to the flawed open deck cylinder block.
If I still had one of those engines, it would definitely be in their workshop having all of Porsche's design faults rectified. The rest of the car is an excellent piece of kit and its a great shame that so many of these engines wont survive into old age!
In view of the Sale Of Goods act I am surprised that the presence of these "inherent faults" have not sparked justifiable litigation. I suspect that Porsche entertain claims right up to the 6 year time limit if the case is watertight?
I have just had a 3 year old laptop replaced due to SOGA and there must be enough evidence world wide to put Porsche under the spotlight.
Anyway, must go and get my anorak pressed and the bobble hat laundered.
Edited by Pugley on Friday 6th January 10:12
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff