faterikcartman

Dock, that would be fine if Porsche was just refusing to cover damage at a track event. I'm wondering where they demonstrated that Mike's damage was caused at the track?

Oh yeah, they didn't bother to establish that.

Dock

Does this quote from Mike help you out on this? It's in his original post...

Dock

You're trying to use an unfair competition code to argue warranty coverage??

Good luck.

1AS

We've beaten this up before. Porsche suddenly changed it's policy on track and warranty, and lots of people used to the old philosophy were taken by surprise. Remember, it wasn't that long ago that they invited you to track days they sponsored, with the only requisite that you had a pre-inspection at the dealership. They even paid top-notch race drivers to demonstrate your car to you, and compete against you in your own car (timed laps).
The PCCB fiasco seemed to trigger the change, since the part advertised as designed for racing, would not stand up to track days. Owners had to eat nearly 10K in replacement discs.
I do think that Dock is upholding Porsche's standard a little too vigorously. The sales guys in the dealership talk up track experiences, and do not give you the warranty booklet with the disclaimer until the deal closes. You have to learn that on your own, often too late.
I think if someone sells you a knife which they demonstrate on TV as really cutting thru a thick steak, it's a little disingenuous to then include a small piece of paper that says 'don't cut steak or our written warranty is voided".
Still, reality caused me to stop tracking my X50 until the warranty lapses. It's hard to justify giving up the value of the warranty. (But I have other track-dedicated cars, so no real problem for mois).
Given the nature of the problem, they could have just voided the warranty on the 6-speed and PCCB cars, and allowed tips with steel brakes to track at liberty. That was a weak attempt at humor, before anybody responds.AS

BC

This is interesting:

User Id: Dock
Biography:
Life is short - Play hard - this I believe is an advertisement for Porsche in some Magazines.
Location:
Atlanta, Georgia - This Ladies and Gentleman is where Porsche Cars North America is based:

Local results for porsche cars north america near Atlanta, GA
Porsche Cars of North America - 11 miles SW - 4091 Southmeadow Pkwy W, Atlanta, 30349 - (404) 344-0351
Porsche Cars North America Inc - 12 miles N - 980 Hammond Dr NE, Atlanta, 30328 - (770) 290-3500
Porsche Cars of North America - 10 miles S - 1777 Phoenix Pkwy, Atlanta, 30349 - (770) 907-1025

As it is properly written and quoted:
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks,"

A Porsche transmission in the 1995 928GTS is quite the stout box. An original Power level of 345hp and similar torque is increased in Mark Anderson's race car to 500lbft, with Sticky Race tires and constant mashing of gears in weekend race duty - actual timed competition.

While gears have disintegrated during "landings" after airborn wheel-offs, the basic structure and design of the box has held up against this "abuse"
Synchros stay crisp, as long as tempatures are controlled.

Truly, Porsche is no longer making automobiles for the true enthusiast, outside, possibly, the GT3. This is very dissapointing to a Porschephile, indeed, since birth.

Dock

Why do you think that is interesting?

(BTW, the "Life is Short - Play Hard" slogan is from Reebok.)

faterikcartman

Any credibility you had went out with this. Does that mean if he tracked the car at 35 mph it caused the damage? NO!

They don't care what caused the damage nor do they care if their defect caused the damage.

I brought that up because in an earlier thread you said they made a decision to not cover damage caused on a track. I essentially said BS because they never even tried to establish how the damage was caused or whether it was it was from tracking the car. They just used that as an excuse to dodge responsibility.

I think several of the posters here are right that if you want a high performance P car buy it just before the warranty runs out. Get the kinks out before warranty is done, but don't go enjoying it to the fullest until the warranty expires.

Buying new looks like an option for those who enjoy throwing money away or are too old to push the car or don't mind taking the risks which will get your license revoked.

And no Dock, you misunderstand my reference regarding the Unfair Competition Law. I wouldn't be using the law to enforce warranty coverage, I would be using the law to stop Porsche from misleading customers in their advertising, sales pitches, and contracts, which damages customers directly when their warranty claims are not honoured.

faterikcartman

Because I asked if you do or have worked for Porsche.

Well?

Dock

I believe you asked the question concerning dealer knowledge. I just told you how they knew about the track usage. What does my credibility have to do with those facts?

That code applies to business practices as they relate to fair practices concerning other businesses, not to how it relates to the customer(s).

Dock

You guys crack me up.

I'm an agent with the CIA...

faterikcartman

Now you are both [someone who doesn't tell the truth] and flat wrong.

First, you lied when you said the first quoted statement above. Here is what I said which you were responding to and in fact you quoted me:

"Dock, that would be fine if Porsche was just refusing to cover damage at a track event. I'm wondering where they demonstrated that Mike's damage was caused at the track?"

That statement asks where they proved the damage was caused at the track. The fact that he was at the track does nothing to prove the car was damaged at the track.

Regarding California's Business and Prof. Code Section 17200 et seq. and your statement that it doesn't have anything to do with how business behavior relates to customers could not be more wrong.

I am a class action attorney in California and it is regularly applied to improper business practices that harm consumers. If you are ignorant on a subject, as you are here, you should consider keeping your mouth shut rather than proving what others may suspect. The choice remains, however, your own.

If you are truly a CIA agent, your inability to accurately follow the discussion here may help explain how certain gigantic errors have been made by the "intelligence" community in recent years.

God save the Republic!

RXDOC

Both dealers! That has been my personal experience, Dock. Now I know about your love for dealerships (Hennessey). But I think they both suck!

Dock

The admission that the car was tracked is all they need.

I don't doubt that the code is applied in cases where one business' advertisement unfairly/wrongly represents their product/service *against* another business. But to say that Porsche dealers having pictures of their cars "racing" and/or on the "track" is an unfair practice *against* other businesses, and that the customer is harmed by this, specifically not buying another product because of the pictures and some kind of implied warranty the pictures represent, is a huge stretch.

RXDOC

Faterik... you are new to this forum.
Dock thinks that the manual is THE TEN COMMANDMENTS as handed down by the Almighty (PCNA) and the dealeships are the Holey Land where one goes to worship.
Don't even try to argue!

Dock

I just represent another data point in the customer satisfaction category...I've *never* had problem one with either dealer.