Porsche Recall

NissanSkylineN1

NissanSkylineN1

Messages
3,204
Canada
2.2L Camry
Messages
NissanSkylineN1
Messages
Xbox??? Who is this Xbox??
I thought this might be interesting:
Yes, this usually bullet-proof manufacturer with a unrivaled reputation for building fast and reliable cars, has just issued a recall for 1702 examples of their 911-model. The defective part is the wheel hub for models fitted with the central locking wheel device.

This system, as used in Porsche racing cars, is intended to reduce rotating mass, while also allowing for quicker tire changes. However, 911 Turbo, Turbo S, GT2, GT3 and GT3 RS models built between May 2009 and September 2010 can be affected by a defected hub which would wear prematurely and that could lead to a crash. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration had notified Porsche of the potential problem, and now Porsche will fix all these cars with a new, improved part.
Click to expand...

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2011/06/recall-notice-from-porsche-can-pigs-finally-fly.html
 
All I can say is..

OhSnap.gif


It will be funny to see what kind of dirt kicking storm this causes on some forums.
 
Oh dear, a whole 1702 Porsches have a problem!


Nothing to see here.
 
Here I was thinking that Porsche had outdone themselves once more in the new model naming stakes.
 
xNEVER-ONEx
In North America, they consistently get ranked as one of the most reliable brands by reputable sources, so ya, they are very reliable vehicles.
Click to expand...

From who? If you're gonna reference a JDPower initial quality survey, please don't bother. Porsche fixed a lot of its issues when the new Boxster and 997 came around, but they aren't exactly Lexus. The late 90s and early 00s were filled with anything but reliable Porsches.
 
It's mainly on cars that the general public does not own anyway, so I doubt it'd be that much of an issue for those that do to have them serviced.
 
ShobThaBob
From who? If you're gonna reference a JDPower initial quality survey, please don't bother. Porsche fixed a lot of its issues when the new Boxster and 997 came around, but they aren't exactly Lexus. The late 90s and early 00s were filled with anything but reliable Porsches.
Click to expand...

But they have been reliable for the last 7-8 years.
 
http://www.piperboxster.com/Engines-failure.htm
http://www.autofarm.co.uk/pdf/Total911_July06.pdf
A quote from that article which is trying to say that the problems aren't THAT big of a deal summarizes everything well

So, should early 996s be avoided? Nick and Steve
each admit that they wouldn’t themselves buy one, but
are keen to point out that the problems they’ve discussed
probably affect five to ten percent of early 996 engines.
In other words, there are plenty out there that are running
fine. Of course, though, no one knows what will happen
in the future.
Click to expand...

Only 5-10%. Only. From an article trying to make 996 buyers feel better, they say that 'only' 5-10% of them will suffer a complete engine loss despite proper maintenance.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/08/porsches-deadly-sin-1-1999-porsche-911-996-3-4/

The guy is pretty brash, but articulates himself well.

The men from Stuttgart knew they had a loser on their hands, so the 996 was freshened in 2002 with a more durable, more powerful engine, interior revisions, and a facelift. The market’s opinion on these cars, however, is written in the resale values. If you had purchased two Porsches in a row — a 1998 Carrera 2S for $75,000 and a 1999 Carrera 2 for $75,000 — and put 50,000 miles on each, you would find that the 1998 car would command an easy $50K in PCA classifieds, but the 1999 would struggle to fetch $20K.
Click to expand...

Also says it all.
 
ShobThaBob
Since when has Porsche been known for reliability?
Click to expand...

People usually baby their Porsches more than they would your average Corolla so they probably don't see quite as much use as the rest of the cars on the road.
 
Plus German engineering is very good. Its not just Porsche, but also Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi, and Mini. These are all very good and reliable vehicles.
 
My 996 passed 105,000 miles today... still on it's original engine.
 
Stotty
My 996 passed 105,000 miles today... still on it's original engine.
Click to expand...
That's quite a milestone for the 996. I know that's around the point many cars need a big service interval, so did the Porsche go through one?
 
Plenty of 996's out there with 100k+.

It has a service every January (minor year 1, major year 2), and other routine work. Other than that it's had the usual stuff 996's need later in their life done over the past 2 years (Rads, back boxes & bottom arms).

It does need a diff rebuild (I'll have the clutch done while the box is out) and the shocks could do with replacing (you can buy a full suspension kit from Porsche for £600, inc. spring, shocks & ARB's), but the engine's still solid and pulls like a train.

It's used daily and covers 12-15k miles a year... not many cars in its class that will cover that sort of mileage without requiring a lot of maintenance.
 
ShobThaBob
You know your car is unreliable if you can say that at the 100k mark as a badge of pride.
Click to expand...

Well for sports cars, its not a bad milestone at all. We aren't talking old family diesels here...
 
ShobThaBob
You know your car is unreliable if you can say that at the 100k mark as a badge of pride.
Click to expand...
That's not a valid argument against cars not normally built for every day usage to begin with, so the fact they do manage to last so long does in fact say a lot for how reliable they are.
 
So you really think Boxsters and 911s weren't build for every day usage? Is that the explanation for their atrocious electronic and mechanical build issues? The remote idea that Porsche has a history of making well built machines that are reliable is completely unfathomable to me.

e - In case you didn't read any of the links I posted, the evidence is plain in the ebay values. You can't find a '98 911 for less than 35k of any variation. Jump up to a '99 and there are plenty available in the teens including Carrera4s, Cabrios, and coupes with body mods. The same is true for 2000 and 2001. It's not just nostalgia that causes a newer, faster, lighter, and better handling car to be drastically cheaper than an older, fatter, slower model.

e2 - Not until you get to 2000 do you find Boxsters being worth more than similar mileage Integra Type Rs. You can find 1997-1999 Boxsters in the 7 and 8ks all day long.
 
Last edited:
ShobThaBob
You know your car is unreliable if you can say that at the 100k mark as a badge of pride.
Click to expand...

Consider the fact that Porsches are prone to be taken to trackdays and are properly fast cars that demand to be hooned from time to time, 100k miles is a pretty impressive milestone.
 
ShobThaBob
So you really think Boxsters and 911s weren't build for every day usage? Is that the explanation for their atrocious electronic and mechanical build issues? The remote idea that Porsche has a history of making well built machines that are reliable is completely unfathomable to me.
Click to expand...
Not to originally withstand 100,000 miles, they aren't. That's why any near that mileage has dropped any sort of value & are more than likely headaches b/c the owners haven't properly taken care of them.

But, as stotty proves, they are reliable enough if they can hit 100,000 miles, a figure Porsche more than likely does not think too much about when building these cars. It's the same for cars of higher caliber. People assume once they hit 10-20,000 miles, they're mechanical nightmares. But, many owners have proven with regular maintenance, they are reliable enough to keep going.

The editor (I believe) of Evo magazine regularly does updates on his Murcielagos. Iirc, both are pushing 100,000 miles & still running just fine. If that isn't reliable for a 6.2/6.5 liter V12, I'm not sure what is.
 
A single car owned by someone hitting a certain mileage in no way denotes or implies that the entire line of vehicles is reliable. 996s specifically have a stratospherically high failure rate for their engines. Read what I'm saying, the links I've provided, and the reality of the market.
 
I'm very specifically talking about the 996 and Boxster. Even people who argue AGAINST the idea that they weren't grenades with wheels will say they would never buy one and that the early failure rate for engines (less than 50k) is 5-10%. A few jerkoffs in their GTRs made national car guy headlines with their early transmission rape. A few 458s decided to light themselves on fire. Simple google searches will yield many articles, forums rants, and people going "told ya so." Also, I dunno about you, but I hardly ever see Porsches at the track days I go to. It's pretty much all Corvettes, S2000s, and Miatas with the small spattering of Evos, STis, and GTRs.
 
ShobThaBob
A single car owned by someone hitting a certain mileage in no way denotes or implies that the entire line of vehicles is reliable. 996s specifically have a stratospherically high failure rate for their engines. Read what I'm saying, the links I've provided, and the reality of the market.
Click to expand...
No, but it proves the cars are more than capable of withstanding the high mileage as long as routine maintenance is done.

Your links are also not really agreeing in your favor. The first 2 I read said Boxsters were not unreliable & that only 5-10% of 911's experience failure. That's about the same for any major car when you take production numbers into consideration.

The other is just 1 link. Not sure how that proves your point when your other 2 disagree with it in context.

The market doesn't prove your point without knowing each car. I could show how bad the Gallardo 5.0 & 360/500 markets are right now. Doesn't mean the cars are unreliable. A few factors play into account when determining how a car is selling on the used market.
 

Latest Posts

Back