Here are some “facts” I looked at your prior post about your DCT EDiff warning light. Looks like your Dealer Pozzi replaced some sensors in the EDiff. The costs of the repairs was covered by your dealer. Did you learn anything about the technical aspects of the E Diff which you can share with us? Prior to the Getrag Ferrari DCT, the differential was not integrated with the gearbox. In the F430 the diff used a series of discs (like a friction clutch) which helped to optimize the power between the right and left rear axles when accelerating through turns. The cost of a replacement F430 diff was $11,000 plus labor. The F1 transmission system wasn’t cheap either. I’d love to learn more about how the Getrag Ferrari E Diff works.
That's really great to read. We have 64 answers to the survey as of today. Here are the results. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Can you drill down a little more about the cars with DCT failures. Track use, model and model year , country, mileage, and type of failure?
2 new original owner 458s, both with DCT failures (one before delivery). The 458 spider also has LSD replaced under warranty (stuck in wet mode) at 3k miles.
Exactly - can you provide these numbers broken out by whether or not the DCT had an issue? Looking at the pie charts for all 64 responses together is less informative than this should be.
I wonder how the DCT compares with the prior F1 and Differential system in terms of reliability. The prior F1 and differential system actually costs more to replace. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Have yet to have a DCT failure in the car. will likely do the fluid change here shortly. I have an appt at the local ferrari dealership which dont seem so friendly.has anyone tried a clutch adaptation on there DCTs? I have my own business but it seems ferrari more than any other car on the market makes it nearly impossible to do work on yourselves.
I think you can still have some fun turning wrenches with: Spark plug replacement (I did my own on my 360) Brake pad replacement (I did mine on my 360 and the 458 isn’t much more complex) But I doubt you ought to tackle your own DCT/EDiff work This a seriously complex piece of kit.
My .02 cents (and it’s probably worth less then that) is that while the information gathered here can be helpful, represents a very small fragment of Ferrari owners. The DCT issue is good information to know going in (especially if you are new to Ferrari) but is not saying that all cars equipped with the early DCT will have a failure. In the information I gathered it appears that Getrag has produced 3 generations of the DCT used in these cars. Generation one was 99 thru 14 (though I have no idea if the 458 still used gen one dct after 14 or not, also of note there was a secondary heat exchanger added to 13-14 californias that seems to have helped with speed sensor failures) gen 2 was introduced in the 15 MY and the gen 3 will be in the Portofino. The gen 1 mostly suffered from speed sensor failures, which is now serviceable if your Ferrari dealer has the properly trained mechanic. I’ve been told if the dealer doesn’t have the trained mechanic they still replace the gearbox but cannot confirm this. Only heard of one issue in a California t over in the California section and it was a different sensor then the usual ones that failed and seems to be an isolated incident. Seems the repair cost differs greatly across the us and likely around the world but is still cheaper, and comparable in cost to a clutch change in an earlier model and certainly cheaper then most of the engine out services. Me personally, I’m avoiding anything older then 13 MY for my own peace of mind. It’s obvious to me that steps have been taken to remedy the situation. Of course if buying used the obvious precautions still apply, PPI and inspection of service records etc. as the cars become more sophisticated there will be more parts to fail. With Ferrari pioneering new tech, and a smaller manufacturing run will seem worse off but it’s only because there are fewer examples so any failures will look far worse then it probably actually is.
Information from 5 people with failures isn't going to be very meaningful statistically. If anything it could be very misleading and cause worry over things that the other 59 people people are doing in their cars without issue. A comparison between the two groups on their answers could be done but the sample isn't large enough to have statistical power.
I’m aware. There are already concerns with the methodology, starting right up front with sampling. I don’t think any serious analytics guys are thinking this is anything but an interesting aggregated collection of anecdotes (much like these very forums). Therefore, 5 anecdotes are better than none.
Online sampling isn't verboten within peer reviewed circles with the proviso that the information is accompanied by potential sample biases and skews. In this case it's the small sample size that prevents meaningful analytics on the smaller subgroup. The bigger issue scientifically is a lack of stated hypotheses at the start. Looking at what the people with DCT issues did in their vehicle in a bubble would be highly misleading without comparative analysis between groups. Likewise, without powerful enough comparative analysis between groups, there is no way to know if activities in the vehicle were truly different or the same. I don't see what the point is if the information is completely misleading. It will just scare people that are unaware of what they are looking at...
The internet has pretty thoroughly penetrated the general population. Get the targeting right, and voluntary online surveys are no worse than those that use traditional collection methods. If the goal is to answer, “How reliable is the 458 DCT?”, I think the targeting here is flawed. Ironically, the one data point that gives us any insight at all, % of owners with DCT issues, is the one easiest to throw out for this reason. Given that confidence is in part a function of the responses themselves, I can argue that there’s potentially some value here even with 5 responses (versus zero value in the current shared aggregated results). For example, look at model year; that’s got a nice and predictable distribution of answers. If all 5 failures happened to 2010 owners, that would be interesting. Conclusive? No. Interesting? Yes. We’re on a Ferrari forum - you’ll likely find an over-representation of smart and educated adults. Release the data and let people interpret them as they will.
The value is in fantasy at this point. That's the problem. At best you stand to malign the models mentioned and at worst create avoidable hysteria. Especially since the guise of a scientific approach potentially lends credence to the results. But whatever, I've wasted too much time on this already.
My point is that I, the other person you originally quoted, and likely many others are aware of the fact that this is far from scientific, so there's no reason for the lack of transparency. Example: