Cayman 718 GPF Failure

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Just had a thought, now that we have established that this GPF oil ash fault with a DTC code of P242F was obviously seen in cars way back in 2019 when they were under the manufactures warranty.

And the original GPF filters clearly had to be modified, wouldn't it be great if we could find out what the modification was on the original filter to stop this fault happening again.

So now, we should have a new customer process, to explain to any owners that present a vehicle to a Porsche Service Department, that has the Consult dealer, Driving permitted warning message on the dashboard, and the DTC P242F oil ash load exceeded present on the car.

Its brilliant now for the Dealers, they don't have to give the pathetic excuses that engine oil and driving style has caused this fault.

They don't even have to mention now, that the extended warranty will not cover its replacement.

All the Dealer needs to do now , is contact the Porsche Technical Department, and remind them about their recent document thats just gone out.

Hopefully the Technical Department will not request that a perfectly good GPF is replaced, which will save Porsche alot of time and money.

Because, we have so many cars that have had new modified filters fitted, that are sadly coming back with the same issue.

So all the stress as gone for the owners, waiting around for somebody to ring them, worring about the average 9K bill, its all over.

Its taken us 2 years, and lots of hard work to get to this situation now, we just need an adjustment in the software, job done.

We need to restore the reputation of these cars, and put them back were they belong.

Sorry for going on again, and repeating myself

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Dan,
Without prejudice

Sorry I forget to reply to your previous comment regarding non members not being able to see our threads.

Yes they can

All they need to do is Google. Porsche Cayman GPF issues.

Enclose screen shots below
Click on top of page
Cayman 718 GPF failure I page 5
The Porsche Club emblem comes up, then you an click on to pages from 1 to 31.
It would take a very long time to look at the work we have done, suggest you start on page 5.

Just a question I would like to ask Porsche Technical who seem to be convinced that internal oil consumption into the cylinders is causing the high oil ash % values in the GPF.

Its well written that 90% of GPF ash is caused by engine oil and its additives.

We have had two of our cars engines removed, and stripped down in Porsche workshops looking for internal signs of oil consumption.

Nothing found apparently, engines put back together.

So you would expect that if this was the case on our cars, you would see signs of this oil pollution hitting the Catalytic Convertor core first.

This is a recent photo of a GPF that was removed showing the Catalytic Convertor core, taken off a vehicle recently with 45k miles on the clock, with the DTC P242F present.

And a quote from the Dealer of 8.5K

Looks very clean to me.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi me again

Without prejudice

Sorry Dan, forgot to mention your comment regarding the Porsche Post magazine article that never got into the customer waiting area at the dealership you recently visited.

They had not seen the two page article that was well written and was asking Porsche for the answers on why this fault was on these cars.

It was in the Dealer Principals office.

Found another photo of a 718 Catalytic Convertor core, with slightly more miles covered, that needed a new GPF fitting.


Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi & Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Have a look at this video, it shows exhaust back pressure being tested on a BMW and differential pressure sensor readings you would expect on a good back pressure reading.

Remember all the differential pressure sensor readings we have seen, on all the cars our Dealers said we needed a new filter were on no higher than around 5.0 hPa.

This is why a back pressure test is crucial in confirming the GPF is blocked and should always be carried out.

Our Dealers are still carrying out a regeneration of the GPF to try and lower the ASH values or try and re set it to zero.

We can see from our GPF data that there are no soot values present at all, which confirms this.

If we go back to the recent technical internal document that was sent out, the last paragraph confirms that a OPF (GPF) regeneration should be attempted, to see if the Ash load is able to be reset.

If this does not reset the oil ash value, then the OPF, (GPF) should be replaced with a modified filter (982254400F).

Any feedback on this post will be greatly appreciated.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Morning all,
Me again

Without prejudice

We now have 65K views on our GPF campaign, can we get to 70K by the end of the month.

We have lots of things coming up this next week, that will help us to prove again that the replacement of these GPF filters are definitely coming under the category of a major miss diagnosis by our Porsche Dealers and Porsche.

Dave

 

[Wrightrubber]

Hi Dave
The video (BMW) seems straight forward, but we have never seen any soot figures and a simple back pressure check would identify if the filter was blocked so why oh why do they not do the back pressure check before replacing these very expensive filters!!!
It should be an interesting week coming up, look forward to more details.
Regards
Mark

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Morning Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

I had an interesting day yesterday, one of our owners with a 23 plate Cayman went into his local Porsche Dealer for its first 20k service, and a GPF oil and ash level check.

This specific check was carried out last year at a mileage of around 11K.

We where surprised to find a reading of 11 %, but arranged with the Dealer that it would be checked again when it went in for its service this year.

The car had covered a total of 14K miles, and the oil ash % check was done before the car was serviced.

The technician checked the readings on page 42 of the Val report and found a reading of 37.65 % with a differential pressure sensor reading of 1.2 hPa.

He then shared these readings with the owner, and he made a comment regarding how the car had been driven with regards to it not doing to many short journeys.

This was backed up by sight of page 32 of the Val report showing the number of motor operations between 0 to 3 miles, and 3 to 6 mile journeys.

In total 307 journeys recorded, see the report below

The Service Manager suggested that a regeneration should be done, to try and reset the oil ash level, this was carried out, and the level returned to zero.

The car will be going back in for another check in a 1000 miles.

This got me thinking back to last year when Mark was told that the reason why his GPF had failed was he had done to many short journeys, and they had the data recorded to prove it.

And he was also told by the Service Manager that half hour journeys were not suitable for his car.

I then had a look at the only Val report I have managed to get over the last 2 years, which came from a vehicle that had a new modified filter fitted by Porsche Reading last year.

You may remember it took me over 5 months to get Porsche Reading to pay for this repair.

Looking at the data again on page 32 at the same journeys recorded, we see a different story.

0 to 3 miles 1520, and 3 to 6 miles 1621 total 3141 journeys, see copy of report below.

This cars oil ash level was at 100 %, and Porsche Technical said it needed a new GPF filter fitting because it was blocked.

Our 23 plate cars oil ash level was at 37.65% with much lower short journeys covered.

We know that the oil ash % load is not monitored by the differential pressure sensor, due to the very low differential pressure sensor reading recorded on every car thats needed a new filter.

Its always been are view that the oil ash % readings on these cars are controlled by an algorithm.

Could this data of low mileage recorded journeys carried out over time, be the how the ECU comes up with an oil ash measured value, that then puts on the warning light.

This could explain why after fitting the modified filters, the oil ash % comes back, because the the low milege journey data is still in the cars ECU.

The first photo is the 23 plate cars data, and the 2nd photo is the Porsche Reading cars data

Its just a theory

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls
Without prejudice

Ive just watched a video of a guy called Pete ( Petrol Ped) on YouTube who recently purchased a 991.2 and unfortunately had to return the car.
The car had blue smoke on start up.

I came across a similar issue with one of these cars when I worked at a local Porsche independent workshop, in July 2021.

The car came in with bue smoke on start up, and after doing some research I found a technical bulletin SY 211655 that explained that due to aluminium chips being produced during manufacturing they could affect the function of the check valve in the oil intake pipe, resulting in oil getting into the turbos.

It gave a full list of pipes that needed replacing along with new turbo aluminium catch tanks.

When we checked over the car we not only found excessive oil in the right hand turbo, we also found the boost actuator lever on the turbo was seized solid and could not be freed off, the lefthand turbo lever was also starting to seize.

We ordered new turbos and all the parts listed on the technical bulletin, and when the new turbos arrived we could see that they had been modified.

They had a stainless steel protection cover over the actuator lever, to stop the levers seizing up.

The engine was removed, and all parts were fitted, we also found that the AOS had failed and had been superceded, so this was replaced.

Unfortunately Porsche would not cover this repair because the car was 6 months out of the failure time range on the bulletin.

The cost was around £12,500.

Durring that repair I came across another faulty 991.2, with the same issue, that was within the failure rang, I gave the customer the bulletin number information and Porsche covered 80% of the repairs under warranty.

If Petes car was checked over by a Porsche workshop, why did they not see these issues, and bring it to somebody's attention, afterall they have known all about this issue for quite a while.

And regarding the failed AOS, I have an answer to why it wasn't picked up, and that is they do not use a manometer to check the vacuum readings on the AOS.

They should start.

This is a simple tool that can check so much, AOS vacuum,and backpressure in our GPF cars.

So my view is, the preparation and check over on this car was absolutely crap, and now Pete is clearly shattered by the experience, and now his bad experience on buying one of these cars is spread far and wide.

I know its not a Cayman or Boxster 718, with GPF issues, but it just shows you that you can spend 80K and still be let down by the people you should be able to trust.

Enclose Petes video for you to see

Dave

 

[911hillclimber]

Saw that this morning myself.
These cars are not a premium brand anymore.
Imagine a good video on YouTube about these 718 filters and the costs and attitudes involved...might make some in the right places wince a bit.

 

[Wrightrubber]

Hi Dave,
Regarding your first post this morning with the 23 plate Cayman and 37.65% Ash Level and a regeneration was carried out and the level returned to 0%, how can this be? I thought you couldn't burn off ash, only soot!! If this is the case and you can return it to 0% that means you would NEVER need to replace the filter because Porsche are saying they can burn off the ash......very unlikely!!! and return it to zero....what is going on?
Regards
Mark

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Mark,

Without prejudice

Yes your absolutely right, if this was the case and you could burn off ASH with a simple regeneration then the company who made these filters for Porsche, would go bust.

It makes you wonder if the company supplying these filters are fully aware that there product is apparently the cause of this fault and has been since 2019.

Pauls car has had two modified GPF filters fitted recently and he still has the oil ash % problem it keeps coming back.

The fact that we cannot get a back pressure check done on these cars in a dealer workshop is absolutely ridiculous.

We offered to pay a Dealer 2 weeks ago to carry out this basic check, they refused and suggested we take the car somewhere else.

Two of our cars have had their engines removed and taken apart looking for any signs of oil consumption that could find its way into the cylinders, and then into the GPF filters.

Quess what, nothing found, so what are we going to do next

How many more parts can we fit to these cars before the penny drops.

We are closely looking at the 2019 992 cars at the moment, that seem to be experiencing the same issues as on our 718 cars.

We will keep you updated

Dave

 

[Greenman986S]

He then shared these readings with the owner, and he made a comment regarding how the car had been driven with regards to it not doing to many short journeys.

This was backed up by sight of page 32 of the Val report showing the number of motor operations between 0 to 3 miles, and 3 to 6 mile journeys.

In total 307 journeys recorded, see the report below

The Service Manager suggested that a regeneration should be done, to try and reset the oil ash level, this was carried out, and the level returned to zero.

The car will be going back in for another check in a 1000 miles.

Looking at the data again on page 32 at the same journeys recorded, we see a different story.

0 to 3 miles 1520, and 3 to 6 miles 1621 total 3141 journeys, see copy of report below.

is that high volume of very short distances a function of the stop start?

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Greenman986S

Without prejudice

To be honest, not sure, we are trying to work out where this oil ash % measured value comes from, it would be great if we could speak to Porsche Reading Technical and work on this together.

We are all waiting for Pauls car to be finally fixed, after all this time spent replacing 2 modified GPF filters, and a new AOS, two differential pressure sensors and a DME.

Not to mention the removal of the engine and a strip down, looking for signs of internal oil consumption.

And after all that time spent, and new parts fitted, we still have this oil ash % reading that makes no sense at all.

The dealer technicians can reset the oil ash reading to zero, then it comes back.

Has Mark said, these readings are not actual ASH, just a measured value thats been created by an algorithm.

Its here one minute and gone the next, and whats really interesting it comes back in a new modified filter thats just been fitted.

Why is it that only a regeneration can change this value to zero, but not every time.

The recent Porsche internal document regarding our GPF issue clearly states that if the first regeneration doesn't reset this value, then a new modified GPF has to be fitted.

WHY, WHATS CAUSING THIS TO HAPPEN

Our 2023 Cayman T, thats just had its GPF filter oil ash % level rechecked again, had increased by 25% over the last 6 months.

Its been reset to zero by carrying out a successful regeneration, and it will be going back to the Dealer for another check soon.

We have proved time and time again, that these new filters are not fixing this fault.

Hopefully we will have some good news on Paul's car soon.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without Prejudice

Well, its been a while since I posted,

I have been waiting for oil ash % readings on two of our Cayman 2.0 2019 cars, that had new modified GPF filters fitted at the back end of last year.

Unfortunately the oil ash readings on both of these cars is far to high, bearing in mind the time duration and mileage covered, 41.96% and 37.65%.

Surely this is more proof, that the fitting of these modified filters to these 2019 cars is not fixing the oil ash measured values we have on our cars.

We are still waiting for news on Pauls car, which is still in the workshop, hopefully we will have some news soon.

Some good news for a change, we are now on 68K views, so a big thankyou to everybody who is following this forum, these views clearly show that people a really interested in our quest to get Porsche to sort out this problem.

I've said this before, and will say it again, these 718 cars are unrivalled in their class, and its a real shame that this issue is being aloud to carry on.

Unfortunately, I have not heard anything from Porsche Technical Reading, which is a shame, as we have the information on how to go into these vehicles software, and make this issue go away, but this can only be done correctly by the manufacturer.

We are still waiting for more cars to go back into Dealers for an oil ash % check, after the new modified filters have been fitted.

Will keep you updated

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Me again
Sorry for the spelling mistake,aloud (allowed)
Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Another busy week gone, guiding our owners through these difficult times, when they have been told their GPF filter needs replacing.

Some interesting information from one of our owners that has completed over 10K with his original GPF filter, after he was told by his Dealer that it need changing because it was blocked.

He's monitored the mileage he covered every time his light came on using a diagnostic tool.

Generally the light is triggered when the Oil Ash % is between 90 and 100%.

He's found that the light can disappear and can come back on after 350 to 745 miles on average, but can go a lot longer.

If the ASH level was real, it can not be reduced by a static regeneration, because you can't set fire to Ash to turn it into Ash.

And remember the regeneration function is to reduce soot into Ash.

You may remember along time ago I mentioned that Porsche cars sold in America can come with an 8 year, 80,000 mile emission defect warranty.

This depends on what state in America the car is sold in.

If this was the case here, things would be a lot easier, could it be that the Americans needed a better guarantee on the emission control side of these cars, bearing in mind it was new technology fitting GPF filters in 2019, and time was clearly needed by all manufacturers to see how things would work going forward.

Enclose this link for your attention

The Ultimate Emission Warranty Guide

Get an in-depth understanding of emission warranty, its regulations, and environmental impact. Learn how to navigate the complexities of emission warranty and its role in reducing emissions.

www.numberanalytics.com

Just a thought

Dave

 

[Wrightrubber]

Just a bit more information, see attached, this was my GPF reading, 4000 miles and 2 years on from the new filter being fitted (when this thread was started), as you can see ash was at 55.29%, soot 0.00% and differential pressure was 0.05 psi.
Currently at 69k views.

Regards
Mark

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Thanks Mark,

Without Prejudice,

Brilliant info, just shows us that 2 years in, and we are still trying to convince Porsche that they have got it wrong fitting these modified filters.

And how were these filters modified in 2019, what did they do to them, we know the same DTC P242F was present at the time.

What will it take to convince them that they need to look at the software.

We have more cars going into Dealers this week, with supposedly blocked filters, will let you know the outcomes.

And we are still waiting for an outcome on Paul's car after further work has been carried out to try and correct the oil ash % coming back time after time.

Fingers crossed

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Well its been a busy week again,

We have unfortunately lost one of our Cayman 718 owners, that had a new modified filter fitted last year.

The car went in recently for a service and a GPF oil ash % check, it had 37.65%.

This was the final straw, the loss of confidence with the car proved to much to bear, so it was sold.

We also had another owner contact us with another P242F trouble code, so we are off again trying to help them get a resolution.

Another one of our cars is currently in at a Porsche Dealer, having further checks done, with the usual P242F code.

Whats very worrying at the moment is we seem to be getting lots of contacts from owners that have purchased a 718 outside the Dealer network with this fault.

We need some reassurance from Porsche GB, that any of these cars with this issue will be looked after.

This fault has been confirmed by Porsche Reading as a manufacturing defect, so they need to stand by these owners.

May I suggest that if you have this fault code on your car, you go to your local Porsche Dealer and ask them to contact Porsche GB on your behalf.

Will keep you informed of any progress

Some good news, we are currently on 70K views

Thank you for your interest and support

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without Prejudice

Unfortunately I have had some bad news this morning, we have been monitoring a 2023 Cayman 2.0 that recently went into a Porsche Dealer to have its Oil Ash % checked.

Its first check was carried in November 2024 at around 11K, the Ash load was around 15%.

A second check was carried out again in the same month, it was still around 15%.

The third test was carried out in June this year at around 14K, the Ash load had increased to 37%, the Dealer carried out a regeneration, and the Oil Ash % value was re set to 0.00%.

The owner took his car back today after covering only 250 miles, and the Oil Ash % value was 31%, the Dealer is sending this information on to Porsche Technical.

I had a call today from a motor trader who had seen a black Porsche Cayman 2.0 2019 for sale on an auction site that listed a fault on the GPF filter with a DTC code P242F.

He has looked on our forum, and needed some reassurance that these cars can be fixed.

What I did say was, hopefully we are trying to get Porsche to engage with us, to sort out this issue, and hopefully soon, they will have a resolution.

I have the registration number and chassis number of this car, and will be watching out for it.

If you are worried at all about your GPF filters oil ash reading, just call in to your local Porsche Dealer, or independent Garage and ask them to check it for you.

We now consider this simple check to be a service item, because of its importance and potential cost.

Lots more of our cars are going in for GPF tests, over the next few weeks, will keep you informed

Regards
David