texasviany

When I got out of the car (981 Spyder) and I noticed condensation inside the rear taillight. This means that there is a leak. The car is still undar warranty. Fix it or leave it? I had a BMW Z8 where the headlight leaked and they replaced it. Thoughts?

terbiumactivated

Need to at least investigate the potential for warranty replacement, first order of business.

LexVan

I suspect your dealership is going to tell you that's normal. Was there a recent temperature swing? Those rear tail lights have "breather holes" and you can get that condensation under certain conditions.

terbiumactivated

Lex is probably right but like dating: "no brass ***** no blue chips". If you are a frequent washer (like most of us) be mindful not to blast that area with strong hose pressure.

Maverick787

That’s not a leak it’s condensation tail lights are not sealed on P cars not sure why. It will dry out, and after 4 Porsche’s they all have done it. (991S, GT3, RS, Spyder) There was a long thread here some place on the board. Headlights are sealed vs tails.

r553

It is normal.

terbiumactivated

I've never seen it and if I did I'd be pissed off, after all my third of the cost Ford has never had a problem with said condensation.

Maverick787

Possibly didn’t exist your model years. It’s dries out and never had an issue nor caused a problem. Dealer will send you back home .....it’s plastic no harm from condensation. Shouldn’t happen .........but there is nothing to break.

Suicide Jockey

Here is the recent thread in this forum on this issue:

https://rennlist.com/forums/987-981-...densation.html

A quick search reveals that taillight condensation has been reported on various models throughout the Porsche range, so, as others have indicated, it seems somewhat common and I'm not sure it is anything to worry about.

Now if you were experiencing "condensation" similar to that on this 997, then my advice would be entirely different!

https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...ht-issues.html



argh moisture

texasviany

Thanks everyone. (Love this forum.) I rarely wash the car, so its not that and I have not has this occur in the other P cars that I have owned (8).

I will leave it be. That image of the 997 looks nasty!

n4v4nod

Wow... looks like that 997 went swimming

Suicide Jockey

I'm with you on this. While it may be nothing to worry about, it's inexcusable on a car like the 981 Spyder, or any Porsche for that matter. The fact that my quick search turned up several examples of this across the model range tells me it's no secret to Porsche, so I'm sure they're aware of it (and have probably heard from dealers moaning about overly concerned customers bringing their cars in for this reason). Why not address it? I don't care if there is some great/legitimate reason why this happens. The bottom line is, it's a bad look for P. Anything that can cause someone -- whether they be a Porsche expert or someone who knows zero about cars -- to call into question quality of build is something P should be concerned about. As you say, if every other manufacturer can make rear lenses that don't fog up with condensation when the car is washed, then certainly P can rise to the occasion.

terbiumactivated

SJ, My guess is all the lights are built by a supplier to Porsche, still your point about it being a bad look and a statement about the company overall should not be overlooked. How hard is it to call the supplier and politely explain they need to raise their game?

GregWormald

According to on-line manuals a little condensation is normal--through the vent holes--and should dry out in normal driving.
If it doesn't dry out then I'd be looking for dealer input.

Suicide Jockey

Thanks, Greg. A good reminder that you can learn a lot by reading the manual!

Frankly, I don't care if it's normal or not. It looks bad. Visible water/moisture infiltration suggests to the average person (and probably most owners) that something is amiss due to a failed seal, a leak, or some other problem. If, as others have indicated, Porsche purposefully doesn't "seal" the lenses when other manufacturers do, then I'm curious why? I'm no engineer so there may be a damn good reason, but, as a layman, I'll take a solution that keeps water out over a solution that allows water in. Call me stupid that way!

Again, it's hardly a huge deal, but it's one of those dumb things that makes you scratch your head. It's fine to chart your own course, but when everyone is zigging and you're zagging, it may be prudent to take a step back and reconsider; particularly if your course, as well thought out as it may be, leads average people to assume you have a quality control issue. Not good.