5 ms·

>Some Porsche cars have this problem where if you don’t drive the car hard enough, engine oil isn’t splashed over an internal rubber seal. Over time and without

>Some Porsche cars have this problem where if you don’t drive the car hard enough, engine oil isn’t splashed over an internal rubber seal. Over time and without lubrication, the seal grows brittle and eventually fails, causing catastrophic engine failure. That's called "poor engineering".

paradox460 3y ago
Porsche engineering
yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
I think that's a reductive take. The cars I'm referring to are designed to be driven hard — they're performance vehicles. It's also bad for just about any car to sit for long periods of time without being run. That's not what it's built for, and unless you design cars professionally and have some authority on the topic, it's lazy to call this poor engineering.
- danpalmer 3y ago
  This is a good point, but I wonder how many Porsches are actually used as performance vehicles? How many have ever been taken to a track day? I feel like many cars in that category, Porches in particular maybe, are status symbols only and other than driving a bit over the speed limit on a long road every now and again, they're not used in this way. Which then begs the question, should Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Probably the former because that's what sells the cars, but it's a weird state to be in.
  - dagw 3y ago
    Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Porsche is smart enough to do both. They have their top end performance cars that people aspire to, and their normal "daily driver" cars that people actually buy and use. That being said, of all 'high end' sports cars the 911 is by far the one I see most often being used as a daily driver. I never see Ferraris driving down a dirt road to a hiking trail, but I do see 911s.
    - danpalmer 3y ago
      Oh no I'm thinking specifically of these being the same car. Many people buy something like a 911 without ever taking it racing. That car needs to be designed for the racing for people to buy it, but at the cost of it being less suitable for driving to golf courses. Making two cars is the easy answer and all brands do it to some extent, but it's a solution for a different group of customers.
  - lelanthran 3y ago
    > Which then begs the question, should Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Presumably none of the above. They are designing the car that people are willing to pay for. PS. "begs the question" does not mean the same thing as "raises the question". Anal? Pedantic? I'm not usually, but it is a minor fault of mine that I get bothered when I see people use "beg the question" wrong :-)
  - treprinum 3y ago
    Porsche is a German company and German highways have no speed limit, so you can see an old lady going back home from a shopping mall at 130mph. Speeds that would be considered super irresponsible or track-only in the US.
- michaelt 3y ago
  Of the Porches I see on the road, 80% are cayenne SUVs being used to take the kids to school, and the other 20% are stationary in rush hour traffic, ferrying some middle-aged financial analyst to work in London or New York. I'm pretty sure Porsche knows this. I'd say any car that doesn't account for this fact is poorly engineered.
  - yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
    Ok. But before we stray too far into straw man territory, the cars I'm referring to which are susceptible to intermediate shaft bearing failure are Boxster, Cayman, and 911 (except Turbo, GT2, and GT3) models from 1997 to 2008. So, not Cayennes. (Not that Cayennes don't have their own problems, but then again, all cars do). Also, there may be some confirmation bias at play here. The cars you see on the road are the cars being used to ferry people around on the school run or daily commute. You aren't seeing the cars being taken for a spirited drive.
  - trilbyglens 3y ago
    German cars are famous for being overly engineered, with tiny failure tolerances. Older BMWs for instance are complete shitheaps compared with lower end brands of similar age and use. Their systems are all very interdependent and any small failure, or even degredation of any part leads to a cascade if failure. Too much precision engineering and not enough robust engineering.
gregoriol 3y ago
It's actually as poor as using a key-value storage as a relational database: both systems were well engineered for their use-cases, but one can use each in a different not optimal way. It's up to the users to use the best tool for what they need: if one plans to drive to work every day in a congested city-center area, one shouldn't get a Porsche. Same for the Rivian of the post: if you plan to use it in a rural area and transport heavy stuff, maybe it's well suited, but if you plan to drive across country or in a city, then it's not the right tool. But the tool by itself seems well made, for its use-case.
jacquesm 3y ago
Indeed, it was poor engineering. To be fair though, that was on their first and second models of watercooled engine, which was a complete redesign and once identified as a problem it was fixed. There are also aftermarket fixes for this issue, but unfortunately this is not something you just slap on. The engines to watch are 996 and 997 engines before 2007 iirc, the turbo/GT2/GT3 is excepted because it was based on another block (the 'Metzger' engine). So if you buy an older Porsche make sure that that problem is fixed when - inevitably - the engine was rebuilt or you could be looking at a very pricey repair, if that bearing (on something called the IMS) goes it will take the engine with it.

paradox460 3y ago

Porsche engineering

yakshaving_jgt 3y ago

I think that's a reductive take. The cars I'm referring to are designed to be driven hard — they're performance vehicles. It's also bad for just about any car to sit for long periods of time without being run. That's not what it's built for, and unless you design cars professionally and have some authority on the topic, it's lazy to call this poor engineering.

danpalmer 3y ago
This is a good point, but I wonder how many Porsches are actually used as performance vehicles? How many have ever been taken to a track day? I feel like many cars in that category, Porches in particular maybe, are status symbols only and other than driving a bit over the speed limit on a long road every now and again, they're not used in this way. Which then begs the question, should Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Probably the former because that's what sells the cars, but it's a weird state to be in.
- dagw 3y ago
  Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Porsche is smart enough to do both. They have their top end performance cars that people aspire to, and their normal "daily driver" cars that people actually buy and use. That being said, of all 'high end' sports cars the 911 is by far the one I see most often being used as a daily driver. I never see Ferraris driving down a dirt road to a hiking trail, but I do see 911s.
  - danpalmer 3y ago
    Oh no I'm thinking specifically of these being the same car. Many people buy something like a 911 without ever taking it racing. That car needs to be designed for the racing for people to buy it, but at the cost of it being less suitable for driving to golf courses. Making two cars is the easy answer and all brands do it to some extent, but it's a solution for a different group of customers.
- lelanthran 3y ago
  > Which then begs the question, should Porsche be designing for the car people envision, or the car people use? Presumably none of the above. They are designing the car that people are willing to pay for. PS. "begs the question" does not mean the same thing as "raises the question". Anal? Pedantic? I'm not usually, but it is a minor fault of mine that I get bothered when I see people use "beg the question" wrong :-)
- treprinum 3y ago
  Porsche is a German company and German highways have no speed limit, so you can see an old lady going back home from a shopping mall at 130mph. Speeds that would be considered super irresponsible or track-only in the US.
michaelt 3y ago
Of the Porches I see on the road, 80% are cayenne SUVs being used to take the kids to school, and the other 20% are stationary in rush hour traffic, ferrying some middle-aged financial analyst to work in London or New York. I'm pretty sure Porsche knows this. I'd say any car that doesn't account for this fact is poorly engineered.
- yakshaving_jgt 3y ago
  Ok. But before we stray too far into straw man territory, the cars I'm referring to which are susceptible to intermediate shaft bearing failure are Boxster, Cayman, and 911 (except Turbo, GT2, and GT3) models from 1997 to 2008. So, not Cayennes. (Not that Cayennes don't have their own problems, but then again, all cars do). Also, there may be some confirmation bias at play here. The cars you see on the road are the cars being used to ferry people around on the school run or daily commute. You aren't seeing the cars being taken for a spirited drive.
- trilbyglens 3y ago
  German cars are famous for being overly engineered, with tiny failure tolerances. Older BMWs for instance are complete shitheaps compared with lower end brands of similar age and use. Their systems are all very interdependent and any small failure, or even degredation of any part leads to a cascade if failure. Too much precision engineering and not enough robust engineering.

gregoriol 3y ago

It's actually as poor as using a key-value storage as a relational database: both systems were well engineered for their use-cases, but one can use each in a different not optimal way. It's up to the users to use the best tool for what they need: if one plans to drive to work every day in a congested city-center area, one shouldn't get a Porsche. Same for the Rivian of the post: if you plan to use it in a rural area and transport heavy stuff, maybe it's well suited, but if you plan to drive across country or in a city, then it's not the right tool. But the tool by itself seems well made, for its use-case.

jacquesm 3y ago

Indeed, it was poor engineering. To be fair though, that was on their first and second models of watercooled engine, which was a complete redesign and once identified as a problem it was fixed. There are also aftermarket fixes for this issue, but unfortunately this is not something you just slap on. The engines to watch are 996 and 997 engines before 2007 iirc, the turbo/GT2/GT3 is excepted because it was based on another block (the 'Metzger' engine). So if you buy an older Porsche make sure that that problem is fixed when - inevitably - the engine was rebuilt or you could be looking at a very pricey repair, if that bearing (on something called the IMS) goes it will take the engine with it.