Bloody boxster falling apart

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by olly986

Brucee your sounding very nasty about our little boxsters of late, do not forget you run the show here, and because usually nobody gives a hoot about my threads i will just have to say that mx5 sucks! would take anyone of them anyday on any track!! mx5=miata i guess this is what it is called here, just another sissi car!! and you all laugh at ricers!! makes ME laugh

Try again with your communication and perhaps I can figure out what you are saying.

For the record, the Boxster is a pleasure to drive, one of the nicest handling and looking cars that I have EVER seen or driven.

Having said that, Porsche SHOULD address the reliability and cost of ownership issues if they want to create a truly GREAT car. They could also increase the content of the car given the high price.

To my way of thinking, the Miata is a great car ror what it is, an inexpensive, reliable car that is a ton of fun to drive.

[ohioboxster]

C-5 has an LS-1, many do encounter piston slap and have ring failure. Im an avid f-dody guy. I know c-5 is a Y-body and not an f-body but they use the same power plant.

[MNBoxster]

Hi,

I expected that many would begin to point out the flaws in other cars (not that this is really relevant to the troubles the Boxster experiences), and many other cars certainly have them.

But, a couple of points; the engine flaws in the Boxster can, and often do, lead to engine failure and require engine replacement. Also, when the PCNA Service Rep says that these failures affect 20-22% of all the cars, that's a tremendous number.

Sure, a mainshaft may have failed in the Miata for the '99 model year, but, they corrected it the following year (unlike Porsche which just continues to produce engines they know to be faulty, because people are so gullable or want a Porsche (even a flawed one) that badly), and the failure rate was more like 2%, not 1-in-5 like the Boxster. Add-in things like reputation, price difference, and the Parent Company's indifference to the issue, and the Boxsters foibles loom much larger...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[eslai]

And again, the point I keep making that you still haven't addressed, although you find it so satisfying to be smug about people mentioning other flaws in the auto world (and I already mentioned that yes indeed, Mazda owned up to their mistake), is that I don't know that the problems I'm seeing are isolated only to Porsche.

There is a general arrogance in the high-end sports car market that seems to say "you've bought a rarefied sports car! It has its quirks and you should have the money to deal with them." Can we really single out Porsche on this when Lambos, Ferraris, Maseratis, et cetera all are money sinks as well? Shouldn't we just take the whole industry to task?

Cars continue to evolve and become more complex pieces of machinery. Old world craftsmanship is absent from just about all industries these days--everything is trending towards a disposable mentality.

******************** all you want about Porsche, but to me it just sounds like you're scapegoating them for an industry-wide issue. Automotive quality is down all across the board, but it seems like the manufacturers have managed to reset most customers' expectations. Bummer, eh?

[Brucelee]

"******************** all you want about Porsche, but to me it just sounds like you're scapegoating them for an industry-wide issue"

I not sure I agree with this statement. Based on what little data we actually get from "independent" sources, industry defects are way down, not up. This is at least true for initial ownership experiences. Longer term data is harder to come by for sure.

I think these data vary widely by manufacturer and to my knowledge, makers like Mercedes Benz have had a marked decline in quality over the years (this was actually admitted by the former CEO of MB just before they fired his sorry butt),

Others like Toyota, Honda and even Cadillac have improved over the years.

I think the thing that rankles me about Porsche is design flaws that go uncorrected for a decade on a car that costs so much. C'mon guys, don't you know anything about a flat six by now?

It is NOT unreasonable to expect that Porsche could fix a RMS design flawor makes changes that allow brand new engine to avoid a IMS failure.

I DON'T think we are asking for the moon. Take away the big stuff and I think we can all breathe a bit easier.

[Perfectlap]

That's all very simple to explain and as MN has pointed out the main problem with P-cars is a potentialy lethal one from the car's longevity or at least the ownership longevity. BMW had this issue with their engines and to my knowledge they fixed it.
This problem is not addressed very simply because Porsche are toooooo(extra o's necessary) arrogant to admit a mistake.
A design overhaul building on the 2000 year changes was in order. But there's been so much letter writing and ********************ing and denials that the Porsche dudes are too far into their 'lie" to admit a mistake. (kind of like the WMD issue ).

The other problems with non-lethal items are inexcusable as well but knowing that so many engines are likely to fail, before they even build them yet they still go forward putting these things out on the market for vastly inflated sums is really worth of jail senetences for fraud. Ok maybe not a 20 year stint but I wouldn't mind seeing a Porsche exec in club Fed for six months like Martha Stewart. I guarantee you there would be MAJOR changes. Losing money is no biggie. Being humiliated and labeled a crook is another matter.

But operating and maintaining a Porsche is not going to be cheap like Honda.
This is no secret, and nothing new. Its a German sports car requiring specialized labor. Porsche had the ability to bring these costs down but decided to stick all those juicy profits in ther backpockets. Expecting them to do otherwise is living in fairy land.
Like asking the wolf to guard the hen house. Especially when they keep bringing more hens!!!

[Brucelee]

Well said Perfect!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by eslai

And again, the point I keep making that you still haven't addressed, although you find it so satisfying to be smug about people mentioning other flaws in the auto world (and I already mentioned that yes indeed, Mazda owned up to their mistake), is that I don't know that the problems I'm seeing are isolated only to Porsche.

There is a general arrogance in the high-end sports car market that seems to say "you've bought a rarefied sports car! It has its quirks and you should have the money to deal with them." Can we really single out Porsche on this when Lambos, Ferraris, Maseratis, et cetera all are money sinks as well? Shouldn't we just take the whole industry to task?

Cars continue to evolve and become more complex pieces of machinery. Old world craftsmanship is absent from just about all industries these days--everything is trending towards a disposable mentality.

******************** all you want about Porsche, but to me it just sounds like you're scapegoating them for an industry-wide issue. Automotive quality is down all across the board, but it seems like the manufacturers have managed to reset most customers' expectations. Bummer, eh?

Hi,

I don't really think I'm being smug at all. I fail to see the relevance of a BMW or Miata having problems so far as the Boxster is concerned. Those would be concerns for Bimmer and Mazda Owners. The issue here (albeit in a hi-jacked thread), is the reliablity and design problems of the Boxster.

Many cars are not becoming more complex at all. Direct injection, fewer and fewer Turbo'd cars are examples of this. Some cars are, but the Holy Grail in engineering is simplicity, not complexity.

Automotive Quality is up across the board. Some marques may be declining, but many others are climbing rapidly (think KIA, Subaru or Jaguar for example) with the overall effect that it is on the rise. When I was a kid, a car was pretty much done at 50k mi. while today at 100k mi. they're just reaching adolescence for many. For Porsche, the conversations I had with the GM of a Dealership and the PCNA Rep indicate that their opinion is that it is declining, I think that's pretty telling.

And, I'm not scapegoating Porche or the Boxster (think how GREAT it truly would be if these issues did not exist), but neither am I denying that some serious issues exist and continue to exist after nearly a decade and over 250k units (counting 996/997s) produced, which I find inexcusable...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[eslai]

Well I can live with those arguments. I mean ****************, I've had my car at the dealership five times now over a stupid radio glitch after all.

But I still feel like most marques are down on quality these days. Don't have any data, but when both Mercedes and Toyota are both turning into crap, it seems to me that something's going wrong in the world...

[Perfectlap]

I see direct corrolation between the copanies that are getting fat and inddiferent
Merc, Porsche, Toyota and the companies that are hungry doing a better job, like Kia, Subaru.
Now if we could get that STI 2.5 300 hp turbo charged boxer engine in the Boxster...

[eslai]

Scary enough, the only car company that's been impressing me as of late is Hyundai, but with all the scandals back home, that may not last.

[Perfectlap]

you know I take that back I don't want any damn turbo lag in my stag

[super66]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Also, when the PCNA Service Rep says that these failures affect 20-22% of all the cars, that's a tremendous number.

MN, I'll give you that you at least realize the percentage you are taking is 20 if not slightly over 20% but slightly shocked you bought into it. I once had a Bad Boy lable rep tell my sisters cousin's grandm biggie is still alive drinking 40's with 2 Pac. Catch my drift? While I'm not sure how many boxsters are made, it can't be a huge number, which would mean 20% - 22% with defective engines would be a definite red flag for some sort of class action suit or definite free engine replacement if it was really that high.

Really want to have fun? We have over 4000 members, last I saw could be wrong. Say we have 4000 all that have a box, that means 800 of us at the minimum have replaced the RMS.......NO WAY!!!

Who's box bites the dust first victim to the 20% failure rate? Super 66? Bmussati? SD987? Epiqtodd? MikenOH? On the next episode of boxsters suck, on the 986 boxster board

[Brucelee]

"Really want to have fun? We have over 4000 members, last I saw could be wrong. Say we have 4000 all that have a box, that means 800 of us at the minimum have replaced the RMS.......NO WAY!!! "

Actually the math would not work that way. Since many of us have had our Boxsters for a brief period of time, and since many of us have used Boxsters which may have already had its RMS issue, there is no way that the 20% number would befall us.

Now, if someone said that over the course of a 7 yr Boxster ownership period, some 20% would have a RMS, I could buy that!

[MNBoxster]

Hi,

I'm only stating what the PCNA Rep said. Also, there was a poll conducted here on RMS failure and I believe that this non-scientific poll had a failure rate somewhere in the 28-30% reported, so I was not surprised at all. Also, remember how MUM Porsche has been on the subject, there is no accessible data from them. There was a Guy on another Forum who attempted to mount a Class Action suit agaionst Porsche, I do not know what his outcome was.

But, face it, if the PCNA guy was disgruntled or mistaken, if he was off by half, that's still in excess of 10% which is still way too high, especially in light of the fact that Porsche has still not redesigned the thing to eliminate the failure. This remains a chronic plague to this day...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Brucelee]

Yes, and the flip side is, if these data were bogus, Porsche has the data to refute.

They have not!

You think these guys had engineering degrees or something!

[ohioboxster]

People say Porsche has a 20% failure rate or something like that. Anyway, arent you glad they dont make jet engines? Eh, 20% isnt that bad.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by ohioboxster

People say Porsche has a 20% failure rate or something like that. Anyway, arent you glad they dont make jet engines? Eh, 20% isnt that bad.

Yes, I AM glad they don't make jet engines.

Think of the upset!

[dbth]

Originally Posted by super66

Who's box bites the dust first victim to the 20% failure rate? Super 66? Bmussati? SD987? Epiqtodd? MikenOH? On the next episode of boxsters suck, on the 986 boxster board

I hope it's not DBTH either!!!

[super66]

Originally Posted by dbth

I hope it's not DBTH either!!!

man how man of us white box owners are out there? I thought I was in the monority! sorry to exclude you dbth!