996tnz

I have zero faith in the NHTSA's handling of this. Porsche managed to massively limit the scope of the investigation, despite most of the complaints to the NHTSA relating to cars that fell outside of the 2007-2008 window that Porsche put forward:

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/feds...-a-recall.html

I'm not sure if it is an age thing, a heat thing, or some combination of both factors but in both my own experience, and that of several other 996T/997T owners in our small club, you cannot keep driving them hard without going home early sooner or later with coolant having gone everywhere. Not like it just seeps out either - it geysers out.

Now, I am a huge fan of the 996T and the Mezger is pretty much bulletproof in most other respects but my first advice to any driver paying a decent amount for trackdays, races or rallies is to get the fittings secured properly ahead of time.

When they pinned my remaining fittings they said that at least one of the others could just be pulled out of the block by hand, so I dodged a fourth bullet at least.

TeCKis300

Let me help you out with some more bolding:

AND does not mean OR

The NHTSA does not exist to protect the interest of consumers. They are a safety oriented organization.

Dock

TeCKis300 -

So you think the NHTSA takes cases where vehicles are mechanically sound in design, manufacture, and function?? What do you think it is that creates the question of a "safety" issue if it is not a problem with the design, manufacture, and operation of one or more systems? I'd offer that you can not have a safety issue unless there is first a design/manufacture/operation problem. The NHTSA must first have a "safety" trigger, and once they do it's their job to ascertain if there is a design/manufacture/operation problem with the vehicle that is causing that safety issue.

Dock

What information do you have that indicates Porsche successfully limited the scope of the NHTSA investigation? From what I've read, Porsche did not restrict which MY cars the NHTSA evaluated.

996tnz

From the NHTSAs press release, as reproduced at http://www.autoblog.com/2014/03/13/n...oolant-leaks/:

"On April 26, 2013, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE13-009 to investigate 10 complaints alleging incidents of sudden coolant loss while traveling on public roadways in certain model year (MY) 2001 through 2007 Porsche 911 vehicles. The complaints alleged that pipe ends joined by epoxy to certain cooling system components may fail suddenly and separate, resulting in large volumes of coolant leakage. The investigation was opened to assess evidence of a design or manufacturing defect in the coolant pipe fittings and any related safety consequences. In response to ODI's Information Request letter, Porsche identified a manufacturing quality issue with the supplier?s application of adhesive to coolant pipe fittings that resulted in elevated failure rates in approximately 6,800 early production 997 generation vehicles (MY 2007 and early MY 2008). ODI's analysis of field data showed that the age-adjusted failure rate for these vehicles was approximately six times greater than MY 2001 through 2005 996 generation vehicles and MY 2008 through 2011 997 generation vehicles built after a process improvement for adhesive application was implemented by the supplier. Most of the leak complaints reviewed by ODI did not appear to involve complete separation of the fittings and many were detected when the vehicle was parked. There were no crashes or injuries reported to be related to the alleged defect in any of the subject vehicles. ODI identified two allegations that coolant leakage resulted in loss of control incidents, but neither involved vehicles affected by the assembly process quality issue. A third loss of control allegation involving a vehicle built during the period affected by the supplier process concern is not counted since ODI was unable to contact the owner to confirm the incident. See the full closing resume in the document file for PE13-009 for additional information about the subject cooling system and ODI's analysis of field data related to the alleged defect. A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted. Accordingly, this investigation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances."

So based on a very small sample size (which would likely be biased towards coolant pipe failures in the newest of the affected cars since owners would be all the more shocked to have it happen in a younger vehicle), NHTSA decides they can believe Porsche's assertion that only MY2007 into early 2008 997 Turbos, GT2s and GT3s were affected by a quality issue, despite the majority of the related complaints relating to vehicles outside that window.

Then they say that they couldn't get hold of the driver with a car from that small window who lost control as a result of a coolant leak so they ignored that event. And that several other loss of control incidents were reported from coolant leaks but they handily fell outside the narrow period they allowed Porsche to define. Come on!!!!

In my even more limited sample size of one 2002 car, I have had 3 coolant fittings blow out suddenly and completely at a rate of one every 10,000 miles, including one on a public freeway (sorry went back through my earlier posts on these incidents and realised that my freeway one was actually the first one, and with the car still at stock power).

The next two happened on track, including one that spewed the coolant sideways where it went under my right rear wheel and could easily have caused a loss of control at speed on track, were I less lucky. Actually, my sample size is a bit bigger than one. I only know of ten people at most in our club with 996 or 997 Mezger engined cars but at least 3 have had at least one coolant fitting blow with a massive and sudden coolant leak.

If NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation hold this up as a shining example of a thorough investigation they deserve to be disbanded and replaced by a more competent investigating authority.

JC Lacayo

So...is the OP going to make the switch or not?
I'm in both Facebook groups (996 t and Golf R), and I can say the Golf group has more mechanical problems than the Porsche's.

I think the adhesive use in the 996t was fine for use for the first few years. With time, any adhesive is going to break down. I imagine Porsche used what it did to save costs(?). Pinning them fixes the problem permanently.

996tnz

More specifically this bit:

"In response to ODI?s Information Request letter, Porsche identified a manufacturing quality issue with the supplier?s application of adhesive to coolant pipe fittings that resulted in elevated failure rates in approximately 6,800 early production 997 generation vehicles (MY 2007 and early MY 2008)."

So Porsche were the ones to suggest that narrow window.

"ODI's analysis of field data showed that the age-adjusted failure rate for these vehicles was approximately six times greater than MY 2001 through 2005 996 generation vehicles and MY 2008 through 2011 997 generation vehicles built after a process improvement for adhesive application was implemented by the supplier."

I suspect that ODI did not take account of the big difference in sales volumes between end of life 996s and the sales swell that came with the 997's release and just went off the raw complaints figures by production year.

Also, the term 'age adjusted failure rate' suggests that they heavily discounted failures in early cars like mine on the assumption that these were somehow a normal thing for old cars. I have driven about 30,000 miles in a 996T and had 3 collant fittings blown out of the block. I have travelled about 300,000 miles in other cars that were mostly older, from Hillman Hunters and Lada Nivas through a range of Jap ones to a '79 928, BMW 540, and a V12 BMW 750iL. No other car has ever blown even one fitting out of the block (though the silly plastic sidetanks of BMW radiators can also fail).

Dock, no-one here is telling you what to believe, but I'd rather forewarn others to have their coolant fittings secured so it can save them a wasted track day down the line if they're lucky, or an early check out if they aren't.

Dock

Automobile manufacturers can not limit what the NHTSA investigates. Porsche freely identified a manufacturing quality issue with the supplier's application of adhesive to coolant pipe fittings that resulted in elevated failure rates in approximately 6,800 early production 997 generation vehicles (MY 2007 and early MY 2008). This information in no way tied the hands of the NTHSA in terms of where they could investigate relative to other model year cars. This is where you are missing the issue.

So that's Porsche's fault? That's an example of Porsche controlling the investigation?

My take was that those events were not ignored by the NHTSA because they didn't fall into your notional narrow MY band, they were ignored because they were failures that occurred at the track. I do not believe the NHTSA investigated any track related failures because tracking the car is outside the designed and warrantied use of the car.

You track your 996 Turbo, right?

IMO, they operated properly in their investigation.

996tnz

Thanks for dragging the discussion back on track. Yes, as I mentioned earlier, the 996T's engine is pretty much bulletproof in all other respects. And with a simple exhaust and flash it still runs with most modern supercars and modified super-sedans. Hypercars are a different story of course but if performance bang for buck is what fries your burger then the 996T is hard to walk past.

I have loved mine since the moment I first sat in her and still detour by windows to check her out.

I have a lot of respect for cars like Nissan's GTR as well so am not blind to the value of other makes but I'm sad to say that I'm not a fan of today's VWs, for reasons that include super intrusive brake assistance and a lack of a drum handbrake. I increasingly fear for Porsche under VW's ownership too and can't believe for instance that a proper lever action handbrake was deleted from the 991.

Dock

I think the majority of parts break down over time. One can decrease the time by the way they drive the car.

996tnz

I didn't say Porsche controlled the investigation, just that they managed to narrow the original scope by suggesting that less than 18 months worth of production was affected. I used to both conduct and receive audits so have some idea of how easily that can happen. The idea of cutting the audit workload by 80% may not have been resisted as strongly as it could have been.

Track failures fall outside their remit and so were not among the reports that originally formed part of their investigation, and so also not among the reports that they subsequently ignored as being outside the window. They ignored failures on road, just from other model years.

Sure do, as do many others in the club. One reason I own a Porsche rather than a Ferrari, since I couldn't afford to track one. That said, typical trackday usage here is just a series of 4 or 5 ten minute sessions, with 45 minutes of cool down in between each one.

Or they would be like that if the coolant fittings didn't start popping in just the first or second session - twice been flatbedded home less than two sessions into the day.

Before the pinning, I only attended one or two track days or sprints a year so wasn't pushing it that hard compared to many others in the club.

I'm happy for our opinions to vary, but if you drive your car at more than 8 tenths for any decent stretch of time I reckon it will eventually give you its own opinion.

996tnz

Absolutely - we're on the same page here.

leftlane

How exactly does your post that states there were 6800 failures in 997s have anything to do with the 996TT? These failures were six times greater than 2001-2005, so it seems like it isn't really an issue on the 996, although you got to experience it 4 times. Neither of my Turbos (01, 04) have had these issues. I also don't track them.

10 complaints from 2001-2007? I have more than 10 complaints on any given day for my BMW.

996tnz

6800 is the number of MY2007 and early MY2008 vehicles imported to the US that were built during the period that Porsche said it had quality problems relating to the fitting of coolant pipes. Problems among the 15000 odd other Mezger engined 996s and 997s imported were put aside and attributed to age related degradation.

The original ten complaints all related to safety ie loss of control or potential loss of control incidents and would be a small fraction of the total number of failures. Dock is right when he says that NHTSA is safety focused, not consumer rights focused. Even so, they received another 50 or so related safety complaints during the investigation.

I would draw your attention to the following statement posted earlier:

"The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances." ( http://www.autoblog.com/2014/03/13/n...oolant-leaks/:)

I'm not telling anyone to live in mortal fear that their Porsche will kill them tomorrow. They're safer than most cars. I'm just trying to save other enthusiastic drivers from repeated trips to the workshop. And to be really honest, I'm also hoping that Porsche were more vigilant on the design and quality front going forwards. On the face of it, the 991 GT3 engine failures would argue against that but at least they handled that process much better.

Dock

That's not how it works. To establish an age-adjusted failure rate you have to know the failure rate of the MY 2001 through 2005 996 generation vehicles and MY 2008 through 2011 997 generation vehicles.

That statement is a standard attorney "cover your a$$" statement. They always want to protect the NTHSA in the event they missed something, and they always want to protect the NHTSA's ability to revisit the issue.

That's good, because if one's 996 Turbo isn't tracked (or hasn't been tracked), it will IMO not have coolant pipe issues.