When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yeah, I agree that it is a long shot, one pattern in my case is the error always pops up when the car start, but never comes up in the middle of driving / if the car has already started - I imagine if it's connection not tight it would tend to come up during driving from vibrations disturbing the connections.
But I will try to see if I can give the connections a checkup...
That's interesting that it only happens on start. From the testing I've done when you start the car it will immediately apply pressure to push into 1st gear only. The TCM seems to look at all the distance sensor output and just see if they are plausible numbers overall but not specifically for the selections. It only seems to look at specifics of the distances when you first put into gear and after this when driving.
One other question. After you get the failure, have you tried shutting down the engine, turning the key back on but not starting, connecting PIWIS, cleared the errors and then started again if the errors don't appear? You can't clear codes with the engine running for the TCU and DME. But if you clear the TCU codes prior to engine start it should think everything is OK. The previously stored numbers from the cal should work fine.
That's interesting that it only happens on start. From the testing I've done when you start the car it will immediately apply pressure to push into 1st gear only. The TCM seems to look at all the distance sensor output and just see if they are plausible numbers overall but not specifically for the selections. It only seems to look at specifics of the distances when you first put into gear and after this when driving.
One other question. After you get the failure, have you tried shutting down the engine, turning the key back on but not starting, connecting PIWIS, cleared the errors and then started again if the errors don't appear? You can't clear codes with the engine running for the TCU and DME. But if you clear the TCU codes prior to engine start it should think everything is OK. The previously stored numbers from the cal should work fine.
@jjrichar i have seen different combinations of behavior, such as:
1. after it threw the errors, no attempt to clear the error, but start/shut down car multiple times, or shift into/out of gears multiple times, occasionally it would get into reverse.
2. after it threw the errors, clear the error, but as soon as i try to put it into reverse the error comes back
3. after it threw the errors, clear the error, the error doesn't come back when i try to reverse but it just wouldn't get into gear.
Once the errors were thrown, the only thing that can put it back to a somewhat stable/useable state is to clear the error and recalibrate it... then it would work for a period of time until it throws the errors again.
Pressure regulator 7's current seems odd which I noted upthread. That being said, I have no idea what #7 does or how it's used in a Panamera PDK. I'd look for more info on that prior to blaming the problems on it. It could be there for an option (like a locking differential) that your car doesn't have. If that's the case then it would make sense that it's reading is zero.
Sorry I can't be more help but the Panamera PDK is a much different beast than that used on the sports cars. I don't have much info specific to it.
I will look into the pressure regulator and see. It just seems odd that is oscillates between 0 and 1 Amp.
The other thing I'm wondering is do you know how the car calculates vehicle speed? Because a reading of over 600 km/hr seems insane.
@jjrichar as far as codes I'm now having trouble with the p1872 again due to failing calibration. Other codes are gone so it seems that the p1872 precedes the rest and won't let them throw for some reason. Other strange thing is after a failed calibration it throws the communication codes with TCU but those will clear. The p1872 is the only one that persists.
At this point I'm thinking the calibration must be failing due to a bad part given that the TCU is programming correctly. I got some pressure sensors to put in and a distance sensor. Will try to calibrate after and keep you updated.
jjrichar
Just saw your latest installment of the YT video called, “Porsche ZF PDK prototype distance sensor 1 testing”
Simply outstanding backyard and garage empirical testing. Without the program code of the vehicle’s controller logic it takes empirical testing into failure to understand the operating parameters and what are acceptable tolerances. Brilliant!
Your Better Half didn’t appreciate the dent in the shed or the smell of burnt plastic in the kitchen, but just wait till she sees what happened to her favorite table cloth! ~12gauge
@jjrichar i have seen different combinations of behavior, such as:
1. after it threw the errors, no attempt to clear the error, but start/shut down car multiple times, or shift into/out of gears multiple times, occasionally it would get into reverse.
2. after it threw the errors, clear the error, but as soon as i try to put it into reverse the error comes back
3. after it threw the errors, clear the error, the error doesn't come back when i try to reverse but it just wouldn't get into gear.
Once the errors were thrown, the only thing that can put it back to a somewhat stable/useable state is to clear the error and recalibrate it... then it would work for a period of time until it throws the errors again.
I saw some of these when testing of our sensor, such as distance sensor 4 giving a distance that was too far, it not going into reverse, but not giving an error. It was really weird.
Whilst my knowledge and experience on all of this is low, it all seems to point to the distance sensor failing.
These are the exact replacement parts for my 2012 Cayman R [987.2] PDK gearcase rear end seal components. I've included the list prices (USD) as shown on my invoice from my local dealership as of JAN 2023:
9P1-301-125 END CAP - $25.68
9P1-301-615 SEAL RING - $11.28
9G2-302-377-00 SEALING RING - $11.86
9G2-321-361-00 CLOSURE CAP - $7.01
Note the CLOSURE CAP for the bottom shaft bearing bore has a 13mm deep sidewall whereby the upper END CAP has a 9mm deep sidewall.
I'm figuring this causes the bottom seal to stand further away from the slotted bearing retainer nut threaded onto that shaft, for clearance. Part illustration for 987.2 PDK rear gearcase seal components
jjrichar
Just saw your latest installment of the YT video called, “Porsche ZF PDK prototype distance sensor 1 testing”
Simply outstanding backyard and garage empirical testing. Without the program code of the vehicle’s controller logic it takes empirical testing into failure to understand the operating parameters and what are acceptable tolerances. Brilliant!
Your Better Half didn’t appreciate the dent in the shed or the smell of burnt plastic in the kitchen, but just wait till she sees what happened to her favorite table cloth! ~12gauge
They've killed Neko!
Originally Posted by 12gauge
These are the exact replacement parts for my 2012 Cayman R [987.2] PDK gearcase rear end seal components. I've included the list prices (USD) as shown on my invoice from my local dealership as of JAN 2023:
These are the exact replacement parts for my 2012 Cayman R [987.2] PDK gearcase rear end seal components. I've included the list prices (USD) as shown on my invoice from my local dealership as of JAN 2023:
9P1-301-125 END CAP - $25.68
9P1-301-615 SEAL RING - $11.28
9G2-302-377-00 SEALING RING - $11.86
9G2-321-361-00 CLOSURE CAP - $7.01
Note the CLOSURE CAP for the bottom shaft bearing bore has a 13mm deep sidewall whereby the upper END CAP has a 9mm deep sidewall.
I'm figuring this causes the bottom seal to stand further away from the slotted bearing retainer nut threaded onto that shaft, for clearance. Part illustration for 987.2 PDK rear gearcase seal components
Does 997.2's PDK have the same part number for these?
PDK speed sensors are finally available!
A big THANKS to @t-design for bringing to market a component that we're seeing failures on more and more. Beck's European will no longer be replacing distance sensors without also including the speed sensor in the repair.
Heathkit speed sensor must surely be on the horizon!
When I look at a 2012 911 (997.2) parts catalog I see an illustration of the PDK transmission and it only calls out a scant few items, one of which is the replacement transmission. However they do show two (2) ends caps and they share the same part number: 9G1-321-360-00 which has been changed to 9P1301125. They don’t show anything more than that. The illustration is displayed on the page 1/77 of this thread by PV997. He also calls out the end seals and a link to them. But after over a thousand entries it’s easily lost!
PDK speed sensors are finally available!
A big THANKS to @t-design for bringing to market a component that we're seeing failures on more and more. Beck's European will no longer be replacing distance sensors without also including the speed sensor in the repair.
Heathkit speed sensor must surely be on the horizon!
@notfastenough - Have a feel for the speed sensor failure rate compared to the distance sensor? Surely they fail occasionally, but we have not talked about them much. Is this a significant problem?
Not sure I understand the requirement to replace both other than "while were in there", sort of like the throw-out bearing when doing a clutch. A throw-out bearing is cheap though when compared to a clutch job's cost. Hopefully the speed sensor price is a comparable expense.
The Heathkit distance sensor is progressing nicely, we learned a lot from the first prototype and prototype #2 is being assembled now. Should have new in-vehicle test data in two weeks. If folks are interested check out the video from @jjrichar documenting the the first prototype testing. In particular check out at 22:45 where he takes a cricket bat to the damn thing (shock test). He's no Mickey Mantle, but not bad.
Here's the latest housing design using our CNC machining CAD model. These are printed in GF nylon as a test article, the actual housings will be 6061 aluminum. Factory units are in the background.
@PV997, We've replaced 4 speed sensors in the last 6 months. Unfortunately having to provide tested used ones as a replacement part was less than ideal but until now we had no choice. (Glad we stocked up on core PDK boxes though!) It's happening often enough that prudence dictates that we replace them along with the distance sensor. As a shop that includes a generous warranty and a reputation to uphold, we have much more on the line if there's a failure down the road; any failure. The first clue for a bad speed sensor is a high temperature code.
@PV997, We've replaced 4 speed sensors in the last 6 months. Unfortunately having to provide tested used ones as a replacement part was less than ideal but until now we had no choice. (Glad we stocked up on core PDK boxes though!) It's happening often enough that prudence dictates that we replace them along with the distance sensor. As a shop that includes a generous warranty and a reputation to uphold, we have much more on the line if there's a failure down the road; any failure. The first clue for a bad speed sensor is a high temperature code.
If I can ask a few questions.
How many of those 4 also had a distance sensor failure?
Were they on any specific models (with/without oil cooler) or across different platforms?
How much does the addition of the speed sensor add to the cost of the repair? The only additional labour would be the soldering of the three wires for this sensor, so it's nearly all going to be the cost of the speed sensor itself I would assume. Correct?
Why would you need to offer a warranty on a completely separate item? If I have a sensor replaced on the engine, it's not like the entire engine is under warranty afterwards, or is this a requirement in the US (or your state). Certainly where I am if there is a sensor replaced then only the work done is under warranty afterwards.
If I can ask a few questions.
How many of those 4 also had a distance sensor failure?
Were they on any specific models (with/without oil cooler) or across different platforms?
How much does the addition of the speed sensor add to the cost of the repair? The only additional labour would be the soldering of the three wires for this sensor, so it's nearly all going to be the cost of the speed sensor itself I would assume. Correct?
Why would you need to offer a warranty on a completely separate item? If I have a sensor replaced on the engine, it's not like the entire engine is under warranty afterwards, or is this a requirement in the US (or your state). Certainly where I am if there is a sensor replaced then only the work done is under warranty afterwards.
Striking spectrum; completely different models.
I believe two had distance sensor codes as well. Obviously we replaced distance sensors “while we were there” on the other two.
You’re correct. Only additional charge is for the part.
Are we compelled to offer a warranty on “the entire job” rather than just the components that we replace? Only by conscience. We learned decades ago that people tend to get a bit frustrated and angry if a future failure could have been prevented had we offered wise counsel and required preventive service options during the process.
We also learned that if the customer declines said options and a failure occurs that they often justify throwing a tantrum and possibly giving a bad review even though they were sternly warned, and even signed a disclaimer. We refuse to put ourselves in that position. It’s simply not good business. Great questions.
01-24-2023, 03:14 PM
