Cheap GT3
09-07-2007, 05:51 AM
#33
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just checked my source for the above reference and its gone! On page 2 of this thread were 2 reports on the GT3. The 2nd one from memory made an explicit reference to a 'crease' seen under the car. Notwithstanding a manufacturing defect, it is highly likely this was the result of on impact of some sort.
Not good.
Not good.
09-07-2007, 09:51 AM
#34
Rennlist Member
Just checked my source for the above reference and its gone! On page 2 of this thread were 2 reports on the GT3. The 2nd one from memory made an explicit reference to a 'crease' seen under the car. Notwithstanding a manufacturing defect, it is highly likely this was the result of on impact of some sort.
Not good.
Not good.
09-07-2007, 10:01 AM
#35
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, I was the one who posted then removed. The dealer has requested I remove, until all the facts are laid out on both ends. I am not upset, just bewildered that a dealer would take a car on trade and find these details out and not go back on the previous owner, let alone not fire the mechanic who blessed the car to be taken in on trade. Per the Porsche dealer who did the PPI, its a safe car, great for tracking, but at a substantial lower price. to much risk in not knowing if the motor will last 100k or 10 minutes. could have a wiped bearing from the initial hit.
09-07-2007, 10:05 AM
#36
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to add, there was $7800 damage back in 2003 before the car was sold at the Porsche dealer in Loisianna, from a test drive, the report for details is in a wherehouse per the dealer, but someone had remember that the front spoiler had damage. The damage found this week is not the same, its fresh and obviously paid out of pocket, or would have shown up in Carfax. PO must have traded it in at night right before end of quarter or something to sneek it by.
09-07-2007, 10:16 AM
#37
Guys, I was the one who posted then removed. The dealer has requested I remove, until all the facts are laid out on both ends. I am not upset, just bewildered that a dealer would take a car on trade and find these details out and not go back on the previous owner, let alone not fire the mechanic who blessed the car to be taken in on trade. Per the Porsche dealer who did the PPI, its a safe car, great for tracking, but at a substantial lower price. to much risk in not knowing if the motor will last 100k or 10 minutes. could have a wiped bearing from the initial hit.
09-07-2007, 06:00 PM
#38
Dealer should have disclosed all info that came up. appears they did not. Trade in inspections are totally lax. The unscrupulous can whammy a dealer with a deal like this and Car Fax is never notified. Car sold at 64 and change. Unless this car is whacked again there is a good possibility the new owner will never know of the damage.
Is there a SN registration, history, etc, registry for 996 GT 2 and 3s ?
With so few in number and a good likleyhood of them becoming collectable. One should be formed.
PS; not me, I can barely post without screwing it up.
Is there a SN registration, history, etc, registry for 996 GT 2 and 3s ?
With so few in number and a good likleyhood of them becoming collectable. One should be formed.
PS; not me, I can barely post without screwing it up.
