GT4 strut top failure
Discussion
It’s a nonesense Porsche not picking up the tab for this. For the relatively small cost (ie their actual cost) they could have a happy advocate in the owner and a whole heap of current and potential owners thinking warm fuzzy thoughts about them.
Instead of that we have this and many other bad smell threads spread out all across the globe.
Well done Porsche, how short sighted can you possibly be..
You can argue the toss all day long about how and why. Personally I think it’s so obviously unfit for purpose or a clear manufacturing defect for a car marketed as a track toy that to blame the owner, just because you can, is incredibly disingenuous. But, this is how these folks operate, for reasons known only to themselves.
Instead of that we have this and many other bad smell threads spread out all across the globe.
Well done Porsche, how short sighted can you possibly be..
You can argue the toss all day long about how and why. Personally I think it’s so obviously unfit for purpose or a clear manufacturing defect for a car marketed as a track toy that to blame the owner, just because you can, is incredibly disingenuous. But, this is how these folks operate, for reasons known only to themselves.
ttdan said:
It’s a nonesense Porsche not picking up the tab for this. For the relatively small cost (ie their actual cost) they could have a happy advocate in the owner and a whole heap of current and potential owners thinking warm fuzzy thoughts about them.
Instead of that we have this and many other bad smell threads spread out all across the globe.
Well done Porsche, how short sighted can you possibly be..
You can argue the toss all day long about how and why. Personally I think it’s so obviously unfit for purpose or a clear manufacturing defect for a car marketed as a track toy that to blame the owner, just because you can, is incredibly disingenuous. But, this is how these folks operate, for reasons known only to themselves.
This ^Instead of that we have this and many other bad smell threads spread out all across the globe.
Well done Porsche, how short sighted can you possibly be..
You can argue the toss all day long about how and why. Personally I think it’s so obviously unfit for purpose or a clear manufacturing defect for a car marketed as a track toy that to blame the owner, just because you can, is incredibly disingenuous. But, this is how these folks operate, for reasons known only to themselves.
It just shouldn’t happen Steve. Period.
The forging, stamping, casting or whatever it is, should NOT fail. Personally, and from a layman’s (ish) perspective, aluminium isn’t the right material for the job, or it needs reinforcing to ensure it doesn’t fail. Though one wonders if you strengthen the turret top, whether something in the chassis leg then fails.
Maybe the turret top is “sacrificial”, but if it is, the whole chassis leg/glitch/turret is a poor design.
That should read flitch, but glitch probably isn’t too far off the truth ...
Let’s flip this on it’s head. If the front or rear subframes “occasionally” failed after a “heavy” impact/abuse, would that be in any way more acceptable ? Personally I’d say categorically not, both are critical components that should not fail under all but the heaviest impact (think huuuge accident).
Edited by Slippydiff on Thursday 2nd May 20:53
Well it certainly won't stop me using my GT4 as intended.
If this system is good enough for the highest performance GT cars --- it must be good enough for the GT4.
Regarding failure rates, the cost of engineering zero failures in all circumstances would create a product that nobody could afford to buy .... over-engineering put Porsche into very deep water in the 3.2 to 964 era ...
What is the inflation linked cost of a 964 in 1990 with the current cost of a 718 ?
Then compare what they can each do ... performance / accommodation / economy / toys /
If this system is good enough for the highest performance GT cars --- it must be good enough for the GT4.
Regarding failure rates, the cost of engineering zero failures in all circumstances would create a product that nobody could afford to buy .... over-engineering put Porsche into very deep water in the 3.2 to 964 era ...
What is the inflation linked cost of a 964 in 1990 with the current cost of a 718 ?
Then compare what they can each do ... performance / accommodation / economy / toys /
ChrisW. said:
Well it certainly won't stop me using my GT4 as intended.
If this system is good enough for the highest performance GT cars --- it must be good enough for the GT4.
Regarding failure rates, the cost of engineering zero failures in all circumstances would create a product that nobody could afford to buy .... over-engineering put Porsche into very deep water in the 3.2 to 964 era ...
What is the inflation linked cost of a 964 in 1990 with the current cost of a 718 ?
Then compare what they can each do ... performance / accommodation / economy / toys /
I’m not suggesting every component in every car they build should be engineered to be zero failure Chris, but body shells (and specifically a turret top) should not fail in this manner. Period.If this system is good enough for the highest performance GT cars --- it must be good enough for the GT4.
Regarding failure rates, the cost of engineering zero failures in all circumstances would create a product that nobody could afford to buy .... over-engineering put Porsche into very deep water in the 3.2 to 964 era ...
What is the inflation linked cost of a 964 in 1990 with the current cost of a 718 ?
Then compare what they can each do ... performance / accommodation / economy / toys /
You’ll most likely be aware of BMW’s floor/rear subframe mount cracking issues ? Mine cracked on my CSL some 8-9 years and 60k miles into the car’s life.
The car had a full BMW service history and a BMW AUC warranty. BMW sent their representative out to inspect the car at my local dealership. Having done so they sanctioned the replacement of the boot floor/rear subframe mounting points.
This means the removal of the fuel tank and all the rear suspension and the interior trim in the rear of the car. The finished job was indistinguishable from original.
That is the way manufacturers should address issues such as failed turrets. Neither you or I have owned a 996/997 variant with a chocolate engine, had you suffered engine failure such as many have, perhaps your views of Porsche would be less rose-tinted ??
WOW! Can't think anyone can argue with that collection of images.
We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
chrisABP said:
WOW! Can't think anyone can argue with that collection of images.
We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
You mean the chassis brace in pic 1? Which is also on a clubsport race car...We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
I think a dye pen inspection of the strut towers should be part of the buying process.
To be fair, it looks like a lot of those images are from the same vehicles.
In reference to the yellow GT4, whilst I do think it is a design fault and Porsche need to hold their hands up, I can understand Porsche not paying out or even contributing to the 10k bill. If they did, this would be an admission of fault and open the flood gates, even a contribution would blur the lines of responsibility and surely cause confusion with regards to insurance payouts.
In reference to the yellow GT4, whilst I do think it is a design fault and Porsche need to hold their hands up, I can understand Porsche not paying out or even contributing to the 10k bill. If they did, this would be an admission of fault and open the flood gates, even a contribution would blur the lines of responsibility and surely cause confusion with regards to insurance payouts.
RevsPerMinute said:
To be fair, it looks like a lot of those images are from the same vehicles.
In reference to the yellow GT4, whilst I do think it is a design fault and Porsche need to hold their hands up, I can understand Porsche not paying out or even contributing to the 10k bill. If they did, this would be an admission of fault and open the flood gates, even a contribution would blur the lines of responsibility and surely cause confusion with regards to insurance payouts.
I've deleted 10 and 14, two duplicates. Ask the rest are seperate cars. I only searched for a few minutes, this isn't all of them. I'm sure you can find plenty more.In reference to the yellow GT4, whilst I do think it is a design fault and Porsche need to hold their hands up, I can understand Porsche not paying out or even contributing to the 10k bill. If they did, this would be an admission of fault and open the flood gates, even a contribution would blur the lines of responsibility and surely cause confusion with regards to insurance payouts.
jimPH said:
chrisABP said:
WOW! Can't think anyone can argue with that collection of images.
We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
You mean the chassis brace in pic 1? Which is also on a clubsport race car...We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
I think a dye pen inspection of the strut towers should be part of the buying process.
chrisABP said:
jimPH said:
chrisABP said:
WOW! Can't think anyone can argue with that collection of images.
We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
You mean the chassis brace in pic 1? Which is also on a clubsport race car...We will never know what the circumstances were of each of these failures but the simple fact is that it is obviously an integral weakness in the bodyshell and if Porsche aren't accepting any responsibility as seems the case then I would be looking at preventative measures to remove (or reduce) the risk. I believe there are now options of chassis braces available which owners should be considering.
Then the issue arises of OPC failing the car on a pre-warranty 111 point check as its modified......
I think a dye pen inspection of the strut towers should be part of the buying process.
TDT said:
Porsche has clearly determined this as an acceptable risk vs the reward in performance benefits they have been able to make wrt profit margins, weight saving, dynamics. If we think about the total number of 9x1 architecture cars that have been produced vs the number of reported failures - this is still negligible and Porsche won't say anything about it, unless there is a major case - and maybe not even in that case dependant on the circumstances. Ideally you'd want Porsche to just underwrite these items and the repair in the case of a failure or provide a strengthening kit as has been mentioned above.
I mean, are we really saying that all 9x1 cars are now untenable as a ownership proposition because of this? Absurd really.
Yes......stop playing around and buy a Radical I mean, are we really saying that all 9x1 cars are now untenable as a ownership proposition because of this? Absurd really.
chrisABP said:
All this part does really is limit how much of the impact is transferred into bonnet damage?It braces against another part of the chassis - we then don't know want load is transferred elsewhere at that point.
Something crucial to note....for these multi-material chassis - Porsche tolerance for chassis measurements is 2mm. So if there is an impact that transfers load to the chassis, and when they measure the chassis, if it is more that 2MM out then a new chassis is required.
Big problem being that 981 chassis are not longer available.... so it's a write-off.
https://youtu.be/yvnVSTTPvkY
Translated German from the description: This video shows a modification of a Porsche Cayman GT4 body shell.
The GT4 got a new body shell because he had a small accident on the racetrack. The body has warped by more than 2 mm, which exceeds the tolerance range of the manufacturer (2mm). Since the body is a multi material mix, the bodywork must not be straightened. So we had to build a new one.
For the rear of the GT4, looks like Porsche actually added reinforcement cups/hats
not sure why they don't just have a similar solution for the front.. if that is stamped steel
Edited by TDT on Friday 3rd May 12:54
Point now taken Slippy !
I'd like to believe that my KW 3 way Clubsport dampers offer better handling in extremis because they do a better job of absorbing track undulations and kerbs.
I also hope that there is so little weight on the inside wheel when I'm running a kerb that the impact is modest ...
However. if chassis are no longer available I would be concerned about the cost of a significant track-day off ... this does make a very good case for always having track-day insurance ...
As far as the mount supports are concerned, spreading the load should minimise the chance of failure and help to avoid significant collateral damage ...
I must find out more ...
Cx.
P.S. I got involved in a McLaren gearbox failure where a leaking oil seal resulted in an £18k replacement gearbox on a 4000 mile 40 month old MP4-12C ... (that had been McLaren serviced three times) ... contrast that to the current GT4 gearbox replacements. Maybe P haven't had enough failures ? Or maybe they will propose a reinforcement (which I guess I will have to pay for due to my mods !)
I'd like to believe that my KW 3 way Clubsport dampers offer better handling in extremis because they do a better job of absorbing track undulations and kerbs.
I also hope that there is so little weight on the inside wheel when I'm running a kerb that the impact is modest ...
However. if chassis are no longer available I would be concerned about the cost of a significant track-day off ... this does make a very good case for always having track-day insurance ...
As far as the mount supports are concerned, spreading the load should minimise the chance of failure and help to avoid significant collateral damage ...
I must find out more ...
Cx.
P.S. I got involved in a McLaren gearbox failure where a leaking oil seal resulted in an £18k replacement gearbox on a 4000 mile 40 month old MP4-12C ... (that had been McLaren serviced three times) ... contrast that to the current GT4 gearbox replacements. Maybe P haven't had enough failures ? Or maybe they will propose a reinforcement (which I guess I will have to pay for due to my mods !)
Edited by ChrisW. on Friday 3rd May 15:48
The legendary reliability of Porsche is slowly turning into a myth.. quite disappointing really..
- 997.1 and 987 boxster engine issues..
- 997 RS 4.0 engine issues
- 991.1 GT3 flammable engine..
- A/C issues on pretty all models (including some of mine)
Now the suspension strut issue on GT cars that looks MUCH more serious..
quite worrying trend.. might be b/c they produce exotica in larger numbers which means more chances to uncover design faults.. but tbh you don't hear these horror stories from Ferrari.. the worst being the F430 manifolds that could easily be cured..
disappointing..
- 997.1 and 987 boxster engine issues..
- 997 RS 4.0 engine issues
- 991.1 GT3 flammable engine..
- A/C issues on pretty all models (including some of mine)
Now the suspension strut issue on GT cars that looks MUCH more serious..
quite worrying trend.. might be b/c they produce exotica in larger numbers which means more chances to uncover design faults.. but tbh you don't hear these horror stories from Ferrari.. the worst being the F430 manifolds that could easily be cured..
disappointing..
rosino said:
The legendary reliability of Porsche is slowly turning into a myth.. quite disappointing really..
- 997.1 and 987 boxster engine issues..
- 997 RS 4.0 engine issues
- 991.1 GT3 flammable engine..
- A/C issues on pretty all models (including some of mine)
Now the suspension strut issue on GT cars that looks MUCH more serious..
quite worrying trend.. might be b/c they produce exotica in larger numbers which means more chances to uncover design faults.. but tbh you don't hear these horror stories from Ferrari.. the worst being the F430 manifolds that could easily be cured..
disappointing..
buy a Cayman R with no AC,, job done, drives better than all the others you posed also ;-)- 997.1 and 987 boxster engine issues..
- 997 RS 4.0 engine issues
- 991.1 GT3 flammable engine..
- A/C issues on pretty all models (including some of mine)
Now the suspension strut issue on GT cars that looks MUCH more serious..
quite worrying trend.. might be b/c they produce exotica in larger numbers which means more chances to uncover design faults.. but tbh you don't hear these horror stories from Ferrari.. the worst being the F430 manifolds that could easily be cured..
disappointing..
430 also kills front end ball joints etc and the manifold issue is only after marklet fixable so touchy subject come inspection time.
as I said in the 992 Audi thread, 987.2 cars and 997.2 911's are the sweet spot not only for driving but for having little to no issues.
I see that PCA Club Racing have issued a notice allowing fitment of the strut reinforcement plates for GT4s
It’s a pity the weakness in design is not acknowledged by Porsche themselves and of course these plates will only minimise damage caused by strut tower failure.
Further comments on this post:
https://rennlist.com/forums/gt4/948382-strut-tower...
It’s a pity the weakness in design is not acknowledged by Porsche themselves and of course these plates will only minimise damage caused by strut tower failure.
Further comments on this post:
https://rennlist.com/forums/gt4/948382-strut-tower...
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff