Folks,

(Little long winded, skip to the bottom if you want to get to the point)

So, my dad was just rudely reminded that his 2008 Corvette with only 17,000 miles will not be covered under warranty after blowing his motor at Watkins Glen. Happened on the right hand turn after the bus stop, where he's done it literally hundreds of times, in 3 previous Corvettes, over the last 5 years. This time it popped on him. $14,000. Like a fool, he let the dealer stick it in him this evening, bought a 2011 Grandsport, and traded in his 2008 for $18,000 due to the $14,000 hit for a new motor. I figured he must have a had at least 4 or 5 better options he maybe could have exercised before taking the hit all on his own, but I digress. His money, he's got enough of it, so he can do what he wants (even if it's insane).

He left for Alaska for 2 weeks this evening, so I drove his new Vette' home for him today. I immediately checked the warranty and in exclusions it says (among other things) 'racing or other forms of competition.' I'm no lawyer, but I bet a bunch of you are. Since we were neither racing nor competing in any way, why should it not be covered? If it said something along the lines of "high performance driving on paved racing surfaces..." then I think he'd have no leg to stand on. But the God damn car has "competitive driving modes" and I was flipping through the HUD pages and you've got "Track Mode 1, Track Mode 2" etc, so who the hell are they trying to kid? Yes, buy this car with all the "race packages" we'll sell you but actually put it on a race track and you're ****ed (pardon the language).

Anyway, I was on the fence as to whether I might consider a newish Z06 vs. a 996 GT3 in the not so distant future. My mind was made up for me today. I've never heard of a newer Porsche having something like this happen to it. I've heard about it more than once on a Vette, and the fact the GM will just turn their backs on long time core customers using the car for what it was intended for is asinine.

So my actual question: Does it anywhere in the Porsche Warranty exclude you from driving your car on a race track? Can anyone tell me the exact wording if it does, or is expressly implied?

 

If you are worried about warranty just keep the car stock until the warranty expires.

GT3 is meant for the track, have fun and take it to its home.

 

as said, if you are worried about the warranty don't take it to the track...PCNA will likely void your warranty if they believe or know you were on track when the problem happened...they can simply call it extreme use and not honor it..really depends on your relationship with your dealer and whether they will go to bat for you or not...I started tracking my GT3 right after I purchased it new and there were a lot of other GT3's out there that were under warranty...I never saw a major failure like an engine or tranny...although, a few over zealous drivers modified some body panels and you can't expect Porsche to fix that for free

 

A bit dated, but read this tread: https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-2004-gt3.html

They can choose not to honor the warrany if you break it on track, but legally, if faced with a suit they need to show that the failure was actually casued by the "extreme use" and not by some other latent defect. A very fact and circumstance centric argument... For example, we all know the cayman/boxter motors have oil starvation problems under heavy G's. So put race rubber on one and blow your motor on a long sweeper and you would have a hard time putting it on PCNA. But do a non-competitive DE on road tires and don't over rev, and you might have a case. I'm sure a DME scan would be exhibit #1. You really just need to have a good relationship w/ your dealer and you will be all set. Find one that does track days for customers, and they will have a much harder time telling you to foot the bill yourself.

 

Huh. Well that's a bit disappointing to hear. I assumed that Porsche, specifically designing their vehicles for track use, would cover your *** if something happened on the track. Racing wheel to wheel or time trials is one thing, but I feel like DE's should be covered. But I see what you're saying about the dealer thing. My dad's biggest mistake was calling OnStar and having them bring it to the local Po Dunk Chevy Dealer in Watkins Glen. He went out two days later and got it with a flat bed and brought it back to HIS dealer. They told him that if he had brought it there first, he woulda had no problems, but the guy in Watkins Glen blew the whistle on him first. Bummer. Well, very expensive lesson learned I guess. Shoulda pushed it out of the parking lot of Watkins Glen and played dumb.

 

Just read the whole 7 page debacle. Thanks for sharing. So it appears Porsche is no better or maybe even worse when it comes to warranties and track time. Anyone know of a company who DOES warranty their cars when doing what it is they were built to do?

 

Most porsches were not built for the track. As for gt3, I have never heard of a failure under regular, non racing scenarios.

 

Aye well Chevy's aren't built for the track either, but the Corvette is. As is the GT3. That was kinda my point.

 

I am not aware of any auto manufacturer who does not have the option to void the warranty for track use. Don't confuse marketing with reality, these are street cars. Race cars (Porsche Motorsport, Lotus Sport, etc) do not come with a warranty...

 

Other than the link listed - I have never heard of any GT3's that have broken down at the track.

I have seen 30-40 corvette's blow up or suspension fail or some hose go out or brakes fail at the track. Most of the times the owners just sucked up the cost of the repair or tried to make the car look perfectly stock before trying to claim a warranty issue.

i.e. - You are much better off in a GT3 than C5/C6. However a C5z06 that is out of warranty can be an excellent track vehicle.

 

I’m having a hard time with this thread. Excluding parade laps, why should a new car warranty cover a car while on track?

If you drive your car onto a racing surface, you should expect to foot the bill for any/all collision damage (car and facility damage e.g., replacing armco etc) and especially mechanical failure pertaining to your car. If you are not prepared to write that check, you have no business being on the track.

In my humble opinion, blaming a car manufacture for a blown engine that occurred while on track is about like blaming your bank for letting you gamble and lose in a casino.

I'm not trying to sound like a d!ck or preach here, but where is the personal accountability.

Instead of posting why someone else should foot the bill, I think it would be more beneficial to discuss why they should.

 

You can rev a car up on the street just as you can on a track. Granted the track use will be harder because their is more of it but just because you drive onto a closed off section of asphalt should not mean the car is temporarily out of warranty...

Now crashing the car on a track would be different as far as insurance goes.

 

It should be covered by the manufacturer, because the car was not being operated in any way outside of what the manufacturer intended it to do. You buy track options from the factory, you put the car in "Competitive Driving Mode", you turn you HUD to "Track Mode" you watch the lovely little accompanying DVD that has a whole section about operating your vehicle at a race track, and no where is there a friendly little asterisk that says *If you use this car in any way that it's been marketed and sold to you, your warranty will be void* Corvette offers Bondurant courses at a discount with the purchase of a Z06. They fail to mention that if you do that with your own car, your warranty is void. If they're gonna sell a vehicle with intentions to be used on a track, then they should stand behind their product when it's used on a track. Period.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilson

You can rev a car up on the street just as you can on a track. Granted the track use will be harder because their is more of it but just because you drive onto a closed off section of asphalt should not mean the car is temporarily out of warranty...

Agreed, but you can't really drive full tilt on the street for 30 min uninterrupted increments. And you are not going to achieve the same repeated high RPMs combined with high lateral g's on the street either. I also doubt you can replicate and sustain the same operating temperatures and general mechanical forces that are easily achieved while on track.

Now multiply all that times the number of session in a day and then multiply that times the number of days on a typical track weekend. That is an accelerated amount of wear in say 500-800 miles. Who in their right mind would underwrite warranties against wear like that for 50K miles??

And driving closed off sections of asphalt is stretching it. I'd ask what your intent was while on said asphalt. How often you go there and what kind of tires and brake pads you have on the car while “driving” on it.

 

Riddle me this: Do factory race cars come with 36k-50k mile warranties too?? There is no question about their purpose is in the world (street vs. track).

Marketing is marketing, based on all the chit that has flown my way I purchased a car that will make me a famous race car driver, have rock hard abs, a large ***** and hot women that swarm me and my car; I think I'll sue....

I do agree with you that what you are describing is a misleading sales pitch, but at some point common sense should have taken over. Do coffee cups really need to say "content is extremely hot"?

Again, help me understand the why should a manufacture warranty cars driven on track??