Fingers crossed everybody
Cayman 718 GPF Failure
- Thread starter Wrightrubber
- Start date
Great news Dave. Like you saay, if consumers are aware of the TSB from Porsche DE then they can raise it when booking in with the OPC.
You you have a copy of the TSB or the reference number so it can be quoted? I'm a big believer in knowledge is power and some OPC are totally oblivious.
Dan
You you have a copy of the TSB or the reference number so it can be quoted? I'm a big believer in knowledge is power and some OPC are totally oblivious.
Dan
Hi Dan
Without Prejudice
This is the top of the front page of the letter.
This can be used as a reference to the current issue on our cars, that Porsche are fully aware of.
Sadly the freedom of information act does not apply to vehicle Manufacturers.
Hopefully someone in a Porsche Service Department can tell us why this information has not been communicated to their customers who have been struggling with this problem for the last 2 years and possibly longer.
I have said this before, and I will say this again, there is nothing out there that can compare to our 718 cars, the driving experience, the performance, the whole experience is un matched.
Let's put and end to this, and sort this software out.
Dave
Without Prejudice
This is the top of the front page of the letter.
This can be used as a reference to the current issue on our cars, that Porsche are fully aware of.
Sadly the freedom of information act does not apply to vehicle Manufacturers.
Hopefully someone in a Porsche Service Department can tell us why this information has not been communicated to their customers who have been struggling with this problem for the last 2 years and possibly longer.
I have said this before, and I will say this again, there is nothing out there that can compare to our 718 cars, the driving experience, the performance, the whole experience is un matched.
Let's put and end to this, and sort this software out.
Dave
Attachments
Hi Guys & Girls
Without prejudice
I would like share with you all, VW,s information regarding re setting the ASH LOAD on their vehicles.
To reset the ash load in a VW's Gasoline Particulate Filter (GPF), you'll likely need to use a diagnostic tool like VCDS to perform an engine adaptation. This is typically done after cleaning or replacing the GPF to ensure the system recognizes the new state and adjusts accordingly. The ash value is often a calculated value that can be reset to zero or an appropriate baseline.
Without prejudice
I would like share with you all, VW,s information regarding re setting the ASH LOAD on their vehicles.
To reset the ash load in a VW's Gasoline Particulate Filter (GPF), you'll likely need to use a diagnostic tool like VCDS to perform an engine adaptation. This is typically done after cleaning or replacing the GPF to ensure the system recognizes the new state and adjusts accordingly. The ash value is often a calculated value that can be reset to zero or an appropriate baseline.
- 1. Diagnostic Tools:
VCDS (Volkswagen Computer Diagnostics) is a common tool used for VW diagnostics, including resetting the ash load. Other diagnostic tools may also be capable of performing this function.
- 2. Engine Adaptations:
The process involves performing engine adaptations via the diagnostic tool. This allows the engine control unit (ECU) to recalibrate the ash load value based on the new condition of the GPF.
- 3. After Cleaning/Replacement:
Resetting the ash load is typically performed after the GPF has been cleaned or replaced, ensuring the ECU accurately reflects the current state of the filter.
- 4. Calculated Value:
The ash load value in the ECU is often a calculated value, not a directly measured value. Therefore, resetting it ensures the ECU's calculations are accurate.
- 5. Procedure:
While the exact steps vary slightly depending on the specific model and ECU, the general procedure involves accessing the relevant parameters within VCDS (or a similar tool), selecting the engine adaptation function, and then following the prompts to reset the ash load.
- 6. Example:
On a VW T6 Transporter, one thread discusses using VCDS to reset the ash level, highlighting the importance of performing the adaptation after cleaning or replacing the DPF (which is equivalent to the GPF).
7. Troubleshooting:
If the ash load value doesn't reset correctly, or if the GPF continues to show issues, it's important to verify the differential pressure sensor readings and ensure the GPF itself is not damaged or blocked.
Funny that our oil ash value is a measured value, could this be the answer.
It looks like its a really simple thing to do on these cars, maybe our Porsche Technical Department needs to have a chat with these guys and sort it out for us.
Regards
Dave
Hi its me again.
Think I have the answer
Could it be that Porsche are using the measured oil ash value in the software, when it needs to be in the calculated value that is always at zero.
This maybe why the DME cannot carry out the function to zero the value.
These values are upside down
Enclose a copy of page 42 GPF data, have a look at K230 and K231.
Regards
Dave
Think I have the answer
Could it be that Porsche are using the measured oil ash value in the software, when it needs to be in the calculated value that is always at zero.
This maybe why the DME cannot carry out the function to zero the value.
These values are upside down
Enclose a copy of page 42 GPF data, have a look at K230 and K231.
Regards
Dave
Attachments
Sorry its me again,
Without prejudice
It's the same on the 992 car I looked at a month ago, when Porsche kindly paid for a Bank 1 GPF filter.
We said at the time the GPF information didn't make any sense, just like our 718,s
Enclose the 992 GPF data showing the oil ash measured values at 100%, and 58.04%, nothing in calculated.
We have said this before that this measured value isnt correct.
VW are using the calculated value for Ash management which is different to our cars, and they don't seem to be having the problems we are having.
Just a thought.
Dave
Without prejudice
It's the same on the 992 car I looked at a month ago, when Porsche kindly paid for a Bank 1 GPF filter.
We said at the time the GPF information didn't make any sense, just like our 718,s
Enclose the 992 GPF data showing the oil ash measured values at 100%, and 58.04%, nothing in calculated.
We have said this before that this measured value isnt correct.
VW are using the calculated value for Ash management which is different to our cars, and they don't seem to be having the problems we are having.
Just a thought.
Dave
Attachments
Hi All,
Latest update on my car….
After having the 3rd GPF fitted (new not a refurb)
2 differential pressure sensors in 6 months
An engine out strip down and rebuild
Live road testing with computers monitoring
And to top that a new DME fitted as recommended by PAG..last week
20 mile road test and the GPF registered 25% full…
Porsche UK Reading technicians are now finally attending the OPC this Weds.. to do what ??? I have no idea..
It’s getting very close to a stage where the people that designed and built these cars can’t fix them… fingers crossed it doesn’t get to this point .
And for the OPC’s that still quote it’s driving style, wrong oil, etc , etc..
It’s complete BS as my case is 100% proof, as all this work and testing results has taken place over the last 5 months by Porsche since my car has been back at the OPC…
Let’s see what Wednesday brings…
And finally a big thankyou to all that follow our journey..
Latest update on my car….
After having the 3rd GPF fitted (new not a refurb)
2 differential pressure sensors in 6 months
An engine out strip down and rebuild
Live road testing with computers monitoring
And to top that a new DME fitted as recommended by PAG..last week
20 mile road test and the GPF registered 25% full…
Porsche UK Reading technicians are now finally attending the OPC this Weds.. to do what ??? I have no idea..
It’s getting very close to a stage where the people that designed and built these cars can’t fix them… fingers crossed it doesn’t get to this point .
And for the OPC’s that still quote it’s driving style, wrong oil, etc , etc..
It’s complete BS as my case is 100% proof, as all this work and testing results has taken place over the last 5 months by Porsche since my car has been back at the OPC…
Let’s see what Wednesday brings…
And finally a big thankyou to all that follow our journey..
Hi Paul,
Without prejudice
It's amazing that after 2 years of posting our frustration over this GPF problem, our Porsche Reading Technical people are finally coming out of their office to have a look at a real car, with a real problem.
Hopefully we will get some feedback from this visit, has we have discussed, you can tell them about my theory about the way that VW monitor the Ash levels using the CALCULATED instead of MEASURED, and they don't.
It all makes sense now, that they have got things upside down on their GPF ALGORITHM.
This is becoming very obvious after all the Dealer time spent on this problem, lots of modified filters fitted, that dont work, and the engine strip downs that found no internal oil pollution which would create extra ASH, but the Ash was never there.
So a big push on re writing the software, and we are done.
Fingers crossed, looking forward to you telling everybody, you have finally got your car back and it's fixed.
Regards
Dave
Without prejudice
It's amazing that after 2 years of posting our frustration over this GPF problem, our Porsche Reading Technical people are finally coming out of their office to have a look at a real car, with a real problem.
Hopefully we will get some feedback from this visit, has we have discussed, you can tell them about my theory about the way that VW monitor the Ash levels using the CALCULATED instead of MEASURED, and they don't.
It all makes sense now, that they have got things upside down on their GPF ALGORITHM.
This is becoming very obvious after all the Dealer time spent on this problem, lots of modified filters fitted, that dont work, and the engine strip downs that found no internal oil pollution which would create extra ASH, but the Ash was never there.
So a big push on re writing the software, and we are done.
Fingers crossed, looking forward to you telling everybody, you have finally got your car back and it's fixed.
Regards
Dave
Whilst we are focussed on this issue a question occurs - what is special about UK 718 Caymans in relation to this problem. I have not been able to find any reference to it in mainland europe and the numbers of boxters or other models affected by it is not yet significant. If it is happening, are they treated differently?
It does appear that Porsche do not have a definitive answer as, if they did, we would expect a TSB to be issued, not an advisory letter. The amount of attention being given to Paul's car would suggest they are taking it very seriously and not just treating it as a one off problem where they simply do what is required to make it go away.
It does appear that Porsche do not have a definitive answer as, if they did, we would expect a TSB to be issued, not an advisory letter. The amount of attention being given to Paul's car would suggest they are taking it very seriously and not just treating it as a one off problem where they simply do what is required to make it go away.
Morning John
Without prejudice
Your right, it's about time they took this issue seriously, we have been on this journey for the last 2 years on the 29th of this month, when Mark started us off.
It started around page 5 on our forum, now we are on page 28, alot of time and work, spent trying to convince Porsche Technical that these GPF filters were not the issue.
This week will be a turning point for us all, after all the fact that Porsche Readings Technical people are coming to try and find out what's still wrong with Paul's Oil Ash % levels is a significant step forward.
All this confirms that we have seen a major miss diagnosis on this fault right from the start, the dealers have tried to blame their customers for the wrong use of engine oil, and doing to many short journeys.
They have also had to manipulate the Porsche Extended Warranty by saying our GPF filters are classed as a Service item, like an air filter, so therefore they are not covered, but yet they we not mentioned in the exclusion section on the old policies.
Even when the GPF filter is not a separate part, it's part of the Catalytic Convertor, which is covered.
And after all there is nothing wrong with these filters, the dealers could have stopped this unnecessary work by just carrying out a simple back pressure test.
Comparing the usual ridiculously low differential pressure senser reading, on a filter with an 100% ASH reading, with a manual back pressure check.
And to finally stop us even asking the question again, they have now added the GPF filter into the warranty exclusions in the new Warranty Booklet out now.
Shocking.
So when Porsche Technical finally find, and come up with a resolution, let's hope all the owners that have suffered from this issue will get an apology, and the appropriate compensation.
We are all looking forward to the out come on this visit to fix Paul's 718 this week.
Let's hope they turn up.
Dave
Without prejudice
Your right, it's about time they took this issue seriously, we have been on this journey for the last 2 years on the 29th of this month, when Mark started us off.
It started around page 5 on our forum, now we are on page 28, alot of time and work, spent trying to convince Porsche Technical that these GPF filters were not the issue.
This week will be a turning point for us all, after all the fact that Porsche Readings Technical people are coming to try and find out what's still wrong with Paul's Oil Ash % levels is a significant step forward.
All this confirms that we have seen a major miss diagnosis on this fault right from the start, the dealers have tried to blame their customers for the wrong use of engine oil, and doing to many short journeys.
They have also had to manipulate the Porsche Extended Warranty by saying our GPF filters are classed as a Service item, like an air filter, so therefore they are not covered, but yet they we not mentioned in the exclusion section on the old policies.
Even when the GPF filter is not a separate part, it's part of the Catalytic Convertor, which is covered.
And after all there is nothing wrong with these filters, the dealers could have stopped this unnecessary work by just carrying out a simple back pressure test.
Comparing the usual ridiculously low differential pressure senser reading, on a filter with an 100% ASH reading, with a manual back pressure check.
And to finally stop us even asking the question again, they have now added the GPF filter into the warranty exclusions in the new Warranty Booklet out now.
Shocking.
So when Porsche Technical finally find, and come up with a resolution, let's hope all the owners that have suffered from this issue will get an apology, and the appropriate compensation.
We are all looking forward to the out come on this visit to fix Paul's 718 this week.
Let's hope they turn up.
Dave
Good news Dan! I wonder if there’s any connection between the above and the fact that Paul reports that Porsche UK Reading technicians are now attending his dealer this Wednesday?
Jeff
I have been watching this thread from the start, no posts since the 5th. what as been the out come with this fiasco.
Hi Glenn
Without Prejudice
We'll its been a while since I last posted, but we have been very busy with lots of GPF related issues, which are not all documented on this post.
Paul's car is still in the workshop, still not fixed as yet.
We also had a guy last week that had put down a deposit on a 2019 Cayman, he rang me reference our forum posts, we asked for the GPF report to check the data before he collected the car.
Unfortunately that was not forthcoming from the Dealer, so he cancelled purchasing car.
Last night I was contacted by another owner that was told by his Dealer he needed a new GPF filter, and it wasn't covered under warranty.
We are waiting for the GPF report to be sent to us.
We have another one of our cars going back to the Dealer to re check the oil ash reading %.
It had a new modified GPF filter 982 254 400AF fitted in Autumn last year, it was rechecked a few months ago and it was already showing 47%, same as Paul's.
Will up date you all, when the car goes in.
When is all this going to stop, 2 years battling with the Dealers and Porsche over this issue.
THESE FILTERS ARE NOT FULL OF ASH, AND THEY NEVER HAVE BEEN.
We have asked every dealer we have been involved with, to carry out a basic back pressure check using either a manometer or a pressure gauge, to confirm the ridiculously low differential pressure sensor readings we always see when the DTC code P242F (oil ash load exceeded) is present.
QUESS WHAT, THEY WILL NOT DO IT AND SHOW US THE READINGS.
And to make matters worse if we press the point about this extra test, we have been told to take the car somewhere else.
If we get any more dealers telling our owners that their GPF filters are blocked with ash, and it needs replacing, without a back pressure check being carried out, then we will post out the details of the Dealer involved and start a possible case against them for miss diagnosis.
I would like you to have a look at this video its reference our DTC code P242F, sorry its takes a bit of time.
It's all about a mileage limit set by the manufacturer on a DPF filter, which says the filter needs replacing after a certain milage covered.
But when the DPF is checked for a high differential pressure reading, it doesn't have high pressure, to confirm the filter is blocked.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
The DPF is reset back, didn't need cleaning or replacing, or lots of diagnostic time spent, or even a regeneration, and certainly no road testing to try and clear the code.
WHY CAN'T OUR DEALERS DO THIS ON OUR CARS
We now have 54,000 views on this subject.
Regards
Dave
Without Prejudice
We'll its been a while since I last posted, but we have been very busy with lots of GPF related issues, which are not all documented on this post.
Paul's car is still in the workshop, still not fixed as yet.
We also had a guy last week that had put down a deposit on a 2019 Cayman, he rang me reference our forum posts, we asked for the GPF report to check the data before he collected the car.
Unfortunately that was not forthcoming from the Dealer, so he cancelled purchasing car.
Last night I was contacted by another owner that was told by his Dealer he needed a new GPF filter, and it wasn't covered under warranty.
We are waiting for the GPF report to be sent to us.
We have another one of our cars going back to the Dealer to re check the oil ash reading %.
It had a new modified GPF filter 982 254 400AF fitted in Autumn last year, it was rechecked a few months ago and it was already showing 47%, same as Paul's.
Will up date you all, when the car goes in.
When is all this going to stop, 2 years battling with the Dealers and Porsche over this issue.
THESE FILTERS ARE NOT FULL OF ASH, AND THEY NEVER HAVE BEEN.
We have asked every dealer we have been involved with, to carry out a basic back pressure check using either a manometer or a pressure gauge, to confirm the ridiculously low differential pressure sensor readings we always see when the DTC code P242F (oil ash load exceeded) is present.
QUESS WHAT, THEY WILL NOT DO IT AND SHOW US THE READINGS.
And to make matters worse if we press the point about this extra test, we have been told to take the car somewhere else.
If we get any more dealers telling our owners that their GPF filters are blocked with ash, and it needs replacing, without a back pressure check being carried out, then we will post out the details of the Dealer involved and start a possible case against them for miss diagnosis.
I would like you to have a look at this video its reference our DTC code P242F, sorry its takes a bit of time.
It's all about a mileage limit set by the manufacturer on a DPF filter, which says the filter needs replacing after a certain milage covered.
But when the DPF is checked for a high differential pressure reading, it doesn't have high pressure, to confirm the filter is blocked.
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
The DPF is reset back, didn't need cleaning or replacing, or lots of diagnostic time spent, or even a regeneration, and certainly no road testing to try and clear the code.
WHY CAN'T OUR DEALERS DO THIS ON OUR CARS
We now have 54,000 views on this subject.
Regards
Dave
Hi, it's me again
Without Prejudice
Sorry but I need to get this off my chest.
I have spent the best part of today trying to help 2 owners of 2019 718 Caymans that have been told they need to replace their GPF filters, and no, Porsche warranty are not paying.
We have been trying to get the Dealers to have another look at the differential pressure sensor readings on both of these cars.
The readings are so low, just about non existent, but yet the Dealers are telling us the GPF is blocked 100% with ASH, which cannot be right.
Has you know I have had sight of the letter from Porsche sent out to all the Dealers on the 3rd March just gone.
This letter clearly explains to the Porsche Service staff what to do if a vehicle comes in with the fault code P242F ash load to high.
This is the list of checks the Dealers were asked to carry out.
Several causes of the high ash load have been found across various vehicles therefore to prevent repeat
issues it is important to check all possible causes of high ash load before proceeding with any repair. These
include completing cylinder leakage checks to ensure oil is not entering the cylinder, checks of the intake
and exhaust for signs of excessive oil build up which could be a result of a leak from the oil separators,
turbocharger or valve stem seals. It is also important to check the operation of the turbocharger actuator to
ensure this is functioning correctly and check the OPF differential pressure senser for correct functionality
ensuring the pipes to the differential pressure sensor are not blocked or restricted.
It seems to me that the Dealers are clearly not following his advice with regards to the functionality of the differential pressure sensor.
Because if they did they would surley question why on a supposedly blocked GPF, is the differential pressure sensor reading so low.
This why we need to check that the sensor reading is correct, and the only way you can do this is by a manual pressure check of the GPF to confirm this reading from the car is correct.
So why are the dealers not carrying out the instructions, we can forgive him for not mentioning a back pressure check in his list of checks.
But remember these Porsche technicians see these low differential pressure sensor readings ever time a car comes in with this fault, and it's clearly recorded on page 42 of the Val report.
And you would expect this to be reported back to Porsche Reading Technical on every occasion, I would ask, is it being reported back, if it is, what's going on, because they can also see this data too.
This information would confirm that the GPF was not blocked and therefore didn't need replacing, and a quick look at the tailpipe would confirm that if no soot was present, this is another indication that the GPF was not the fault.
So why is this not happening, when we now have proof on lots of our cars recently fitted with new modified filters that it hasn't fixed the oil ash problem and it's coming back quicker then ever.
We are not wrong on insisting further diagnostic checks should be carried to support the replacement of a very expensive part on our cars.
We need more help and support from our dealers, because it's not our owners fault that are Dealers appear to be miss diagnosing this fault on our cars.
Sorry the OPF is a GPF
Regards
Dave
Without Prejudice
Sorry but I need to get this off my chest.
I have spent the best part of today trying to help 2 owners of 2019 718 Caymans that have been told they need to replace their GPF filters, and no, Porsche warranty are not paying.
We have been trying to get the Dealers to have another look at the differential pressure sensor readings on both of these cars.
The readings are so low, just about non existent, but yet the Dealers are telling us the GPF is blocked 100% with ASH, which cannot be right.
Has you know I have had sight of the letter from Porsche sent out to all the Dealers on the 3rd March just gone.
This letter clearly explains to the Porsche Service staff what to do if a vehicle comes in with the fault code P242F ash load to high.
This is the list of checks the Dealers were asked to carry out.
Several causes of the high ash load have been found across various vehicles therefore to prevent repeat
issues it is important to check all possible causes of high ash load before proceeding with any repair. These
include completing cylinder leakage checks to ensure oil is not entering the cylinder, checks of the intake
and exhaust for signs of excessive oil build up which could be a result of a leak from the oil separators,
turbocharger or valve stem seals. It is also important to check the operation of the turbocharger actuator to
ensure this is functioning correctly and check the OPF differential pressure senser for correct functionality
ensuring the pipes to the differential pressure sensor are not blocked or restricted.
It seems to me that the Dealers are clearly not following his advice with regards to the functionality of the differential pressure sensor.
Because if they did they would surley question why on a supposedly blocked GPF, is the differential pressure sensor reading so low.
This why we need to check that the sensor reading is correct, and the only way you can do this is by a manual pressure check of the GPF to confirm this reading from the car is correct.
So why are the dealers not carrying out the instructions, we can forgive him for not mentioning a back pressure check in his list of checks.
But remember these Porsche technicians see these low differential pressure sensor readings ever time a car comes in with this fault, and it's clearly recorded on page 42 of the Val report.
And you would expect this to be reported back to Porsche Reading Technical on every occasion, I would ask, is it being reported back, if it is, what's going on, because they can also see this data too.
This information would confirm that the GPF was not blocked and therefore didn't need replacing, and a quick look at the tailpipe would confirm that if no soot was present, this is another indication that the GPF was not the fault.
So why is this not happening, when we now have proof on lots of our cars recently fitted with new modified filters that it hasn't fixed the oil ash problem and it's coming back quicker then ever.
We are not wrong on insisting further diagnostic checks should be carried to support the replacement of a very expensive part on our cars.
We need more help and support from our dealers, because it's not our owners fault that are Dealers appear to be miss diagnosing this fault on our cars.
Sorry the OPF is a GPF
Regards
Dave
Hi, me again
Sorry forgot to send you this short video clip, showing
a manometer being used to check for exhaust back pressure.
Very simple test, you can buy a manometer on Amazon, usually around £60.00, and you can also use it to check your AOS vacuum.
Regards
Dave
Sorry forgot to send you this short video clip, showing
a manometer being used to check for exhaust back pressure.
Very simple test, you can buy a manometer on Amazon, usually around £60.00, and you can also use it to check your AOS vacuum.
Regards
Dave
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
