Generator failure - Park Vehicle safely

[Scubaregs]

2 minutes ago, moonshine said:

The problem is if the OPC stick to their initial position, there is little wiggle room 

 

2 hours ago, moonshine said:

Belt has come off due to tensioner bolt snapping.

 

Their initial position is a snapped bolt caused the issue. A snapped bolt is not a wear and tear item, point this out to them in the strongest possible terms.

[moonshine]

Is the bolt replaced at belt and pully change?

[iborguk]

15 minutes ago, moonshine said:

Is the bolt replaced at belt and pully change?

Don't think so see WM 137319 in the Workshop Manual.

Edited April 28, 2023 by iborguk

[moonshine]

4 minutes ago, iborguk said:

Don't think so see WM 137319 in the Workshop Manual.

That adds to the narrative that it is not an part expected to suffer from wear and tear. 

I'm struggling to orientate myself.

Which part  / bolt do we think has gone? Is it bolt 8?

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by moonshine

[Stuart21UK]

this is classic Porsche warranty BS, failing to see the 'failure' and claiming its 'wear and  tear' and not covered

IIRC the OPC will be bound by Porsche Warranty accepting the claim i.e. its not the OPC final decision

hope you get it sorted

[iborguk]

5 minutes ago, Stuart21UK said:

the OPC will be bound by Porsche Warranty accepting the claim i.e. its not the OPC final decision

 

Yes this, it's an insurance product which will require approval beyond the OPC.

I've had about 5K's worth of warranty repairs over 2 cars,  so the process does work IF the actual issue is communicated clearly and correctly back to the mothership.

Edited April 28, 2023 by iborguk

[iborguk]

21 minutes ago, moonshine said:

That adds to the narrative that it is not an part expected to suffer from wear and tear. 

I'm struggling to orientate myself.

Which part  / bolt do we think has gone? Is it bolt 8?

 

Yeah looks like (8) to me and not the (7) I was previously referring to.

[moonshine]

Yes, its bolt (9) on this diagram (M8x60) p/n 99907341101 - you can see the 30mm spanner flats on the tensioner nut and the tensioner is displaced to the right as the bolt has sheared 

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by moonshine

[The Caped Crusader]

4 hours ago, moonshine said:

That's what I said. It's a mechanical failure, not wear and tear.

The service manager said they need to code the failure into the Porcshe system and the code for the deflection pully and  the bolt both start with the same p/n and the P/n is excluded on the porsche system. 

That's a bit of 'computer says no'!  Common sense should be used. A bolt snapping is not a faulted of a wear and tear item like a tensioner and its bearing etc. 

[Araf]

3 hours ago, moonshine said:

Nope - the BOLT has sheared

If the belt and tensioner are still in good condition then it is just a sheered bolt and the part number is not on the consumables list. 

[moonshine]

Its this part

And service schedule for the belts is 6/12 yr intervals - so failure is premature

 

[½cwt]

Slam dunk.  Failed bolt not tensioner.  Bolt is not touched until a later point in the service schedule, therefore premature failure.

Hopefully another win for the BoXa collective.  Good luck to the OPC turning it down if you go in armed with this lot.

[moonshine]

The 6yr service was carried out on 31/05/19 with the car at 29,670 Miles, so this failure has happened +6.499 Miles and at <4yrs from replacement of the v belt 

Tensioners were not replaced at 6yrs according to service invoice.

I don't think they have to be  the maintenance schedule says it's a drive belt check at 4/10/16 yrs with replace every 60,000 Miles / no later than every 6 yrs 

I think it is hard to argue there is wear and tear at this Point.

Indeed, the car was in with them only 2 weeks and -415 Miles ago at an event organised by PCGB R1 group and it passed with fly colours and the "drive belt condition, if visible" was given a green tick 

 

[½cwt]

@moonshine to be fair to them at that event, unless they took off an undertray or opened the rear bulkhead, the belt would have not been visible...

[moonshine]

2 minutes ago, ½cwt said:

@moonshine to be fair to them at that event, unless they took off an undertray or opened the rear bulkhead, the belt would have not been visible...

Agreed. 👍

[Scubaregs]

Am I missing something here, is the bolt that sheared a serviceable item, i.e gets replaced at a specific time or mileage?

 

[iborguk]

4 minutes ago, Scubaregs said:

Am I missing something here, is the bolt that sheared a serviceable item, i.e gets replaced at a specific time or mileage?

 

Nope. Looking at the workshop manual I think it’s a “if needed”catch all re the tensioner, pulleys etc , I didn’t see anything re that bolt specifically but it was a wine o’clock.

[EXY]

24 minutes ago, iborguk said:

Nope. Looking at the workshop manual I think it’s a “if needed”catch all re the tensioner, pulleys etc , I didn’t see anything re that bolt specifically but it was a wine o’clock.

Does a new tensioner come with a new/replacement bolt?

Is that a stretch bolt, if not it's like an episode of Wheeler Dealers.

[iborguk]

7 minutes ago, EXY said:

Does a new tensioner come with a new/replacement bolt?

Is that a stretch bolt, if not it's like an episode of Wheeler Dealers.

No, looks like it’s a discrete part.

[moonshine]

It is not a stretch bolt or a requirement to change at tensioner replacement. 

There is no service requirement to change the tensioner at any set interval.

If you did, you might argue it is good practice to replace it for allow the cost, but it is not a stated requirement.

But the tensioner / belts have been inspected as per the service schedule with no issues found,

The tensioner has not been replaced (ever) so the fixing bolt failure has to be because of 

1) mechanical failure due to material defect (ie metallurgical issue)

2) over stressing of bolt above specified installation torque  (done in factory, so possible, but unlikely) or

3) Under spec bolt spec..( Highly unlikely)

Wear and tear in a static fixing is noted plausible 

 

 

[Boxer boy]

In Ferrari land on belted cars ( ok cam belts so the stakes of failure are catastrophic) it’s customary to replace the tensioners .

Not every time Ie 5 yrs .There’s nothing written up .Techs / DIY ers just spin them when the belts are off and check the age / milage ( not a lot of miles tbh ) and make a call .Seeing as it’s labour intensive to strip it down to get the cam belts off and obviously reassemble = Labour for the sake of £40 a bank most owners elect into new tensioners.

 

I can’t see this ploy belt tensioner being any different ,it’s gonna go at some time .I get the 6 yr belt change .My 09 had a new belt fitted 2022 .A friend recently brought his 10 modal round for me to show him the service position .We got the covers off inc the behind the seat to find a almost perished poly belt , but I demonstrated moving the tensioner with a big spanner , checking it’s spring effect was good at tightening and the thing moved freely and easily.Needs a bit of force of course .

So to me for that bolt to snap it’s ceased up .

1- too tight .

2- corrosion.

3 - the things never been exercised like I did with my mates ( and my own for that matter )  

 

But what you need to do is loosen it take the pressure off and spin it = listen for bearing grumble and access it’s function .As well as check it moves ie it’s no fast .

 

Wether this is mentioned under “ check tensioner “ or meant to be included in “ check poly belt “ is another discussion.

This discussion will drift into the fallacy of assuming full franchised dealer history ( with a stamped book )  is of any value .

Value with older cars .Say from 5 upwards .Especially valueless with a car over a decade old .U.K. salt , damp cars un garaged etc etc .

You really need to at least annually get the wheels off wax ( use what ever corrosion protection ) everything.

Lub + grease the hood linkages .

Apply anti corrosion substance to the front cross over pipes ( remove the front wheel liners ) .

check all drains are patent inc the front by removing all the scuttle plastic .

Apply anti corrosion product to the front AC condenser connections + remove the front bumper skin and under trays to clean the condensers .

Bleed your own brakes properly opening the inner calliper not letting the OPC just do the outer calliper = useless inner pad pressure = premature inner disk corrosion. 
 

Record all this .

 

A book of stamps  only on a AGED car is a kiss  of death really .

 

That bolt wouldn’t have snapped if it was checked , the tensioner moved now and again and occasionally lubed with WD 40 of light oil .

 

As far as the warranty the conditions are pretty clear it’s not covered it says so .Unfortunate sure / Yes . Not disputing that .It’s on the exclusion list that the OP has entered into contract with the warranty Co .

 

Next time folks get the cover off ( seat ) lub up all those pulleys and exercise   that tensioner .If your cars over 10 think about replacing it if it rumbles , has play , stiff , wobbles or won’t spin free with a finger swipe .

 

RANT over ! 

 

Edited April 29, 2023 by Boxer boy

[EXY]

21 hours ago, Boxer boy said:

As far as the warranty the conditions are pretty clear it’s not covered it says so .Unfortunate sure / Yes . Not disputing that .It’s on the exclusion list that the OP has entered into contract with the warranty Co .

I fear BB has hit the bolt on the head and your best hope is to embarrass them into repairing/replacing as a gesture of good will. 

Best of luck with that but as always if you don't ask etc.

21 hours ago, Boxer boy said:

Next time folks get the cover off ( seat ) lub up all those pulleys and exercise   that tensioner .

Even better do it when you are fitting an under drive pulley, IMHO it's up there in the top five best modifications you can do, maybe not to a 981 but on a 986/7 it's epic

 

[moonshine]

Agreed the   warranty eroding excludes “Drive belt, including tensioning and deflection roller”

• Specific wording is “Below is an exhaustive list of items commonly subject to wear and tear, which if fail due to Wear and tear, will not be covered by your policy (my emphasis)

the question is

1) can / is the item that failed subject to “wear and tear”? (Suspect a fixing bolt (unlike a pulley, bearing or belt) cannot

2) if it is an item that can be subject to “wear and tear”, what is the specified maintenance schedule?

3) the clause “which if fail due to Wear and tear”, will not be covered by your policy” does not except the items from ever being covered - only where the failure was as a result wear and tear.  Imagine a new belt / roller etc failing 1mile / 10 miles / 100 miles / 1000 miles after replacement - that failure would not be a result of wear and tear, rather a manufacturing defect - and that should be covered.

What is the lifespan of a static, properly torqued steel bolt? , i would suggest that is significantly longer than a belt,  pulley or tensioner.

Im going to have a meeting with the service manager tomorrow to see how we advance the situation - he said there are avenues open - but it was too late on Friday to do anything, so we are going to look at them tomorrow

 

[Scubaregs]

39 minutes ago, moonshine said:

Agreed the   warranty eroding excludes “Drive belt, including tensioning and deflection roller”

 

This is the crux of your argument, the bolt sheared which caused damage to items not covered under warranty.

If that bolt is a serviceable item and you have a full service history from Porsche then either it wasn't replaced when it should have been or if replaced it was faulty.

If it's not a serviceable item, reasonably speaking it should last the lifespan of the car. 

[moonshine]

25 minutes ago, Scubaregs said:

This is the crux of your argument, the bolt sheared which caused damage to items not covered under warranty.

If that bolt is a serviceable item and you have a full service history from Porsche then either it wasn't replaced when it should have been or if replaced it was faulty.

If it's not a serviceable item, reasonably speaking it should last the lifespan of the car. 

Yes, this is exactly the crux of the argument I will be making.