What harm does it do to run it in for 2000 miles as the manual states in the US? Give me one good factual, scientifically proven, reason why running in the car is NOT a good idea?

 

I agree and stand by my statements, for what possible reason would Porsche tell their customers, who they want to please and keep happy, to follow a break-in if this was not good for the car?

Antidoctal stories are meaningless, just because something works for you one or 2 times does not mean it is the right thing to do.

For the past several years, shortly after I get my flu shot in September, the oak trees lose all there leaves! To solve this, I go to the tree every March and pour diluted beer on the roots and every year. so far, the leaves all come back in the spring!

 

did you guys even read the link i posted?

 

"Warning:
This is a very controversial topic !!"


his warning, not mine


does he know more than the people who build and design the porsche cars?

I apologize if I sound a bit hostile, but I see the same thing every day in my practice from people who think that because their uncle's sister' dughter's neighbor's brother heard from a friend that drinking bochkepapuchie juice lowers the cholesterol, they reject years of scientific research and stop their prescribed meds

ask Bill Clinton what happened when he stopped his lipitor

 

i supposed porsche engines are "special" and different from everyone's elses?

the articles' theories are logical and make sense. i just broke a zx10r in that way and it's running incredibly strong with no probs.

i'm a believer that the warnings are there to give new vehicle owners an introduction period to the vehicle so they don't wrap it around a pole.

i'm not saying to thrash the car and abuse it, but there is no reason to follow the manuf. break in procedure.

 

I just can't resist giving my opinion. Having seen what the Porsche factory does to engines before they are installed...and then realizing that Porsche is probably being cautious (CYA)...of course they would recommend a an overly undemanding break-in regime. After all, they have to cover the failures that occur within warranty (infant mortals). The engines are, by and large, burned-in at the factory. Bottom line, IMO they are ready to run when you get them (that has nothing to do with the fact that you should warm your car up before stompin on it). Flame away! BTW, I doubt the engineers that designed the engine have anything to do with the writing of the manual (different departments).

 

And still no one has given me a scientific answer as to why you would NOT run in the car...

Those who claim to know better than Porsche are preaching a form of false shamanism - beware! Would they put their own money behind their theory of not breaking in the car? I doubt it.

 

Here you go. I've seen numerous engines dyno much higher than their counterparts using this method.


What's The Best Way To Break-In A New Engine ??
The Short Answer: Run it Hard !

Why ??
Nowadays, the piston ring seal is really what the break in process is all about. Contrary to popular belief, piston rings don't seal the combustion pressure by spring tension. Ring tension is necessary only to "scrape" the oil to prevent it from entering the combustion chamber.

If you think about it, the ring exerts maybe 5-10 lbs of spring tension against the cylinder wall ...
How can such a small amount of spring tension seal against thousands of
PSI (Pounds Per Square Inch) of combustion pressure ??
Of course it can't.

How Do Rings Seal Against Tremendous Combustion Pressure ??

From the actual gas pressure itself !! It passes over the top of the ring, and gets behind it to force it outward against the cylinder wall. The problem is that new rings are far from perfect and they must be worn in quite a bit in order to completely seal all the way around the bore. If the gas pressure is strong enough during the engine's first miles of operation (open that throttle !!!), then the entire ring will wear into
the cylinder surface, to seal the combustion pressure as well as possible.


The Problem With "Easy Break In" ...
The honed crosshatch pattern in the cylinder bore acts like a file to allow the rings to wear. The rings quickly wear down the "peaks" of this roughness, regardless of how hard the engine is run.

There's a very small window of opportunity to get the rings to seal really well ... the first 20 miles !!

If the rings aren't forced against the walls soon enough, they'll use up the roughness before they fully seat. Once that happens there is no solution but to re hone the cylinders, install new rings and start over again.

Fortunately, most new sportbike owners can't resist the urge to "open it up" once or twice,
which is why more engines don't have this problem !!

An additional factor that you may not have realized, is that the person at the dealership who set up your bike probably blasted your brand new bike pretty hard on the "test run". So, without realizing it, that adrenaline crazed set - up mechanic actually did you a huge favor !!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

give us one reason as to why?



I know many engine builders and 99% of them laugh at break in periods. I think the most important factor is to not keep them at a constant RPM, but keeping them below say 4K like most cars state for 1000 miles really serves no purpose. I've seen identical cars broken in different ways and the one that was broken in harder is always quicker. Everyone has their "right" way. I'll drive mine hard, you can baby yours, we'll both live on

 

The harm is its BORING!

 

And still no scientific proof - lot of "my engine builder says so" and my cousin Vinny kind of **** but no proof.

So which one of you will guarantee the engine in my new car if I "drive it like I stole it" from day 1? Anyone of you brave enough to take a bet from any new owner of a 997 who ignores the break in instructions..?

 

What's with the "scientific proof?" In order to do a proper scientific study it would require:
1. a rather significant sample of cars
2. some agreement on how results would be quantified
3. a thorough investigation of the measurement systems and their inherent uncertainty
4. an appropriate data acquisition strategy
5. replicates to handle noise variables...

should I go on?

There is very little posted on this forum that is an actual "scientific study". Oh BTW you can't prove anything true (only not reject the null!)...scientific method (induction and deduction).

So no "proof" for break-in procedures either way. Now what? Do what turns your crank!

 

WROSS996TT you just made the point I was trying to make. If you believe all the heresay that's fine, but the empirical data is what Porsche does as part of it's development process.

But there again if people want to disregard that empirical data that's up to them...

 

This is what I have stated in 4-5 threads of this nature...right on my friend!

 

I'm with LeChef, all these antidoctal stories mean nothing, I repeat my question: why would Porsche, who wants nothing more than to make there buyers happy (spelled "make more money") publish these break in guides if it was not for the good of the car?