Porsche 911 UK Enthusiasts Online Community Discussion Forum GB

Welcome to the @Porsche911UK website. Register a free account today to become a member! Sign up is quick and easy, then you can view, participate in topics and posts across the site that covers all things Porsche.

Already registered and looking to recovery your account, select 'login in' and then the 'forget your password' option.

Porsche Approved Warranty..?

If the warranty won't cover the exhaust for corrosion failure then I don't see the problem with doing the preventative work and sorting decent bolts :dont know:
 
Zingari said:
If the warranty won't cover the exhaust for corrosion failure then I don't see the problem with doing the preventative work and sorting decent bolts :dont know:

:yeah: ......... but obviously the work would need to be done after the car had been accepted onto the OPC Warranty scheme.

Luddite. In your position I'd think seriously about taking advantage of the new option of buying a 3 year warranty up front. It's a big outlay but is significantly cheaper per annum than the other shorter options.
 
Iain/DeMort, you provide no comfort, but much valued information to underline the possible realities... THANKS.

Zingers, I suspect you may be entirely correct to suggest that there may be a chance of having the OPC waiver the cost or part thereof of the 111 point check, given that they seem likely to be be performing a MAINTENANCE not long after the car had the benefit of a PDI check by another of their "group" from whom I purchased the car, and it also had the benefit of a complimentary check carried out by themselves..?

T8, yup the three year policy was my initial target, to save on spending time travelling to and from the OPC. Also your experience would seem to suggest that your OPC may not work to the letter of the law in terms their assessment of that which is covered by the policy.. I imagine that it is possible that past and possible future customer expenditure may play a part in any such assessments made by an OPC..?

Interesting discussion guys, and been very educational for me. Initially I had a different mindset from that which seems to be the likely reality. I had thought/hoped that the 111point check alone would confirm whether or not my car was eligible to enter the warranty scheme...

Given the discussion to date I can well understand that Porsche would not take on responsibility for the possible workmanship outcomes/lubricants/parts choices of an indy regardless of that indy imagined to be using Porsche filters, Mobil oil, and having Porsche trained mechanics carry out the work ... But that Porsche would require the task to be PROVEN to have been carried out to match defined Porsche standards and within the OPC network, for any Porsche to be acceptable for entry to the STAND ALONE POLICY and to do so would indeed require a MAINTENANCE to be carried out by an OPC...End of..?

The cynic in me suggests that perhaps indy involvement may be another reason for the different choice of policy ID, as opposed to just defining the time difference between policy uptake after the Porsche warranty expired..Hmm..?

Who reads the small print anyway... Yeah like an old friend used to say... It matters not, until it matters, at which time it REALLY matters..!

The above being the case, had an indy not stamped the book.... The OPC would perhaps only feel a requirement to carry out an INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE, as it would be the only service not completed... in which case the cost to customer might be somewhat less...?

As things stand for my car, I suspect, that after 5 months and circa 5k miles since the indy service, in order to comply with Porsche requirements, the oil and oil filter will again require to be replaced

According to the service record the drive belt has not been replaced for 5 years, thus I expect that too will require replacement to bring the car back into line with Porsche requirements. The hope being that the tensioner is not seized, and that it`s bearing is showing no signs of needing replacement to add to the potential cost..Hmm..?

That the last OPC MAINTENANCE was performed only 5 months previously, I would expect that neither the air/particle and cabin filters would require to be replaced..?

Also in that neither time or mileage trigger points have been reached for spark plugs replacement, they too will not require to be replaced.

Additionally that the car has been subjected to a Sytner (non-Porsche) PDI prior to purchase a couple of months back, and a couple of weeks back it had the benefit of a Sytner OPC Complimentary Inspection carried out, with nothing other than puncture goo out of date and "service" highlighted in the yellow tick box zone... it seems reasonable to expect that minimal additional issues might add to the likely expense... fingers crossed.

I suspect I would rather tackle the exhaust fixing corrosion issues myself than pay OPC rates to do so, though also suspect there may be a chance that in order to comply with the POLICY requirements that only OE fixings may be used to replace the corroded items..which once again brings into question as to WHO fitted them, were the gaskets replaced, with OE and were the fixings torqued correctly.... However as those are considered to be outside the scope of the POLICY it seems a possible grey area may exist.

Were it not for the game of Russian Roulette that seems to be involved in running a Porsche, in that very expensive items may fail, perhaps without warning, even when fully maintained by the OPC network, it seems perhaps worthwhile to consider carrying out a cost benefit analysis comparison of maintaining one`s Porsche with lesser cost implications by other means..?

It goes against the grain for me to engage in detailed financial analysis with any degree of accuracy...And that at this stage that I can not factor in the the OPC MAINTENANCE costs and probable corroded exhaust fixing replacement, the lack of that information defeats accurate financial assessment from the outset.

All of which would incline one to think they were a tad financially vulnerable to the monthly targets of an OPC..?

I`m guessing that if one has experience enough in matters mechanical and facilities enough to carry out servicing changing fluids, filters brakes, suspension and upgrading of corroded exhaust parts, then the reasoning for taking on the extra costs involved relative to buying into the STAND ALONE POLICY, other than apprehension relative to major component failure, might be down to a degree of imagined value retention, and ease of resale...?

On value retention, I guess that subject deserves a separate thread on the many and varied ways that the value of a Porsche might be assessed in the marketplace dependant on the methods used to carry out servicing and repairs... My thinking would likely be to use OE parts other than the poor quality exhaust fixings.

On the poor quality of exhaust fixings... As previously stated... To my mind the fixings should be of a material which will last close to the expected lifetime of the exhaust, and from what little knowledge I have gained to date, it seems they do not perform as well as might be hoped for or expected..? As for salt perhaps being a reason/excuse for any premature failing...? On my NOV 2012 circa 43k mile car the rest of the system is nowhere near as corroded as the fixing I posted a pic of in my Nuts or What thread.. The rest of the system looks to be in serviceable condition and likely to last for a few years minimum..?

Thanks for the education guys, and if you have anything alternative or otherwise to add, please feel free to jump in.. :thumb:
 
If you decide not to go the OPC Warranty route and maybe not get your car serviced at OPCs there have been numerous threads over the years discussing the difference in values of cars that have/have not got a full Porsche Service history.

The most concise is this one which features contributions from a couple of well regarded experts.

http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=134035&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=history

Many will argue that the restraints of the warranty and the extra cost of OPC servicing make going the non-OPC route worthwhile.

For my peace of mind I was happy to take the OPC option and follow the rules but can understand why many don't.
 
I'm confused :?

Have you bought the car in question from a OPC? If so how much warranty did you get, normally its 2yrs unless you low ball and then they might reduce it to 1yr to do the deal. I believe you could pay at the time of purchase to extend to a max of 3yrs.

Are you at the end of the new/approved warranty period and looking to 'renew' or what am I missing here? :dont know:
 
T8, thanks for the link to the evaluations on the value an OP service record or not, though I expected to find more input, and it does seem pretty one sided with not a lot of variation considered...? I might have something to add in time..!

Zingers, apology for any confusion, though the more typed, the more room for confusion, you might not be surprised to discover I can confuse myself on occasion.. (-:

An attempt at clarification... I bought the car from a distant Sytner BMW dealership, and my local OPC franchise just happens to also be Sytner.

For sure in buying from a BMW dealership for OPC money, I lost out, and that it was last serviced by an indy, I suspect lost out more IF I wanted to get the car back into the Porsche warranty system.. ? Admittedly I had an idea I was paying over the odds for it, having carried out HPI pre purchase checks, but not to the extent that it seems I have done, given the likely costs implications should I desire to take the OPC warranty route..

As for the value of the supplying dealer warranty... with a max single claim 4K limit and that lasting for 6 months, seems unlikely to go far on a Porsche 991 if things go wrong...?

I did inform the supplying dealer at the time of sale, that my intention was to put the car through an OPC 111 point check as soon as it was eligible so to do. Thus should anything turn up to initially preclude acceptance of the car into the scheme which requires expenditure, we could then be into a warranty claim discussion...?

Though in fairness to the supplying dealer, when I pointed out that the puncture goo was flagged up in the OPC complimentary checks, they did post a new Porsche Goo kit to me. Keeping my fingers crossed that the 111 point check goes as well as hoped.

Hope that clears up any confusion. :?:
 
I suppose as a franchise within Synter each dealership is treated as a separate entity :?:

It questions why the OPC arm would not take it on and allowed BMW to sell. Probably so they can avoid the OPC preparation and warranty costs and it was taken in as a px against a BMW.

On the plus side that tyre glue is c£70 and when mine was flagged up as out of date I politely declined replacement. :bandit:
 
Zingers, I suspect you are correct in terms of each Sytner franchise operating as their own entity,however I would expect a degree of co-operation in some circumstances as seemed evident when my car was delivered with a paint blemish that was sorted out at my local OPC as arranged via the selling dealer... As to who`s idea the complimentary inspection which was that was carried out on the same visit as the blemish issue was resolved, is anybody`s guess.

I have noted this particular Sytner dealership marketing the occasional seemingly "selected" 911.. :?:
 
It's probably a bit late in the day to suggest it but ....... How about cancelling the impending 111 point check and waiting until next year to put the OPC warranty on the car.

You're covered by the supplying dealer warranty and their legal obligations in the meantime and I suspect that you won't be driving the car much between now and next spring anyway.

My thinking is that perhaps with longer between service intervals and a few months ownership under your belt the idea of paying for a Major OPC service won't seem so painful.

:dont know:
 
T8, many thanks for taking the time to consider alternative options relative to the best way forward re my C4S.

I understand that many folk lay-up their "recreational" vehicles, whereas My old crate was ever road ready 365 days /year to act as a less than ideal backup transport to the family barge, for a time when my usual daily came to the end of it`s use. The Porsche will hopefully fit more comfortably into that task if required, than a two seat vehicle of vintage design..(-:

Further to the above, there were numerous wonderful Winter days when a drive in the old crate was much desired, if not required to blow the cobwebs away, though these days cold weather driving is not the fun it used to be, and that was the primary reason to think of buying back into Porsche and in coupe form.

The selling dealers guarantee has a £4k limit on any one claim, and from that which I have read of the way OPC`s bills can tot up, I suspect I might be left feeling a tad vulnerable to be involved in arguing the toss with a dealership that was not reasonably local to me, should the sort of catastrophic issue arose that it seems Porsche may be no stranger to, and was perhaps part of the motivation for them to set up the extended warranty scheme in the first place..?

Will keep you posted as to the roll out of events.

Thanks again. :thumb:
 
Porsche`s poor material choices for exhaust fixings...?

Unsure if this would be better in a thread of it`s own, however as I have mentioned the exhaust fixings in this thread I thought it might be worth posting here..? Yeah a bit of a rant, just that I expected better of Porsche, more so when it seems a quality fix by Porsche at time of production would be a relatively simple matter..?

Having spent a bit of time enjoying Flyingelburro`s post of his acquisition and subsequent enjoyment of his 997.1 I could not help but notice the pic he posted which contained detail of part of his exhaust and which seems to go some way to highlight that which I had typed of previously, in that the exhaust fixings seem to corrode at a far quicker rate than the exhaust system, and in the case of exh manifold to cyl head, create a well documented issue.

Back to Flyingelburro`s image (link below) It seems obvious that his 997`s nuts have corroded to the point of potential failure well ahead of the exhaust system as have the ones on my 2012 991 which are somewhat newer but not well on the way to matching those of the 997..?

http://www.911uk.com/files/img_9279small_123.jpg

The linked image below is of a section of my 991`s exhaust displaying the condition of it`s fixings.

http://911uk.com/files/8_year_old_c4s_exhaust_fixings_589.jpg

That Porsche seem to use a captive (pressed in) studs with a serrated head to hold it to one of the exh flanges, seems to add a degree of difficulty in replacing the fixings..

Yeah, I can understand that in production terms having the studs held on the flange cuts down initial assembly costs, but it also seems to complicate maintenance in time...?

Perhaps if interested you might like to beam up the vid below to gain an understanding of that which I seem to be ranting about.

https://youtu.be/mITEttfNwAw

I found another very informative vid on the subject which serves to further underline the possible difficulty involved in what would be a potentially simpler task if nuts and bolts were used, or indeed not something that would cause an issue in the first place had better material choices been made...?

https://youtu.be/saPehtZk1eM

All of which seems to beg the question does it seem likely that higher quality non-OE fixings were used... how might such an "improvement" affect any future warranty claim.... assuming no stress or damage was placed on the system or sensors during the replacement process..... I already think I might have an idea of the answer to that..

Any thoughts you care to share.. :?:
 
I'm thinking the 991.1 doesn't have splined studs in the exhaust joints? In which case corroded ones would be easier to shear off and knock out?
 
OttoOtto, you caused me to miss part of Strictly Come Dancing, as I went out to the garage and got down to gaze at the side opposite of the triangular flange to that which I photographed and it looks as if you may be correct..? Of course the fixing just like the nut on the other side is deformed with corrosion, so not easy to determine the exact set-up. However I suspect I will find out in time..(-:

I also typed earlier of my wonderment as to why Porsche excluded the drive belt tensioner from their guarantee scheme, just watched a vid of the tensioner on a Cayman in need of replacement due to being seized and in the Cayman it is unlikely to be exposed to much in the way if rain water... Perhaps something worthy of an improved engineering solution... :?:
 
Sorry about that! :dance:

I'm not sure what your concern is about the tensioner; it's a consumable that's replaced with the belt as a service cost (which I'm guessing is not your concern).

If it fails and causes damage to the engine after following the recommended service interval (every 6 years I think -or 54k miles if that's sooner), then that's for Porsche to put right under warranty.
 
OttoOtto, I guess my thinking needs to be updated, to meet modern expectations of the throw away society, in that a tensioner becomes a service item, and one that seems to be known to occasionally seize while in service... and it is that the tensioner seems to be known to fail by seizing, which kinda undermines my air cooled expectations of quality engineering... Perhaps it`s just an age thing.. :dont know:
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
124,558
Messages
1,446,314
Members
49,691
Latest member
vrover_993
Back
Top