rxjohn

What's wrong with apples to oranges tangent. I happen to like both fruits and it does have a lot of correlations yet you don't see it because you're blinded. It's about "providers/professional" being accountable for the product/services to "customers." And if you do write malpractice checks, then you of all people should know better.

Yes, if it's whichever is higher.

Wrong.. not with IMS failure.

Does the headlight design flaw shut down the engine? Who's talking apples and oranges here?

rxjohn

I didn't ask. I was pondering.

rxjohn

Run while you can!

Torontoworker

What if...

anyone who has a trashed motor because of an IMS failure (not of their own doing) gets 25% off a new car?? Drives the sales end of it - moves dealer inventory - retains a customer - repair department get you back after warranty period is over.

Isn't a 'positive' result better for everyone?

Couldn't Porsche sales divison absorb a 25% discount for what we are told is a few cars with IMS issues leading to blow ups?

And of the 'proactive' replacements of the bearings that didn't lead to a motor blow up: why not a 25% discount on the install price? Wouldn't you feel better about the company and the dealer network? Wouldn't you want to continue buying from this company when there are so many other sports car buying options out there. When there was just a few s**ty brit sports cars for sale in the 1960's - 70's market place and Porsche had a lock on the market - they might have got away with a 'blinders on' business approach. But now?

Seems to me they have a lot to learn about being loyal to their customers. In this new economy, will they be shocked if they see the 'old' customer base talk to a new generation base and talk them out of buying?? It could happen.

Whats been the damage to sales from these generally internet based IMS stories and PCA members talking to each other? How many sales were lost? We don't know and we can't know if it is just lost future sales of someone who bought a used 996 model. But...

A 'lost' in the puddle of oil 996 IMS owner many not be a future 997, SUV or Panamerra owner. If they don't care about this market group or the rest of the customer base then Porsche better be prepared to handle the 'churn' rate and of course - the lack of brand loyality.

One way loyality is a bad business model.

Jake Raby

Lets just say I recently received a call from a Government agency that was interesting.

My focus for the first quarter of this year is more IMS awareness tips, completing the IMSR instructional DVD and adding a ton more info to the website about IMS facts and myths.

The IMS design isn't a flawed design as much as the fact the bearing is permanently lubricated and a few other "features".

rb101

Playing devil's advocate, where does the responsibility end for a manufacturer? The 944s had a problem with oil starvation in hard turns and spinning #2 bearing. The air cooled, 911’s broke head bolts and pulled threads from the block. Did Porsche recall or warranty weak head bolts/blocks for cars 6-10 years old? Now broken bolts or a spun bearing in most cases don't CATO engines like the IMS failure does. But these short falls by Porsche has opened up private companies to come up with repairs and upgrades that may have never opened if Porsche warranted all these cars for ever.

Rick
99 996C4
87 944S

rxjohn

Powertrain warranty of 7 years/100,000 miles would be reasonable. We can't dictate Porsche's business practice. But we can compare Porsche to other reputable auto brands and the way they stand behind their product and design.

jakermc

Using your math, the expected value of engine failure is $1K. (10%*$10K). The expected value of the upgrade is a cost of $2K. With regards to your business decsion, doing the upgrade has a 90% probability of being a money loser. What you are really doing is buying insurance with an estimated cost of $1K.

Makes you wonder if buying an extended warranty (i.e. insurance) for $2.5K or so isn't a better option, as then you have insurance on the whole car, not just one part.

rxjohn

Except warranty expires but IMS upgrade shouldn't. Then what are you options once the vehicle no longer is under a warranty.

Charlie C

But if you get just a warranty, it has a time limit, be it for 1, 2, or 3 years, etc.

The upgrade would at least prevent an IMS failure, hopefully for the life of the car.

jakermc

Good points, the decision may depend on how long you intend to own your car.

Personally I never get the extended warranty because like the IMS upgrade, the expected value is negative. As long as the loss isn't catastrophic, I don't feel a need for insurance. Losing my house would be tough to recover from, I need insurance. Losing a car will just make me sad, not set me back. Everyone's risk tolerance is different.

With regards to the life of the IMS bearing, we should acknowledge that we only THINK it will last the life of the car. I'm sure some life cycle testing has been done in the lab, but its not like these have been on the road very long to know for sure. I bet Porsche thought their IMS would last also - oops. That said, I bet the upgrade does last but we won't be able to say the problem is solved until later on down the road.

rxjohn

And if it doesn't, then we'll all get together and go beat up Charles at LN Engineering and Jake down in Georgia.. we know where to find em..

Shark Attack

You cant tell me they do not have somekind of insurance for this. 450 Million to fix the cars. At 1500 a car, Its my opinion this is the risk of doing business.

Has anyone contacted consumer affairs? Has anyone talked to an atty about a class action? I would rather see the government step in with a recall. What are the laws on a recall. How many have to fail? Do people have to actually get hurt? I think consumer affairs is a good avenue to try. But I would take someone who can prove the problem. How could you prove how many are failing? I see published a number of 10% failure rate. I think its BS. I think it is a lot higher and if its not, its going to be.

Rickker

Let me speak from personal experience here. A lot of us have purchased early 996s because of the low price. Many, perhaps most of us can not justify 80k or more for a sports car. But a ten year old 996 for 20K or less is well within reach. These (used) cars are a bargain. Well, at least until the engine blows up. In my case, I bought a high mileage (about 100K) car that looked not too much different than a new one, drove great and all was well until the IMS failure occurred ten months and 6000 miles later.

As to WHY people are buying these cars? They don't know any better. Who would expect a Porsche engine to blow up? Porsches win races all over the world, don't they? Most new buyers are not on Rennlist, or any other forum. I had already purchased my 996 before I learned about RMS and IMS issues. Of course, even after I had learned about it, I never expected the failure to occur to me. After all, the engine had run nicely for 100,000 miles, why should it expire now?

I have owned perhaps 20 or so cars over the last 40 years, including one other Porsche, a 1969 911T. I have driven hundreds of thousands of miles with these cars and NEVER had an engine failure until the 996 expired a year or so ago.

Oh, and let me add, the replacement 2003 X51 engine installation wound up costing almost as much as the current price for an early 996.

Knowing what I know now, would I buy an early 996? No.

....Rickker

rxjohn

I really can't tell you much what Porsche does...