COA, or whatever they're calling it now, Am I being impatience? |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
COA, or whatever they're calling it now, Am I being impatience? |
adolimpio |
Oct 30 2018, 12:32 PM
Post
#1
|
Art Group: Members Posts: 182 Joined: 10-March 10 From: Greenwood SC Member No.: 11,449 Region Association: South East States |
I've requested a Porsche Product Specifications (COA), and its now been a month since they charged my Credit Card, and I still have not received anything.
Is this normal? Do I need to be more patient? |
Unobtanium-inc |
Nov 2 2018, 08:20 AM
Post
#2
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,213 Joined: 29-November 06 From: New York Member No.: 7,276 Region Association: None |
For the record, COA's have been a weak document from the beginning. Here is a perfect example. The COA is from 1991.
I recently bought a 61 Cab. The owner had a hand written note from the previous owner that the engine had been replaced by the Factory with an SC motor, apparently the original Super 90 motor went boom. I checked the COA that came with the car, no mention of this, so I kind of filed it in that place where all the other folk-lore stories go. "My car was a Factory Use car" or "My car was driven in the Alps by Baron You Know Who" "Ferry Porsche wrote his memos while sitting in my car" etc, etc, etc. But just to double check I pulled a Kardex on the car and wouldn't you know it, in June of 64 the Factory installed the SC engine that is currently in the car! You would think this would be good information to put on the COA, considering it shows the continuity of the motors. But there was no mention of this on the COA, though Porsche is supposed to use the Kardex to get all the information for the COA, so when the COA was filled out the writer had the same info I have now. I guess I could rail at the person who signed the COA, but he's no longer with Porsche so it wouldn't change anything. But it would be much nicer for the consumer if Porsche would just provide a scan of the Kardex, they can redact the owner info to get around privacy laws. They've always maintained the COA is just as good as the Kardex, but this instance proves that wrong. For $120 they should go the extra mile. Attached thumbnail(s) Attached image(s) |
bbrock |
Nov 4 2018, 06:11 PM
Post
#3
|
914 Guru Group: Members Posts: 5,269 Joined: 17-February 17 From: Montana Member No.: 20,845 Region Association: Rocky Mountains |
But just to double check I pulled a Kardex on the car and wouldn't you know it, in June of 64 the Factory installed the SC engine that is currently in the car! You would think this would be good information to put on the COA, considering it shows the continuity of the motors. But there was no mention of this on the COA, though Porsche is supposed to use the Kardex to get all the information for the COA, so when the COA was filled out the writer had the same info I have now. I guess I could rail at the person who signed the COA, but he's no longer with Porsche so it wouldn't change anything. But it would be much nicer for the consumer if Porsche would just provide a scan of the Kardex, they can redact the owner info to get around privacy laws. They've always maintained the COA is just as good as the Kardex, but this instance proves that wrong. For $120 they should go the extra mile. How did you get your hands on the Kardex? I'd love to get a peek at that for my car. Regarding transmission #: I provided that with my app and the COA just listed "Unconfirmed." I followed up and was told they didn't have info about the original transmission # for the car even though the app makes kind of big deal about it. |
Unobtanium-inc |
Nov 4 2018, 06:17 PM
Post
#4
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,213 Joined: 29-November 06 From: New York Member No.: 7,276 Region Association: None |
But just to double check I pulled a Kardex on the car and wouldn't you know it, in June of 64 the Factory installed the SC engine that is currently in the car! You would think this would be good information to put on the COA, considering it shows the continuity of the motors. But there was no mention of this on the COA, though Porsche is supposed to use the Kardex to get all the information for the COA, so when the COA was filled out the writer had the same info I have now. I guess I could rail at the person who signed the COA, but he's no longer with Porsche so it wouldn't change anything. But it would be much nicer for the consumer if Porsche would just provide a scan of the Kardex, they can redact the owner info to get around privacy laws. They've always maintained the COA is just as good as the Kardex, but this instance proves that wrong. For $120 they should go the extra mile. How did you get your hands on the Kardex? I'd love to get a peek at that for my car. Regarding transmission #: I provided that with my app and the COA just listed "Unconfirmed." I followed up and was told they didn't have info about the original transmission # for the car even though the app makes kind of big deal about it. Kardex's stopped late 69/early 70, they went to a different system, so no Kardex for 914. You get a bunch of codes, which translates to options, but it's far less dramatic than having the hard card. I get mine from a friend at the Factory, but my un-written rule is I only get them for myself. There are guys on the 356 Registry and early S Registry who charge to get one. |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 9th June 2024 - 10:15 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |