othomasjr

Porsche sucks. I wish the factory would burn to the ground

Irksome

...

htny

honestly, I don't know if this guy gets a hit on the motor, but I would sign onto a class for the coolant expansion tank in a minute.

I'm under CPO and it isn't covered? OK, tough luck for me, no big deal.

Oh, but the kid at the service desk remarks, "I can't believe these aren't covered, I've had like 10 guys in here this week with cracked tanks, and when I called the rep, and told him, 'hey this isn't a consumable, why isn't this covered?' all I got was dead silence."

That is a design flaw that should and could be covered, really annoys me due to how common it is. And he's right, it's not a consumable, it Shouldn't wear. It's a flawed design that results in failure of the part and potentially catastrophic subsequent damage to the motor. I want my MTV

Carrera Mike

Thats the problem in buying a used Porsche or any other car. You dont know if the previous owner abusively red lined the engine or worse down shifted in a wrong gear(money shift)[I know they could read this from the car's computer... stage II red line??) or repeatedly dropped the clutch in show off lauches that very possibly cause these problems.

JBRipps

I'm an attorney as well. There will be a settlement (if PNA is smart), it's that simple. The fact that the case got some publicity is key here....without the public scrutiny, the case could indeed have taken the back seat. This is NOT a bad faith cause of action and has some merit. If I had their stock, would I dump it? No.

J

911TTCAB

This is a well documented problem with 1999 engines. I first heard about this in the book "The Used 911 Story" by Peter Zimmermann

Many engines had to be replaced due to a casting porosity problem which would cause cylinders to fill with coolant and actually put the engines into hydraulic lock. When Porsche identified this problem, they sent replacement engines verse just replacement parts.

I am not sure why Porsche won't settle but the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.

cdodkin

Yes, many times

In fact - I've seen PCNA provide a replacement engine to an out of warranty car, with salvage title!

He still got a Free Of Charge motor, when he pointed out his depth of knowledge on the 'issues' inherent in the M96... And an NDA to sign as well.


Of course all this must be pure hearsay, as I'm told by reliable fellows on this forum that the problems don't exist, and it's all just hype.

phaphaphooey

Good for him

munro86

From the report cited:" a latent(hidden) manufacturer's design defect".

Mmmm, I wonder what Messrs Dell and Well'Mardac would say?
Predictably-"bs,naive,worthless substance,crap,buy another one or sell it if your so worried,your(fill in your nationality here)what have they ever done?,your a troll,get a life,etc etc.

This shouldn't happen(oil getting into coolant,cylinders cracking/slipping) not only on low mileage motors-any Porsche motor!

That's right just give the poor fellow a new motor to shut him up.

Sorry people- I'm just a stupid Aussie- I've got no idea what I'm talking about.

Marc Gelefsky

Or you could just bait them and turn this thread into the pure unadulterated crap that the last one was....

ejdoherty911

If you can sue a company for purchasing their product (hot coffee), then pour it all over yourself causing a mild burn, and win tens of thousands of dollars. Based on that, I'd say he's got a shot.

If a buglar can break into your home, injure themselves, sue you and win. Again, he's got a shot.

blk on blk

I am not fan of abusive law suits, but the listing of the coffee suit as a bastion of lawsuit abuse is ridiculous. Read the case on that one sometime, and you likely will not mention that again. FYI- the lady sued for medical expenses because she had 3rd degree burns on her hoohaw from the coffee. Again all she asked for was medical. McD's had already been warned numerous times by restaurant inspectors that their coffee was too hot and burned peoples skin, mouths, etc. They were doing it on purpose in order to keep the coffee out longer and not have to replace it as often. They were issued directives to reduce the temp of the coffee. The JURY awarded the lady more cash because they were trying to teach McD's a lesson about their business practices, and health of their customers. The lady won because she had a legit case, and McD's was grossly negligent. Again we are not talking about 95 degree coffee here we are talking intentionally hot enough to blister skin. You cannot do that.

salayc

Actually for the most part you do. A PST will read overrevs.

Palting

Yup, that's the American justice system for you. Keep suing and you may hit the jackpot. Even if you don't think you have a case, sue anyway. And you'll find some ambulance chaser to do it for you. It'll cost at least $60K to defend a case, even a nonsense one. So, settle it off the bat. I'm not making any statements whether this particular case is nonsense or not, but $60K will pay for a new motor, plus put money in the ambulance chaser's pocket.

Yoops Racing

Well I hope he does get somewhere with this lawsuit. It can only benefit every 1999 996 owner like myself, that wonders what day and time my original stock 30k mile motor will detonate....
Heck even my dealer admits the 1999 996 motor is flawed.....hmmm

Sue the hell out em.....