Lizard1

just to clarify one point so you guys can get back to arguing on the true topic:
I know Dock and can attest to the fact that he has absolutely ZERO ties to PCNA or to anything porsche besides the car he drives. I believe he is just stating facts and at times just playing the devil's advocate.

Now you can try to infer that Dock and I are the same since we both drive polar silver TT's and from Atlanta but we are not.

Now, to get back to the topic...If true track driving voids the warranty, then how can PCNA sell their PDE cars with not only a full warranty, but often include the CPO warranty as well? These cars show up often at dealers in their used car inventories. They usually have about 6-8K miles, lapis blue with black interior with sport seats and aerokit. They will not advertise that these cars are previous PDE cars but will tell you if you ask. I almost bought one from Brandywine a couple of years back.

faterikcartman

Thanks Rob.

When I bought my Porsche I was told about the great "bumper to bumper" warranty. When I researched Porsche's at their website it allowed me to compare models with charts labeled "accelleration", "price", AND "top track speed."

What conclusions should I have drawn? I never heard anything about warranty exclusions until I read this thread.

RXDOC

[QUOTE=Lizard1]just to clarify one point so you guys can get back to arguing on the true topic:
I know Dock and can attest to the fact that he has absolutely ZERO ties to PCNA or to anything porsche besides the car he drives. I believe he is just stating facts and at times just playing the devil's advocate.

Now you can try to infer that Dock and I are the same since we both drive polar silver TT's and from Atlanta but we are not.


It's sad but true. Dock doesn't work for PCNA. But they should hire him! He would make the perfect spokesman for the denied warranty dept.!!!!!!!!
Now, Frank, I know you work for PCNA.
I saw your new ride on Clifton Rd. in front of Egleston last Thurs. around noon. I was driving a big Black Navigator, I bet you wondered why I was honking my horn (those damn SUV drivers).

mike_la_jolla

My guess is that the percentage is single digits: 5% or lower. But the 'trackers' are people like me who are most enthusiastic.

I would add that Porsche just didn't refuse to repair the defective transmission. The Porsche rep, Ian Richie, made sure he personally insulted me also.

Loosely quoting:

"The 911 Turbo is not a race car. It can take track events, but only if the driver knows what they are doing"

Translation: “You don’t know how to drive and don’t deserve to own an X50. The 911 Turbo X50 is not robust enough to handle a few hours of moderate track use unless you are an expert.”

What happened to this company? When did Porsche become so hostile to those of us who like to drive? Is this recent? What are they thinking? When did the standards go down so low?

This is mind-blowing, depressing, and unfathomable.

1AS

I had read that Chevrolet stands behind the ZO6, regardless of track use. In fact a friend who destroyed a brake disc at Gingerman got warranty replacement for what would normally be considered a wear item.
I think we are crying over spilt milk. The past is definitely over. Porsches are now touring cars. The sport part will need to come from something else.
Interestingly, my Elise 190R came with no warranty. Didn't bother me a bit. Of course, since the seller was LotusNA, the car would have had to go back to Atlanta. Fortunately, 2000 track miles resulted only in the need for pads and a replacement wire to the alternator. Now, it would be out of warranty anyway.
No real reason to buy a GT3 now. The CGT seems a bit of a handful, so maybe the Cayenne is the Porsche of the future. I wonder if there will be a track package for a turbo Solstice? AS

Bob Rouleau

Alex, Ferrari warrants cars used on the track. That said I have tracked every Porsche I have owned and other than the pccb I have had no failures. No tranny issues with my GT2 in 12000 track miles.

1AS

Hi Bob,
That's why I think it was the PCCB's that put the nail in the coffin. My cars have done well at the track, except for the tire issue that was caused by my ignorance when I went out for the first 5 laps on recommended pressures. I think that the few hundred sets of PCCB's on GT2's spooked them, when the considered they might have to spend about $2,000,000 to replace them all, if the owners went to the track. With the GT2, I think the liklihood of tracking was far higher. But, it is difficult to think of a warranty clause valid for only one part on one model.
So Bob, I'm thinking this is all your fault.... AS

Dock

From what the Vette guys tell me, GM does not cover cars (Vettes in this case) under warranty if they have been tracked. I believe GM uses the word "racing" in it's warranty explanation of exclusions.

Looks like another windfall for California lawyers, because GM includes in the new owner's package a DVD of the Vette "racing" at the track - this is an open and shut case according to the California code...right?

Dock

Porsche does not prohibit owners from tracking their cars.

Before buying your insurance policy did you check with your insurance provider to see if any of your cars are covered during track events? My insurance will not cover any track activity, including DE's.

Since tracking can be *very* hard on the car, and the repair costs can be very large (and occur very often if an owner tracks his car regularly), I don't blame Porsche at all for having a tracking exclusion in their warranty. Why should they foot the bill for some guys hobby? They didn't sell him a race car.

Salespunk

Actually it is explictly stated in the Z06 manual that they will cover the vehicle under track conditions.

Does this conversation make anyone else want to buy a Z06? It makes me feel like I should spend my money with a company that understands it's market and stands behind their product. I just have an internal bias against the typical Vette image.

Bob Rouleau

Dock,don't play with words. The poster should state that the warranty is invalid if the car is tracked. Use the actual wording in fact.

How do you know that tracking is so hard on the cars? I am the chief instructor of a very active region. We see 150 cars tracked every event. Failures? What failures? Yes there is the odd boosted 944 turbo that blows a gasket but the 911s are very reliable. My 1995 993 is still going strong with over 50,000 miles and over 150 track days.

faterikcartman

What a joker. No case is open and shut. This sort of hyperbole is the best you can come up with after talking like you understood California's UCL?

Misleading advertising is illegal in California. Dock, are you suggesting that statement is wrong?

1AS

And for the third time, how is this congruent with the warranty on used Porsche Driving Experience track cars. That seems like a whole bucket of wrong. It's at best hypocritical and at worst a scam to get abused cars into the hands of unsuspecting paying customers. You would think those cars would be sold with a clear statement "No warranty-used at racetrack".
If they can be warrantied, how is that different?
Still, we are blowing smoke since nothing is going to change. AS

Dock

I don't consider Porsche dealers having posters of their racing cars on the walls misleading in terms of what their warranty coverage is on the street cars they sell.

lexpro

The Porsche warranty is available on the web: http://www.porsche.com/filestore.asp...letype=default
Note page 9 of the warranty, specifically excluding component or part failures during Porsche sponsored track events. Federal law requires that a warrantor who offers a written warranty must provide a copy of that warranty to the buyer before the purchase. Here is a link to the Federal Trade Commission's "businessperson's guide" to the Magnuson Moss Consumer Product Warranty Act: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/...#Magnuson-Moss. I would be surprised if Porsche dealers refused to provide a copy of the warranty in compliance with the law.
I understand that Porsche has changed its view of warranty service for failures arising in track events. Obviously, that is a business decision they made for whatever their reasons were. Just as obviously, as consumers, we can complain about that and ultimately not buy their product if we don't like it. The law provides car buyers the ability to do due diligence before making the purchase. Due diligence is the buyer's obligation. Many products are advertised glorifying their successes under other-than-consumer circumstances, and those circumstances are commonly excluded from warranty coverage. Given that fact and the fact that the warranty is available pre-purchase, notwithstanding faterikcartman's insistance to the contrary, I would be surprised if a court would find a violation of the California statute cited by him based on Porsche advertising. If he's right, I'm sure he would be happy to take a class action contingency case to its ultimate success on behalf of Porsche owners who have been damaged by Porsche's actions.