Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins
I have to tell you guys (after reading this thread and the referenced Planet 9 thread with great interest) that I smell another blown-way-out-of-proportion internet panic. It has all of the ingredients - the accused company in denial it's doing anything wrong, folks "in the know" at that company saying otherwise, reputable mechanics having done a great deal of research, and on and on. Quite the nefarious scheme, replete with all of the intrigue requisite for such.
Bottom line is, the failure rate on newer Porsche engines is so small as to be insignificant (I believe they still lead the J.D. Powers surveys on owner satisfaction, and have for some time). Unless, of course, it is yours and it's out of warranty - then it is very significant to you, the owner, and looking at a $15k bill, we all want to see another answer. Misdeeds at the manufacturer are the best - they may gain you a free repair, if ever proven.
Now if it was yours from new, and you are therefore knowledgeable about its history, care, and upkeep, that's one thing - assuming it's been well treated and cared for. If it's used, even with the ability to kinda sorta evaluate its history both from maintenance records and stored in the car electronic records (over revs, etc.), face it - you still don't know how the thing was really treated. You are buying a performance car that may have been "ridden hard and put away wet" as a matter of course, or you may be buying one that was treated respectfully. You just don't know. A "premature" engine failure on such a car - and I would not categorize one failing with over 100k on the clock as such - has always been kind of the lotto we play when purchasing used toys of this sort.
As far as Porsche "remanufacturing" an engine that failed any part of its testing - why the hell not? I think any manufacturer that does not utilize the good components from their rejected assemblies - motors, trannies, brakes, suspension - whatever - would have to be insane. Would it trouble any of you to know that in large commercial aircraft manufacturing, the re-use of good components from a failed or out of spec assembly is common practice? Come on, think about this for a moment. I suppose this might speak to the less than mechanically inclined, to know that their motor was partially assembled with the good parts of a "bad" motor - they think they are getting a less than top quality unit. Hogwash. These are all zero mile components. "Remanufactured" sounds ominous, like a high mileage rebuilt motor, at least to the folks who don't understand manufacturing.
So, yeah - seems like much ado about nothing to me. Another perfect "conspiracy theory" that those staring a $15k bill in the face really want to believe. Some big evil corporation put their motor together knowing it would fail. Out of warranty, of course - their predictive modeling can nail its service life that closely to where the company knows it is safe... Really? Does anyone really believe all of that? I suppose...
|