* Engine warranty void if used in DEs - WTF? *

[Craig 930 RS]

Been hearing of a few engine rebuilds that carry a warranty that is void if used at a track - even in DEs.

I can see some basic reasons why this would be, but...

FWIW, Chris' German auto in Bellevue WA (did the work on my 911 3.6 Varioram conversion and is considered one of the best @ engines; does not have this restriction)

Care to weigh in on this -- and have you heard of this often - ?

[bigrubberjeep]

Try http://www.supertecperformance.com/

Very well known for his "racing" engines and warranty

[Craig 930 RS]

One well known Pelican is waiting for the warranty to expire on his innovative 3.4 build so he can head to the track agin. What a load.

[Jim Sims]

Infinite accelerations lead to infinite loads (over-rev due to missed shift is a good enough approximation); one doesn't stay in business long if you grant warranties related to any aspect of infinity. Jim

[Craig 930 RS]

Then no warranty ought to be issued for any motor vehicle?

[Vipergrün]

So, if I go canyon carving with a bunch of Pelicanheads and blow my motor, that 'may' be covered under warranty, but driving on the track is not? If I am gonna drive my car hard, I am going to do it regardless of 'where' I am driving. To me, that equates to frequent visits to redline, braking hard, and getting back on it. Please do not start a irresponsible street driving thread

[Jim Sims]

Vehicles warranties are usually granted with conditions and are typically of finite duration and cycles (miles). Racing (and DE is a subset of racing in the view of a bean counter) takes the operation out of the conditions under which the warranty was calculated and costed. If one expects a warranty for racing conditions then you'll have to expect to pay a lot more for the car. Production Porsches are not race cars. If you want to play you have to pay. Cheers, Jim

[MotoSook]

Plug.....

[Kraftwerk]

Isn't the Autobon considered a kind of huge racing track?

[Formerly Steve Wilkinson]

I suspect that what may have contributed to some of this thread is the recent news that several Japanese manufacturers of cars promoted as performance cars--Subaru and Mitsu mock-rally cars--were revealed to have limitations in their warranties if used in autocrosses, and that the companies involved were actively searching various websites--which they deny--to find customers listed as autocross entrants and then cancelling their warranties. It's a mini-controversy going on right now in the trade, but I have never heard of anything of the sort involving Porsches, at least not from PCNA.

Stephan

[Neilk]

I don't really have a problem with a manufacturer not warrantying a blown engine when you are continuously bouncing off the rev limiter or shifting into the wrong gear. However, I think it's wrong for them to deny a warranty claim if certain design flaws cause parts to break when properly used on a track.

[Craig 930 RS]

Let's get back to the topic - a private shop not allowing track/DE usage
after an engine rebuild. What a load of hooey - and unusual, no?

[siverson]

> So, if I go canyon carving with a bunch of Pelicanheads and blow my motor, that 'may' be covered under warranty, but driving on the track is not?

There is a huge difference in load between 20 minute track sessions and canyon carving.

-Steve

[Vipergrün]

Steve, I don't think the differences are that large as I am talking about the extremes of the motor, ie, high revs, hotter temps, etc. The point I am trying to make is that 'abuse' can take place on the street as well as the track, so I do not understand why the track is the delimiting factor. More appropriate language of the warranty may be "beyond normal wear and tear" or something similar. I don't think many folks have an RS spec motor built to piddle around at 3K RMP's while getting groceries.

[Carrera3.5L]

Originally posted by Craig911
Let's get back to the topic - a private shop not allowing track/DE usage
after an engine rebuild. What a load of hooey - and unusual, no?

Craig,

I don't think it's unusual at all. Many shops here in SoCal will not warranty a motor destined for some sort of track use, and I personally would not expect them to.

A guy misses a shift and destroys the engine and the shop is somehow at fault? Please. How about a turbo application where the guy decides to turn up the boost just a bit more than prudent and melts his pistons. Is that the shop's fault as well? This applies to street or track use for that matter, although I think the percentages will be higher on a racetrack than on the street of something going severly wrong.

If the customer makes a mistake, than I think it is totally wrong to go back to the shop and try and pin it on them.

Hey, if you guys can get an engine builder to provide a warranty even for track use, more power to you. I think it's crazy for the engine builder though and that may eventually come back to haunt them. It gives the customer free reign to go out and screw up with no repercussions. 40 hours is alot of time to swallow for a small shop.

If my 3.5L twin-plug breaks, I'll have no one to blame but myself.

Ralph

[rdane]

I think we are talking about my engine

Here is my thought on it. I bought the majority of the major parts (Mahle, Pauter, ect from Pelican and EBS) and spec'ed the engine. The engine went together with no expense spared. Better than the original from what I know. But my budget also limited my shops profit. I figured they were getting enough just by the small parts and labor. Buying that way also allowed me to spread out the costs a bit. Shop has always been willing to work with me that way. It is the reason I ended up having them do the build instead of others.

That and the fact that several reputable builders refused the work as spec'ed. Hey it was Helmet Bott's specs, not mine. But no question the engine would get ran hard when done, no secret there.

The original warrenty discussion was when the engine was half way done and there was to be no warrenty offered. (my mistake I should have ironed that out beforehand) That I found unacceptable so both the shop (a well known race shop maintaining many, million dollar cars) and myself attempted to find a compromise.

Porsche no longer warrenties their new cars for track or DE use. Which my shop used as justification as well as not buying the parts themselves. Although they would have used the same parts as did I.

I didn't build a race engine (no ultra high compression, no wild cam or induction). Which we were both well aware of. I expected a warrenty. The final agreement was no track time and a 12 month or 12,000 miles whichever comes first. My parts would not be warrentied either way. Fair enough. I am attempting to make the milage and time frame both come in at the same time.

No question my car isn't getting used as hard on the street, as it would at the track, as Craig knows well.

I figure this engine should easily be good for 150K miles. So 12K miles isn't a big deal to me. At 12K miles I figure the engine should just begin to be broken in. Besides I am saving a lot of coin this summer on brake pads, Mobile 1 and new tires.

But then I sure won't have to tolerate a oil leak in those 12K miles either

So I am happy with what I got for a warrenty and more importantly I am more than happy with the engine. I'd have them build another engine for me. I would just get everything in writing up front, that would save us both some stress I suspect. Good communication can be priceless on both sides.

[Jack Olsen]

Originally posted by Formerly Steve Wilkinson
I suspect that what may have contributed to some of this thread is the recent news that several Japanese manufacturers of cars promoted as performance cars--Subaru and Mitsu mock-rally cars--were revealed to have limitations in their warranties if used in autocrosses, and that the companies involved were actively searching various websites--which they deny--to find customers listed as autocross entrants and then cancelling their warranties. It's a mini-controversy going on right now in the trade, but I have never heard of anything of the sort involving Porsches, at least not from PCNA.

Stephan

Sorry to contribute to further fracturing of the thread, but...

Stephan, it's happened:

Autoweek, July 5th, page 6:

"When it hits the track, all bets are off." said Bob Carlson, Porsche Cars North America spokesman (re: warranty coverage and track/autocross use).

[88 Club Sport]

Seems similar to the many threads about street insurance covering a physical damage loss at the track.

The way I see it, I do not expect a shop to cover a motor loss at the track and no insurance company should cover the physical damage of the car. Our motors are exposed to much more stress at the track and our cars are at significantly higher risk of physical damage. We can call it "drivers ed" but we all know, that those of us that are pushing the limits of our skills, risk the chance of a miss shift or worse, a smack into the wall. Many of the best drivers on this forum have done it.