John McM

Was not keen on the ramp. Thank goodness they put us all on the flat.

nzskater

How did you guys go with the ramp on to the ferry at Paihia/Opua? I had to take it at a pretty severe angle and still gouged the front lip. Think the operator took pity as she lowered it quite a bit further on the other side.

John McM

Sunny

John McM

I can see the promised land

John McM

We didn't seem to any problems. Does the tide height make a difference ?

O2GO

Not rough so far :-)

996tnz

I use Continentals for the bigger stuff. Last time I asked them about pinning they pretty much gave me a blank stare but Matt has just had his GT3 pinned there so they should be au-fait with the process now. There was just one fitting on Matt's they couldn't do (believe it needs a right angle drill bit adapter , which we could supply - about NZ$60/70 to land from the US if it can't be found here in NZ).

NZskater - if we can get some friendly pricing, you may want to do it earlier. A quick look on the 997 forums shows that the Turbo, GT2 and all GT3 models also suffer from this. I'd been leaving my fix for a major service too but with 2 fittings blowing in roughly 2 years/20,000 kms, I'm bringing it forward if possible.

Information Porsche provided to a US investigation indicated that 2007 and early 2008 cars are six times more affected due to a process defect so hopefully yours is not of that vintage. Mine is a 2002 and has blown two fittings so I can only imagine how flaky those particular 997s will be. With 996s, here in NZ Matt and John have both had at least one fitting blow. Can't remember if Chris said his 996T has done the same.

Pinning is very expensive if the whole engine gets dropped out but I believe the (semi DIY) procedure Matt provided allows it to be done with the engine just lowered a bit (much easier). Will call Continental and see what ballpark we're talking. I suspect that it will need the exhaust and on Turbos possibly the ICs etc removed still.

While in there it apparently pays to chuck in another $200 or so and get the two big rear coolant hoses replaced as these soften the fastest. Assuming that doesn't need full engine removal...

BTW - thanks for the great pics of the SITT expedition guys.

mjg

I think I've actually got three left (need to double check how many they have pinned), the instructions I supplied were for a 997 GT3 with no engine drop, but having done some more digging it turns out the 996 has two additional fittings (nobody was particular clear until someone posted pictures of all of the manifolds removed from the 996 engine for welding). Hopefully those are easy to get to and it's just the one that requires a slight drop to access. Bit annoyed with myself now, because I'll be up for a second round of labour to remove all the guff off the top of the engine to get access.

I haven't had a fitting blow yet, I'm doing it before any let go as I mostly run the car on the track and having them go mid corner could be extremely bad for me or someone behind me.

John McM

A ***** of a trip. Hardly rocked the whole way over

nzskater

Sound advice. Mine is a MY2007 997 so appreciate the info. I'll also be getting the coolant pipes replaced at the same time, may buy these: http://www.sharkwerks.com/products.php?pid=394

If it's a Porsche acknowledged defect this should be covered by them!!

O2GO

^^^^^ Sound like a good tui ad

Porsche will fix the defect. Yeah right

996tnz

Yes it should be. That US investigation apparently only spoke to 10 or so owners and concluded that it was not a safety related defect. They somehow believed that it usually only happened when parked! Porsche obviously have their audit-fu down pat. And obviously the auditors don't frequent Rennlist. They did reserve the right to reopen the investigation. If Pukekohe racetrack ran counter-clockwise, I suspect it would have been a safety issue for me as the coolant pretty much all gushed out into the right rear wheel well last time. As it was, they cleared the track for a while since it also doesn't do following cars any favours.

Here's a repost from Jumper5836 elsewhere on Rennlist:

more technical explanation in NHTSA's official bulletin

Quote:
Summary:
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.

Here's a saner take on it: http://sharkwerks.com/porsche/techni...urbo-cars.html

996tnz

The most curious aspect of the NHTSA investigation is this:

(Out of 10 cars reported) "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" ... a safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted...

In short, the NHTSA investigators believed Porsche when Porsche said that the problem only applied to cars built in the 2007-early 2008 period that Porsche themselves suggested as being the only one of concern.

The fact that the bulk of related alleged loss of control incidents reported to the NHTSA concerned cars built outside that period didn't seem to wake them up to the likelihood that the problem was much bigger than a temporary 'process control' issue. IMCO it is a design fault, pure and simple, found in all 996/997 Turbos, GT2s and GT3 variants built from 1999 through to 2010. Porsche don't make many of these mistakes, but when they do, they are often pretty epic.

John McM

Obviously not Playday rules. Diving into the corner.

nzskater

Just sent a message to Porsche, out of curiosity more than anything else. Keen to hear what they have to say regarding the acknowledged QC issue. Agree that it is a design flaw.

Great photo John, which one is you and which is Doug?