Oil scavenging pump failure
04-15-2009, 10:16 PM
#31
Instructor
Thread Starter
Well... I spent the better part of one hour at the dealer talking with the head mechanic and the service manager.
We went through the engine with a fine tooth comb. We took apart the oil scavenging pump on the spot to look for debris of any kind. The rotor was wedged in pretty tightly, but we got it out. Two rotor lobes had 1/8-inch divots in them at their center - this is where the rotor wedged up against the outer ring. The outer ring was cracked in two places (about a 1/2-inch apart) where it protruded from the case. Look as we did, we could not find any debris of any kind in the scavenging pump. There were no other wear marks or damage seen elsewhere on the rotor lobes or ring. This seems to imply that the ring failed catastrophically and immediately and then jammed the rotor.
Trust me, I was looking hard for debris and a cause for the failure. The build date for this car is late 2004, so the pumps were an earlier design. Later scavenging pumps apparently are larger, I was told. At this point, rather than cry "BS", I'm leaning toward an exogenous event where the ring failed with a stress fracture. Porsche must have revised these pumps and made them larger for a reason. Being buried in the engine and maybe a lower probability failure, the actuaries over at Porsche probably decided that a TSB on the scavenging pump didn't make financial sense. I'm conjecturing, of course.
We checked the ECU logs. Only the usual type 1 and 2 over revs (limiter). No mechanical over revs like you might find with a missed downshift.
We looked carefully at all the oil passages - no debris to speak of.
Timing chain sustained some damage in the process, and the variocam gear had a chip.
One of the timing chain guides (plastic) was cracked.
No valve-piston contact.
When the vehicle was driven after the pump failure, the car could be driven (rough) but would not idle.
There's the question of what failed first - variocam? timing chain? pump?
But as much as I was hoping to find a "smoking gun" or signs of a "cover up", I didn't sense any of that during the hour-long discussion.
What I did learn is that the 2-year warranty after $10.5k of repairs ONLY covers the parts replaced. This means that the other side of the engine could fail and I would be on the hook for another $10k of repairs or more if the valves/pistons were damaged. I realized that I would be much better served by a crate engine. The entire engine would be covered for 2 years, and I would have the latest part revisions with the larger scavenging pumps and the updated IMS, among others. My 997 build is late 2004, so it has *early* revisions of everything.
There is a 2005 997 customer at this dealer who has over 200k miles on his car (he's a realtor). So these engines aren't necessarily doomed (it just feels that way right now!).
Let's hope the crate engine doesn't cost a fortune, and I'm not expecting any "love" from PCNA on this, although a parts discount on a crate engine would help.
I'll post more when I know more (probably tomorrow)....
We went through the engine with a fine tooth comb. We took apart the oil scavenging pump on the spot to look for debris of any kind. The rotor was wedged in pretty tightly, but we got it out. Two rotor lobes had 1/8-inch divots in them at their center - this is where the rotor wedged up against the outer ring. The outer ring was cracked in two places (about a 1/2-inch apart) where it protruded from the case. Look as we did, we could not find any debris of any kind in the scavenging pump. There were no other wear marks or damage seen elsewhere on the rotor lobes or ring. This seems to imply that the ring failed catastrophically and immediately and then jammed the rotor.
Trust me, I was looking hard for debris and a cause for the failure. The build date for this car is late 2004, so the pumps were an earlier design. Later scavenging pumps apparently are larger, I was told. At this point, rather than cry "BS", I'm leaning toward an exogenous event where the ring failed with a stress fracture. Porsche must have revised these pumps and made them larger for a reason. Being buried in the engine and maybe a lower probability failure, the actuaries over at Porsche probably decided that a TSB on the scavenging pump didn't make financial sense. I'm conjecturing, of course.
We checked the ECU logs. Only the usual type 1 and 2 over revs (limiter). No mechanical over revs like you might find with a missed downshift.
We looked carefully at all the oil passages - no debris to speak of.
Timing chain sustained some damage in the process, and the variocam gear had a chip.
One of the timing chain guides (plastic) was cracked.
No valve-piston contact.
When the vehicle was driven after the pump failure, the car could be driven (rough) but would not idle.
There's the question of what failed first - variocam? timing chain? pump?
But as much as I was hoping to find a "smoking gun" or signs of a "cover up", I didn't sense any of that during the hour-long discussion.
What I did learn is that the 2-year warranty after $10.5k of repairs ONLY covers the parts replaced. This means that the other side of the engine could fail and I would be on the hook for another $10k of repairs or more if the valves/pistons were damaged. I realized that I would be much better served by a crate engine. The entire engine would be covered for 2 years, and I would have the latest part revisions with the larger scavenging pumps and the updated IMS, among others. My 997 build is late 2004, so it has *early* revisions of everything.
There is a 2005 997 customer at this dealer who has over 200k miles on his car (he's a realtor). So these engines aren't necessarily doomed (it just feels that way right now!).
Let's hope the crate engine doesn't cost a fortune, and I'm not expecting any "love" from PCNA on this, although a parts discount on a crate engine would help.
I'll post more when I know more (probably tomorrow)....
04-15-2009, 11:23 PM
#32
Burning Brakes
Too bazaar... The pump is well lubed and if it had any issues it should have failed long ago.
Did you get any more pics? Can you send me these parts? I'd like to get every broken piece, even the cam cover...
Did you get any more pics? Can you send me these parts? I'd like to get every broken piece, even the cam cover...
04-16-2009, 10:26 AM
#34
Rennlist Member
Hi Useridchallenged,
I have been reading through the threads regarding your engine failure and I must say that I am very disappointed with the position Porsche are choosing to take for the moment. Regretfully, it seems to be indicative of the narrow mindedness of the big boys these days.
Whilst it is openly recognised that you are out of warranty, when somebody looks logically at the situation, frankly your car has suffered a major mechanical failure that is less than acceptable for any carmaker let alone a prestige car maker like Porsche. It is obvious that failures of this nature are not common place, nor acceptable for an $80k car and furthermore it happened in their own hands so there can be no concerns about abuse by you. If ever there was a perfect occasion for repairing a customer's car as a good will gesture, this would be it!
A few people have brought up the economic times as an excuse for Porsche not paying but the reality is:
- This is an opportunity for Porsche to differentiate themselves from the rest by saying we listen and give a crap for the little guy who has had a run of hard luck- a $10k repair can be a fantastic PR spin for them under the circumstances whereas if you end up paying, it makes them no better than GM and Ford, and we know where they are going... just look at the negativity being generated on this forum from your situation.
- we live in the digital age, 10 years ago if they had screwed you by not paying- only you, your family and friends would know... in today's age, with the internet and forums, EVERYBODY knows how they treat their customers and many more people will develop a negative view of them.
- didn't they make $15-20 billion screwing brokers last year! $10k or even $15k (for a crate motor) would be spare change for them and would put them a cut above the rest. The public confidence from their good will gesture to you would pay itself many times over through added sales because the rest of us would think " these f#kers stand by their product so I will continue to buy it". If you choose to never buy a Porsche as a result of this incident, they are already behind, let alone if it turns other purchasers off also through the perception of their product and customer service no better than that of GM or FORD.
I am just months away from purchasing my first Porsche and whilst it is accepted that cars fail, stories of narrow mindedness and arogance by companies like this makes me think, "why should I pay your gastly price if you won't even stand by your own product!"
Maybe someone should give PCNA a link to these threads so they can see first hand what their tightassed ways are doing for business amongst their most loyal customers!!!
Hope they come around and do right by you!!
Best of luck, Chris...
(Sorry for rambling on, I'm just annoyed for you, for the way you're being treated... )
I have been reading through the threads regarding your engine failure and I must say that I am very disappointed with the position Porsche are choosing to take for the moment. Regretfully, it seems to be indicative of the narrow mindedness of the big boys these days.
Whilst it is openly recognised that you are out of warranty, when somebody looks logically at the situation, frankly your car has suffered a major mechanical failure that is less than acceptable for any carmaker let alone a prestige car maker like Porsche. It is obvious that failures of this nature are not common place, nor acceptable for an $80k car and furthermore it happened in their own hands so there can be no concerns about abuse by you. If ever there was a perfect occasion for repairing a customer's car as a good will gesture, this would be it!
A few people have brought up the economic times as an excuse for Porsche not paying but the reality is:
- This is an opportunity for Porsche to differentiate themselves from the rest by saying we listen and give a crap for the little guy who has had a run of hard luck- a $10k repair can be a fantastic PR spin for them under the circumstances whereas if you end up paying, it makes them no better than GM and Ford, and we know where they are going... just look at the negativity being generated on this forum from your situation.
- we live in the digital age, 10 years ago if they had screwed you by not paying- only you, your family and friends would know... in today's age, with the internet and forums, EVERYBODY knows how they treat their customers and many more people will develop a negative view of them.
- didn't they make $15-20 billion screwing brokers last year! $10k or even $15k (for a crate motor) would be spare change for them and would put them a cut above the rest. The public confidence from their good will gesture to you would pay itself many times over through added sales because the rest of us would think " these f#kers stand by their product so I will continue to buy it". If you choose to never buy a Porsche as a result of this incident, they are already behind, let alone if it turns other purchasers off also through the perception of their product and customer service no better than that of GM or FORD.
I am just months away from purchasing my first Porsche and whilst it is accepted that cars fail, stories of narrow mindedness and arogance by companies like this makes me think, "why should I pay your gastly price if you won't even stand by your own product!"
Maybe someone should give PCNA a link to these threads so they can see first hand what their tightassed ways are doing for business amongst their most loyal customers!!!
Hope they come around and do right by you!!
Best of luck, Chris...
(Sorry for rambling on, I'm just annoyed for you, for the way you're being treated... )
04-16-2009, 11:49 AM
#35
I agree 911rox with your sentiments!
Back in 1986, when a new car warranty on my Honda was 12 mos or 12K miles, I had a motor blow after 10 mos, but with 73K on the clock. Way out of warranty, I didn't complain, I just told the dealer to fix it and send me the bill, I'm a big boy who can and does read the fine print, Honda oweed me nothing legally. Next day I get a call at my ofc it is Honda Motors of America in Torrance and they say that they heard of my misfortune and that even though it was well past warranty, they would pay the entire cost of repair and replacement! What more can you say about a company that really stands behind its products like that? Needless to say I have told this story several hundred times and hopefully Honda has earned more business because of this attitude.
In most areas of business "high-end" clients get extra special consideration but in cars it seems like the standard of customer care is minimal no matter what price point you are talking about.
Back in 1986, when a new car warranty on my Honda was 12 mos or 12K miles, I had a motor blow after 10 mos, but with 73K on the clock. Way out of warranty, I didn't complain, I just told the dealer to fix it and send me the bill, I'm a big boy who can and does read the fine print, Honda oweed me nothing legally. Next day I get a call at my ofc it is Honda Motors of America in Torrance and they say that they heard of my misfortune and that even though it was well past warranty, they would pay the entire cost of repair and replacement! What more can you say about a company that really stands behind its products like that? Needless to say I have told this story several hundred times and hopefully Honda has earned more business because of this attitude.
In most areas of business "high-end" clients get extra special consideration but in cars it seems like the standard of customer care is minimal no matter what price point you are talking about.
04-16-2009, 01:22 PM
#36
Burning Brakes
A few years ago I had a customer who purchased a turn key Aircooled Porsche engine from me.. He took longer than expected to finish the car (6 years) and when he installed the engine it immediately failed. When he called me he never asked for any assistance repairing the engine, but I remembered he had been a great Customer and atb the time his engine was in the top 5% of what I had created.
That engine NEVER had a warranty on it since it left my door, due to how insanely tuned that it was and he never demanded that I do anything about the issue and he didn't get obnoxious, demanding or otherwise nasty.
He paid to have the engine shipped back to my facility, I did a full tear down, repaired the issue and shipped it back in about a month... I picked up the return shipping and sent the engine back to him with a paid in full invoice.
Since then he has bought two more engines and has referred dozens of people to me for my services for both aircooled and watercooled Porsche engines. What I did was done because he was a great customer, had an awesome car and when the issue occurred with the engine he was respectful and fair. The repair wasn't that difficult and was the fault of a stainless steel braided hose that was installed without being cleaned thoroughly enough before install. Whos fault it was was unclear since I had installed braided hoses on the engine and so had he. (a chunk of the braid was embedded in the #1 main bearing and seized the engine)
The bottom line is if you take care of people when they have problems the effort that you expend to do so will usually be returned to you 5X over. No piece of paper will keep an engine from failing.
That engine NEVER had a warranty on it since it left my door, due to how insanely tuned that it was and he never demanded that I do anything about the issue and he didn't get obnoxious, demanding or otherwise nasty.
He paid to have the engine shipped back to my facility, I did a full tear down, repaired the issue and shipped it back in about a month... I picked up the return shipping and sent the engine back to him with a paid in full invoice.
Since then he has bought two more engines and has referred dozens of people to me for my services for both aircooled and watercooled Porsche engines. What I did was done because he was a great customer, had an awesome car and when the issue occurred with the engine he was respectful and fair. The repair wasn't that difficult and was the fault of a stainless steel braided hose that was installed without being cleaned thoroughly enough before install. Whos fault it was was unclear since I had installed braided hoses on the engine and so had he. (a chunk of the braid was embedded in the #1 main bearing and seized the engine)
The bottom line is if you take care of people when they have problems the effort that you expend to do so will usually be returned to you 5X over. No piece of paper will keep an engine from failing.
04-16-2009, 01:51 PM
#38
Instructor
Thread Starter
when somebody looks logically at the situation, frankly your car has suffered a major mechanical failure that is less than acceptable for any carmaker let alone a prestige car maker like Porsche. It is obvious that failures of this nature are not common place, nor acceptable for an $80k car
And as you point out, who is going to take the chance that the 997-2 isn't going to have similar flaws when the carmaker won't stand behind those that take the risk to buy that first year of a new model.
Using the economy as an (overused) analogy, Porsche is looking more like a bank stock these days. Once banks were thought of as "safe" investments, while under the hood the banks were taking greater and greater risks for profits. As the news gets out that Porsche is putting their self-interest ahead of the customer's best interest, formerly loyal Porsche customers may start leaving the ranks.
As much as consumer groups repeatedly say "don't buy the first year of any new car", car makers need consumers to buy those new cars or the car maker fails. In thanks to the consumers for supporting the car makers' new models, the car makers should support those consumers for taking a chance on their new product - even when their product fails out of warranty. And especially when it is a luxury product.
What Porsche may be counting upon is the fact that many Porsche owners don't put a lot of miles on their cars. I've heard the number 6000 miles per year bandied about as the average mileage on a Carrera. So if the life of a part is predicted to be around 60,000 miles, this might be an acceptable risk to Porsche as the car will be long out of warranty and the owner will have had 10 years of joy from the car.
But Porsche should also escrow some repair funds for the small percentage of owners who use their Carrera as a daily driver and have catastrophic failures when the car is barely 4 years old (my car was 4 years, 3 months, 17 days when the engine blew). Escrowing such funds is common and considered best practice in manufacturing.
Frankly, I'm almost wondering if PAG (who should be escrowing funds) is jerking around PCNA.
Perhaps over time more 986/987/996/997 motors are failing than Porsche anticipated, and PAG ran out of allocations for repairs. Maybe the motor failure problem is bigger than we realize.
I don't know about the "screwing brokers" bit, but I remember reading the WSJ article (it was a financial news front pager if I recall) and I think that windfall was a legitimate combination of planning, some luck, and some strange set of rules and clauses. Nonetheless, I believe Porsche is the wealthiest and most profitable of the world's car makers. Let's hope not the stingiest, too.
Okay - I'll stop with the op-ed and get back to facts:
I learn how much that crate motor is going to cost today.
I'm also supposed to hear from PCNA tomorrow or Monday about my case.
04-16-2009, 02:14 PM
#39
Three Wheelin'
UserID:
Under the circumstances you lay out I would not be comfortable paying for the repair. I think if you let all involved know this in a convincing fashion they will take care of you.
Under the circumstances you lay out I would not be comfortable paying for the repair. I think if you let all involved know this in a convincing fashion they will take care of you.
04-16-2009, 03:21 PM
#40
I have to commend the rational approach you are taking to this. I would certainly make your displeasure about the situation known. If you can't get anywhere with the dealer or over the phone with PCNA. You can always send a letter to someone high up in PCNA regarding the situation. Ultimately, they can take a "so sue us" attitude to this if they want, but they risk alienating a customer, and they should care about that.
04-16-2009, 04:11 PM
#41
Race Director
Actually I think many of the engine problems arise from too little use not too ...
At least for me, this is the crux of the matter - a badly designed or manufactured part in an expensive high performance car that when it fails causes catastrophic 5-figure damage. Who wants to buy that car? It's like driving a financial time bomb.
And as you point out, who is going to take the chance that the 997-2 isn't going to have similar flaws when the carmaker won't stand behind those that take the risk to buy that first year of a new model.
What Porsche may be counting upon is the fact that many Porsche owners don't put a lot of miles on their cars. I've heard the number 6000 miles per year bandied about as the average mileage on a Carrera. So if the life of a part is predicted to be around 60,000 miles, this might be an acceptable risk to Porsche as the car will be long out of warranty and the owner will have had 10 years of joy from the car.
<snip>
Okay - I'll stop with the op-ed and get back to facts:
I learn how much that crate motor is going to cost today.
I'm also supposed to hear from PCNA tomorrow or Monday about my case.
And as you point out, who is going to take the chance that the 997-2 isn't going to have similar flaws when the carmaker won't stand behind those that take the risk to buy that first year of a new model.
What Porsche may be counting upon is the fact that many Porsche owners don't put a lot of miles on their cars. I've heard the number 6000 miles per year bandied about as the average mileage on a Carrera. So if the life of a part is predicted to be around 60,000 miles, this might be an acceptable risk to Porsche as the car will be long out of warranty and the owner will have had 10 years of joy from the car.
<snip>
Okay - I'll stop with the op-ed and get back to facts:
I learn how much that crate motor is going to cost today.
I'm also supposed to hear from PCNA tomorrow or Monday about my case.
Tech just back from engine training (new engine) tells me in Europe peoply buy Porsches to drive then and in USA people buy Porsches to store them.
Low miles, infrequent use coupled with the insane belief that this means the oil can sit in the engine for a year, maybe longer without changing is sheer madness.
Not saying you're at fault but I do say that if these cars were driven more and serviced more frequently there would be fewer troubles.
Now a writer for a BMW magazine has let BMW have it for its "global war on maintenance" as he puts it and I think's on to something. BMW (all car makers) have been stretching service interval out ever longer and doing away with initial/early services. (Just did an oil/filter service on my 08 Cayman S at *750* miles and you would not believe the amount of metal in the oil poured from the filter body. I can't imagine running a fine mechanical device on such oil even 750 miles let alone 7500, 10,000, 12,000, 15,000, or evne longer. Sheer madness.)
Also, the newer BMW engines are noisy.
BMW says they're noisy cause USA usage is different enough that the engines do not see enough and frequent use and lifters bleed down from this and it takes driving of a spirited kind to pump these up again. In the meantime, they make noise.
BMW says these engines are designed for European type usage. This may be a cop out -- I could hear BMW telling its European customers their problems are becuase the engines are designed for the USA market...--- and this BMW mag. writer lets BMW have it for this too saying the cars ought to be designed for the market into which they're sold.
I agree, to a point. However, the requirements for an engine to deliver thousands of hours of trouble free running vs. the requirements for an engine to deliver thousands of hours of running, infrequently, and under severe operating conditions: lots of idling, short trips, low RPMs, crappy gas, way way too much time between oil/filter services; are quite different.
What I'm getting at is I think Porsche is faced with the same conundrum as BMW.
And believe it or not I have a tiny bit of sympathy for Porsche and BMW in this regard. Not much mind you and I have more than a little bit of sympathy for anyone who's experienced serious engine troubles, failures, in or out of warranty.
Sincerely,
Macster.
04-16-2009, 04:17 PM
#42
Nordschleife Master
I agree that the OP is showing amazing restraint. The culprit here, AFAIC is the dealer. When this saga runs its course I urge the OP to post the dealer's name so we all know.
Here are the facts:
(i) the OP takes a running trouble free car to a dealer for regular maintenance.
(ii) the dealer returns the car to the OP with a broken engine.
(iii) the dealer sends a $10k+ bill to the OP to repair the engine, negates any responsibility and refuses to intercede near PCNA for a fully justified goodwill engine replacement.
The bottom line is the dealer is at fault here on several counts. A totally unacceptable situation.
I think that the OP should weigh all his available means to make the dealer pay. And I would not accept a partial engine repair. I would insist on a new engine or a total engine rebuild.
Note: I am traveling this week but specifically made time to check this outrageous situation and support the OP.
Here are the facts:
(i) the OP takes a running trouble free car to a dealer for regular maintenance.
(ii) the dealer returns the car to the OP with a broken engine.
(iii) the dealer sends a $10k+ bill to the OP to repair the engine, negates any responsibility and refuses to intercede near PCNA for a fully justified goodwill engine replacement.
The bottom line is the dealer is at fault here on several counts. A totally unacceptable situation.
I think that the OP should weigh all his available means to make the dealer pay. And I would not accept a partial engine repair. I would insist on a new engine or a total engine rebuild.
Note: I am traveling this week but specifically made time to check this outrageous situation and support the OP.
04-16-2009, 04:59 PM
#43
Drifting
I'll jump in on the other side and say, based on what has been presented as facts, the dealer is not responsible for the damage the engine suffered because they did not do any work on that part, or operated the car in a manner that would cause that part to fail. The failure was a highly improbably materials failure. The kind of thing a manufacturers warranty is designed to protect against. Blaming the dealer is like blaming passengers on a crashed airplane because they were riding in it at the time it crashed.
The warranty was expired. Its not fine print... its the big top-level words of the warranty, whose terms have been exceeded. Non one is screwing anyone by following the contractual agreement. They may be missing out on an opportunity for using good will to make right a situation that should not occur. These types of failures, if it is a material failure, should occur in the warranty period. Seems this one got away.
What I might expect is for PAG, PCNA and dealer to deliver the engine to the customer at cost, or maybe have some small amount of support by PAG, but in the end, its a really bad luck situation and whether its a 2k car or a 200k car, it can happen.
The warranty was expired. Its not fine print... its the big top-level words of the warranty, whose terms have been exceeded. Non one is screwing anyone by following the contractual agreement. They may be missing out on an opportunity for using good will to make right a situation that should not occur. These types of failures, if it is a material failure, should occur in the warranty period. Seems this one got away.
What I might expect is for PAG, PCNA and dealer to deliver the engine to the customer at cost, or maybe have some small amount of support by PAG, but in the end, its a really bad luck situation and whether its a 2k car or a 200k car, it can happen.
04-16-2009, 05:18 PM
#44
Yeah, I hear you Minok, but the timing is a pretty damn big coincidence. My layperson's understanding is that debris from elsewhere can cause the problem with scavenger pump, so it wouldn't necessarily matter if they didn't work on the part. The claim would probably have nothing to do with the warranty, which, as you say, has expired.
Apart from potential legal avenues OP can talk over with a lawyer, though, this is a customer satisfaction issue for Porsche. Do you really want to be a high-end car company that leaves its customers holding the bag for $10k repairs on 4 year old, properly maintained cars? But the problem for PCNA is setting a precedent of helping with these types of high cost repairs, if they are expecting a whole lot of other engine failures. Of course, if you have to do this a lot, you may well have a quality issue with your product.
Apart from potential legal avenues OP can talk over with a lawyer, though, this is a customer satisfaction issue for Porsche. Do you really want to be a high-end car company that leaves its customers holding the bag for $10k repairs on 4 year old, properly maintained cars? But the problem for PCNA is setting a precedent of helping with these types of high cost repairs, if they are expecting a whole lot of other engine failures. Of course, if you have to do this a lot, you may well have a quality issue with your product.
04-16-2009, 05:22 PM
#45
Instructor
Thread Starter
My car was driven over 16,000 miles per year on average (nearly 26,000 km per year) - almost 70,000 miles on the odometer at this point. I'd be curious to know how many miles per year the typical European driver puts on their Porsche.
Porsche warrants their cars for 50k miles and 48 months. This implies that Porsche expects and designs their vehicles to be driven for 12,500 miles per year.
In any case, I don't think that driving this car more would have made a difference.