dphil66

Also have a 2008 Cayenne Turbo...and wanted to put the same Hawk LTS (green package) pads on it that I put on my '04 Cayenne Turbo, and they say they have two part numbers that are compatible with the 2008, but they are NOT compatible. The 2008 Turbo has the 368mm discs / 6-piston calipers, and those Hawk pads will NOT fit. The larger calipers have to be removed to change pads, whereas with the older 350mm versions on older Turbos, you just remove the retaining pin and spring and the pads come straight out without removing the caliper. Picture of the 368mm version: It also seems the 2009-2010 models had the larger 380mm front brakes from the prior year's Porsche Cayenne Turbo Power Kit, so the 2008s had different front pads than the 2009-2010. The only pads for the 2008 seem to be...from some good information I found at "some other place" on the interwebs. A very nice fellow posted this info as brake pad part numbers for the '08 Turbo: Front Pads: Porsche Part # 955.351.939.63 Pagid Part # T1798 EBC Yellowstuff Part # DP41835R Carbotech Part# CT1349 Rear Pads: Porsche Part # 955.352.939.63 Pagid Part # T1863 EBC Yellowstuff Part # DP41836R Carbotech Part# CT1350

I put Hawk LTS pads all around on my 2004 Cayenne Turbo, and the virtual elimination of brake dust is fantastic! Also, you guys are right that they don't have the same "feel" as factory, however I always thought the factory brakes were WAY too grabby...I never liked them. Same with my 2008 Cayenne Turbo. Driving these with factory pads back to back with our Boxster with factory pads, and the CTT's brakes are just way to sensitive. You get a hard initial bite, but then have to do a real leg press to get any real stopping power The Hawk LTS pads totally fix the grabby brake feel, and they give better ultimate stopping power when you're really standing on them vs. the factory pads. I like that they feel much more progressive and linear, and are much closer in feel to the sports car. Those factory pads are designed for soccer moms who want a light touch on the brakes as they slow down for the stop sign in front of little Johnny's school a quarter mile before they get to it. It's a reassuring bite for people who never actually brake (or drive) hard. The Hawk pads are proper pads, with more force required to initialize, yes, but ultimately far more linear when you get deeper into trouble. I like them WAY better. Plus, virtually zero dust. I do a deep clean maybe twice a summer on my daily driver's wheels.

Hi guys, Just thought I'd add my experience here in case it helps somebody... I was having this problem with our '98 Boxster 2.5: (video not my car, but same problem) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lVGBfjHgAk Our local Porsche dealer narrowed the issue down to a sticking Idle Control Valve (ICV). They removed it, de-gunked it really well, and had it moving freely before re-installing it just to try that out. The problem went away. They asked if I wanted to wait for them to get a new part and replace it while they had it opened up, but since I just literally that day handed them almost $1,500 for a new carden shaft on the Cayenne Turbo, I said, "Let's just see how it goes after being cleaned up." A new ICV is about $500 at the dealer, and about 1.5 hours of labor. This problem had been intermittent - it would occur maybe once a year, and then over the course of an hour or so, the idle revving would be less severe. It might start going from idle up to 2,700, and when it started to abate, it might just go from idle to 2,200....then to maybe 1,800...then it would go back to normal static idle. This has been a real bugger to diagnose because of its intermittent nature. But there you have it. It could not find a stable idle, and the computer kept trying to compensate with the revving...all because the Idle Control Valve was sticking. We drive the car daily, a lot, even in the winter (with snow tires and a hard top). So it is truly a daily whip. We bought the car with only 10k miles on it in 2006. It now has about 204,000 miles, and still has the original clutch. Our air-oil separator has just been replaced as well. OT, but we've never had an RMS leak, most likely because it's driven daily, all year long. And even though she sees plenty of red-line revs, never an issue with the Intermediate Shaft Bearing. Mobil 1 and factory filters every 15k just like the book says. And again, still the original clutch. Except for these two recent issues (ICV and air-oil sep), she's been a real champ.

I just replaced the front brake pads on my 2004 Cayenne Turbo, and was looking for something with good feel, low noise, and more than anything - less brake dust than the OEM pads. I ended up using Hawk LTS pads (light truck series, in the green package), Hawk p/n HB501Y.625. I found some pros and cons, but mostly pros. PRO: The Hawk LTS pads throw WAY, way, way way way less brake dust than the OEM pads. My wheels were cleaned & detailed 3 weeks ago, and at the moment, the rear wheels (with OEM pads) have about 50% more dust on them than the front wheels. This is absolutely awesome. With the OEM front pads, I used to get brake dust on the SIDE of the vehicle, like, on the door panels, on the door handles even. No more. When it comes to dust, these are quite awesome. PRO: The brake feel is less 'grabby' than the OEM pads. This is a good thing, as I thought the brakes were too abrupt with the OEM pads, an example where I thought the factory got the calibration wrong in this vehicle. PRO: Cost was a lot cheaper than OEM, and pads are pricey on the Cayenne. (Surprisingly, the Cayenne rotors are cheaper than those for my 911, but the pads were a lot more...wtf?) NEUTRAL: I can't speak to the high-speed, high-performance aspect of the pads because I drive this as a street car. Spirited driving in this big fat pig, to be sure, but I'm not sure how they'd compare to the OEM pads on the track. Because I don't plan on tracking my CTT, I guess I don't care. CON: The molded plastic part of the sensor wires broke when I pushed them home into the notches in the pads. The portion that broke was the flange that basically holds the sensor in the pad left-to-right (relative to the vehicle), but once installed they stayed in place more or less. You may have to file or work the receiving pad to prevent this, and it was disappointing. I have no noise from these pads, however I did replace the retainer pins, bolts, and springs that come with the factory hardware package that is recommended for every brake change. I also used the normal red grease between the pads' backsides and the caliper pistons. No noise is good noise... Hope this helps, Dan

Loren, I bet you're correct on that reasoning. Wheel fitment over big brakes it critical, and those numbers indicating minimum wheel size would make it easier to discern. And still, 380mm is a huge brake rotor...the same diameter of the wheels on my VW Eurovan!

Sorry, I just can't take it anymore...I keep reading about 17" brake rotors on Cayenne forums, and feel the need to point out that there are in fact 25.4 mm in every 1.0 inch. Therefore: 380mm = 14.960" 350mm = 13.780" 300mm = 11.811" As much as I'd love to have 17" brake rotors on my Cayenne, it just ain't so... BTW, I believe the silver and red calipers between the S and Turbo are the same, just different paint color. Black calipers on the Cayenne V6 are smaller. I also believe the 380mm brakes are only found on the Turbo S models, and on Turbos with the (very expensive) Powerkit option, which basically turn a regular Turbo into a Turbo S by changing intake mainfold, ECU, brakes, and etc.

This may help those of you looking for a part number, and this feature has been available on Porsche's website for a long time, but you can download the real factory parts catalog for your Porsche right off the Porsche website. This is the same catalog your dealer looks at on their computers when they look up parts for you. Just go to this page on the Porsche site, and select your model: http://www.porsche.com/usa/accessoriesandservices/porscheservice/originalparts/originalpartscatalogue/ You can navigate to this from the top level main page by clicking Personalization and Service >>> Porsche Service >>> Parts and Diagnostic Information >>> Porsche Original Parts Catalog. The factory Porsche website contains many other very useful features and sources of information. Take some time to browse through the lesser-travelled areas, and you may be surprised at the wealth of information you might find. Dan Phillips President, Western Michigan Region, Porsche Club of America

Another person posting on this forum recommended a 21 mm spacer for 10x18 et65 rears on a Boxster, instead of an 18mm spacer. He said otherwise, the tire rubs on the strut, I presume at maximum suspension travel. It is common that 18mm spacers are offered to make the 10x18 et65 rims fit on a Boxster from wheel shops, and it does mathematically add up. The Boxster's factory 10x18" wheels are an et47 offset, and 47 + 18 = 65. I am thinking of doing the same on a '98 Boxster (with some factory 18" rims with the et65 offset), and I'll probably play it safe and get a 21 mm spacer set.

I have the factory Sport Design wheels on my car (18" two-piece with 10 spokes and bolts all the way 'round), and they are chromed. Since I'm not too fond of chrome, I had a company that advertises in Panorama quote a strip / paint job. Company was Wheel Restoration or something like that in California. They quoted about $600 per wheel, not including shipping and removal / reinstall of tires. They would strip the chrome, polish / grind everything to remove any curb rash, separate the center spokes from the rim, polish the rim and clear-coat (almost a chrome-finish) and paint the center part midnight blue metallic to match the car. Would look sharp, but still, $2400 plus plus.

By the way, my passenger seat shakes like a Mexican space shuttle when nobody is sitting in it. Engine idles perfectly, you hardly know it's even on. So the shake has nothing to do with the engine, but has everything to do with the seat design!

I think this whole engine reliability question is way overblown. There were a small (small!) number of early engines that had problems due to a casting issue at one of the two block casting suppliers, or so I've heard. So the occurrence of factory-related engine problems is trivial. Maybe I should knock on wood here, but my daily-driver 99 C4 has been fine except for a rare cam tensioner issue on bank 1. I also had an oil leak on bank 1. It's been nothing but gas, oil, and spark plugs ever since, with 63k on the clock. My car does not have an RMS problem, and this is with the original RMS from 99. The likely reason? It's driven every day...

A bit of a public service message here, but would you like a copy of the factory repair manual? The factory parts lists / diagrams? All of the factory information is available directly from the source. Visit Porsche's web site, and go to the Service area. You can download the parts list / diagrams here. They have every catalog for every model, free to download: Factory Parts Lists Here, you can purchase downloads for very reasonable prices, including the factory service manual for your car. A one-year subscription (with unlimited access) costs $5,000, but you can purchase individual documents (the repair manual is an individual document, for example) for only $1.80, and you can even use your credit card. Wiring diagrams for $11. It's electronic and thus saves paper, it's cheaper than a Haynes manual, and it's the real deal. It's pretty nice: https://techinfo2.porsche.com/PAGInfosystem...r?Type=GVOStart

My dealer in Michigan quoted about $1300 P&L... They charge $105/hr for labor. They also give you a 10% parts discount if you're a PCA member. By the way, my old 944 had a hydraulic clutch...I just assumed they all did. My current car - a '99 C4 - does it actually have a cable-operated clutch, or is the mechanic talking about the '02 have it all wrong? I haven't seen a cable-operated clutch in many modern cars...

My wife uses the Kensington Pico for her iPod Nano in her Boxster. It's an FM transmitter that matches the Nano very well. In our view, an FM transmitter is a better solution because: 1) Nothing to install in your vehicle, just tune the factory radio to a particular station to pick up the transmitter's signal 2) Works in all of your vehicles, in your shop, in your house, on your boat, and anywhere you have an FM radio, with only a single $50 item to purchase 3) Freedom to place your iPod, while playing, in a concealed place like your armrest or glovebox. I know there are mixed reviews on FM transmitters, but we live in an area fairly saturated with FM stations, and we have virtually NO issues with static or interference. It even worked perfectly the last time we were in downtown Chicago. Plus, you won't miss any sound quality because a) the MP3s are massively compressed, and therefore aren't much better than a good FM signal anyway, and B) you're in a noisy car to begin with. The Kensington Pico, and many other FM transmitters, are available on store.apple.com. They even sell versions that are an FM transmitter and an iPod charger (plugs into cigarette lighter) rolled into one. That's my $0.02!

Improved winter performance is more a function of the *width* of the wheel/tire, not the *diameter* of the wheel. This is because a tire that is narrow results in a contact patch with the ground that has a smaller surface area. If we make these assumptions: 1) Weight of vehicle is constant (4400 lbs) 2) Front-to-back 'length' of contact patch is constant (8 inches) 3) All 4 wheels are the same contact patch, and receive the car's load equally) Thus, a 7-inch wide tire will result in 4 contact patches that are each 56 square inches, and each bear 1100 lbs of load. The resulting pressure of that contact patch is 19.64 psi. If you had an 8-inch wide tire, the surface area increases to 64 square inches, with a resulting pressure of 17.19 psi. Therefore, changing from an 8-inch wide tire down to a 7-inch wide tire will increase the pressure on your contact patches by 14.3%. This is equivalent to adding 629 lbs of weight to the vehicle. That's a *lot* of kitty litter! Since the force of friction per square inch (how much grip the tires will have) equals the contact patch pressure times the coefficient of friction, skinny tires will have much better grip on wet, icy roads. It's amazing how much difference an inch of width can make. But your logic is right on. As a general rule, 17-inch rims are narrower than larger diameter rims for the same vehicle. And of course, 17-inch rims and snow tires are also cheaper than 18s or 19s. Plus, they tend to get more beat up in the winter, so why not beat up on the cheap ones.

Lucky me, I have the 'old' design, which used set screws for a flat-blade screwdriver, instead of an Allen head. I tried tightening one of those screws to break the paint first, and the little ears just broke off in the other direction. I also tried cutting the paint around another one with an exacto knife, and not only did that not work either, but I also created the first opportunity in this adventure for the body shop. But now, it's almost finished. After hours of trying different things, I finally figured out the trick - bore out the screws with a drill size equal to the minor diameter of a 6-1.00 metric screw, and gently work a tap into it, removing the shavings with the tip of a magnetized drill bit along the way. I now have them drilled and tapped, and ready for the roof rack. Except for the first anchor, where I had originally attempted to use some high-end helical screw remover made by Kobalt, from Lowe's. For the record, beware of anything made of metal that spells its name with a K. Like "Krazy Krank Jack Stands". You can bet it's Krap if they use a "K". So this super-duper screw remover, on the very first try, breaks off in the small hole I'd already drilled. Since it's hardened high-strength alloy tool steel, every drill bit I use goes dull in about 1 rotation. It's hopeless, as the broken off part is totally subterranean. So I try drilling with moderate pressure and some oil and a new HSS drill bit. Must have been one of Krazy Krapland's Magic Drill Bits, because the bit breaks in half in about 5 seconds with hardly any pressure on it, allowing the 1/3-hp drill motor with the jagged bit of drill bit still in the chuck to come flying down onto the roof of the car, creating a huge dent with paint gouged out of the center of it. Awesome. I was so mad that I threw the drill about 35 feet out the garage door into the street, forgetting that it was still plugged in. As that Dodo took flight, it pulled the extension cord up around the front of the car and scratched the front fender. After seeing that, I then threw my safety glasses across the garage and pounded, just once, with the palm of my hand, the part of the roof that is between the track running front to back, and the rear side window, and guess what? That dented it. God F-ing dammit. The safety glasses then lost their life under the heel of my boot as I stomped inside to open a beer. After cooling off, I completely removed that entire troublesome anchor from the car. The factory instructions show you how! (Cue audience laughter...) "All you have to do" is unscrew the nut from behind it under the headliner (after taking all the trim off inside the car). What they don't tell you is that the anchor is also held down by some miracle German sealant that you can only get in Stuttgart, in addition to the fact that it's painted in place. So I'm cutting the paint and sealant around the anchor on the outside of the car. Guess what? I slipped. Huge scratch on the roof now!! That's ok, it's only a few inches away from the huge dent from the broken drill bit and drill chuck. So I'm going to buy a new anchor bracket, if they even sell it separately, because I can't find it in the parts catalog other than maybe 996 504 801 00. (Let me guess - "installation is the reverse of removal!") Once this is installed with the nut and something resembling Permatex, it will then have to be painted over by some 17-year-old Trainee at Floyd's Auto Body and Nightcrawler Stand down the street, meaning it will never be the same again. It probably won't after Trainee takes my car for a 20-minute churn-n-burn "test drive", like the Trainee at Belle Tire did in May. Once again, Awesome. You too can have all this, for the $500 or more I'll have to spend at a body shop, on fixing something that the dealer would have charged $200 to do. (Bore and tap the holes.) Had I only done that, it would have been done right, fast, and with NONE of my time expended. And had they messed up the car in the process, it would have been their dime. But no. I insist on paying over $1000 for something that should have cost the $300 for the rack from eBay and 10 minutes to mount it with nothing but an Allen wrench...had only some G-D engineer in Germany designed it right!!! He probably went to the same school as the guys who designed my Audi A6's water pump, from main seal, cam oil seals, timing belt tensioner, front control arms, Quattro center differential, and automatic transmission...to name just a few miracle cures for the syndrome of thinking German engineers can do no wrong. To top it all off, the roof rack itself is a piece of jewelry, which means you won't actually want to use it for anything in the real world, for fear of marring the delicate anodized finish. I'm telling you, Industrial Designers running amok at that place...

On oil changes: You're wasting your money changing 9 quarts of synthetic oil every 3000 miles. The only time you may want to do that is if you spend a good part of your time driving over 4000 rpm, i.e. you track the car all the time. If you drive the car like a normal car, there is nothing wrong with the factory recommendation. Look at it this way: a 3.4 liter 6-cyl engine would normally take about 4.5 quarts of oil. The 911 uses twice that, so your oil life will be extended. Synthetic oil lasts a lot longer than conventional oil, so that extends the life as well. If you got twice the life from having twice the oil, and twice the life from using synthetic, then divide the 15,000 factory interval in half twice, and you get 3750 miles. Not a bad interval for changing oil. I'm sure that's grossly oversimplified...but 9 quarts of synthetic every 3k? That's just tremendous overkill. Stretch it out to 7-8k at the very least. It's really not necessary unless you drive the car at 6 grand on a dirt track all the time.

Dream car it is...but, the luster tends to fade a bit if you drive it every day. In the end, it's just a car. I still enjoy its performance every day, and I love simply looking at it every day. But one tends to get used to it after a while, however crazy that may sound. If you have another car to drive sometimes for comparison, the shimmering halo over the car will not fade. It really is a great car. I drive mine in snow. It's a C4 with PSM and a manual 6-speed, so even a beginner can master it on ice. Turn off the PSM and...I've never had so much fun in any car doing donuts in a parking lot. Heated seats are great, as is the HVAC system. Never any oddball problems with extremely low temps, this car is very well sorted out. Paint and undercarriage hold up well in severe salt, gravel, and ice. My only gripes are sometimes, the interior feels a little cheap. I have full and supple leather, tons of nice other options, but that plastic surrounding the instruments and nav system in the dash are pretty weak for a $100k car. Headlight washers fail with age because the pop-up part that holds the little spherical directors ages and cracks, and the pressure shoots the little director spheres right out, and then it's just a sloppy soaker on your headlights. $125 each. Had some oil leaks at about 40k that cost $400 to repair. Now I'm having a problem at about 55k with bank 2 cam adjusters, 11 hours labor and $750 in parts. Now THAT one...should not happen. I keep hearing about engine failures on many cars, and I'm hoping for the best. I'm not that worried though. I don't drive my car like a 16-year-old in his dad's Mustang Cobra, so I'd expect it to last for at least 200k miles. At least, that's what I expect from a car like this. If I blasted its brains out at every stop light, and the engine failed at 60k miles, I would hardly be surprised. So don't get to hung up on claims of weak engines. Otherwise...very solid, reliable car so far. I'd love to know how well they do with 100k miles and more. Any car should be almost perfect up to 50-70k miles. It's after that which counts most. My Audi A6 2.8 was just awful - front control arms, transmission, window regulator (2x), memory seat control module, a freezing throttle body at -5 deg F and 75 mph, failing water pump, failing cam and front main oil seals, and many other completely inexcusable problems, before the car even had 100k on it. We'll see about the 911!!

1999 996 C4, 57k miles, owned it since 28k. No service records from before 28k, but since I've owned it, I've done basic maintenance, and fixed a couple of oil leaks on bank 2. Current problem: requires new bank 2 cam adjusters, originals are "sticking". (Huh?) Requires removal of engine, remove bank 2 cyl head, and replacement of cyl head VarioCam parts on bank 2. Job is 11 hours labor, $750 in parts. Ouch! Shouldn't need this kind of work at this low mileage. I drive the car every day, or at least every other day, all year long. This probably contributes to the fact that I have no RMS leak. Fuel mileage is about 19-20 mpg around town, about 28 mpg on highway @ 78 mph. I can get 32-33 mpg if I set the cruise to 70-72 mph.

I have a cousin with a new Mustang GT, to which he just added a cold-air intake kit and a chip tuner. The air intake kit included a different MAF and housing as well. The chip tuner is a revised ECU chip, and a handheld device that plugs into the OBD-II plug. You modify the chip's programs via the handheld. The handheld device has a USB port that connects to a laptop and can provide all kinds of engine data. He did this whole thing for under $500, and a dyno test showed he has an extra 30 at the rear wheels, with at least 10-15 throughout the entire range, not just at 6 grand. Chip raises the rev limiter from 6200 to 6750, so that's where some of that power lies. It has a more aggressive sound, and a slight seat-of-the-pants power bump. A Porsche is similar to a Mustang in that it too uses a gasoline-powered combustion engine with largely the same fundamental design of fuel, spark, sensors, and controls. So why wouldn't an intake kit and a tuned chip give you the same results? It probably will, and maybe that slight bump is worth $500-700. But if you want more than 20-30 hp, you'll have to go further. And if you appreciate the Porsche design philosophy, then you'll also want the rest of the car designed for it - from stronger major engine and transmission components, to bigger brakes, to stronger bushings and bearings all around, all the way up to heavier-duty bolts for your flux capacitor. All of that adds up to a balanced car with higher total performance and the same durability. It's so extensive and in done in so many areas of the car that you'll be better off upgrading to a different model if you want a serious HP boost. Plus, turbo engines are much cheaper to get an extra 50 hp out of! :)

'99 C4, 57,004 miles as of today, on what I presume is the original engine and clutch. (I purchased at 28k miles w/limited history available.) Because of my car's extremely nice interior condition, and the way the clutch and gear lever feel compared to other 996s I've seen, I have reason to believe my car was never (or very rarely) driven hard. Nor do I drive the car very hard myself. It seems like one of those cream-puff classic garage queens vs. a 22-year-old's Mustang Cobra. I currently have a CEL code indicating a cam timing sensor. Dealer runs a test and they can reproduce the problem in the shop - cam adjuster sticking on bank 2. I'm going to have this confirmed by an expert non-dealer Porsche mechanic who is also a very successful club racer, like going to another doctor for a 2nd opinion, before dropping $850 on parts and 11 hours labor at the dealer. Phone conversation w/2nd opinion said 'yeah, that tends to happen on some of those engines...' Involves dropping engine, removing cylinder head, and rebuilding mechanism w/new parts. 2 points to make on this engine failure issue: 1) I drive my car every day, even in the winter. The weather here varies year-round between -20F to +100F. I use 0W-40 Mobil 1 every 10k miles, dealer service at factory recommended intervals otherwise. Nothing special. I don't have a RMS leak, and I don't have any other issues with the car. Many people have issues with their cars that...I can't help wondering if letting the car sit has something to do with it. My car has thrived with constant daily activity. My car is only one data point, but there it is. 2) Why spend $10k at the dealer for another 3.4, when you can get a 3.6 or 3.8, and built to run fast, from Motor Meister for less money? At least that's what I would do! :)

I purchased an RTS for my 996, and in theory, it should be a 10 minute job to install it. The factory used set screws (designed for a flat blade screwdriver, not the Allen-wrench type) to fill up the mounting holes, which are supposed to be removed, then you mount the anchors for the roof rack. The factory installed these set screws before painting the car, so you'd have to break the paint to get these loose. This is impossible to do without breaking off the tips of the set screws. It only takes one hand with moderate torque on a screwdriver to break them off because they used cheap soft metal, and the painted-over joint isn't even thinking about breaking loose. Now they have to all be drilled and tapped. What a pain!! Does anybody know how deep I can go with the drill? Because the tap will only make full threads after its already been inserted by about a quarter inch, I have to drill pretty deep. Plus it's really hard not to scratch the paint of the car in the process. Am I completely missing something here? There has got to be an easier way than this. No amount of swear-words has helped. If they had just put some grease over those screws, I would have had the whole roof rack on in about 10 minutes!! GGGRRRRR!!!

I was having the same problems with the ignition switch. Turns out it was not the ignition switch, but even simpler. Of course, I only found this out AFTER I did the pain in the butt job of replacing the ignition switch. If you don't want to upgrade to the new revised Porsche part, which includes the mechanical steering lock and the switch (about $115 from the dealer), then just buy the VW-Audi part. Just search for it on eBay, the old-style switch can be had for about $15, but it's a VW part. After I replaced my switch, the ignition sure felt a lot more "new", but the problem persisted. Check the two switches that are actuated by the clutch pedal. There are two - one tells the car the clutch pedal has JUST begun to be depressed, and cuts the cruise control. The other switch tells the car that the clutch pedal is all the way on the floor. I'm not sure about this part, but I *think* that both switches have to be activated to start the car. If not, then at least the one that tells the car that the clutch pedal is all the way down. These are simple switches, and the one that tells the car that the clutch pedal is fully depressed has a little metal tang on it that, over time with thousands of clutch pedal actuations, gets distorted. I just bent the little tang back into place, and BAM! Starts perfectly every time. If the problem keeps coming back, the tang may be fatigued to the point that it won't hold its shape. In that case, just replace it. That's next for me...but it's very easy to get to, to remove, and the switch can't be too expensive... Best of luck, Dan

The ECU will notice the difference. It knows O^2 content at X RPM and calculates fuel input. If there is a change larger than Y (new values don't align with history), can trigger CEL. Ask your dealer.

I bought my new front trunk lever on eBay from this place: www.msroadrace.com Their number is 323.660.7674, email is msroadrace@msroadrace.com. They may be able to get the rear trunk lever for you if you need it.