Another RMS

[MikenOH]

I'm no mechanical engineer but looking at how Porsche has picked at the edges of this problem for the better part of 7-8 years, if it was an easy fix, they'd have done it by now.

--If it was an installation problem, you retrain hans & franz or replace them, but we continue to have leaks; the installation tool has changed also,BTW.


-- If it was a seal material/ design problem you make the necessary changes and you're done; Porsche has been through several design changes IIRC and we still have leaks

--Epoxied bolts have been tried to increase rigidity of the cradle structure, yet we continue to have new cars with leaks.

As i see it, they've done all that they can do, short of a major design change on the engine to either eliminate or reduce the incidence of RMS. On the 987 they reduced the crank weight a bit at the unsupported end to help lessen the "forces"? working on the seal. But in one of the publications testing the new 987S last year, the car was leaking with less than 5K miles on it.

I would think major design changes to this engine to fix the problem would cost a lot in engineering and probably tooling. it's probably less expensive to deal with the individual leaks as they arise and hope the customers aren't too persistent.

One question I haven't heard anyone address is:
if this leak is a symptom of the crank not being ( or staying) concentric with the block, does this indicate an eventual catastrophic failure because of this imbalance? I ask since Porsche does replace some engines after mutilple RMS failures or if it excedes a particular concentric tolerance. If there was no chance of engine failure, why not keep replacing seals? @ $10K a pop for a new engine, you could buy& install a lot of replacement seals.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by MikenOH

I'm no mechanical engineer but looking at how Porsche has picked at the edges of this problem for the better part of 7-8 years, if it was an easy fix, they'd have done it by now.

--If it was an installation problem, you retrain hans & franz or replace them, but we continue to have leaks; the installation tool has changed also,BTW.


-- If it was a seal material/ design problem you make the necessary changes and you're done; Porsche has been through several design changes IIRC and we still have leaks

--Epoxied bolts have been tried to increase rigidity of the cradle structure, yet we continue to have new cars with leaks.

As i see it, they've done all that they can do, short of a major design change on the engine to either eliminate or reduce the incidence of RMS. On the 987 they reduced the crank weight a bit at the unsupported end to help lessen the "forces"? working on the seal. But in one of the publications testing the new 987S last year, the car was leaking with less than 5K miles on it.

I would think major design changes to this engine to fix the problem would cost a lot in engineering and probably tooling. it's probably less expensive to deal with the individual leaks as they arise and hope the customers aren't too persistent.

One question I haven't heard anyone address is:
if this leak is a symptom of the crank not being ( or staying) concentric with the block, does this indicate an eventual catastrophic failure because of this imbalance? I ask since Porsche does replace some engines after mutilple RMS failures or if it excedes a particular concentric tolerance. If there was no chance of engine failure, why not keep replacing seals? @ $10K a pop for a new engine, you could buy& install a lot of replacement seals.

[RANT MODE ON]

Hi,

No offense, but that's the Best Job of Whitewashing the issue I have heard to date!

Poor Little Porsche has tried everything and it can't be fixed...

So the Onus and Financial Burden must be bourne by those who misplaced their Trust and Confidence in Porsche?

Perhaps if Porsche did actually accept some responsibility, this would ease the impact of the problem somewhat, but they are not and have not!

Those who have received some Dealer/Manufacturer support received it only after shouting themselves Blue in the Face. And this, for the most part, only for those Original Owners and then with the Car still under Warranty. GOD HELP the Used Car Buyer, because Porsche will not!

Shame on Porsche for not stepping up and FIXING the problem or coming to the Aid of those affected without the requisite Hystronics by the Owner. But, afterall, it's their Nature - they are simply acting like the Multi-National Corporation that they are.

A much greater shame belongs to those Consumers who minimize or downplay the issue. Have we learned Nothing from the Age of Consumerism? We should be shouting this from the Rooftops! Taking every opportunity to cast this Issue and Porsche in a Negative Light! This problem is not Miniscule - It does destroy Engines! But, also people's Confidence, Ownership Experiences, and also their Dreams!

We should take every opportunity to criticize Porsche not only for the poor design, but also their Corporate Practices! Owners should write Dealers, the NHTSA, the Federal Trade Commission, Auto Mags and Reviews, Internet Forums, hell, even the World Court if necessary!

Only if our collective voice is LOUD enough will there ever be a permanent solution to the problem! As this too is the Nature of Multi-National Corporations!...

[RANT MODE OFF]

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[MikenOH]

I'm not attempting to whitewash or minimize anything; I was just trying to recount the reported fixes that have been attempted--largely to no avail--and take a stab at what the real fix would entail.

Am I saying that Porsche should not be held accountable for defective products?--NO WAY, and I didn't infer it! I am saying this isn't an easy fix--or they would have already done it and it will probably take a new engine design to get rid of the problem.

So then the question becomes, what should Porsche do for the people that have bought their product and been adversely affected by this bad design?
I would think a extended warranty on the engine--10 yr/100K(?)--would be a good faith offer of trying to do the right thing. If there really isn't a RMS problem, it won't cost them anything; if there is a problem, they will retain customer loyalty for making sure the customer doesn't pay for Porsche's mistakes. The bottom line should be to make the customer whole if there is a failing with the product, especially since they've get the production lines running while attempting to fix it.
Makes me think of the 986 sleeved engine issue, but I digress..

Anyway, there is plenty of precedent for an extended warranty for engine problems; MB and BMW both had engines problems with some of their models and offered extended warranties to address customer concerns. It's not a perfect fix--there never is--but it would give an owner some breathing room if he wants to keep the car for 10 years or to sell it with a warranty in the same period.

Are we done here?

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by MikenOH

I'm not attempting to whitewash or minimize anything; I was just trying to recount the reported fixes that have been attempted--largely to no avail--and take a stab at what the real fix would entail.

Am I saying that Porsche should not be held accountable for defective products?--NO WAY, and I didn't infer it! I am saying this isn't an easy fix--or they would have already done it and it will probably take a new engine design to get rid of the problem.

So then the question becomes, what should Porsche do for the people that have bought their product and been adversely affected by this bad design?
I would think a extended warranty on the engine--10 yr/100K(?)--would be a good faith offer of trying to do the right thing. If there really isn't a RMS problem, it won't cost them anything; if there is a problem, they will retain customer loyalty for making sure the customer doesn't pay for Porsche's mistakes. The bottom line should be to make the customer whole if there is a failing with the product, especially since they've get the production lines running while attempting to fix it.
Makes me think of the 986 sleeved engine issue, but I digress..

Anyway, there is plenty of precedent for an extended warranty for engine problems; MB and BMW both had engines problems with some of their models and offered extended warranties to address customer concerns. It's not a perfect fix--there never is--but it would give an owner some breathing room if he wants to keep the car for 10 years or to sell it with a warranty in the same period.

Are we done here?

Mike,

I agree with you and wasn't taking a PotShot at you at all. There is just a disgusting lack of OUTRAGE from most quarters on this issue.

Porsche is supposed to be one of THE Car Manufacturers, but couldn't prove it with this fiasco. As I've said (AD NAUSEUM to some I know...) Even KIA got this Part right.

Extended Warranty would certainly help. Paying for the Repair would as well. But, good as your suggestions are, they seem to be falling short of the Ears in the Boardroom in Stuttgart, at least currently.

Earlier someone remarked about the Reliability of Lotus (which I also own) and I agree that it is sub Par, but everyone knows this and believes that the Performance outweighs the severity of it - it is NOT one of the reasons you Buy one. But, to their Credit, Lotus does not abandon their Customers, even those buy Used. When Former President and CEO of LotusUSA (Arne Johnson) stops by your house when in town for a Family Wedding to help with a problem you're having, that's Service! (We fixed it too..!!) But Porsche is supposed to have a reputation for reliability and responding to Customer needs, it IS one of the reasons you Buy one... is this a thing of the Past?

So, Mike, you have proposed a fair and equitable solution... How do we get the Message to Porshe..?? Until we do, the issues remain... PEACE!!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Brucelee]

As I understand it, Porsche has known the cause of this issue for some years and is simply not willing to redesign the engine.

That says much about how they feel about customer service issues.

If this was Lexus, the issue would have been resolved in a year or two.

'Nuff said!

:troll:

[wild1poet2]

kudos to both Jim and Mike on their comments on the RMS problem. I'd love a 10 year warranty on the engine or even specifically on the RMS. I just did a google search and find most reviewers giving the Boxster model high marks for reliability. Only Consumer Reports cited some "unspecified engine problems" and rated reliability much worse than average.

I'm a new owner and frankly this kinda spoils it for me. So much of this car can be described using the word "excellent" as long as I don't think about potential future RMS failure.

[gRed04]

I really don't want to shout that loudly about potential problems with the engine as I intend to sell it long before the warranty expires.

Making the greater public more aware will only make it harder ( and more costly ) to pass on to another owner who MAY have to deal with the problem more than likely out of warranty.

In the long run Porsche must realize what a turn off this persistent problem is to potential customers. I could deal with many other issues more easily but possibly needing engine replacement is just too much. First, and almost undoubtedly last, time owner here.

I would add MB to the list of other makers that would not have allowed this problem to continue for 9 yrs.

A great looking and handling car but there are just so many other choices where I don't think you have to worry so much about needing to replace leaky seals and possibly a engine.

[MikenOH]

this really is a great board and realistically, we're all in the same boat.

The RMS issue is just one of those unknowns that lurks in the background and can spoil owning this terrific car.

As a former owner of a '99', I have nothing but good things to say about the car we just sold for our '06'. in 6+ years and 39K miles, we never had one problem--not one--and we auto crossed extensively and did a few DE's. By far and a way, the best car I ever owned and ensured when it was time to trade, that the 987 was the replacement.

Despite my good experience, there are people in our PCA club that have had horror stories with their 986 and I wonder if my good fortune was just the luck of the draw or was it their's?

You look at all the posts on the various boards and have to wonder how extensive this problem is; I'm guessing that Loren's survey--when it comes out--will shed some light on this and hopefully answer more questions than it raises.

The biggest issue--in my view--is that if you buy a 986/987 and the engine goes you're looking at roughly $10K to get back on the road if Porsche doesn't help. That's a lot of money for most people, particularly if you've just spent a minimum of $20K to get the car. I bought an extended warranty from the dealer to cover an additional 4 years before the factory warranty ran out because of all the chatter about the RMS. I didn't have a problem but it did give me some peace of mind.

Anyway, I'm sure the people in Stuttgart and their associates over here know exactly what going on and i doubt we'll ever find out from them. With any luck information like Loren's survey may just cause enough of a stir to get someone at PCNA to do the right thing. When the BMW E46 engines started hand grenading in 2002 for no apparent reason, the Roadfly board listed all the failures by location, VIN, mileage and circumstances surrounding the engine blowing. It became clear that BMW had a problem with the car and they ended up extending the warranty to 100K on that model. Turns out the bearings weren't up to the job but that didn't prevent them from looking at the customer as the problem first.

At end, it is my sincere hope that none of us have our enjoyment of this car spoiled by this dreaded repair.

[Brucelee]

It is very clear that Porsche knows about this design issue and has chosen to work around a re-design. In effect, they are trading a lower cost option (ie fix the seals) over the higher cost one (re-design the engine).

That says much about how they view the customer.

As much as I am not a litigator by nature, it would be nice if someone developed a class action suit on this.

[MikenOH]

the sleeved engine fiasco affecting the '99' model year is more troubling, IMHO.

For the uninitiated, in late '98' the supplier that provides blocks to Porsche had a major problem with the machinery that did the casting. The net result was they were out of new blocks while the machinery was repaired. During the interim, porsche reworked blocks that didn't pass the quality standards by boring them out and inserting--pressing in--sleeves. Not a bad idea--it has been used for years-- except the installation process was flawed and some of the reworked blocks failed as the sleeves moved, creating a catastrophic failure. Supposedly, most of the failures occurred early in the life of the car and were replaced by porsche at no cost to the owner. However since many of these cars are driven sparingly, an owner might not experience the failure until after the warranty has expired. I'm not sure how Porsche handled those cases but I have seen a few posted on Pete's board. Also, you have to wonder if the second owner would be treated as well or would even know what was going on. BTW, all of this is on the PCA site on the tech section of the Q&A for boxsters

In my view, to substitute a reworked engine block in order to keep the assembly lines running runs counter to everything that Porsche was supposedly about; the phrase " There is no substitute.." comes to mind first.

I would expect this from any of the Big Three but from a high end, limited production, specialty car manufacturer..? When decisions like this are made, you can only assume that the accountants, rather than the engineers, are running the show.

[wild1poet2]

Mike, good info. Stories like that along with the RMS problem make you wonder about the viability of the company. To keep expenses down they are avoiding a fix? Even bringing out the Cayman with the same inherent flaw. Didn't the problem exhibit itself during prototype testing during engine develpment. OK maybe not so then lets assume it was a production problem. How many years does it take to correct that? With such a long production run, any new tooling or dies could be amortized over the production run. Very uncharacteristic for a German engineer.

Might be interesting to send a letter off to Porsche headquarters to see what the response is.

[Brucelee]

Funny thing is, as a % of sales, Porsche is reported to be the world's most profitable car company.

Agg profit rumored to be $2B last year if memory serves.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

...Funny thing is, as a % of sales, Porsche is reported to be the world's most profitable car company...

Hence the Deaf Ear to RMS and Intermediate Shaft Failure. I guarantee that if their profits dip, they'll listen well enough...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by gRed04

I really don't want to shout that loudly about potential problems with the engine as I intend to sell it long before the warranty expires.

Making the greater public more aware will only make it harder ( and more costly ) to pass on to another owner who MAY have to deal with the problem more than likely out of warranty.

In the long run Porsche must realize what a turn off this persistent problem is to potential customers. I could deal with many other issues more easily but possibly needing engine replacement is just too much. First, and almost undoubtedly last, time owner here.

I would add MB to the list of other makers that would not have allowed this problem to continue for 9 yrs.

A great looking and handling car but there are just so many other choices where I don't think you have to worry so much about needing to replace leaky seals and possibly a engine.

Hi,

I hear what you're saying... and Thank You for Your Support...

The problem is that you're trying to keep a Lid on a Dirty, Little, Secret that is already Out-of-the-Bag. It's appeared in National Print Mags numerous times and will continue to do so.

You may find some Sucker who hasn't heard of it (so much for Seller Integrity), but in truth, you're much more likely to come across potential Buyers who've done their Homework, such as the Many Prospects who chime in here from time-to-time, not to mention that those performing PPIs will be on the lookout for it as well..

That being the case, wouldn't you be in a Better position if Porsche were urged, through LOUD vocal support of current Owners and Dealers, to come up with a Fix, Extended Warranty, or the like which you could transfer to the New Owner? I suspect you would...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[BoxsterSbob]

It really is outrageous that cars at this price point and a brand with such an engineering heritage has this (known) built in defect. If I were aware of this prior I probably would have bought a Corvette.

Very simply-it’s a Porsche! We should expect, and they should deliver more! A group letter is a good idea. I support getting this issue on the record.

I wonder if Subaru owners have this problem?


04S
bob

[Ronzi]

A friend of mine had a Ferrari 348, and if you think Porsche is unresponsive to customer complaints, you should have heard him wail about his treatment from Ferrari.

I'm sure I will be painted as an apologist for Porsche, but the fact of the matter is that low-volume, high performance auto manufacturers frequently seemingly take their sweet time about resolving design issues that the Toyotas of the world have squared away by the next model year.

It will be interesting to see the results of the ongoing "survey" of RMS complaints.

Who is doing this survey, and how do we get the results?

Will it delineate betweeen the 986 and the 987?

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Ronzi

A friend of mine had a Ferrari 348, and if you think Porsche is unresponsive to customer complaints, you should have heard him wail about his treatment from Ferrari.

I'm sure I will be painted as an apologist for Porsche, but the fact of the matter is that low-volume, high performance auto manufacturers frequently seemingly take their sweet time about resolving design issues that the Toyotas of the world have squared away by the next model year.

It will be interesting to see the results of the ongoing "survey" of RMS complaints.

Hi,

I DO think Porsche has been unresponsive. I have no doubt that Ferrari may have issues in this regard as well, but I fail to see any relevance. They're not even in the same league. Ferrari is a Limited Production Manufacturer - 8k Units/Yr., while Porsche is a Low-Volume Mass Producer - approx. 80k Units/yr. - a significant difference.

Ferraris problems don't let Porsche off the Hook. Besides, I own a Porsche, not a Ferrari.

But, when I did own a 328 GTS, it was a marvelous Car. Gave me 30k mi. of trouble-free driving. I sold it because it was about to take a big hit to depreciation... 'nother story...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Brucelee]

Porsche has no excuses on these types of issues, which have existed over the year.

All you have to do is read the tech section of excellence mag each month.

[Ronzi]

I don't know whether Porsche has an "excuse" for RMS problems or not, as they are the only ones that really know the frequency of this problem, and as far as I know, they ain't talkin'.
I'm sure their lawyers have them firmly by the throat, so they stonewall and admit nothing.