Trackdays and warranties -update
Discussion
As an update to a previous thread, I have received clarification from the underwriters of the Porsche Approved Master Plus Warranty scheme regarding warranties on cars used at track days.
If you are thinking of buying a used GT3 (for example) through an OPC and it is covered by the approved used car warranty scheme - Be Careful.
Use the car for the purpose for which is was designed and you will not be covered if it breaks.
To quote them in an email received today:
"We must advise you that we could not offer a Porsche Approved warranty for vehicles which are intended to be used on
track day events"
If you are thinking of buying a used GT3 (for example) through an OPC and it is covered by the approved used car warranty scheme - Be Careful.
Use the car for the purpose for which is was designed and you will not be covered if it breaks.
To quote them in an email received today:
"We must advise you that we could not offer a Porsche Approved warranty for vehicles which are intended to be used on
track day events"
Don't know, Dom.
I think the used car warranty is different to the new one. The new car one is a Porsche AG product I believe, while the used one is in fact a Porsche -labelled "Car Care" warranties product.
I think they will prefer to hide behind their ambiguous statements until something happens and someone decides to take them on ( as with getcarters BMW for example ) .
I think the used car warranty is different to the new one. The new car one is a Porsche AG product I believe, while the used one is in fact a Porsche -labelled "Car Care" warranties product.
I think they will prefer to hide behind their ambiguous statements until something happens and someone decides to take them on ( as with getcarters BMW for example ) .
this is quite suprising as I have spoken to the service depts. of three dealerships on ths issue now.
They all said it would be covered under the used warranty scheme.
Evo seemed to suggest the same thing a few months back.
But I have also heard that it depends how badly abused the car was (on- board computers record everything) and that good sensible track driving can be distinguished from abusive driving..
They all said it would be covered under the used warranty scheme.
Evo seemed to suggest the same thing a few months back.
But I have also heard that it depends how badly abused the car was (on- board computers record everything) and that good sensible track driving can be distinguished from abusive driving..
Just like to point out that when the Domster and I were taking on BMW (on an identical issue), that I spoke to Porsche UK and asked them whether a new car would remain under warranty once the car had been tracked (in a non competitive event). The response I got was (and I quote) "Of course - we build proper sports cars"
Lets hope they do.
>> Edited by getcarter on Sunday 22 February 07:38
With total respect to all on this board, I am not sure that ranting that it is ‘utterly shocking’ for Porsche to safeguard themselves from damage to their cars while on a circuit is at all helpful.
It must be the most dangerous environment for any car/Porsche, where abusive driving from what I observe, is common place. We are not all Derek Bells are we? No, not at all. Who could own up to being able to nurse a purpose-built car through 24 hours like him?
From first hand experience, a new Porsche race car has no warranty cover. None, full stop. Otherwise, where would it stop? Where would the line be drawn? They will consider claims however where it can be proved that a flaw existed, which has only happened as far as I know in some extremely isolated and obvious cases.
Porsche themselves must have huge reserves of experience and knowledge of how to build equipment that are right down to the bone for enjoyment and competitiveness's sake, and how abuse of their equipment manifests itself in this highly stressful environment.
I think if you think it through, you can see why being so utterly negative is irresponsible. Ultimately, because of the blinding dangerous nature of the place and the very low standard of high speed driving abilities, is there any alternative to the closure of the Nurburgring? And if Porsche produce only a handful of these delectable cars but receive nothing but aggro sorting out predominately bogus claims, well surely it’s easier not to produce the cars.
Throwing opinions around in such a manner and baiting manufacturer’s like this I view with real suspicion. I also stress that this is a personal opinion only, and yes of course manufacturers do make mistakes.
>> Edited by john m on Sunday 22 February 19:20
It must be the most dangerous environment for any car/Porsche, where abusive driving from what I observe, is common place. We are not all Derek Bells are we? No, not at all. Who could own up to being able to nurse a purpose-built car through 24 hours like him?
From first hand experience, a new Porsche race car has no warranty cover. None, full stop. Otherwise, where would it stop? Where would the line be drawn? They will consider claims however where it can be proved that a flaw existed, which has only happened as far as I know in some extremely isolated and obvious cases.
Porsche themselves must have huge reserves of experience and knowledge of how to build equipment that are right down to the bone for enjoyment and competitiveness's sake, and how abuse of their equipment manifests itself in this highly stressful environment.
I think if you think it through, you can see why being so utterly negative is irresponsible. Ultimately, because of the blinding dangerous nature of the place and the very low standard of high speed driving abilities, is there any alternative to the closure of the Nurburgring? And if Porsche produce only a handful of these delectable cars but receive nothing but aggro sorting out predominately bogus claims, well surely it’s easier not to produce the cars.
Throwing opinions around in such a manner and baiting manufacturer’s like this I view with real suspicion. I also stress that this is a personal opinion only, and yes of course manufacturers do make mistakes.
>> Edited by john m on Sunday 22 February 19:20
I take your point. But somewhere between the position of not covering any car for any problem when it has been on a track day, and having needless exposure to risk through damage arising out of negligence, lies some middle ground.
At present at least, Porsche do not recognise this. Breaking a car through crashing is one thing, while having a gearbox let go or a clutch fail in the correct and proper execution of something for which the car is designed, is something else.
Perhaps the way forward is for warranties to involve some form of professional inspection? If the engine went bang because the driver engaged 1st gear rather than 3rd , then it is surely a clear case of error/ mis-use. If however the engine went bang after a 140mph straight for no reason - then there must be a case to argue that it should not have broken.
And of course there is the ECU - which reveals many secrets!
As the popularity of track days increases ( most of which are not for the purpose of insensitive thrashing of the car ) this issue is not likely to go away IMO.
At present at least, Porsche do not recognise this. Breaking a car through crashing is one thing, while having a gearbox let go or a clutch fail in the correct and proper execution of something for which the car is designed, is something else.
Perhaps the way forward is for warranties to involve some form of professional inspection? If the engine went bang because the driver engaged 1st gear rather than 3rd , then it is surely a clear case of error/ mis-use. If however the engine went bang after a 140mph straight for no reason - then there must be a case to argue that it should not have broken.
And of course there is the ECU - which reveals many secrets!
As the popularity of track days increases ( most of which are not for the purpose of insensitive thrashing of the car ) this issue is not likely to go away IMO.
Mmm... John does make an interesting point and it's one that I've not given full consideration to before. Where does the line get drawn?
I'd always looked at it from the point of view that the way I drive on track isn't harmful to the car and that I'd expect the car to cope with it and for a warranty to back that up if it doesn't.
But then if I was to drive like a nob on track for hours on end putting stresses and strains on the car that it wasn't designed for, why shouldn't a manufacturer say "No, it's not reasonable to expect it to cope."
The answer is probably as alluded to below. If the ECU doesn't show anything ridiculous then pay up (even if some of that time was on track). If the ECU shows several hours of slamming up and down a gearbox/engine in a manner that ins't mechanically sympathetic then perhaps a different viewpoint isn't so out of order...?
I'd always looked at it from the point of view that the way I drive on track isn't harmful to the car and that I'd expect the car to cope with it and for a warranty to back that up if it doesn't.
But then if I was to drive like a nob on track for hours on end putting stresses and strains on the car that it wasn't designed for, why shouldn't a manufacturer say "No, it's not reasonable to expect it to cope."
The answer is probably as alluded to below. If the ECU doesn't show anything ridiculous then pay up (even if some of that time was on track). If the ECU shows several hours of slamming up and down a gearbox/engine in a manner that ins't mechanically sympathetic then perhaps a different viewpoint isn't so out of order...?
I've had to justified to me very well by a manufacturer. From their testing, one track mile is roughly equal to twenty road miles in terms of component wear. If a manufacturer offers a 3 year, 60,000 mile warranty for road use, why should they cover you for the extra wear of track days? If your engine blows at the end of a 140mph straight you may have a point, but if this happened because you were slipstreaming a faster car and it overheated, or because you cornered at a continuous 1g shortly before and suffered oil starvation?
If your clutch goes after 2000 miles you'll be covered regardless. If your disks crack after 500 track miles you haven't got a hope.
I only had this discussion because I was having a warranty argument. With hindsight, I see their point though. Cars are produced for road use, and if we subject them to anything exceeding this, I don't think we can expect the same level of cover, regardless of whether you drive a Porsche, BMW or any other marque.
If your clutch goes after 2000 miles you'll be covered regardless. If your disks crack after 500 track miles you haven't got a hope.
I only had this discussion because I was having a warranty argument. With hindsight, I see their point though. Cars are produced for road use, and if we subject them to anything exceeding this, I don't think we can expect the same level of cover, regardless of whether you drive a Porsche, BMW or any other marque.
Hmmm... I always drive with extreme care on track days, but I'm a pu55ie 
But as some many people 'abuse' their cars on the road, what's the difference? It's all very well saying "1 track mile = 20 road miles", but that depends on how you drive on the road...
How are you to tell? Where will the line be drawn? If you drive your car 'hard' on the road will this invalidate your warranty too? (data aquired from ECU)...
Saying "your warrenty is no longer valid as you drove your car hard (on track)" is not very far away from "your warrenty is no longer valid because you drove you car hard" which is not very far away from "you drove faster than a milk float, I'm sorry, your warranty is no longer valid".
It's effectively the same as insurance, the company is there to make money, which means that they'll honour as few claims as they can possibly get away with. If they can use the ECU data for this purpose, then they surely will. Get used to it, Big Brother is watching you!
Fox
---
964C2
But as some many people 'abuse' their cars on the road, what's the difference? It's all very well saying "1 track mile = 20 road miles", but that depends on how you drive on the road...
How are you to tell? Where will the line be drawn? If you drive your car 'hard' on the road will this invalidate your warranty too? (data aquired from ECU)...
Saying "your warrenty is no longer valid as you drove your car hard (on track)" is not very far away from "your warrenty is no longer valid because you drove you car hard" which is not very far away from "you drove faster than a milk float, I'm sorry, your warranty is no longer valid".
It's effectively the same as insurance, the company is there to make money, which means that they'll honour as few claims as they can possibly get away with. If they can use the ECU data for this purpose, then they surely will. Get used to it, Big Brother is watching you!
Fox
---
964C2
...with all due respect John, chill your boots, it was just a comment on a forum not a letter to an OPC! There are extenuating circumstances and factors eluded to by other post here that define acceptable/non-acceptable failures. There is no clear line on warantees on any car, it is down to the manufacurers of what normal use is. If they think that you have over abused the car (telemetry will give them some info) and components have failed out side of their "normal" limits then whatever the car the warantee won't cover it. My point is just that to not offer any kind of warantee is maybe not what you would hope for from a car specifically aimed and engineered for a certain type of driving environment.
BTW...for the record I own and love the Porsche marque, i spent not an inconsiderable amount of my hard earned cash on the product. I wouldn't want them to stop producing such evocative and focused machines and my comments are not ment to undermine the future direction of porsche.....but really i don't think my comment is likely to have that much gravity with the heads of porsche anyway
>> Edited by welshnobby on Sunday 22 February 23:50
BTW...for the record I own and love the Porsche marque, i spent not an inconsiderable amount of my hard earned cash on the product. I wouldn't want them to stop producing such evocative and focused machines and my comments are not ment to undermine the future direction of porsche.....but really i don't think my comment is likely to have that much gravity with the heads of porsche anyway
>> Edited by welshnobby on Sunday 22 February 23:50
john m said:
Throwing opinions around in such a manner and baiting manufacturer’s like this I view with real suspicion.
I'm not sure I agree with the content or tone of the quotation above.
Throwing opinions around (within the boundaries of the libel laws) is what we do here.
No 'baiting of manufacturers' has been going on. The topic originally came to light when BMW tried to refuse a genuine warranty claim by Steve Carter on his E46 M3. If anything, they were baiting him
Standing up for our rights as sportscar owners is something we do here (with perhaps a little consumer protection legislation thrown in). Manufacturers are big enough and have big enough legal departments to look after themselves, but you are right to defend them against spurious or unfair claims.
And what is the basis of your suspicion? Do you work for a manufacturer? Do you think people here are making spurious or unfair claims? Isn't that showing a lack of 'total respect' for the people on this forum?
[quote=john m]With total respect to all on this board, I am not sure that ranting that it is ‘utterly shocking’ for Porsche to safeguard themselves from damage to their cars while on a circuit is at all helpful.
Do you work for PCGB by chance??
Regarding this track day issue I find it a bit perplexing as Porsche have there own instructor(Burnard Aubry?)to tear you around the track at chobham in your new/new used purchace so how come the warentee is then nul and void??
Do you work for PCGB by chance??
Regarding this track day issue I find it a bit perplexing as Porsche have there own instructor(Burnard Aubry?)to tear you around the track at chobham in your new/new used purchace so how come the warentee is then nul and void??
Thanks for your responses; I shall certainly chill my boots out!
I must add that I too, was very shocked at how bad the brakes were on the Mk1 GT3 at say Donington going hard two up. What were Porsches thinking of?
But given the sure fire likely hood of serious abuse, I entirely understand why warrenty considerations when track use is involved, finds the line acceptability line drawn at a pretty low level. I don’t think damming them for that is particularly clever.
What I’m personally far more interested in is individuals who will take personal responsibility for the lamentably low levels of skill and appreciation on show at most UK track days, and do something about that.
>> Edited by john m on Monday 23 February 22:03
I must add that I too, was very shocked at how bad the brakes were on the Mk1 GT3 at say Donington going hard two up. What were Porsches thinking of?
But given the sure fire likely hood of serious abuse, I entirely understand why warrenty considerations when track use is involved, finds the line acceptability line drawn at a pretty low level. I don’t think damming them for that is particularly clever.
What I’m personally far more interested in is individuals who will take personal responsibility for the lamentably low levels of skill and appreciation on show at most UK track days, and do something about that.
>> Edited by john m on Monday 23 February 22:03
I think Porsche realised they got the GT3 Mk1 brakes wrong - evidenced by the larger six pot front calipers on the Mk2. 
Sometimes it takes them a little while to realise something is up. On the 993 wiring loom issue they claimed to Scottster that there was 'no problem, just general wear and tear' one month. Then the next it was the subject of an official bulletin and he got his parts and labour paid for. Talk about an about turn!
You are right about variable trackday driving standards, John. Personally I think these days will eventually become 'licenced' ie you have to pass an ARDS test to show you know what the flags mean and what the lines are. However, with all the electronic safeguards in modern cars, are they becoming more difficult to thrash? Many will go into limp home mode if they see a nasty looking car at the lights.
Cheers
Domster
Sometimes it takes them a little while to realise something is up. On the 993 wiring loom issue they claimed to Scottster that there was 'no problem, just general wear and tear' one month. Then the next it was the subject of an official bulletin and he got his parts and labour paid for. Talk about an about turn!
You are right about variable trackday driving standards, John. Personally I think these days will eventually become 'licenced' ie you have to pass an ARDS test to show you know what the flags mean and what the lines are. However, with all the electronic safeguards in modern cars, are they becoming more difficult to thrash? Many will go into limp home mode if they see a nasty looking car at the lights.
Cheers
Domster
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff