Cayman 718 GPF Failure

[911hillclimber]

Agree, a very sucint summary and clearly states the state of play.

This is beyond David and Golieth, a 'small' group of people lumbered with a duff system verses the Corporate fortress that is Porsche.

The dealers are helpless, just puppets, Porsche's first moat of defense.

Finding a alternative solution to resetting (as it seems now to be developing) is to me a perfect answer to these car's issue.

Nothing to do with Porsche, they are on another planet and do business by other values. Enthusiasts will have taken note.
The Dealers can't use the 'other' system coming along, so they lock themselves out, and the Independents can enjoy a solution and keep the customer to themselves.

A focus on the alternative system gets these cars sorted, Porsche do not win, they have no interest, this I feel is not on thier radar at all.

It is tempting to say the Club has let the side down, but they have allowed this thread to run and run, well done for this.

Dave's extraordinary work and determination wins the day!

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Morning Guys & Girls

A guy contacted me on Wednesday from Malaysia with our P242F ash DTC.

His garage checked over the vehicle and as usual found the 100% fault code, they gave him a few repair options.

1. Clean the GPF filter and carry out a regeneration.

2. Change the particulate filter

3. Disable the exhaust particulate filter system.

Ive sent him lots of information regarding what to look for, so his garage have all the information they need on this fault.

He contacted me this morning to say they are carrying out option 1, including a regeneration, which is what our Porsche memo recommends.

I have asked for the post regeneration data to see if the reset was successful.

We have another vehicle thats going to have its ash adaptation carried out, but it may go into next week due to to work commitments.

Will keep you informed of progress, enclose the data information sent from my Malaysian owner.

Regards
Dave

 

[Wrightrubber]

Hi Dave

Back in September, John said he wanted to follow up the article published in Porsche Post and produce an update in print. He said he was going to meet up with you and prepare something for PP. Did anything happen with this?
Regards
Mark

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Mark,

Nothing booked at the moment, but hopefully we will catch-up, we have lots more information now than we did on the last Porsche Post article, which unfortunately doesn't look good for Porsche and their Dealers.

We have more of our cars out there with new modified filters fitted with software ash levels that are worse than the original ash accumulation on the original GPF filter, bearing in mind the mileage covered, and the time on the car.

So yes, it will be brilliant to get together with John and update you all.

Hopefully we can meet up on the 13th of November at the Classic Car show at the NEC.

Dave

 

[patersont718t]

Hi Dave

Great to see that all your hard work and perseverance is helping people while also building a useful pool of data.
I've included an update on my GPF journey below. The OPC currently has an open technical ticket regarding the differential pressure sensor, which was recently replaced. Despite the replacement, it is still showing a reading of -1.24 hPa with the ignition on and engine off, which would appear abnormal.
Interestingly, following replacement of the differential pressure sensor, the reported ash loading has reduced to 2.75%, It will be interesting to see what feedback comes back from the technical investigation on the sensor .

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Tony,

Thanks for providing this information, its brilliant detail.

To start with, you have never had a minus differential pressure sensor reading on your car from new, they have all been positive.

Your spreadsheet confirms this in great detail.

The reason why the new differential pressure sensor is reading a negative percentage with the ignition on, engine not running, is due to an offset calibration error in the DME software.

A new sensor should definitely read a 0.00 hPa value ignition on, engine not running, and a very small positive reading with engine running.

Why this is happening is very simple, the old sensor data in the DME is conflicting with the new sensor reading, and the old ash % data still in the DME.

On our cars the function to adapt a newly fitted differential pressure sensor is not on our cars, just like the Ash % adaptation is not available either.

So the old software data readings are still a problem, because they can't be reset correctly back to zero, which would in turn re set the algorithm.

The issue you have reported on your car says it all,

Basically the algorithm that calculates the ash and soot percentages can not function correctly as it was designed to do.

Every time we have carried out our own adaptation of the ash % value using a different diagnostic scanner, the soot values in both the calculated and measured values instantly appear at very high percentages.

High enough to put the ( Regenerate particle filter) warning message on the dashboard, along with the DTC code P2463 (Particulate filter soot load high).

We then have to drive the car carrying out the deacceleration style, and we always have to drive the car quite a lot of miles to lower the soot values.
So the warning light goes out and we can clear the code easil.

It seems this rising Ash % measured value seems to be masking the soot level information in the software, even though our cars never fill up with soot.

These GPF filters seem to deal with the soot loading through passive regeneration very well through a rise in the exhaust temperature on spirited runs.

This is confirmed, because we never see a soot regeneration message on our dashboards even when these GPF filters are supposedly blocked 100% with Ash.

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Hi Guys & Girls,

Just heard from our 718 owner in Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia.

His garage cleaned his filter and carried out a regeneration.

He sent us this information, one photo showing the 0.00% measured ash reading after this work was completed.

And the second photo showing the measured ash reading was now at 61.57% after 120 miles.

This shows you how ridiculous this software issue is.

The ash hits 100% and puts the light on, a clean and regeneration changes the software to 0.00% for a short while, then it comes back.

The crazy thing is our Dealers and Porsche believe that this Ash is real, so much so they replace the GPF, without doing a back pressure check.

Its like magic, here one minute, and gone the next.

This is a perfect example of why we are campaigning to stop this stupidity.

Enclose both photos to support this post

Dave

 

[Cyclemotor1958]

Morning Guys & Girls

I would like to share with you this spooky information regarding the software ash % coming back on two of our cars.

The car above had 61.57% of ash coming back after a road test of 120 miles, after the filter was cleaned, and a regeneration was carried out.

In April this year we had a Boxster 2.0 2019 car that had a new modified filter replaced free of charge by Porsche.
When the owner picked up the car they asked to see the GPF % ash level.

The ash level was at 62.75%, and the car had covered 100 miles of road testing.

They couldn't believe what they were seeing, they have agreed to take the car back for another Ash% check.

I have on file the GPF report from the Dealer to this owner to support this statement.

So whats the difference between these two cars.

The difference is, the second car had a very expensive GPF filter replaced by a Porsche Dealer, who contacted Porsche Technical, for authorisation, probably followed the internal memo instructions, and definitely did not carry out an exhaust back pressure test.

Thank goodness we helped the owner to persuade Porsche to pay for its replacement.

Spooky returning Ash percentages, and road testing mileages.

Dave