Cayman 718 GPF Failure

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

To continue on with our challenge to Porsche Technical for them to confirm to us that our cars have a manual adaptation facility on PWIS that would re set the oil ash reading to zero.

Found this VCDS (VW) video on YouTube that shows how easy it could be, its on a DPF, but its the same on a GPF car.

This is what we would expect to see on our cars, or something very similar.

Both DPF and GPF vehicles have to have an adaptation capability in order to reset the ECU, when either the filters or the differential pressure sensors are replaced in service.

Hopefully this week we will get confirmation, either from the Dealers, or maybe Porsche Technical at Reading.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

I never stop thinking about this GPF emission control issue on our cars, and the phone never stops ringing, its frustrating that after more than 2.5 years we have still no answers from Porsche or their dealers on why its taking so long to fix these cars.

We have so many questions to ask Porsche Technical, so let's go.

1. Why when, we have asked the Dealers to check for back pressure on the cars that have been diagnosed with a blocked GPF, have they always refused to do it.

2. Why have the Dealers and Porsche Technical ignored the very low differential pressure sensor readings on all the cars with a oil ash filter reading at 100%.

3. Why when we see a GPF report showing the oil ash at 100% do we never see any significant soot values, bearing in mind if the filter's blocked with ASH, weres the soot going to go.

4. Why if the filter is blocked 100% and needs changing, do we not see any other DTC codes, a blocked GPF would certainly leave other running codes. For a start, if the exhaust is blocked you would expect to see, running and performance issues surely.

5. Why when a new filter is fitted, do we get a zero oil ash % reading, then within a few hundred miles it comes back with an average oil ash % reading of between 48 and 58%, we had a reading of 64% on one of the first cars we looked at a few years ago.

6. Why are the Dealers carrying out regenerations and miles and miles of road testing after these new modified filters have been fitted.

7. Why is the modified GPF filter, part no 982 254 400AF not fixing these cars, the internal memo sent out in March this year said it would.

8. Why are the Dealers still telling our owners that driving style is the reason why these filters need changing, we have had 2 in the last 2 weeks.

8. Why after all the parts that had been fitted to Pauls old car, did we have a situation where Porsche and the Dealer couldn't get his oil ash level % down to zero permanently, bearing in mind it never left the garage. And they bought the car back off him.

9. Why can Ash be here one minute and then gone the next, if its real ash.

10. Why now after a new modified GPF filter is fitted, can the Dealers tell us that a reading of 54% is acceptable, after such a short time, and no further work will be carried out.

11. Why will Dealers not answer our questions regarding the possible manual adaptation of the differential pressure sensor, and the GPF oil ash function on our cars, do they have it, or not, thats all we are asking.

We will get confirmation very soon regarding the real reason why the Dealers are struggling to reset the oil ash levels.

Any feedback from this post would be greatly appreciated

Dave

 

[911hillclimber]

Written in that way it reads to me the Dealers have been told what to do or not to do by Porsche, so they are following the instructions.
If this thought of mine is true then the issue is simply being ignored by Porsche and the dealers are tied.

Doubt the dealers will break silence, and only Porsche in the UK or better still Germany can answer those very relative and reasonable questions you have written.
Do Porsche UK have the ability to give answers? What level is the UK tech team or are they the group who are not allowed to face the customer?

There must surely be an open door for this in Porsche UK?

 

[Scrounger]

Take those questions to the motoring press and get them to ask Porsche. It's really frustrating that the same questions are being asked and the same silence comes from the manufacturer. If you want answers to questions then the only option is pressure by full exposure to the general public.

Porsche are quite literally on their arse at the minute (just look at discounts on new 911) and I think that if a scandal like this came to light it would make a big dent in their reputation to such end that they'd rather solve it quickly. It does make me wonder though if PGB are actually passing these issues onto the mother ship.

Dan

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys

Without prejudice

Thanks for the feedback, we are now at a point where we have to prove 100% that the reason for the Dealers struggling to sort this out, is the the inability to perform a correct reset of these values.

Your right the Dealers have never been in a position to tell us the truth even when the internal memo sent out in March, dropped in their inbox.

But they are still accountable, they have technicians and Managers and Senior Managers that know what the issue is, but has long as Porsche are paying them valuable workshop hours why would they go against them.

It seems after all this time they would rather embarase themselves, with pathetic reasons for blaming the owners of these cars for this problem, using driving style has the cause of this fault, and they are still clearly agreeing with Porsche Technicals advice and guidance.

Along time ago we sent an email to Porsche Technical Reading requesting to go down to see them to see if they could answer our questions regarding the soot regeneration warning light not coming on, and why the ash had come back on our new modified filter.

We where told that they where not customer facing and we should go back to the dealer who fitted the modified GPF.

The reason we wanted to speak to them was because the Dealer concerned said if the new modified filter blocked up again the owner would have to pay, the ash level increased twice in 1500 miles and it reached 55%.

Because of all this stress the owner Mark sold his car, and he has been behind me on this journey right from the start. In fact he was the first owner with this fault, that I convinced Porsche
that this fault wasn't the customers fault, and they paid for the filter.

This is becoming a major miss diagnosis of an emission control function on their cars. They are quite happy to loose valuable customers, along with reputation, and between them they are affecting the brilliant technical advances that have been made on these 718 cars, and thats why people bought them, love them, and in most cases Ive seen, never ever wanted to sell them.

Our next step is to speak to the people out there in the Vehicle Emission World and ask them if they can get our questions to Porsche answered, before this situation gets even worse.

Somebody somewhere is responsible for this ridiculous situation we are in with these cars, mistakes happen its a fact of life, most things can be fixed, reputation can be rebuilt, its time the people responsible stood up and became accountable.

Fingers crossed

Dave, and all the people out there, affected by this issue.

 

[Wrightrubber]

Thanks Dave, I really don't know what I would have done without your help, I was facing a large bill and the dealership and Porsche Technical couldn't be less helpful if they tried, they had taken my £50K and didn't want to know!
I was getting nowhere with either of them so I contacted Porsche in Germany and guess what?? they didn't want to know either, they said because I had purchased the car in the UK I had to speak to Porsche GB effectively washing their hands of it.
I then had to pay a third to get the GPF replaced, but after Dave's intervention they gave me my money back...why would they do that? I believe they did that because they knew of the problem all along!!!
As Dan said Porsche are on their arse at the minute and i'm not surprised, they are such an arrogant company that don't respect or treat their customers well, what goes around comes around!!
I really believe Dave will get to the bottom of this and it will get sorted, keep up the good work!
Regards
Mark

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Well, I've had a brilliant week dealing with more GPF issues on our cars which has been very productive.

Porsche have kindly fitted a modified GPF filter to 13 of our 718 cars, unfortunately they only agreed after we presented them with information that contradicted their diagnosis of the fault code P242F oil ash load exceeded.

From the start we have always said that a very low differential pressure sensor reading didnt go with a filter supposedly found to show a reading of 100% full.

On every vehicle we have dealt with and managed to get sight of page 42 of the Val report (vehicle analysis log) we found the same readings, very little pressure from the K251 reading.

We need to go back to the beginning when these cars were new, 2019.

We know from the information written on the internal memo that Porsche sent to their dealers in March this year, that they had been having issues with this oil ash load to high, back then.

Even the fault code P242F was the same, and they even came up with a modified filter to correct this issue, which was fitted to vehicles with a production date later than December 2019.

This is what they said in the last paragraph of the memo, explaining what to do if this fault code is present.

If no causes can be located and the above checks are all confirmed as OK then in some cases the OPF can be recovered therefore a OPF regeneration should be attempted to see if the OPF ash load is able to reset.If this has already been attempted or the ash load level does not reset when the OPF regeneration is attempted then the OPF should be replaced and the vehicle retested. The new OPFs (982254400AF) have been modified to prevent this issue. All vehicles with a production date later than December 2019 should already have the modified OPF and are therefore not relevant to this document. If there are any issues outside of this model year range or any further questions please submit a PRMS ticket or email directly.

This week I managed to have a conversation with a Technician working on one of our cars with the P242F oil ash exceeded code present.

He found my phone number on the forum, and was asking for help, after he had read lots of our posts on this subject.

He had already carried out a regeneration using his PWIS tester and managed to lower the oil ash reading, but he had soot and differential pressure sensor readings that didn't seem correct.

So the plan was to carry out another regeneration and see what happens.
After that regeneration and a road test, the ash came back at 52%.
He then carried out 2 more regenerations including road tests and he finally got a zero oil ash measured reading of zero.

I asked him then to go and have a look for the Adaptation page on PWIS, he found Adaptations and then Reset Adaptations Unfortunately has we suspected there was no facility to reset the adaptation on either the differential pressure sensor or the GPF.
He spent some time looking, but unfortunatly couldn't find anything at all, he sent me photos of the revelant pages to prove this.

So this clearly shows that these cars appear not to have the reset facility that they should have. And the only way the Dealers can reset the oil ash is by regeneration and lots of road testing which is also confirmed in the internal memo instruction.

It also means that Porsche Reading Technical must have known this, because they would have had the same issue in 2019 after they fitted the new modified filters to cars with this fault.

Its shocking how our owners have been treated by Porsche and their Dealers, they have both carried on with this miss diagnosis for far to long.

We have had 13 of our vehicles fitted with modified filters, and every one has come back with oil ash readings that defy any logic, from between 45% to 64%. Porsche now are saying this is exceptable.

Out of those 13 cars, 8 have been sold, because the owners had lost confidence with Porsche and their Dealers, regarding the other 5 cars we are still waiting for an answer from the Dealers and Porsche of what they are going to do next.

I have had dealings with many others with this fault, and the way they have all been treated is absolutely appalling.

Found this on the Internet

If a vehicle manufacturer replaces an emission part that doesn't fix the original fault, they may have to re-evaluate the vehicle's type-approval and comply with new emission standards, especially under the EU's type- approval regulations and in-service conformity rules. Manufacturers are required to ensure their vehicles' emissions remain within limits throughout their normal life.

So I think we have finally got to the reason why this oil ash problem is on these cars, its simply, the oil ash reset function on the cars we have seen, was not programed in from new.

If it had been, they would not have had to come up with another modified filter, and carry on this pretence that has caused a major loss of confidence with the Brand, Dealers and the financial implications this has caused along the way.

Over to you Porsche

Dave

 

[911hillclimber]

What an interesting latest post Dave, real progress!
I cannot grasp why Porsche would redesign/modify the actual filter to fix the software missing resets.

If you have a car with a bad filter, and then replace it with a virgin modified filter (presumably proven to fix the original issue) the dealer would find he cannot get the values to 'as-new' status/levels. Why did the Factory not find the same issue??

Thus the Dealer has to ask the factory (or whoever) how to re-set the car to accept the virgin filter?

Little wonder the Brand or at least the 718 will get this stain for ever more.

Should have asked VW to fix it all...

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Graham

Without prejudice

Continuing on with our investigations on why our cars are having this GPF oil ash % issue, when they shouldn't be.

These are the PWIS screens you see when you go into in the Repair and Maintenance sections.

The 5th screen shows you where the differential pressure sensor and GPF adaptations would normally be.

All diesel vehicles have this facility to carry out this function for the differential pressure sensor recalibration, and when a new DPF is fitted, or cleaned.

Just to go over this point again, if this was on our cars, our Dealers wouldn't have had to replace all the parts they have in trying to get the oil ash percentage to stay at zero, especially after fitting the modified filters.

They could have just made sure that no back pressure was present, meaning no ash and soot was in the filter, checks to make sure the differential pressure sensor was giving accurate data, and then carry out the adaptation of the sensor and GPF.

Enclose 5 photos of the screens below, screen 3 shows where they initiate the regeneration process, the last laptop page shows you what's available to adapt.

The last photo shows you the report given to one of our owners a few weeks ago, when his oil ash light P242F came on and then went off.

It was from his Vehicle Health Check Report, Ive hidden the car and customer info.

This is the evidence to prove that our dealers are still trying to get our owners to pay. Obviously Porsche Reading Technical didn't update this dealer not to fit a new filter, because they clearly do not fix this issue.

We also had another vehicle in the same week with the same issue and the same request to spend 9K.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Graham
Without prejudice
Sorry forgot photos
Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Quick update on what's happened this week, we are still waiting for an answer to our questions regarding our 2 current cars that have the P242F oil ash load exceeded.

Its been over 3 weeks now, and still no news on what the Porsche Dealers are going to do regarding this problem, who's paying for a GPF filter that doesn't fix this issue.

Both these owners were told that the cost to replace the GPF filter was 9K, we obviously challenged this diagnosis because its absolutely ridiculous that they are still trying to blame our owners for this fault.

We also have several other vehicles that have had new modified filters fitted, with high oil ash levels recorded already, and we are having to have further level checks because the Dealers are telling us that these levels are now acceptable according to Porsche Technical.

Funny that in 2019 when cars with the 100% oil ash level exceeded went into their Dealers, they decided to modify the GPF filter to stop this issue, this issue wasn't acceptable then.

But of course then, they had to do something because these vehicles had the manufacturers full 3 year warranty.

All these years later, the memo that was sent out in March this year, confirmed that they new all about this problem, they had seen the P242F code oil ash load exceeded before.

It clearly was a case of a major miss-diagnosis then, and they are still doing it now.

All this crap about wrong engine oil used, or the driving style being the reason for this fault looks VERY PATHETIC NOW DOESN'T IT.

Dave

 

[Hari-Singh]

Well this is really rubbish of Porsche I must say, I've always had reservations on the PPF/GPF on cars but thought the higher temperatures and cleaner burn would alleviate some of the issues commonly seen on Diesel engines. It's well known that PPF/GPFs are not good for engines (and not just the sound) but the 4.0 NA engines constantly pull ignition timing due to the restriction of the filters and the ECU strategy to keep them 'happy', once removed even with no tuning (except to turn off the PPF function) this increases the power output by c20-30WHP and the ECU will no longer pull timing.

This would be further exasperated on a turbo car, the ECU has two strategies at odds with one another, one for quick spool and maximum performance the other to keep the PPF happy, the reduced flow with also adversely affect the spool of the turbo too.

So what am I getting at, if push comes to shove and there is no recourse from the OPC what I would do it get a fabricator to open the system, remove the filter, close it back up and then switch off the monitoring system. I know this will invalidate the warranty, but how good is it anyway!? It'll also be quite a bit cheaper.

I do hope you get the resolved the right way though and that being Porsche admitting this is not a wear item and should be replaced under warranty, keep us all updated.

Good Luck!

Interesting to read this, I’ve only recently acquired 718 GTS 4.0 manual and am alarmed to hear these stories of GPF issues. Wouldn’t this “final resort” measure impact on the MOT? I have yet to look up the MOT test technical guide but even in the absence of any interference with the CAT, could the emissions readings be affected so as to cause a fail? As I’m writing this, I suspect not but would value views. Many thanks

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Spoke last night to another owner thats been quoted 9K to replace his faulty GPF filter.

Its unbelievable that the Dealers are still carrying on with this blatant miss diagnosis of this fault on these cars.

If you put in Google this search text.

Whats the diagnostic protocol on a suspected blocked GPF filter

This is what comes back.

The diagnostic protocol for a suspected blocked Gasoline Particulate Filter (GPF) involves a combination of observing physical symptoms, using diagnostic scan tools, and performing targeted pressure tests.

Step 1: Initial Assessment and Symptom Verification

• Check Warning Lights: The most common sign is an illuminated GPF/PPF or engine management light on the dashboard.
• Observe Engine Performance: Look for symptoms such as reduced engine power, sluggish acceleration, the vehicle entering "limp mode," or difficulty starting.
• Note Other Signs: Be aware of a change in engine note, increased fuel consumption, an acrid smell from the exhaust, or excessive black smoke.
• Review Driving Habits: Frequent short trips can prevent the exhaust system from reaching the necessary temperature for passive regeneration, which is a common cause of GPF issues.

Step 2: Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC) Retrieval

• Use an OBD-II Scanner: A professional diagnostic scan tool is used to retrieve specific GPF-related error codes, such as P2452, P2002, 1A2818, 1A280E, 1A280C, or 34D909. These codes provide a starting point for the diagnosis.

Step 3: Live Data Analysis and Sensor Testing

• • Monitor Differential Pressure: Access the vehicle's live data to monitor the differential pressure sensor readings across the GPF.
    • Readings should typically be below 15 millibars at idle and less than 80 millibars during full acceleration.
    • Readings significantly above these values indicate a restriction requiring action.
    • Fluctuating readings may suggest a faulty sensor or a split in a hose.
  • Verify Sensor Accuracy: If live data seems erratic or inconsistent with symptoms, use a digital manometer or a Mityvac pressure gauge to manually verify the pressure readings.
  • Check Soot Mass/Load: The diagnostic tool will also show the calculated soot mass or ash accumulation level, which determines if a regeneration is possible or if the filter needs professional cleaning/replacement.

Step 4: Further Inspection and Action

• Attempt Regeneration (if levels permit): If soot levels are not excessively high and the pressure is within a manageable range, a forced (active) or passive (extended road test) regeneration procedure may be initiated using the diagnostic tool or by driving at sustained high speeds (e.g., 40+ mph for 20-30 minutes).
• Inspect for Damage: If regeneration fails or soot levels are too high, use a borescope to inspect the GPF's internal structure (monolith) for damage.
• Chemical Cleaning/Replacement: A chemical on-vehicle cleaning process might be an option for stubborn blockages. If the filter is damaged or completely blocked, replacement is necessary.
• System Reset and Road Test: After any successful cleaning or replacement, the new GPF must be registered/initialised using the diagnostic software, fault codes must be cleared, and a post-repair road test conducted to ensure proper function.

Well, if you compare what Porsche tell their Dealers to do, reference the recent internal memo instructions, to what's written above, something is clearly very, very wrong.

Also on the Porsche memo below it didn't show you the K251 reading which is 4 down from the K231 reading showing 100% oil ash measured.

The millibar readings above, 15 at idle and 80 on acceleration are the same as hPa, on all our cars we have never seen any hPa readings higher than 6.00 hPa.

This K251 particular filter bank 1, differential pressure, current value, is very important, it tells us if excessive back pressure is present in our GPF filters when the 100% oil ash load measured is displayed.

Simply, if a very low pressure value is seen, then the GPF is definitely not blocked, and if no significant soot values are seen, then there is no need to do a regeneration.

Remember regenerations using diagnostic equipment are only required if you have high soot values. Physical Ash can not be removed by these regenerations, yet the Porsche memo clearly says they can, last paragraph.

Enclose again, a copy of a GPF report from one of our earlier cars showing the full GPF information on page 42 of vehicle analysis log.

You will see the K251 pressure was only 2.32 hPa.

This car had its modified GPF filter replaced by Porsche, paid for by Porsche, because we pointed out that these figures in this GPF report made no sense at all.

Sadly the oil ash load measured value is now at around 46% and the K251 differential pressure sensor reading is only at 2.65 hPa.

We are waiting for a response from Porsche Technical on why there modified filter has clearly not fixed this issue, and what they need to do next.

Because these cars seem not to have the facility to reset the oil ash %, especially after fitting new modified GPF filters. And the fact that they cannot reset the differential pressure sensor, after replacement is not good.

They are still carrying out regenerations and lots of road testing in an attempt to reset the values, that are now coming back.

Maybe this was the same issue way back in 2019, when the modified filters were being fitted.

I will let you draw your own conclusions.

Sorry to go on, sorry if I seem to repeat myself all the time, but its important that you have all the facts, because my phone keeps ringing, and our Porsche Dealers are still trying to get our owners to Pay for a filter that doesn't need replacing.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls,

Without prejudice

Hope you are all well, its Friday again and we are still waiting for information from Porsche and their dealers regarding the GPF filters we are currently being told have to be replaced, and also what's happening to the filters that have been replaced because the Ash is back.

For anybody out there that isn't up to speed on the workings of the GPF regarding the diagnostic code DTC P242F oil ash load exceeded 100%, that we see on page 42 on the Vehicle Analysis Log report from our Porsche Dealers.

I will try and explain what they should do after they get sight of this GPF report.

First of all they would see the measured and calculated soot load readings, K211 & K221, generally they will see no significant high soot % is present.

Moving down, they will see the oil ash measured value K231, usually around 100% if the warning light is on, the light could be out if its between 90 and 100%.

Further down they can check the GPF exhaust temperature calculated values in T255( in filter) and T251 (upstream of filter).

Further down they can check the most important GPF value on this data, the K251 differential pressure sensor current value.

This pressure information is vital in establishing the state of the GPF filter regarding pressure. Obviously if the GPF is blocked to the extent it needs replacing, then it would be very, very high.

You would normally expect the GPF to be blocked with soot, not ash, on cars with such a low mileage, and see a soot regeneration message displayed on the dashboard, which would certainly have these two DTC codes present, P2463 (Particulate filter soot load to high), and 26740 (Particulate filter Regeneration needed).

We have never seen this codes reported on any of our faulty cars.

The funny thing is, the Differential pressure sensor doesn't know the difference between oil ash, or soot, it just looks for pressure.

So what you would do next, is to check to see if the information provided from the sensor is correct, bearing in mind the GPF is supposedly blocked 100%.

You would manually check the pressure in the GPF with a pressure gauge, usually known as a back pressure check.

If the readings are different, and the connecting pipes to the GPF are clear, you would probably replace the sensor, recheck readings, clear the code and carry out an adaption process to remove old data from the DME, and start a fresh with the new sensor.

If the readings from the manual pressure tester and the cars information are the same, and they show no significant pressure, then there is no requirement to carry out a static Regeneration, because no soot is present and no pressure is shown.

When we look at the causes of the high oil ash load checks documented on the Porsche memo sent out in March we do see it mentions checking the OPF differential pressure sensor for correct functionality and ensuring the pipes to the sensor are not blocked.

What it doesn't mention is what to do if the differential pressure sensor value is very low, and certainly doesn't mention to carry out a back pressure test. Yet our Dealers and Porsche seem to be ignoring this very important data.

THESE TESTS ARE BASIC IN THE CORRECT DIAGNOSIS OF A SUSPECTED BLOCKED GPF OR A DPF FILTER.

And considering the memo goes on to explain, last paragraph, that they had to modify these filters in 2019, and it also confirms that all vehicles with a production date later than December 2019 should have already have the new modified filters fitted.

ITS UNBELIEVABLE

I mentioned a few posts ago that I found on the internet a Porsche Patent application Publication with the method for determining the loading state of a particulate filter of a motor vehicle, it was dated December 26th 2019.

This document is 8 pages long and details the workings of a particulate filter including the algorithm.

Very interesting document, and I have managed to work out what the symbols mean, I have hand written these down, and I even sent it to my mate Tom for his comments.

It seems the Algorithm starts with looking at the actual vehicles differential pressure readings twice and then it filters these readings through various measuring blocks, then applies a further 2nd pressure reading by computation.

It goes on using various engine information including air flow and engine temperature and other things.

Its a long document with information thats alien to me, but you begin to understand that without the correct information this Algorithm may struggle to carry on delivering the information it was designed to do.

I believe that the fact the Dealers can only try and reset the oil ash % by carring out regenerations is not right, because it clearly isn't working and our new modified filters are now displaying new oil ash% figures that don't make any sense.

I think the fact that our cars do not have physical exhaust temperature sensors fitted, could also not be helping, this algorithm is using calculated temperature information, not actual.

Remember any regeneration, either passive or active relies on accurate engine exhaust temperatures.

If you buy a 4.0 GTS or GT4, you get a separate GPF, not one attached to a catalytic converter, and they have an exhaust temperature sensor fitted to both filters.

And the issue I really believe is definitely not helping, is the fact that the Dealers can not carry out an adaption process when replacing either the differential pressure sensor or the GPF filter.

If you carried the necessary checks on a GPF filter and it had no pressure, no Ash, no soot, everything ok, you should be able to carry out an adaption to reset it back to zero.

That's what we do on Diesel cars, we just tell the car its got a new filter fitted.

HAVEN'T WE HAD NEW FILTERS FITTED

Enclose the Algorithm info below, for your attention and feedback.

Sorry to go on, but we still have Dealers that are insisting our owners pay for extra diagnostic checks on these vehicles with the P242F code present.

What Porsche Technical must not forget is Pauls car, they spent alot of time and money to replace 2 GPF filters, a differential pressure sensor, a DME, the removal of his engine, stripped down looking for signs of internal oil consumption, and none found.

And then a new engine, and a new turbo was fitted, I may have missed some other parts off this, and they still had an oil ash % figure that was not correct, and didn't make any sense at all.

We had another car shortly after that one, that had its engine also removed, and stripped down, and again no engine faults causing internal oil contamination were found.

The Dealers have admitted they couldn't get a zero oil ash % reading that would stay on these car, but they did say that Porsche said that the remaining oil ash % figure was ok.

To save Porsche some money, Porsche Technical need to stop their Dealers fitting these modified GPF filters, and all these other expensive parts that do not fix this issue on our cars if no Ash is present.

We know that 90% of ash is from burnt engine oil, why are they still believing that these filters are full of ash, we don't even have any excessive soot present.

If the filter was blocked with ASH were is all the soot going

The only reason a GPF filter can fail, is if it leaks soot, which would be obvious when checking the exhaust tailpipes.

Sorry to go on, but until the Dealers and Porsche wake up to the miss diagnosis they are still carrying out, we will keep going.


Dave

 

[Scrounger]

Dave.

With the utmost respect, and I do applaud the work you’re doing to help those caught up in the debacle, but no one at Porsche GB or AG are interested and neither will they be unless the issue is brought to the wider public’s attention through the press. Porsche’s share price is pretty much rock bottom right now and they can’t afford another scandal however, the only way they’ll actually do something is if the motoring press get a grip of it. Even though this thread has had thousands of views it’s most probably the same people, like me, who are reading the updates and boosting the view hits not those at Porsche that sit at the top.

Please please take this to the press, and i don’t mean Porsche Post. Its the only way you'll get Porsche to sit up and take notice

Dan.

 

[kjhurley]

Dave.

With the utmost respect, and I do applaud the work you’re doing to help those caught up in the debacle, but no one at Porsche GB or AG are interested and neither will they be unless the issue is brought to the wider public’s attention through the press. Porsche’s share price is pretty much rock bottom right now and they can’t afford another scandal however, the only way they’ll actually do something is if the motoring press get a grip of it. Even though this thread has had thousands of views it’s most probably the same people, like me, who are reading the updates and boosting the view hits not those at Porsche that sit at the top.

Please please take this to the press, and i don’t mean Porsche Post. Its the only way you'll get Porsche to sit up and take notice

Dan.

Hi Dave.

Like Dan, I have been viewing all the posts on this thread with great interest and like him have to applaud all your sterling efforts in diagnosing this issue and providing invaluable assistance to PCGB folk caught up in this debacle.

As an owner of a 718 Boxster myself, I can only hope I do not see the dreaded error message appear on my dashboard.

I agree with him, however, that the only way forward now is to take this to the motoring press or to look to get a car YouTuber (how about JayEmm on Cars?) to take up the issue.

Porsche UK / Germany have been given ample opportunity to respond to the issue and the fact that they have not indicates that no matter how much more analysis is done on it, they are very unlikely to unless they see there is potential brand damage involved. As Dan rightly points out, the state of the company currently means that no doubt they are grappling with much bigger issues right now.

Is there a problem from your perspective in doing this? You clearly have all the information at your fingertips….

Best regards,
Keith

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls

Without prejudice

Ive just come off the phone with another owner with a GPF problem and the Dealer wants to charge him over 9K to fit a new filter.

I want to show you this information regarding a vehicle we had, that had its GPF cleaned with a detergent that temporarily restricted his GPF.

It left a DTC code of P2463 (soot load to high) and another code 26740 Particulate filter Regeneration needed.

When you look at the soot measured and calculated data you see 40.00% and 52.55%.

Now look at the differential pressure reading K251 its only at .75 hPa.

This just shows us how these cars are operating and it doesn't make any sense.

Remember the differential pressure sensors job is to monitor soot values, and when the soot level gets high enough it puts the above light on.

You would expect soot values of 40 to 52% would normally show a sensor pressure reading alot higher than .75 hPa.

No wonder we never see this soot warning light coming on.

If you doubled the soot values, you would only have a reading around 1.50 hPa,(not alot).

Maybe the sensor is faulty, who knows, but is this another example of how this emission system control is struggling to make any sense all.

With regards to the suggestion that we take this to the press, I have always wanted to give the manufacturer enough time to prove to us that these modified filters would sort out this issue.

It takes time to get to a position were all the testing has been carried out, and you have the confidence to present all the evidence to the manufacturer to support our claims that these cars are not right.

We are now at a point after seeing all the parts that have been fitted to all these cars, all time and money spent by the manufacturer to try and fix this issue, to understand and confirm that this is clearly is a manufacturing defect.

We have an email from one of our owners that had a modified GPF filter fitted last year, from Porsche Customer Care, stating that this GPF issue with the DTC P242F was indeed a Manufacturing defect, we have the case number to support this.

Sadly because the oil ash came back, they sold the car.

We will be asking somebody soon to ask these questions we have been asking for quite some time.

Dave

 

[Scrounger]

I think 2 years is long enough for Porsche to answer question and/or come up with a solution.

Their silence is deafening.

Dan.

 

[911hillclimber]

I think it is telling.
They have a problem, they do not have an answer.
Hopefully one will be provided soon.