injurylawyer

I have just installed the Depo 997.2 rear tail lights and the smoked LED 3rd brake lights for the rear and the electric spoiler...while everything seemed to be working, I lost my cruise control. I am trying to get the details on how to install the resistor, how many and where to overcome the problem. Perhaps you can assist?

bBunny I had installed the Depo tail lights and now the smoked third brake lights and lost my cruise functionality. It seems to be common since what I am reading is that in addition to the 50w 6ohm resistors for the tail-lights, you would also need the resistor for the 3rd brake light. The issue is do I need one for the recessed one as well as the one in the electric spoiler? If so, how did you mount your resistor for the lights in the spoiler when you should not attach it to plastic because of the heat generated? Any input would be appreciated. :help:

Looking at the engine bay, I think I see the two large connectors on the passenger side, just below the high pressure hoses....they seem to have some form of round twist connectors but I am uncertain how to disconnect them to inspect and spray...

Not certain as to the cam deviation read out... The big round connectors in the passenger side engine bay....not sure which ones you may be referring to. If you have a little more for me to go on, I will check that out since I have a can of Deoxit in the garage...that would help me pinpoint where it is since it sounds like somthing I can try. Yes, have tried and they have tried resetting the code. It comes back every 10 to 25 miles. The second opinion garage inidcated when testing the CEL was off for almost a couple of days on one test round (they had the car for nearly 4 weeks since they were not charging me full rate, they were testing same during down time on other projects). Ahsai, thanks for your input on this post too...

I purchased a '99 996 C2 in October 2014. Never been in an accident. Less than 10k miles before I purchased the car, the engine was replaced on the car by the previous owner professionally with a complete rebuild using a '01 block, L&N Engineering Nickies upgrading the bore from 3.4L to 3.6L, forged pistons and their IMS upgrade. The car runs great but I have the P0341 code and the CEL on. After discussing same with the prior owner, who essentially owned the car for 13 years, it was not on supposedly after the rebuild but perhaps about 5k miles later when it started. The prior owner had the very reputable shop that rebuilt the engine replace the sensors, check and redo the timing, replace the tensioners, etc. and try to trouble shoot the issue to no avail. Even the DME was sent out to be tested and came back just fine. Money was really no object for the prior owner (lucky him). The master mechanic who did the work tells me the car is running great, nothing is otherwise wrong and I should just enjoy driving it... I took it to another PCA member recomended Indie for a second opinion. After $1,200 in electrical troublshooting (that was discounted) and sending the DME out again to have it come back good yet again, the only advice given was the possiblity of replacing the entire engine harness---an expensive proposition without a guaranteed result. I have continued researching the issue and even come across an article stating sometimes, in some models, low battery voltage or a weak starter can even trigger a CPS code. Porsche's owne OBD II definition of the code for this model is 'Camshaft Position Sensor 1-Signal Implausible, Short to Ground, Short to B+'. So, it seems to be an electical issue... FYI-the alternator-starter Y-cable (part no. 99660701903) was just replaced because of a low voltage issue I was having only 5k miles after the alternator was replaced along with an older version of the Y-cable (99660701901). The car is putting out the proper voltage even under a heavy load now... Regardless, the interesting thing about your post from 1 1/2 years ago, Dharn55, is that you mention the 5.2 DME having only one CPS...I have that DME but the engine is a '01 that likely had the 7.2 DME which you indicate there is one on each cylinder head. However the swap retained the intake plenum from the original engine since it is drive by the wire rather than the later E-gas version of the throttle rather than retro-fitting the entire car for E-gas (like changing the pedal to electronic, changing the DME to 7.2, etc.). Looking under the car, there appears to be CPS on the passenger side... Any thoughts/insights would be appreciated. :help:

Wow! As an aside, I read that a faulty starting circuit or starter motor can even cause a host of CEL issues as well (P0341)...the corrosion on that cable would explain alot... Hope it does not happen again for you!

What do you think did that to your cable? 'farmer boy' indicated that he had a defective starter that he replaced and looking at the photo of the terminal you posted, looks to be the end at the starter. Do you think your starter has a short that caused that? Corrosion? Engine Temperature?

I have to thank you and everyone who contributed to this thread. I am really grateful for the valuable information shared. I purchased a '99 996 C2 in October 2014. Less than 10k miles before I purchased the car, the engine was replaced on the car by the previous owner professionally with a complete rebuild using a '01 block, L&N Engineering Nickies upgrading the bore from 3.4L to 3.6L, forged pistons and their IMS upgrade. I had the exact problem happening on my car. Thinking it was the alternator, starter, voltage regulator, battery, etc., I was ready to endure a massive repair bill one way or the other. However, going through the service records carefully, I then recognizing that only 5,000 miles had passed since the alternator was replaced with a new one, I became suspicious... At that time, a new cable was installed and it was part number 99660701901...the older number Porsche had. Curious, I sprayed a little WD-40 on the contacts at the starter and the + jump pole of the cable and the voltage increased, at least when cold and then the resistance of the heat when the engine warmed up made the voltage drop just like all the rest of you experienced...I knew something else had to be going on. I too contacted Sunset Porsche and gave my VIN. I got the updated/upgraded part No. 99660701903...I had the parts specialist check and he indicated that he was aware of the other number but to go with this one....how right he was. It took about a week to get the part in. Just as you said, about $42! When bringing it back to the indie shop that had been servicing the car for the prior owner and actually did the engine rebuild, I brought the cable with me. Unlike other shops that whine about not wanting to install a 'customer provided part', since it was a genuine Porsche part, from a dealership no-less, they actually thanked me for having it. However, to be on the safe side, they ran all the electrical tests that confirmed our hunch. The alternator/voltage regulator, battery and starter were all good. Thereafter, the plan was to install the cable and then retest and if necessary do whatever else was needed. It turns out, nothing else was... The previous cable had actually 'melted' in certain areas...they apologized for using the older part 99660701901 when replacing the alternator for the previous owner because their supplier did not have the new part number 99660701903, which they admittedly stated had some noticeable differences at the terminals and a bit in the length. They say it happens a lot when an older part is sitting on a shelf and the supplier moves what they have... Makes me think that the changed configuration of the part and the trouble that we all share, the part should have been an optional recall. Overall, between the testing, removing of the old one, installation of the new one, retesting, and closing the project out, they put in about 4 hours but lucky me, I was charged for only 2.8 hours which is more than fair for the work done. My results are the same....an overall increase in voltage...nearly 1 1/2 volts making it run in the same range as you specified (as it should). Once more, without the direction of your thread, and the contribution of all of you, I would not have had the insight to target the problem and arrive at a simple and cost effective solution. Thank you. :notworthy: