Greenman

1 hour ago, 986CKY said:

I was under the impression these mounts worked in comfort mode unless you hit the sports plus button so if the magnetic field shorts out and you get a code fired up and the mounts are technically still in comfort mode what is the harm in just getting rid of the code like you would if you fit standard engine mounts? 

Or does this mean the mounts are no longer firm enough when driving in anger? 

From reading many of posts online now regarding PADM failure and people being out of warranty I am shocked most don't just fit standard mounts. Especially if Chrono never gets used in their cars. 

I think you are correct aka how they work, as far as I know they don’t do anything different in comfort mode (I.e. act like a standard mount) but I’m not 100% on this, maybe they work like PASM and are always active but in two levels of stiffness? I do get the impression though that the active mounts are a bit more comfort oriented when not active (obviously less compromise needs to be made w.r.t the passive units)

As for the second point. If one of these goes it would cost you around £1000 part plus 4 hours labour to fix, an alternative would be to change both mounts for passive units, in which case you buy two passive mounts, more labour (maybe not quite double) and coding of PIWIS to code out the mounts.  Likely the cost of the second option would be similar to the first. You then have a car without the advantages of the active mounts, a reduced value etc etc.  So most would go with the first option.

Interestingly when I had my second unit replaced (both under warranty) I raised this passive option with the technician; you would have thought I’d have suggested replacing the engine oil with lard the look I got; followed by ‘you wouldn’t want to do that’. So I never actually got confirmation that it was or wasn’t possible.

22 hours ago, J & F Hux said:

thanks all, for the above.

Its a difficult call now whether to do one, or both? 

i.e if they fail at random, "bad batch" and so on, likelihood is that the opposite side could also be affected.

 

In my case I had issues with both, but there seem plenty of people where just one has gone and the other has been fine.  Based on my Experiance of cost etc the part costs around £1000. With 4 hours labour,  I suspect if you had both sides done at the same time it would be around 6 hrs labour, so having them done together would only save you 2 hrs labour (my guesstimate of course).   You could get quotes for both, but if it was me I suspect I’d just be changing one. 

18 hours ago, Paul P said:

from what I have read, parts "relatively" cheap - labour (engine out) killer - so maybe do both sides while it is in pieces.

Not really.  Part is £1000ish a side.  Labour is about 4 hrs, it isn’t engine out.

5 hours ago, Patt said:

I didn't say it would feel normal.  Feels a lot less tight and sloppy - as if the suspension were way past its replacement date of 1984

When my first one went Porsche assistance said their computer didn't categorise it as a return to base fault.

When the AA man came out, we agreed it was not "fit for purpose" and he made some calls that resulted in a low loader collecting it and taking it over to Reading OPC.

When the second went - I told OPC to call Porsche Assist as I was not prepared to jump through the hoops.

It is not an engine out job, seem to recall 2 hours but I'll hunt through my emails and see if I still have the quote they sent me.

 

It looks like there are different failure modes, as when each of mine went you could barely tell, certainly in normal day to day driving,.

I had a 2.0 Macan as a Courtesy car a few months ago, I thought performance wise it was perfectly adequate (are we really saying 260bhp is too little power for a small SUV?) without much real excitement.  

What I found most disappointing was that I only got just over 20 mpg on my journey to/from the dealer 25 miles of country roads 5 miles urban each way.  A journey that my Boxster S usually sees 25-30 mpg.

23 hours ago, daz05 said:

Think I may reinstate my warranty when I approach that mileage lol.

I don’t think these are really mileage related, I had one replaced at around 13k and onother at 19k, they are just pretty random if you happen to have a bad batch.

33 minutes ago, Patt said:

I've had two replaced so far in less than 2000 miles under extended warranty  - think they quoted £2500 for the last one.

2014 with 35K

£2500 - they must be mistaken (or maybe quoting the cost of doing two)?  My OPC had mine done in under 4 hours, I know this as I picked it up done 4 hrs after dropping off, and the part as quoted above is around £900-1000. So I’m not sure how they could inflate that to £2500

4 hours ago, RBD914 v2 said:

Would it be worth putting a warranty on it then getting it done, or would an OPC pick up the fault beforehand?

Unfortunately, a message appears in the binnacle every powerup, even when dismissed it leaves a small yellow ‘!’,   so no chance of them not noticing.

18 hours ago, Toeside said:

  What about fitting non dynamic mounts and deleting the input? Just throwing up ideas an Indie might know some pragmatic alternative options?

On my last OPC visit to have one of these sorted I asked the engineer if this was possible, you would have thought I’d just told him I was sleeping with his mother!  Hi didn’t explicitly exclude the possibility but didn’t say it was possible either, so none the wiser really.  Of course you would have to replace both and decode on PIWIS so it would likely be no cheaper just taking one failure case.

You will need PIWIS anyway to diagnose which mount you have an issue with as it won’t be obvious.

I had two done under warranty at OPC.  It was 4 hours labour, but I believe the part is around £950, but whether any can be obtained at a better price than that I don’t know.

i believe there were some batches of these prone to failure, I think they have magnetic coils in that can short out.  I think when failed they effectively default into comfort mode, so you can still drive the car fine.

On 14/04/2017 at 7:50 AM, mdunderwood said:

Have you noticed any difference in wind noise or performance ?. I assumed those smart German engineers switched to a honeycomb design to improve the airflow rather than just making it really hard to see behind you ?

Yeh, a mesh guard should produce less turbulence in the cabin as it doesn't just deflect the backdraft over the top it also allows some through the mesh at a low speed and prevents the deflected flow curling back into the cabin. (In theory). If you do get this problem you may be able to mitigate by drilling small holes in the Perspex, would be a bit hit and miss though.

Have you had any issues with rattling ? You may need to put som tape or similar in the frame to prevent rattling I would have though.