Do Porsche have better excuses when things go wrong?
Discussion
Sadly my car has suffered multiple (28 in total) small dents in both rear arches amongst other things. The dents are smooth and there is no evidence of metallic paint damage or previous repair.
Apparently, this is due to pre-existing stone chip repairs that have all failed simultaneously in the space of 24 hours.
I think my car has been worked on during an episode of Red Dwarf..
Apparently, this is due to pre-existing stone chip repairs that have all failed simultaneously in the space of 24 hours.
I think my car has been worked on during an episode of Red Dwarf..
gottans said:
After a service, the tape was used to show the location of the small dents as they very difficult to photograph but can be seen in bright sunlight as distortions in the reflection.
Are you ABSOLUTELY certain they weren't there before?The dents are in the area most prone to stone dings, which is why the car has protective film there, or thereabouts.
Unfortunately, Porsche sports cars DO collect dings in certain areas and that's one of them.
13m said:
gottans said:
After a service, the tape was used to show the location of the small dents as they very difficult to photograph but can be seen in bright sunlight as distortions in the reflection.
Are you ABSOLUTELY certain they weren't there before?The dents are in the area most prone to stone dings, which is why the car has protective film there, or thereabouts.
Unfortunately, Porsche sports cars DO collect dings in certain areas and that's one of them.
I am 100% certain both rear arches were free of damage, I hand wash the car and check the bodywork carefully. Having seen the effect of a stone chip take the paint clean off the front wing down to the primer without denting the metal in one go. I do not understand how the same paint can resist a stone chip that leaves a dent in the steel panel but not damage the paint.
The chances of a completely smooth stone being a projectile once is possible but to repeat this a further 20+ times in such a short space of time is pushing the realms of possibilty.
The chances of a completely smooth stone being a projectile once is possible but to repeat this a further 20+ times in such a short space of time is pushing the realms of possibilty.
gottans said:
I am 100% certain both rear arches were free of damage, I hand wash the car and check the bodywork carefully. Having seen the effect of a stone chip take the paint clean off the front wing down to the primer without denting the metal in one go. I do not understand how the same paint can resist a stone chip that leaves a dent in the steel panel but not damage the paint.
The chances of a completely smooth stone being a projectile once is possible but to repeat this a further 20+ times in such a short space of time is pushing the realms of possibilty.
So how do you think it happened then?The chances of a completely smooth stone being a projectile once is possible but to repeat this a further 20+ times in such a short space of time is pushing the realms of possibilty.
gottans said:
If I were theorising I would suspect a carelessly wielded jet wash nozzle..
And a valeter with Parkinson's disease presumably, to have bashed it that many times in the same area.I've had pressure washer damage and it tends to be gouges or "C" shaped scratches, when the nozzle doesn't have a rubber guard on it.
If I were a gambling man I'd say that those dents were always there and you've only just noticed because the car has been in someone else's possession for a while. You've now got your baby back and have scrutinised it more closely than you otherwise would.
The area might be prone to stone chips but I know these areas where not damaged prior to the service.
I have owned the vehicle for 6 months and driven less than 6k miles so am I really expected to believe this rate of bodywork damage per mile is normal? I could believe one or two marks happening but not 28 in such a short period of time.
Add in a very deep scratch in a window and removal of the paint from the egde of the drivers door I am struggling to believe this is just an accumulation of damage over time.
I have owned the vehicle for 6 months and driven less than 6k miles so am I really expected to believe this rate of bodywork damage per mile is normal? I could believe one or two marks happening but not 28 in such a short period of time.
Add in a very deep scratch in a window and removal of the paint from the egde of the drivers door I am struggling to believe this is just an accumulation of damage over time.
gottans said:
The area might be prone to stone chips but I know these areas where not damaged prior to the service.
I have owned the vehicle for 6 months and driven less than 6k miles so am I really expected to believe this rate of bodywork damage per mile is normal? I could believe one or two marks happening but not 28 in such a short period of time.
Add in a very deep scratch in a window and removal of the paint from the egde of the drivers door I am struggling to believe this is just an accumulation of damage over time.
I hear you.I have owned the vehicle for 6 months and driven less than 6k miles so am I really expected to believe this rate of bodywork damage per mile is normal? I could believe one or two marks happening but not 28 in such a short period of time.
Add in a very deep scratch in a window and removal of the paint from the egde of the drivers door I am struggling to believe this is just an accumulation of damage over time.
The flip side is, I think most people would struggle to believe this happened whilst the car was away for service. Unless they'd used your car on a rally stage.
No idea about using the wrong solution.
There are a couple of stone chip repairs in one of the rear arches which are not affected and show up as a darker patch as the metallic particles in the paint are not reflecting the same about of light as the factory paint finish.
And to boot there is a wet patch of concrete under the car behind the nearside front wheel, the liquid is thin but oily so doubt if it AC water draining.
Should have bought an Audi R8.
There are a couple of stone chip repairs in one of the rear arches which are not affected and show up as a darker patch as the metallic particles in the paint are not reflecting the same about of light as the factory paint finish.
And to boot there is a wet patch of concrete under the car behind the nearside front wheel, the liquid is thin but oily so doubt if it AC water draining.
Should have bought an Audi R8.
gottans said:
No idea about using the wrong solution.
There are a couple of stone chip repairs in one of the rear arches which are not affected and show up as a darker patch as the metallic particles in the paint are not reflecting the same about of light as the factory paint finish.
And to boot there is a wet patch of concrete under the car behind the nearside front wheel, the liquid is thin but oily so doubt if it AC water draining.
Should have bought an Audi R8.
It's nothing to do with the wrong cleaner or, I doubt, previous repairs. The areas in question are prone to damage from stuff being flung up from the road. Despite how confident you are that the damage wasn't there before, I would still bet it was. There are a couple of stone chip repairs in one of the rear arches which are not affected and show up as a darker patch as the metallic particles in the paint are not reflecting the same about of light as the factory paint finish.
And to boot there is a wet patch of concrete under the car behind the nearside front wheel, the liquid is thin but oily so doubt if it AC water draining.
Should have bought an Audi R8.
However, I suppose it is just conceivable that the tech took it for a speedy test drive through a section of road repairs where there was a lot of coarse surface dressing, or maybe was honing his donut technique on pea gravel.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff