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.
Too bad Porsche really screwed up on some simple things with these engines let final quality control slip because I consider them to be engineering marvels. We are going to find out just how good the VE with stock cams is and how much power they will hold.
BTW Pete, your 928 is ridiculous! Well played sir.
Carl, do you know what happened in 2009 that changed the failures? I've run a survey here on the failures https://rennlist.com/forums/cayenne-...03-2010-a.html - and so far it seems that no engines newer than early 2009 have been blessed with scoring. There is a similar survey being run in the 958 subforum - and no failures have been reported. There is some indication that late in 2008 or early in 2009 Porsche changed the engine block manufacturer - where formerly there had been two, it was now down to one - and that one used a different polishing technique during final finishing to expose the silicon grains in the bores. Somewhere in that hugely long thread on bore scoring are some details on that - including a note on how rings and piston part numbers were specified by who manufactured the block. Here is a direct link to some of that info: https://rennlist.com/forums/cayenne-...l#post15356866
Note - there is no claim that the survey results are accurate or definitive - they likely reflect some bias that naturally happens in Internet polls - people with problems tend to be noisier than people without problems - so the percentage of failures may well be overstated. That said - the rest of the info collected shouldn't be biased - and may be of some use to someone.
Great questions, Don. You beat me to them. It sounds as though there are multiple causes of failure of the earlier engines, but I would love to know if there is a way to discern which engines numbers to avoid. The mysterious TSB gets us part of the way there for answers, but not all the way. I for one would never purchase a MY2008 CTT.... unfortunately I did and the engine failed!
Hi Tom - I posted a distillation of the results from the survey in the survey thread - but I think it's worth copying that post here:
Just thought I'd distill down some of the results from the bore scoring survey.. and this is the record of reported failures:
I find it interesting that there were only 3 failures reported occurring before 60,000 miles (and out of those, only 1 before 30,000 miles.) The survey results included 168 vehicles - 23 reported failures (13.7%) The failures were almost equally distributed between normally aspirated and turbo engines (putting to bed the theory that turbos were less prone to failure due to the under-piston oil squirters.) The 2004, 2005 and 2008 model years have the highest number of failures (7, 6 and 6 respectively). The 2006 model year seems under-represented with only 1 reported failure (2007 also - but there was no 2007 US model so that could account for the low representation of the 2007 model year.) And it also seems with the 2008 model year as if the turbo engines experienced a MUCH higher failure rate than the normally-aspirated engine.
I have done two 2010 blocks for 957 owners, but that's all. Everything else has been 2002-2008. For us, it did not completely stop in 2009, but it certainly has cut way way back. And because we are not seeing enough of the post-2009 Cayenne's, I have not been able to see what they changed internally.
I have done two 2010 blocks for 957 owners, but that's all. Everything else has been 2002-2008. For us, it did not completely stop in 2009, but it certainly has cut way way back. And because we are not seeing enough of the post-2009 Cayenne's, I have not been able to see what they changed internally.
Carl, do you recall if those 2 2010s were Turbos or non-turbos?
Me starting my 08 GTS in cold weather after reading these threads:
Can you have a plug-in block heater installed? I think they are available at the dealer. Less expensive to install is a "pump heater" or a "heater hose tank heater". They get cut into your heater hose (assuming you have one with a section available to cut into) and they take in about a pint of water, heat it up, and then pump it into the motor...taking in another pint... repeating all night long. They worked well. Your goal is to bring the temp of the block up a couple degrees. It would really help.
Can you have a plug-in block heater installed? I think they are available at the dealer. Less expensive to install is a "pump heater" or a "heater hose tank heater". They get cut into your heater hose (assuming you have one with a section available to cut into) and they take in about a pint of water, heat it up, and then pump it into the motor...taking in another pint... repeating all night long. They worked well. Your goal is to bring the temp of the block up a couple degrees. It would really help.
I’m going to have to look into that. I’m in the suburbs of Chicago, but I do keep it in my garage which stays in the low 40s right now.
Carl, do you recall if those 2 2010s were Turbos or non-turbos?
I looked this up for you and found I made a mistake. We've done only one 2010, not two as I had said before. It was a DI TC car.
I've heard the theory that it doesn't happen to the turbo cars because they used forged pistons where NA cars used cast pistons. Our experience shows it happens less to the TC cars, but then again, there are also fewer TC 957's out there.
I agree with this:
It might even be a combination of both to a certain degree.
I think it might even have a fuel-related component - 10% ethanol vs. no ethanol. I know Porsche explored this idea already too.
Then there is the lubricant angle on this: do some owners use motor oils with high ZDDP content and some do not? Zinc (the Z in ZDDP) is an upper cylinder lubricant.
I agree with this: I think it might even have a fuel-related component - 10% ethanol vs. no ethanol.
Unfortunately where I live, I can't source non-ethanol premium 93 octane. The only grade of non-ethanol blended fuel I can easily get is 90 octane and I was told by a very reputable source that in my forced induction motors I was better off using the higher octane with 10% ethanol than the lower octane non-ethanol fuel to prevent detonation. Would you agree?
I'm not too worried about it in my case though since it's an 09 after the new honing process should have gone into effect (9PA AN1 motor), it's not really cold where I live, and the car stays in a heated garage all the time.
Unfortunately where I live, I can't source non-ethanol premium 93 octane. The only grade of non-ethanol blended fuel I can easily get is 90 octane and I was told by a very reputable source that in my forced induction motors I was better off using the higher octane with 10% ethanol than the lower octane non-ethanol fuel to prevent detonation. Would you agree?
I do agree. If your car calls for 93 octane, that's what you have to feed it. There is only one fuel additive on the market that I am aware of that actually adds the missing hydrocarbons, oxygenates and organometallic compounds to the fuel to give you what we used to be able to buy (and even better). It is available as a concentrate, and we stock it. (shameless advertising link follows) https://928motorsports.com/parts/race_gas.php
If you keep turning up the boost on your 928 you may want to consider this.
01-15-2019, 09:12 PM
you may want to consider this.