What info do you want from PAG/PCNA?
03-23-2014, 03:29 PM
#16
You asked relevant questions. To your point, I was trying to make clear that it was a design change that would be less sensitive to manufacturing tolerances, and not just a tightening spec change, that was the issue, at least according to PCNA. My comment wasn't intended as a put down of your post in any way.
PAG will continue to be held in high regard ... this 785-car recall I think may nudge the company towards more frequent/transparent customer base communication. Well, at least the hope is there ...
Mike, we do have a common interest here.
03-23-2014, 03:39 PM
#19
Rennlist Member
03-23-2014, 03:45 PM
#20
Race Director
We certainly wouldn't be here unless we had respect and "faith" in Porsche's abilities to design a performance car. This stop sale/stop drive event has created such a hunger for detail, not helped by lack of transparency from PAG ... Transparency is what the world is now expecting/demanding throughout politics, governance, business ... no longer can a doctor NOT tell the patient/family what's wrong with themselves or their baby because they "don't need to know" or "they won't understand" or "they don't want to know".
PAG will continue to be held in high regard ... this 785-car recall I think may nudge the company towards more frequent/transparent customer base communication. Well, at least the hope is there ...
Mike, we do have a common interest here.
PAG will continue to be held in high regard ... this 785-car recall I think may nudge the company towards more frequent/transparent customer base communication. Well, at least the hope is there ...
Mike, we do have a common interest here.
03-23-2014, 03:51 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
At this stage all I want from Porsche is SPEED!
Speed in communicating status of engine replacements.
Speed in replacing the engines.
Speed in communicating status of the compensation program.
Speed in implementing the program.
Above all; communicate, communicate and communicate frequently. Getting information in dribbles at three week or 30 day intervals does not cut it.
It would go some much better for them by giving us weekly updates as to where Porsche is dealing with this issues. After all, we are an integral and vital part of this mess.
Speed in communicating status of engine replacements.
Speed in replacing the engines.
Speed in communicating status of the compensation program.
Speed in implementing the program.
Above all; communicate, communicate and communicate frequently. Getting information in dribbles at three week or 30 day intervals does not cut it.
It would go some much better for them by giving us weekly updates as to where Porsche is dealing with this issues. After all, we are an integral and vital part of this mess.
03-23-2014, 03:53 PM
#22
03-23-2014, 04:17 PM
#23
03-23-2014, 04:23 PM
#24
At this stage all I want from Porsche is SPEED! Speed in communicating status of engine replacements. Speed in replacing the engines. Speed in communicating status of the compensation program. Speed in implementing the program. Above all; communicate, communicate and communicate frequently. Getting information in dribbles at three week or 30 day intervals does not cut it. It would go some much better for them by giving us weekly updates as to where Porsche is dealing with this issues. After all, we are an integral and vital part of this mess.
03-23-2014, 04:28 PM
#27
03-23-2014, 04:29 PM
#28
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hi Mike,
when I made reference to the "new engine", I should have said 'replacement' engine. But, I wish PAG would definitively state what were the facts behind the 'stop sale', so that everyone is on the same page.
I especially think this will be important at resale...to be able to clearly inform a buyer (who may not have been following this forum) of the facts directly from PAG.
Knowing the facts will also make it easier to hold PAG accountable for the future performance of the product, in my opinion.
when I made reference to the "new engine", I should have said 'replacement' engine. But, I wish PAG would definitively state what were the facts behind the 'stop sale', so that everyone is on the same page.
I especially think this will be important at resale...to be able to clearly inform a buyer (who may not have been following this forum) of the facts directly from PAG.
Knowing the facts will also make it easier to hold PAG accountable for the future performance of the product, in my opinion.
Obviously I don't know the answer to 2 and we haven't been given a detailed explanation for 1 and I know I'm not really answering the question posed by the thread. But just to be clear, we have been told by PCNA that a "loosened piston rod screw connection" was the culprit and that an "optimized screw connection" has been designed and is being tested. Based on other information we've received the implication is that the old connection was too sensitive to production tolerances.
I suppose if one doesn't trust that Porsche can design an "optimized screw connection" then one shouldn't keep the car. But for those who are looking for confidence like GTEE3, we're not getting a newly designed, untested engine, we're getting an engine that has been tested successfully for thousands and thousands of hours that had one troublesome (to say the least) part in production that is now being upgraded. Personally, I'm not too concerned about the "new engine" being robust after the fix.
I suppose if one doesn't trust that Porsche can design an "optimized screw connection" then one shouldn't keep the car. But for those who are looking for confidence like GTEE3, we're not getting a newly designed, untested engine, we're getting an engine that has been tested successfully for thousands and thousands of hours that had one troublesome (to say the least) part in production that is now being upgraded. Personally, I'm not too concerned about the "new engine" being robust after the fix.
03-23-2014, 04:32 PM
#30
Me too. And I have owned many Porsches including a 2014 turbo and a 2013 Cayenne currently. I cancelled my GT3 order.
IMHO this was handled very poorly for a company that charges a premium for its products.
