Autoweek Words on IMS

[BYprodriver]

Autoweek is a "breaking news" focused publication, formerly weekly, now bi-monthly? I believe. Dutch Mandel's column is limited to a single page like most of the editors in Autoweek. The column was about Porsche's acknowledging the IMSB issue is a problem. Endorsing a aftermarket product without some form of proof would be like publishing a test drive evaluation without actually driving the vehicle.
Dutch includes his E-mail address at the end of every column.


Autoweek's reporting of this issue did not do us, the present owners, any good. For very obvious reasons of heightening the drama they chose not to tell the readers of this piece that there have been fixes for this issue since 2010. Read the comments and you'll dozens of people saying "oh I will never buy a used Porsche now". Either Mandel is very very sloppy in doing his research or Autoweek deliberately presented this as a "no remedies that will cost Porsche and owners untold fortunes". If it was meant to inform, particularly those time-out of the settlement, then he at the very least could have provided links for LNE, Pelican or other experts who can carry out preventative maintenance on the issue or that you can instal a simple dash-mounted device to alert you a impending failure -- a simple mod that could have saved the owner a total loss on the car's purchase price.. This is type of IMS reporting we can all do without: Partial facts and no shortage of dramatics and colorful language.[/QUOTE]

[Perfectlap]

Fine, make no mention of LNE or Pelican. But at least inform the reader that a simple Google search or poke in any Porsche forum for the letters IMS will reveal that the specific owner he profiled had options available to him. Options that would have saved his car had he taken the time to stay informed rather than waiting around for Porsche to provide him with that info. It seems that the years of ad nauseum forum threads and magazine articles on this one issue still weren't enough?

But adding this one line about proven options to address this issue would have taken much of the reader outrage right out of his article. That was an accidental ommission? I dont think so....It's very aparent that in trying to rile up the crowd against Porsche on this issue he chose to keep the crowd deliberately underinformed on what's been going on in the aftermarket for over three years now. He chose only the certain facts that inflame rather than the basic facts that best inform. He should be working in partisan cable news instead.