Cayman 718 GPF Failure

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi John
Without prejudice

Yes you are right on all counts, it would be great to engage with technical, but their absence makes this situation even worse.

I received this post yesterday from Sarah an owner from the 718 forum who I have been helping, I was surprised to see that I have sent 69 posts on this GPF subject over the last 2 years.

Also enclosed is my reply to Sarah, my sign in name is Cyclemotor1.

I will be posting out some more informative on Monday that will finally prove that Porsche have been aware of this issue for a long long time.

Regards

Dave.

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Morning everybody, hope you are all well.

This journey we have all been on, has relied on information we have managed to obtain from the dealers involved in trying to fix our cars.

From the first car we looked at, which is now nearly two years ago, we started to see consistent readings on the GPF reports that made no common sense at all. It was difficult to get this information, and sometimes it took weeks and even months to see this report, page 42 on the Vehicle Analysis Report.

The most obvious thing to see was on a supposedly blocked GPF filter showing 100% oil ash, the differential pressure sensor reading always showed very little pressure.

You would expect the pressure in a blocked exhaust to be very high.

Also we never see any soot values in these reports that look normal, they are either zero or again very low readings.

I asked this question to all our owners of these cars, have you ever seen a soot regeneration warning message on their dashboards.

No one has ever seen this message to date, after nearly two years of asking, I even offered a reward to any one that could send me a photo of that warning message, no replies.

Thankfully I managed to get proof that this message can be seen on the dashboard, we managed this purely by accident, one of the cars I was working on, had been treated with a very aggressive DPF cleaner.

This cleaner had coated the GPF substrate so badly that it put the message on the dashboard (Regenerate particle filter see Drivers Manual).

It also left two trouble codes P2463 soot load high, and 26740 Particle filter Regeneration needed.
It also gave two soot values K211 soot load calculated 38.04% and K221 soot load measured 43.14%.

Brilliant, this proved that this car had a fully working soot regeneration warning light, the trouble is we have never seen soot values any way near these levels on any of our cars.

Surely when the dealers are blaming our owners and telling them, that the reason for the Ash levels being so high, is their driving style, short journeys, and wrong oil used.

Short journeys would just trigger more soot regeneration cycles, more warning messages on the dashboard, exactly what it says in the drivers manual.

This is not clearly happening, and its a fundamental function on a emission controlled vehicle.

One thing you see when collecting data from a large sample of cars is common and repetitive readings from these GPF reports.

And you could come to the conclusion that this must be covered under the heading of a Manufacturing Defect, bearing in mind its regarding an emission controlled vehicle.

After months and months of conversations with owners with this issue, and the high repair costs involved we had a break through.

Last August we received an email from Porsche Customer Care , regarding one of our cars that had spent months in a Porsche dealer with a £9,172.00 GPF filter quote, we managed to over turn the decision based on the GPF data provided.

This email apologised on behalf of the dealer concerned for the delays and stress the owner was put through, it also confirmed that at the time they where unaware of any faults with the GPF filters on their vehicles, but did say that the fault codes present allowed the Technical and Warranty Teams to identify the fault to be that of a Manufacturing Defect.

At last.

Around November time last year the dealers received an internal memo from Porsche to stop sending out information to customers which could be not in their interests.

After this memo our owners have found it very difficult to supply us with any information regarding their cars, but we are still trying.

We have recently said on previous forum updates that fitting these new exhausts has not fixed this oil ash issue, because quite of few of our cars fitted with the new filters part no 982 254 400AF are coming back with high oil ash levels over very low mileages covered.

We have asked time and time again for a simple exhaust back pressure test to be carried out to confirm the 100% oil ash readings, to date its not happened.

You shouldn't have to regenerate a GPF filter with an ASH load of 100% to re set the level, regeneration is for soot levels, you cant regenerate ASH if its really present.

We have just received some information that clearly confirms that the GPF part no 982 254 400AF is a modified part brought out to fix this issue regarding abnormally high oil ash levels.

It will surprise you to hear that the original GPF part no 982 254 400K was replaced by the above part number around November 2019.

Also the information states that this new part number 982 254 400AF was fitted on cars with a production date later than December 2019.

So Porsche have clearly known about this potential issue for quite some time, yet we have had to fight to get help from them in every case.

Its funny that the excuse for not replacing the exhaust under the Porsche Extended Warranty was because it was classed as a filter, yet it wasn't written in the policy as an excluded specific part.

You will find now its clearly written in the policy in (brackets).

And its clear that issues with the oil ash levels on these cars were obviously found within the first year of production with these filters, hence the filter change.



No need to say any more really

Sorry its taken so so long this get this far

David

 

[Scrounger]

Great work David but it leads me to ask a question.

Those who have the extended warranty and the newly issued warranty booklet which clearly states that GPFs are excluded, where do they stand? All that Porsche will refer the individual back to is the warranty booklet and still be forced to stump up for a new GPF/Cat.

If Porsche will openly admit that there is an issue with the aforementioned part then surely they should replace with an upgraded part FoC when/if an issue arises. If this will be the case then it would offer owners some form of comfort in the knowledge the 'shouldn't' be a fight to get it changed under warranty. Otherwise, I fear, the 2.0 sales will drop for cars older than 3 years when the warranty expires.

Dan

 

[Greenman986S]

I've already told my OPC that I wont buy a car in the affected range....they effected no knowledge of the issue...

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Dan

Without prejudice

My view on this is that Porsche concentrate on the software on these cars, clearly we have proven that after fitting the original GPF, then fitting a modified GPF, it's proven the filter is not the issue.

Remember they have now admitted they where working on this issue on vehicles not quite a year old, what data did they collect and how does it compare to the data we have now.

Back pressure checks should be mandatory, the soot regeneration warning light needs to function, not just on our 2019 model cars, but on the later cars also.

They need to finally acknowledge this defect to the Porsche community and restore confidence with the owners, and protect the resale values on these cars.

Its their responsibility now to support our owners that are suffering with a manufacturing defect that needs to be fixed, which warranty department pays it doesn't matter.

Dave

 

[JohnCRS]

Dave, an excellent result, thank you. We will keep chasing for confirmation from Porsche GB on these matters and their overall response to the article in this month's Porsche Post.

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Thanks John,

Looking forward to catching up with you on the 17th,

Just to remind every body we are still looking at the workings of the differential pressure sensor and other engine sensors regarding their communication to the ECU.

All good stuff, will keep you all informed if we find anything.

We have just hit 40K views,

I would like to thank everybody for following our journey its appreciated

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Just received some really good news this afternoon, we have had one of a cars in with a Diesel Specialist to look at our oil ash problem.

We checked this car last August, after the local Porsche dealer had quoted 8K to change the filter. We carried out an exhaust back pressure check at the owners local garage, it had no pressure at all.

The owner has been driving this car around with the light on ever since, with an 100% oil ash level.

They cleared the oil ash P242F fault code, which was still at 100% and adjusted the parameters of the oil ash % level, in the ECU, that was set way to low.

This is proof that it's definitely the software that's wrong and can be changed.

We are monitoring this vehicle, but we have been told by our Specialist that this a permanent fix.

Regards
Dave

 

[Bill_S]

Hello Dave, like many I guess I have been following this thread with interest. Do we know when the rough dates Porsche changed the warranty wording to specifically exclude the GPF? I assume for new cars as well? I ask as I have just purchased a brand new 2.0L in December and assume it will have part number 982 254 400AF fitted. If this has not solved the issue for 2019 cars then in the absence of any other differences that I'm aware of its likely concerning for later cars as well.

 

[BrianJ]

If you go to the Porsche Approved website and download the current T’s and C’s for the Warranty I can’t see any mention of the GPF at all. Have I missed it?

https://assets-v2.porsche.com/gb/-/media/Project/PCOM/SharedSite/Porsche-Service/Vehicle-Information/Approved-Warranty/PCGB/Porsche-Approved-Warranty-Terms-and-Conditions

 

[JohnCRS]

Good spot Brian. It is stated on the web page, but not in the T's & C's that the web page links to.

Porsche Approved Warranty | Porsche Great Britain

Discover a new view on peace of mind with the Porsche Approved Warranty.

www.porsche.com

Now that we have confirmed that the GPF is a result of something else happening, this should not be an issue anyway unless they try to claim it as a consumable. I think we now have a robust defence against that.

 

[Scrounger]

This is lower down on the Porsche warranty web page

'Components that are not covered by the warranty when repaired due to ageing and normal wear and tear are:
wiper blades | tyres | brake pads and discs | shock absorbers | clutch discs and pressure plate | drive belt including deflection and tensioning roller | spark plugs | batteries (including high-voltage battery) | expansion tank PDCC | refrigerant | all bulbs (except xenon and LED lights) | all filters (including particulate filters) | fluids, oils and grease'

The part in red is new and isn't in my new car warranty booklet or my extended warranty booklet.

Dan

 

[Paul-718gts]

This is lower down on the Porsche warranty web page

'Components that are not covered by the warranty when repaired due to ageing and normal wear and tear are:
wiper blades | tyres | brake pads and discs | shock absorbers | clutch discs and pressure plate | drive belt including deflection and tensioning roller | spark plugs | batteries (including high-voltage battery) | expansion tank PDCC | refrigerant | all bulbs (except xenon and LED lights) | all filters (including particulate filters) | fluids, oils and grease'

The part in red is new and isn't in my new car warranty booklet or my extended warranty booklet.

Dan

Hi Dan,

I expect it will be next time you or another owner needs to extend it ..

 

[Paul-718gts]

Dave, an excellent result, thank you. We will keep chasing for confirmation from Porsche GB on these matters and their overall response to the article in this month's Porsche Post.

Hi John,
Realistically what do you believe the chances of the club receiving a response is given the radio silence on this issue so far from Porsche.

We have tried to contain this issue within the club and owners forums but patience is running thin and there will need to be a point where we pull the pin and go to the general motoring press with our story.

 

[Terry]

I have just been reading this thread after seeing the article in Porsche Post. Does this problem affect the later 4.0 GTS cars?

 

[Scrounger]

Not heard anything about the 4.0 Terry. Seems to just be affecting the 2.0 and a couple of 2.5s.

Dan

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Now that we are fairly certain that the GPF filters are definitely not the issue with the cars we have been involved in.

A simple exhaust back pressure check at the differential pressure sensor connection would have confirmed this very quickly.

No need for expensive exhaust systems, and lots of customer distress.

I found this video on YouTube that shows in detail the affects of back pressure, it's on a diesel car buts it's the same on a GPF.

Our thoughts regarding the possible software fault, are that the oil ash level is increasing to quickly, and it may be preventing the soot regeneration warning light function from working correctly.

There is no regen on a GPF in the same way as there is on a DPF.

It isn't required, but when / if a partial blockage occurs the soot loading warning light should work.

Durring this procedure some tiny amounts of ash does get ejected, hence the brownish deposit on your tailpipes.

But mostly all that happens is the debris gets a good shake up with the help of the vacuum created in the exhaust durring active regeneration.

And this unclogs the filter, allowing the ash (which is mostly harmless) to settle in the collection chamber in the GPF.

They say it will take a car a lifetime to fill the GPF for most people driving these cars.

Kind regards
Dave

 

[Paul-718gts]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Now that we are fairly certain that the GPF filters are definitely not the issue with the cars we have been involved in.

A simple exhaust back pressure check at the differential pressure sensor connection would have confirmed this very quickly.

No need for expensive exhaust systems, and lots of customer distress.

I found this video on YouTube that shows in detail the affects of back pressure, it's on a diesel car buts it's the same on a GPF.

Our thoughts regarding the possible software fault, are that the oil ash level is increasing to quickly, and it may be preventing the soot regeneration warning light function from working correctly.

There is no regen on a GPF in the same way as there is on a DPF.

It isn't required, but when / if a partial blockage occurs the soot loading warning light should work.

Durring this procedure some tiny amounts of ash does get ejected, hence the brownish deposit on your tailpipes.

But mostly all that happens is the debris gets a good shake up with the help of the vacuum created in the exhaust durring active regeneration.

And this unclogs the filter, allowing the ash (which is mostly harmless) to settle in the collection chamber in the GPF.

They say it will take a car a lifetime to fill the GPF for most people driving these cars.

Kind regards
Dave

Just for the record Dave, how many views has the this story had ?
I wonder if the club has the capability and know how to see how many are linked to a Porsche IP address ?
Could this information give us some insight into whether anyone within the Brand is taking this issue seriously or at least acknowledging it ?

John is this something you could pick up with the club as it doesn’t appear as if the article in this months Porsche Post has rattled any cages in Reading.

 

[Greenman986S]

Just for the record Dave, how many views has the this story had ?
I wonder if the club has the capability and know how to see how many are linked to a Porsche IP address ?
Could this information would give us some insight into whether anyone within the Brand is taking this issue seriously or at least acknowledging it ?

John is this something you could pick up with the club as it doesn’t appear as if the article in this months Porsche Post has rattled any cages in Reading.

this thread has had 41000 views to date....

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice


Struggling to find any GPF information on YouTube that talks about the calculations that are needed for the regeneration of soot.

This video covers what happens regarding DPF regeneration, but we can apply this to a GPF system.

Three quarters into the video, it explains the factors concerning regeneration and it mentions exhaust back pressure.

Sorry for mentioning back pressure, but it's been my favourite subject for the last 2 years.

Only because for some reason our Porsche dealers and Porsche Reading seem to be reluctant to carry out this simple test on our faulty cars.

We have one of our Caymans in at the moment, that will be shortly having its second GPF fitted, after the original GPF for this oil ash fault.

Sorry for repeating myself again, but the recent information we have on one of our cars from last year, clearly points to the incorrect coding of the oil / ash parameters.

Surely this coding issue could be sorted out quite quickly, and our cars put right once and for all.

Enjoy the video

Regards
Dave