Mech33

I'd be interested in crunching the numbers on the impact of stiffer springs at stock ride height in terms of available suspension travel before internal shock bottom out or spring bind. Would be spring implementation dependent...

Buteo

One documented for sure.

stout

I can document two GT4s in the Bay Area.

Other 981/991s have been photographed with the same failure.

Bardman

Then forgive me for saying this, but does this thread need to be a sticky? By being sticky, it kind of implies some form of systemic problem exists, but that data doesn't really support it.

I dont mean to diminish this threads importance to some members of the community, but it doesnt seem to be of community wide importance.

sunnyr

Good to know. Thanks. Quick question if you don't mind answering - did you have stock wheel/tires when it happened to you?

Joe Weinstein

Yes.

Yargk

Glad you asked. If there are even just 2 cars with busted struts in the bay area, that's not completely insignificant because there are probably only 200 GT4s in the bay area (more than 50, less than 300, probably). Who knows how many are actually putting on miles? If it was a 1% failure rate per year ownership, I think I'd be hard pressed to find another car that has the same failure rate that necessitates 25k in repairs. (not saying it is that rate, but at this point I don't think we know for sure, and even a 1% rate for tracked cars would be enough to pay attention to)

Why did most members of this forum (though not all) buy a GT4? To drive it! I'd say we went in for the brakes that don't need upgrading, a little built in aero, some of the suspension adjustability required for track, and no extra cooling needed. We don't like to break on track and we'd like the factory to take care of a good bit of the prep. If it was truly a 1% failure rate per year of ownership, among cars putting on more than 5k miles a year, with a failure meaning $25k, I bet a large portion of GT4 owners would be interested in strengthening to prevent the hassle, if strengthening was available, once the warranty is out. All the CS racecars have strengthening on the strut. So yes, it's affected only a small minority of owners so far, but also yes, I think the information applies to a significant portion of owners. (if ride height is the deciding factor, all owners need to know not to lower too far, for instance)

TonySCV

Agreed... 2 incidents (or even possibly double that) is not statistically significant given the total # of cars produced. Barely a blip on the radar. When the incident becomes statistically significant, then make it a sticky.

mooty

i been driving porsche for 30 years
gt4 owners are funny bunch
now arguing in what needs to be a sticky????

Bardman

All the stickys fill up my phone screen causing me to scroll more...

jk - if every little one off issue becomes a sticky it not only defeats the purpose of having stickys, it also starts to undermine people's confidence in the car (as evidenced in the reliable track car thread). We could make Rev matching breaking a sticky, we could make exhaust melting bumper a sticky, we could make wrong fuel tank a sticky. I could go on.

This issue seems isolated and in my view doesn't warrant being highlighted as a general problem with the car, which it's current sticky status implies.

stout

Agree with your logic on one hand, as too many stickies can get annoying—though at six, we are still far from that stage imho.

On the other hand, who says "stickle-worthiness" is defined by number of instances? In this case, severity of failure is a valid reason, as is the unprecedented nature of the failure (body structure failures with wheel and suspension damage that you have to really look for), the safety factor, and extraordinary repair cost. FWIW, I believe it is worth monitoring this subject closely. This is neither a "one-off" nor a "little" matter. But back to your (good) point: Maybe deleting one of two transmission failure stickies might be a better first step in thinning the herd? One could argue the "What did you do to your GT4 today?" sticky should be self-sustaining or rightfully fall off the front page. Fwiw, I always skip it—but I suspect others may not agree.

Finally, while I'm generally egalitarian—I grew up next to Bezerkeley, after all—if you're gonna make member service requests of RL, I'm hereby respectfully poking you to become a member.

okie981

This resonates with my thinking. I think I'd vote to remove the non-database gearbox failure thread and leave the database thread.

Bardman

I'm not passionate about the unsticky, so if others are keen for it to stay then fair enough.

Good point. Given there is so little technical distinction between users and members (in terms of what you can do), I had actually forgotten that the concept of a member existed and that I was not one. I'll have a think about becoming a member.

okie981

Update: Plan D and E have failed, I'm unable to obtain a new strut tower part.

Here's the deal. Porsche will only release the part to a Porsche aluminum-certified body repair shop. I have tried 3 Porsche dealership parts departments, 1 of which has a Porsche aluminum-certified body shop. All 3 of the parts departments thought it would be no problem to get the part for me, but when they attempted to push the order through, it was never filled by their parts distribution warehouse(s). Each time they eventually got the word back the part can only be released to a Porsche certified body shop. I also tried an online parts house that supplies a lot of OEM Porsche parts, and they had the same result (that was my Plan A). I also contacted a family owned body shop I've done business with for 20 years, and they've been in business for 45 years. They do repairs on every make of car, and have done so for decades. They tried to get the part but got the same response. My contact there was quite frustrated by this, and I think I picked a scab off of some old scars. He then referred me to the last of three Porsche dealers I tried to obtain the part from directly (Plan E), and that also failed. After I got back to my body shop contact to let him know it didn't work out at the dealership he referred me to, he emailed me a blast of frustration at the "restricted" nature imposed on some parts by European car companies:

This “restricted” BS should be and probably is against federal trade laws, the European car companies started all of this same crap back in the early 80’s and the government shut them down. Their ploy is to be able to keep control of all the money that is spent on a car from cradle to grave. They do this in the name of “safety” and they act like they know more than anyone else but they create more unsafe cars and car related failures than the collision industry could ever create. They can’t even engineer a car correctly but they want to be in control of the repair process and that just doesn’t seem to me to be any of their business. But again it’s all about the money.

So I think my only option at this point is obtaining a salvage part. I'll make those attempts but I think it'll be a much slower process as it takes more of my time to seek out salvage sources due to the amount of emails and phone calls required, as compared to just ordering a part number for a new part.

neanicu

Thanks for your efforts okie981,they are truly appreciated