Well Guys, I have a copy of the final report from NHTSA regarding the inquiry into the 1995 wiring harness failure issue. Seems they closed the investigation on Jan 31, 2002. Briefly, the reason quoted by the NHTSA principal Engineer Frank was: ‘no safety defect trend found at this time.’

As I read the detailed two-page report, I learned the following facts of their investigation:

1. Total of 414 Cases were reported to NHTSA – 18 Direct complaints, 389 warranty claims, and a few miscellaneous reports.

2. Harnesses were originally made with insulation of thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) with rubber protective sleeves made by Leonische Drahtwerke AG. Later the supplier reported to Porsche that the TPE insulation is incompatible with the rubber material under high temp conditions.

3. On Approximately May 10, 1995, Porsche changed the rubber sleeves to PVC. (Anyone know of a way to correlate a Serial Number or Build Date from this?)

4. Additional changes were made for 1996 model on January 5, 1996 when the material was changed from TPE to PVC.

5. Warranty numbers are: 1995 – 315 replaced; 1996 – 74; 1997 – 13; 1998 – 2;

6. For the majority of complaints, the failure was discovered after some electrical system malfunction including: illumination of engine warning light, starter motor self activation, run on or failure to crank, engine rough running, dead battery.

7. No new fire complaints have been received since November 1998.

8. Reason for closing: a safety related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety related defect does not exist. The agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

In closing, it appears that NHTSA did not see a significant safety issue. In my conversation with Frank and review of the report, it would appear that NHTSA requires a strong risk of fire to really act on a claim like this and unfortunately (or fortunately) there just were not that many fires. They list the total number of cars for 1995 and 1996 as 14,579 (1995: 7847 and 1996: 7092). I would like to way that Frank told me that the case is not permanently closed and that if more cases are brought to their attention, they may re-open the case. At any rate, if you will continue to send me the necessary info, I will continue to forward it to Frank. While it appears that we will not have much luck going forward, it never hurts to try. I would add that if you find the problem in your car, print out a copy of the report and take it with you to the dealer. At the least you can prove that Porsche has fixed the problem before under warranty and they should do the same for your car.

One interesting fact that I learned from the report is that NHTSA thinks the affected harness part number is 993.607.016.05, while I have found that to be the improved harness number. They believe that the fixed harness number is 993.607.016.15 while my database has not record of this part number. I am not sure of this discrepancy since I can prove my later part number with a recent build date.

Finally, thanks to all who have helped with this effort over the past two years. I personally forwarded 25 positive cases to NHTSA with your help. Frank said I was the largest single contributor and I would not have been able to do this without your help.

E. J.

You can find the updated info on my site too
<a href="http://www.pcarracing.homestead.com/wiringharness3.html" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.homestead.com/_ksi0701961505864646/pcarracing/files/NHTSA_Harness_Report.pdf" target="_blank">here</a> you can directly view the NHTSA report in a pdf version.

 

Thanks for the update, E.J. Did they mail this to you or did you come across it on the web someplace? I’m curious because as you know, Frank Boris has my failed harness as part of his investigation, and I have not heard from him since I mailed it to him.

We did learn (or confirm) a few things that should help others. One, it is definitely heat and/or moisture related. Two, any cars after build date May 1995 should be OK. (Well, it says they “changed the material” at that date. Does that mean cars built at that date got the new material, harnesses on the shelf had the new material, or that’s when they told the harness supplier to switch, or what? I guess we don’t know.)

I don’t get it with the part numbers, either. Perhaps the –15 part number represents the changes made in 1/96 for the ’96 model year, and the changes on May of 95, for ’95 model cars, went into the –05 version. I’m still curious about my new harness, which is supposed to be the new and improved version. It still has the old (-01) part number, even though the “Fert Datum,” or build date, of the new harness is 5/4/00.


Tom

 

Tom,

I am still confused about the part nubmers too. It just doesnt make any sense. The date for my new harness was sometime in 2001, but the part number ends in .05. I guess we will have to assume on that one. As far as the build dates, I wish there was a serial number cut off or a build date for the harness itself as on the sticker rather than a car build date. I learned that some options can cause a car to be pulled off the line. I think this is why my car has an early serial number, but a late build date - the speed yellow was special. A serial number would certainly make it easier to figure out. I think my advice will be the .05 part number and a harness build date later than Jan. 1996.

As far as the report, Frank faxed it to me, and he also has my harness as evidence. As I said before, I will continue to collect names and forward them to Frank, I am just afraid that it doesn't make much difference now. At least we learned a few things from the report.

E. J.

 

EJ,
Thanks for all your time and effort in doing this. You were a big help in my getting mine fixed.

David

 

E. J., like others thanks for all your efforts on this.

 

nks. <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

 

Lost most of my reply.
E.J.,
Your warnings pushed my mechanic to REALLY check my harness, finding bare wires and cracked insulation throughout. Your tenacity and clarity is really appreciated. You likely not only saved me time and money , but a visit from the Columbus fire dept.
Thanks <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> ::

 

E.J.

I just wanted to add my thanks to you too.

Hank