Me again
Sorry for the spelling mistake,aloud (allowed)
Dave
Sorry for the spelling mistake,aloud (allowed)
Dave
Cayman 718 GPF Failure
- Thread starter Wrightrubber
- Start date
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
www.numberanalytics.com
Just a thought
Dave
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
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
Currently at 69k views.
Regards
Mark
Attachments
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
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
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
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
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
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
Hi Dave
It will be interesting to see what Porsche Technical say about the 2023MY car, as this is still under the manufacturers warranty.
Regards
Mark
It will be interesting to see what Porsche Technical say about the 2023MY car, as this is still under the manufacturers warranty.
Regards
Mark
Hi Mark,
Yes it will be interesting on how this will play out, we will be following this case with great interest.
Thanks for your post
Dave
Yes it will be interesting on how this will play out, we will be following this case with great interest.
Thanks for your post
Dave
Hi Guys & Girls
Without prejudice
Sorry its been a while since I Iast posted, we have been waiting for cars going back into Dealers for their oil ash % levels checked.
This week we have 2 cars going back in, after they had new filters fitted at the beginning of this year, under warranty.
Fingers crossed, we hope to find no Ash present, will let you know as we go along.
Thanks for all your views again, we are now at 72K
Regards
Dave
Without prejudice
Sorry its been a while since I Iast posted, we have been waiting for cars going back into Dealers for their oil ash % levels checked.
This week we have 2 cars going back in, after they had new filters fitted at the beginning of this year, under warranty.
Fingers crossed, we hope to find no Ash present, will let you know as we go along.
Thanks for all your views again, we are now at 72K
Regards
Dave
Hi Guys & Girls
Without prejudice
Following on from my last post, both cars have been in this week, these cars had new modified GPF filters fitted within the last 4 months, and the oil ash % levels have been rechecked.
We recorded 54% and 47%, this information as now been sent to Porsche Technical for their attention.
When we look back at another 4 previous vehicles that have had new modified filters fitted, we recorded the following oil ash % readings.
42, 48, 64, 55.
Hopefully Porsche Reading Technical will have all this information on all these cars, which clearly now confirms that replacing the original filter, without confirming the actual existence of Ash is pointless.
To date, we have had no dealer carry out our request for a GPF back pressure check to be carried out on any of our faulty vehicles.
Also we have evidence that if a successful regeneration reset on these cars is carried out, and the oil ash value shows 0.00 %, if its then checked again, within 500 miles it comes back, usually around 50% on average.
Hopefully now the Dealers will not be asking us to find the money to replace a faulty GPF, when the DTC code P242F presents itself, because it clearly is not causing this issue.
Its taken us, over 2 years to get to this position, but by not needing to replace such an expensive exhaust, it really takes the pressure off.
We just need to look somewhere else, and finally sort this out.
We will be waiting in anticipation from our Dealer Technical Requests regarding this situation.
Dave
Without prejudice
Following on from my last post, both cars have been in this week, these cars had new modified GPF filters fitted within the last 4 months, and the oil ash % levels have been rechecked.
We recorded 54% and 47%, this information as now been sent to Porsche Technical for their attention.
When we look back at another 4 previous vehicles that have had new modified filters fitted, we recorded the following oil ash % readings.
42, 48, 64, 55.
Hopefully Porsche Reading Technical will have all this information on all these cars, which clearly now confirms that replacing the original filter, without confirming the actual existence of Ash is pointless.
To date, we have had no dealer carry out our request for a GPF back pressure check to be carried out on any of our faulty vehicles.
Also we have evidence that if a successful regeneration reset on these cars is carried out, and the oil ash value shows 0.00 %, if its then checked again, within 500 miles it comes back, usually around 50% on average.
Hopefully now the Dealers will not be asking us to find the money to replace a faulty GPF, when the DTC code P242F presents itself, because it clearly is not causing this issue.
Its taken us, over 2 years to get to this position, but by not needing to replace such an expensive exhaust, it really takes the pressure off.
We just need to look somewhere else, and finally sort this out.
We will be waiting in anticipation from our Dealer Technical Requests regarding this situation.
Dave
Without Prejudice
Well it’s been at least a month since I last posted and there has been a lot going on so I feel I owe you all an update.
Just as a recap the start of my GPF nightmare started over a year ago after the light we all fear came on after a days driving enjoying my car with my wife.
A week later I had the you need to pay £8 to £9k call to fix your car as the GPF is 100% full.
I am fortunate enough that my GTS Boxster is a 2nd car and only used at weekends for days out and weekends away which normally entails journeys of 40 to 100 miles each way minimum.
I had only had the car since March 2024 and driven around 1200 miles.
So after the normal 3 month arm wrestle my 1st exchange GPF was fitted and I insisted that I didn’t believe this was the root cause and wanted 4 further VAL tests completed over a period of a year which the OPC agreed too otherwise I was going to reject the car.(my car showed the GPF to be 78% full when I purchased it on a 2019 car with 11200 miles from new)
After 500 miles and me logging my journeys it went back in and was at 29% full… we agreed a further period of driving and 300 miles later in Jan 2025 it went back in and was at over 40%.
Like most people it had taken me a long time to find my perfect spec car and I just wanted it fixed.
So jumping forward to July 2025 my car was still in the OPC trying to be fixed after 7 months. I must say at this point the OPC have been fully supportive and we had regular calls and quite a few face to face interactions. I wouldn’t however have the same level of praise for Porsche GB Reading, and TBH there customer interaction and service levels don’t represent a premium brand in my opinion/experience.
Sadly I have now thrown in the towel and rejected my car but continue my journey with Porsche in a 2021 Boxster GTS 4.0..
My old car is still not fixed and as far as I am aware been trailered off to Reading for further diagnosis and testing.
So in summary the following work was completed in the last year.
3 x replacement GPF(2 brand new/1 exchange)
2 x Differential pressure sensors
1 x DME (Computer/Car Brains)
1 x Oil separator
1 x engine strip down and check
1 x replacement turbo
1 x replacement engine
But sadly no software investigations as far as I am aware.
I am sure there are other bits I have missed and as well as a number of live road VAl tests completed.
Lessons to be learnt -
Work with your OPC - unfortunately it feels to me like they have their hands tied and have to follow what they are told to do.. they have all the responsibility and unfortunately none of the power.
Before you buy any modern car don’t just ask about FSH, ask for the VAL report and check the GPF or even DPF report.. if you feel it’s too high compared to the mileage walk away..
I am no expert but based on my experiences my rule of thumb is 1% ash fill for every 1000 miles.
Please feel free to ask questions I will try and help and support and share my knowledge and experience.
On a final note to the Club and your lack of support for you members, for whatever reason…..
Very disappointing and could try a lot harder…
Well it’s been at least a month since I last posted and there has been a lot going on so I feel I owe you all an update.
Just as a recap the start of my GPF nightmare started over a year ago after the light we all fear came on after a days driving enjoying my car with my wife.
A week later I had the you need to pay £8 to £9k call to fix your car as the GPF is 100% full.
I am fortunate enough that my GTS Boxster is a 2nd car and only used at weekends for days out and weekends away which normally entails journeys of 40 to 100 miles each way minimum.
I had only had the car since March 2024 and driven around 1200 miles.
So after the normal 3 month arm wrestle my 1st exchange GPF was fitted and I insisted that I didn’t believe this was the root cause and wanted 4 further VAL tests completed over a period of a year which the OPC agreed too otherwise I was going to reject the car.(my car showed the GPF to be 78% full when I purchased it on a 2019 car with 11200 miles from new)
After 500 miles and me logging my journeys it went back in and was at 29% full… we agreed a further period of driving and 300 miles later in Jan 2025 it went back in and was at over 40%.
Like most people it had taken me a long time to find my perfect spec car and I just wanted it fixed.
So jumping forward to July 2025 my car was still in the OPC trying to be fixed after 7 months. I must say at this point the OPC have been fully supportive and we had regular calls and quite a few face to face interactions. I wouldn’t however have the same level of praise for Porsche GB Reading, and TBH there customer interaction and service levels don’t represent a premium brand in my opinion/experience.
Sadly I have now thrown in the towel and rejected my car but continue my journey with Porsche in a 2021 Boxster GTS 4.0..
My old car is still not fixed and as far as I am aware been trailered off to Reading for further diagnosis and testing.
So in summary the following work was completed in the last year.
3 x replacement GPF(2 brand new/1 exchange)
2 x Differential pressure sensors
1 x DME (Computer/Car Brains)
1 x Oil separator
1 x engine strip down and check
1 x replacement turbo
1 x replacement engine
But sadly no software investigations as far as I am aware.
I am sure there are other bits I have missed and as well as a number of live road VAl tests completed.
Lessons to be learnt -
Work with your OPC - unfortunately it feels to me like they have their hands tied and have to follow what they are told to do.. they have all the responsibility and unfortunately none of the power.
Before you buy any modern car don’t just ask about FSH, ask for the VAL report and check the GPF or even DPF report.. if you feel it’s too high compared to the mileage walk away..
I am no expert but based on my experiences my rule of thumb is 1% ash fill for every 1000 miles.
Please feel free to ask questions I will try and help and support and share my knowledge and experience.
On a final note to the Club and your lack of support for you members, for whatever reason…..
Very disappointing and could try a lot harder…
Last edited:
Sobering result.
7 months and no fix that works and that mechanical list is massive in terms of cost and time which I presume the OPC took.
I'm surprised you have stayed with the type of car and the brand in general and hope your future experiences will be happy.
What a saga.
I also presume the PCGB are poor because the factory are ignoring them and the issue.
Refreshing to read the OPC involved has been on your side.
7 months and no fix that works and that mechanical list is massive in terms of cost and time which I presume the OPC took.
I'm surprised you have stayed with the type of car and the brand in general and hope your future experiences will be happy.
What a saga.
I also presume the PCGB are poor because the factory are ignoring them and the issue.
Refreshing to read the OPC involved has been on your side.
I think the disappointing thing is that PCGB haven't posted anything here for some time, even if it were to report that they've had nothing back from Porsche GB or AG.
As I've said before, Porsche AG will do nothing until the wider audience is made aware and it starts to affect new and used car sales.
Dan
As I've said before, Porsche AG will do nothing until the wider audience is made aware and it starts to affect new and used car sales.
Dan
Spot on Dan. They did feature the issue in PP, but short of mentioning the differential pressure testing that showed the filters were NOT blocked.
I am amazed that this doesn't seem to have hit the motoring media somehow. I get that many owners won't want this to happen because if Porsche don't step up and fix it they will no doubt see a hit to residual values. However, if the resulting clamour were to result in positive and restorative reputational action from Porsche (ie a fix, like the centre lock wheels and other examples), then the market would soon respond. The market is gradually learning, with adverts starting to appear for early 718s specifically mentioning that they don't have GPFs. The fact that this is mentioned will result in at least some potential buyers asking what that's all about - and it's not just the noise they make.
Greenman986S
PCGB Member
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree....
I can see another IMS/bore score/ crank seal conversation soon kicking off.
I don't think that lot bothered Porsche in Germany at all.
I don't think that lot bothered Porsche in Germany at all.
As someone who has been part of this from the beginning, working with Dave and also getting the original article in Porsche Post, I guess I should put a Cayman Register and PCGB perspective on this, albeit that it is my personal opinion and not 'sanctioned' by the Club.
This all started over two years ago with a CEL light coming on and the dealers were trying to charge £7-9k to turn it off. So what has been achieved through Dave's work?
- there is now no reason any owner should accept this diagnosis and we can help them work through this. Dave has saved members £thousands.
- the GPF fault is the result of a problem elsewhere, probably in the software algorithms. GPF's don't 'block' themselves.
- there is enough publicity on here and the related forums like Piston Heads to think that anyone who still hands over their hard earned cash for a new GPF is daft!
- we will move through this stage as dealers realise they will be rebuffed.
- if anyone is willing to be identified on here, asking for help because they have received such a diagnosis there is no problem with naming the OPC providing that it is restricted to being factual, supportable and 'unemotional'.
Summary: there are a relatively small number of cars out there that may throw up a P242F error code. We know that the OPC diagnosis is incorrect and can help owners push back against a costly GPF replacement. That is a significant win in my book.
But, of course, it would be good to get to the bottom of this and have Porsche confirm what is really going on. Just so we know!
We know that the GPF, AOS and other components have been upgraded during the period from 2019. We also have a body of evidence to support the fact that these are not the problem in terms of the ash load:
- replacing these components may be a reprieve but in some cases, such as Paul's, the dealers do this and still can't complete a fix. We also believe that the problem will recur in other cars that have been ‘fixed’.
- the fact that Porsche are still issuing different instructions suggests that they do not feel they have a complete solution to offer. My understanding is that the Oliver Hayward document was a letter, not a technical bulletin, again pointing to uncertainty at Porsche.
- we do not know why this affects some, but not all, cars in this 2019 period of production.
Dave has pointed at the software and the related hardware (sensors etc.) as being at the root of the problem almost from the start. This is based on:
- the VAL reports producing unbelievable results
- the inability of the dealers to reset the software after replacing the hardware.
- and finally Paul's experience where, having stripped the engine, replacing virtually everything that can be replaced, they are now pulling the car back to the centre and doing a deal.
Porsche GB are stonewalling us over this, and doing it successfully. They simply do not respond to the club, their customers or even the OPC's. It is a numbers game. Porsche has no reason or incentive to do anything other than deal with this matter on a case by case basis. Being generous we might find 30 owners willing to share their stories in public. We might get more by 'advertising' for owners to step up. But most won't want the hassle, just a working car. A decent OPC sells over 30 cars a month. These Caymans would be 0.01% of Porsche production in 2025. (The VW emissions case affected 11 million vehicles.) In Porsche terms this GPF issue is a minor blip. They have dealt with much bigger issues in the past - PDF gearboxes where owners had to buy new ones instead of getting the fault repaired (Still the case today) - wheels falling off centre lock cars (they could not ignore that one) - the myriad issues affecting the electric vehicles - 997 engines grenading on cars that had barely covered 50,000 miles. The list goes on. Unpalatable as it might be, in our world this 'GPF' is a big deal. In Porsche world it is in the inbox of a junior technician. The same applies to trying to attract the attention of the media. It only affected a certain series of cars produced in 2019. It is yesterday's headline in a world where Caymans and Boxsters continue to be rated as highly reliable.
It is at this point that I start speculating, based on the fact that I cannot believe that Porsche do not know where the problem lies. Such ignorance is inconceivable. So, consider the hypothesis that they know the answer, that there is a fault in the calibration of sensors and, or, the programming of the ECU etc. and the controlling of emissions. This fault is enough to trigger the P242F error code in some circumstances. All these systems are subject to TUV and global certifications and any changes would require re-certification and potentially cost $lots and $lots. Better to keep the lid on it, acknowledge nothing and let OPC's handle the relatively small number of cases, most of which can be dealt with somehow.
So, where does that leave us?
1. we do have knowledge and leverage to help those who are affected by the P242F error code.
2. we do not have leverage to make Porsche explain the issue and offer a solution through a technical bulletin.
From a register and club perspective I will take 1 above as having done our job for members. I am not happy about 2 but I think we have to live with it unless we can see a negative impact on those members that we can get hold of.
Therefore, we keep going, support our members, publicise as much as possible on here and elsewhere and see what, if anything, developes.
This all started over two years ago with a CEL light coming on and the dealers were trying to charge £7-9k to turn it off. So what has been achieved through Dave's work?
- there is now no reason any owner should accept this diagnosis and we can help them work through this. Dave has saved members £thousands.
- the GPF fault is the result of a problem elsewhere, probably in the software algorithms. GPF's don't 'block' themselves.
- there is enough publicity on here and the related forums like Piston Heads to think that anyone who still hands over their hard earned cash for a new GPF is daft!
- we will move through this stage as dealers realise they will be rebuffed.
- if anyone is willing to be identified on here, asking for help because they have received such a diagnosis there is no problem with naming the OPC providing that it is restricted to being factual, supportable and 'unemotional'.
Summary: there are a relatively small number of cars out there that may throw up a P242F error code. We know that the OPC diagnosis is incorrect and can help owners push back against a costly GPF replacement. That is a significant win in my book.
But, of course, it would be good to get to the bottom of this and have Porsche confirm what is really going on. Just so we know!
We know that the GPF, AOS and other components have been upgraded during the period from 2019. We also have a body of evidence to support the fact that these are not the problem in terms of the ash load:
- replacing these components may be a reprieve but in some cases, such as Paul's, the dealers do this and still can't complete a fix. We also believe that the problem will recur in other cars that have been ‘fixed’.
- the fact that Porsche are still issuing different instructions suggests that they do not feel they have a complete solution to offer. My understanding is that the Oliver Hayward document was a letter, not a technical bulletin, again pointing to uncertainty at Porsche.
- we do not know why this affects some, but not all, cars in this 2019 period of production.
Dave has pointed at the software and the related hardware (sensors etc.) as being at the root of the problem almost from the start. This is based on:
- the VAL reports producing unbelievable results
- the inability of the dealers to reset the software after replacing the hardware.
- and finally Paul's experience where, having stripped the engine, replacing virtually everything that can be replaced, they are now pulling the car back to the centre and doing a deal.
Porsche GB are stonewalling us over this, and doing it successfully. They simply do not respond to the club, their customers or even the OPC's. It is a numbers game. Porsche has no reason or incentive to do anything other than deal with this matter on a case by case basis. Being generous we might find 30 owners willing to share their stories in public. We might get more by 'advertising' for owners to step up. But most won't want the hassle, just a working car. A decent OPC sells over 30 cars a month. These Caymans would be 0.01% of Porsche production in 2025. (The VW emissions case affected 11 million vehicles.) In Porsche terms this GPF issue is a minor blip. They have dealt with much bigger issues in the past - PDF gearboxes where owners had to buy new ones instead of getting the fault repaired (Still the case today) - wheels falling off centre lock cars (they could not ignore that one) - the myriad issues affecting the electric vehicles - 997 engines grenading on cars that had barely covered 50,000 miles. The list goes on. Unpalatable as it might be, in our world this 'GPF' is a big deal. In Porsche world it is in the inbox of a junior technician. The same applies to trying to attract the attention of the media. It only affected a certain series of cars produced in 2019. It is yesterday's headline in a world where Caymans and Boxsters continue to be rated as highly reliable.
It is at this point that I start speculating, based on the fact that I cannot believe that Porsche do not know where the problem lies. Such ignorance is inconceivable. So, consider the hypothesis that they know the answer, that there is a fault in the calibration of sensors and, or, the programming of the ECU etc. and the controlling of emissions. This fault is enough to trigger the P242F error code in some circumstances. All these systems are subject to TUV and global certifications and any changes would require re-certification and potentially cost $lots and $lots. Better to keep the lid on it, acknowledge nothing and let OPC's handle the relatively small number of cases, most of which can be dealt with somehow.
So, where does that leave us?
1. we do have knowledge and leverage to help those who are affected by the P242F error code.
2. we do not have leverage to make Porsche explain the issue and offer a solution through a technical bulletin.
From a register and club perspective I will take 1 above as having done our job for members. I am not happy about 2 but I think we have to live with it unless we can see a negative impact on those members that we can get hold of.
Therefore, we keep going, support our members, publicise as much as possible on here and elsewhere and see what, if anything, developes.
Without Prejudice
Paul, I am pleased you managed to get out of that car but I am somewhat surprised you have taken on another 718 and from the same dealer, you said the dealer has been very supportive, is this the same dealer that never returned your calls and you had to constantly chase for updates on the progress, the way they have treated you over the past 7 months, I don't think I would have been as forgiving!! What gives you the confidence that your new 718 doesn't or will not suffer the same issue, Porsche clearly cannot or are not willing to sort the problem, we have seen later cars (later than 2019 models) with the same problem.
Anyway I started this whole issue with the very first post but thankfully I am out of the loop now having sold my car.
Enjoy your new car Paul, I hope everything goes well, best wishes.
Mark
Paul, I am pleased you managed to get out of that car but I am somewhat surprised you have taken on another 718 and from the same dealer, you said the dealer has been very supportive, is this the same dealer that never returned your calls and you had to constantly chase for updates on the progress, the way they have treated you over the past 7 months, I don't think I would have been as forgiving!! What gives you the confidence that your new 718 doesn't or will not suffer the same issue, Porsche clearly cannot or are not willing to sort the problem, we have seen later cars (later than 2019 models) with the same problem.
Anyway I started this whole issue with the very first post but thankfully I am out of the loop now having sold my car.
Enjoy your new car Paul, I hope everything goes well, best wishes.
Mark
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
