RMS survey from Pete's Boxster board - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

MikenOH · 01-02-2007, 06:43 PM

is now available; the link to download the data is:
http://www17.rapidupload.com/d.php?file=dl&filepath=10992

255 respondents with the gist of the results being that 40+% of the respondents either had an engine failure or RMS leak. IIRC, the engine failure rate eas 8%.

This seems fairly close to our survey and the one I did with my club with roughly 30% had RMS leaks.

The older cars were more prone to leaks or they just haven't shown up yet in the new ones. However you look at it, an inordinate number or cars have had this problem despite Porsche's attempts at a fix.

yellowbox · 01-02-2007, 09:15 PM

How about the fact that most owners without problems probably didn't fill out the surveys. Whereas owners with problems are more likely to complete such failure survey. Human nature on internet forums to be more vocal with problems, less without.

MNBoxster · 01-02-2007, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yellowbox

How about the fact that most owners without problems probably didn't fill out the surveys. Whereas owners with problems are more likely to complete such failure survey. Human nature on internet forums to be more vocal with problems, less without.

Hi,

That statement may or may not be true, you have no data to back it up. This poll is consistent (to a great degree) with several others which have been conducted. As Porsche continues to remain mum on the subject, it is the best information available.

Arguing about degrees of accuracy obscures the fact that this is a serious design problem, even if the degree of error in these polls is 50%. And one which every potential Boxster Owner must be aware of, and weigh carefully, when making an informed Purchase Decision.

Many existing owners are either too loyal, or too emotionally invested, to point a finger at Porsche. They're more likely to blame the methodology or results of a poll, or excuse the design flaw as something you have to endure with if you want to drive a Porsche, or point to other failures in Autodom (as if that is somehow relevant).

But, if a Private Aircraft manufacturer experienced an issue like the RMS in even 1/10th the degree that the Boxster does on one of their aircraft, their Airworthiness Certification would be suspended in a heartbeat.

Granted, a failed RMS won't cause the Boxster to fall out of the sky. But if RMS failure happens to you out of warranty, you'll not only feel like it did, but that it also landed on you!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

djomlas · 01-02-2007, 10:09 PM

i still cant believe that no one can get this info from porsche, there has to be a way.

Adam · 01-02-2007, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djomlas

i still cant believe that no one can get this info from porsche, there has to be a way.

Sneek into Porsche HQ 007 style and get the files!

Tool Pants · 01-02-2007, 10:36 PM

Find out from Porsche how many seals they have sold.

About 2 years ago I asked my local parts guy how many seals they had sold. He put the part number in the computer and out came a number.

djomlas · 01-02-2007, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tool Pants

Find out from Porsche how many seals they have sold.

About 2 years ago I asked my local parts guy how many seals they had sold. He put the part number in the computer and out came a number.

you might be onto something there

Perfectlap · 01-03-2007, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tool Pants

Find out from Porsche how many seals they have sold.

About 2 years ago I asked my local parts guy how many seals they had sold. He put the part number in the computer and out came a number.

I'm going to do that when I visit the dealer parts counter for a VERY BIG Porsche dealer here in N.J.
What is the part number for the RMS?

MNBoxster · 01-03-2007, 07:33 AM

Hi,

Asking for RMS PN# (999.113.476.40 (obsolete), 999.113.490.40, 999.113.490.41) sales will only be relevant if total sales from all Dealers are combined. And, this still won't account for multiple failures or engine replacements.

These RMS threads go crazy trying to run down the exact number of RMS failures, and this will be near impossible without some input from Porsche and PCNA. It suffices to say that it is a large problem affecting an inordinate number of cars as evidenced by poll results like these, discussions with Service Depts., and the fact that virtually every board for Boxsters and 911's has tremendous bandwidth devoted to the reporting of these problems.

As I've said before, Shaft Seal technology is as old as the Industrial Revolution itself, it's not Rocket Science. Porsche however decided to try and cut engine production costs using a new design and casting technology in order to increase profits which backfired.

The issue isn't so much that the RMS failure rate is so high as much as it is Porsche's reticence to own up to the problem and provide their loyal customers with aid (financial and technical) in dealing with the issue...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

YellowJacket · 01-03-2007, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Hi,

That statement may or may not be true, you have no data to back it up. This poll is consistent (to a great degree) with several others which have been conducted. As Porsche continues to remain mum on the subject, it is the best information available.

Many existing owners are either too loyal, or too emotionally invested, to point a finger at Porsche. They're more likely to blame the methodology or results of a poll, or excuse the design flaw as something you have to endure with if you want to drive a Porsche, or point to other failures in Autodom (as if that is somehow relevant).

While Jim is correct that people are too quick to justify this issue with the "that's the price you pay for owning such a great car" bit, Yellowbox is completely correct regarding this survey's uselessness. There are two huge sources of error here, both related to a self-selected population. Those who have had the problem are much more likely to respond than those who haven't had it, have never heard of it, don't completely understand it, etc. The second bias is that those who happen to be on a message board related to Boxsters are those who are most likely to drive their cars hard, modify their cars, or have had problems in the past (i.e. they found the message board by Googling RMS failure after their mechanic told them they had it or something like that). So the best you can say from this survey is that "of those who are inclined to respond to a poll on RMS failure, of those who happen to browse a Porsche forum online, 40% (+/-6% or so) have had RMS failure. I bet if you took that poll by sitting outside a private country club and interviewing the women who drive up in their Boxsters for a weekday afternoon game of tennis, you'd get a much smaller number.

Bottom line:
Is this a HUGE inexcusable design flaw that Porsche should be addressing? Absolutely.
Is this 40% number likely WAY over-stated? Absolutely.

By the way, I'm a statistician; I dissect this type of stuff for a living, and this survey tells you nothing except that the problem exists.

MikenOH · 01-03-2007, 08:22 AM

but have to add when I polled the boxster owners in our local PCA organization, the numbers were in the 25-30 % range. This entailed getting a list of all owners on the club list that had Boxsters at the time the list was generated.

After making the individual phone calls and emails, it was clear, at least in our club, that there were quite a few cars of the 50 sold, traded or tuned in off a lease. My guess is about 1/3 of the owners no longer had the cars that were listed; I was a bit suprised in the turnover since most of the active people in the club have had their cars for years. It seemed clear that there were a number of owners that had them for a while and got out of them pretty quickly (2-3 year) and just moved on to something different.

Many previous owners didn't have any problems with the cars (or didn't recall and problems them) but the ones that did had very clear memories of the leaks.

Also, the number of miles driven annually was very low--under 5K typically--and very few were tracked or auto-x'd.

My takeway from the experience was that there might have been more positive responses had the cars been kept longer or been owned by an automotive enthusiasts.

Tool Pants · 01-03-2007, 08:29 AM

http://www.renntech.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=15&st=0&#entry24

There have been 4 generations of the seal. When I had the part number checked it was about 2 years ago and I think it was for generation 3. The parts guy told me how many of those seals had been sold by my dealer. I did not ask but I doubt he could tell me how many were sold in the world - but Porsche can.

If you put a part number in the computer you can search the history. It will tell you former and present part numbers. I did not ask the parts guy to do this.

If someone has a cooperative parts guy ask if he can tell how many of each style seal has been sold at the dealership.

Sboxin · 01-03-2007, 03:20 PM

Loren's survey included other questions that show the very cold climate where you live may affect the RMS
AND, the way you warm up your Boxster may also affect the oil seals.
Design changes may have also included material specification changes in the rubber/plastic.

...what say you about this?

I live in warm Arizona and the car spent its early years in Houston, TX so...
Oh, and I do warm it up before >3K RPM

Ed