Running-in CGTS - Page 3 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

I know this has been done to death already, but I seem to remember someone saying not to use “Sport Plus” during running-in. Is there a technical reason for this or is it just personal preference. I am no engineer but can’t understand a reason for this

If a PDK it wont change gear until it reaches the red line. During my run in I used Sport and or paddles to keeps the revs to a sensible level.

yes this would be the only reason. But if you drive in manual and keep revs below 5-6k it's fine.

RBT0 said: yes this would be the only reason. But if you drive in manual and keep revs below 5-6k it's fine. I think I was told 4000 revs as a maximum - which I did for 1500 miles. The book says "high revs" - I would regard 6000 as high. I think it is more important not to let the engine labour, not to use full throttle or sustain high engine loads (combination of large throttle and highish revs) for long periods. You need to gradually increase the load/revs over the running in period. But every new car I've owned has had vague instructions and it is difficult to make any definite statements.

My limiter was 5k with couple of peaks at 5500. Once engine was warmed up properly, no fear to touch this rev zone. Sure for high revs they mean from 6k up. It is a high rev NA engine, 5k doesn't represent a risk.

Thanks for the input. It will be a long term keeper so I intend to run it in properly and then change oil at 1500 miles. Excited now, one month to wait!

You possibly won't use Sport+ much at all (I only ever use it in 'Manual' mode) if you want any PDK box longevity, as it doesn't half slam the gears in? In 'Auto' it also makes your driving look a bit knobbish with its gear selections, especially if in any urban environment.

Milnsey said: Thanks for the input. It will be a long term keeper so I intend to run it in properly and then change oil at 1500 miles. Excited now, one month to wait! One poster was advised NOT to change the oil before it was due. The argument I've heard for that is that modern oils are so go that there is a danger that the engine won't be run in. You DO need some wear to complete the running process but I'm not sure whether I'm convinced one way or the other - but might be worth asking. From other postings it does seem to be the case that as the engine beds in oil consumption falls. So, in effect, extending the duration of the bedding in process by changing the oil early might not that good an idea.

bcr5784 said: One poster was advised NOT to change the oil before it was due. The argument I've heard for that is that modern oils are so go that there is a danger that the engine won't be run in. You DO need some wear to complete the running process but I'm not sure whether I'm convinced one way or the other - but might be worth asking. From other postings it does seem to be the case that as the engine beds in oil consumption falls. So, in effect, extending the duration of the bedding in process by changing the oil early might not that good an idea. Mines booked in for a oil change and check over at the end of the month, it's now covered just under 2500 miles since my collection date on 1st March. I am just having it done for piece of mind really, as Ive always run my other cars in the same manor.

I work in car engine development, we test engines (without the car) in laboratories that can simulate a granny driving to the shops or a racing driver lapping the nurburgring and anything in between. Typically our clients (manufactures, not private individuals) are from the luxury/super car market. It usually takes 40-50 hours to run an engine in. We run the engines over a wide range of speeds and loads, gently increasing them from 25-50% load to 100% load over the first 20 hours. Every 10 hours we run a power curve, its takes about 2hours to complete that! When two consecutive power curves match the engine is 'run-in'. My basic advice to you has to be, drive the car to warm it up (don't sit on the drive way at idle) don't labour the engine or rev it to very high speeds in the first 10-20 hours. Give it the very occasional wide open throttle accel after 15 hours, but most of the time just drive it sensibly following the car in front. Basically; don't be a hooligan, be sensible, and your car will run in OK. If you choose PDK you can pretty much drive and forget (with the exception of using kick down) as the transmission ECU will make sure you neither labour or over rev the engine. Manufacturing tolerances are so good now that the running in your Dad had to do on his 1978 Cortina is obsolete. Just keep an eye on the oil level (most cars do that for you these days) as it will use some in the first few thousand miles. The oil doesn't need changing at 2,500miles, it will easily cope with 20,000miles

One more thing on a slightly different note, what is the typical % increase in power over the running in period from the first power run you do to the final one?

engineermk said: I work in car engine development, we test engines (without the car) in laboratories that can simulate a granny driving to the shops or a racing driver lapping the nurburgring and anything in between. Typically our clients (manufactures, not private individuals) are from the luxury/super car market. It usually takes 40-50 hours to run an engine in. We run the engines over a wide range of speeds and loads, gently increasing them from 25-50% load to 100% load over the first 20 hours. Every 10 hours we run a power curve, its takes about 2hours to complete that! When two consecutive power curves match the engine is 'run-in'. My basic advice to you has to be, drive the car to warm it up (don't sit on the drive way at idle) don't labour the engine or rev it to very high speeds in the first 10-20 hours. Give it the very occasional wide open throttle accel after 15 hours, but most of the time just drive it sensibly following the car in front. Basically; don't be a hooligan, be sensible, and your car will run in OK. If you choose PDK you can pretty much drive and forget (with the exception of using kick down) as the transmission ECU will make sure you neither labour or over rev the engine. Manufacturing tolerances are so good now that the running in your Dad had to do on his 1978 Cortina is obsolete. Just keep an eye on the oil level (most cars do that for you these days) as it will use some in the first few thousand miles. The oil doesn't need changing at 2,500miles, it will easily cope with 20,000miles Interesting, thanks. In your basic advice above, how should engine speed feature? When you say wide open throttle occasionally after 15 hours, are implying WOT to max revs occasionally? Or just WOT for a few secs below a certain engine speed? Could you also specify what you mean by occasionally e.g. once an hour? Edited by Mario149 on Monday 22 June 14:17

engineermk said: If you choose PDK you can pretty much drive and forget (with the exception of using kick down) as the transmission ECU will make sure you neither labour or over rev the engine. Interesting comments about PDK. Many of us with PDK are surprised what low revs are used on occasion. 7th down to 1100 or 1200 revs on occasion on light throttle. Some have suggested that is too low - and certainly, left to its own devices, it does allow the engine to labour - albeit very briefly, before changing down - if you try to maintain speed up an incline for example. Personally I anticipate that situation and manually change down. I would have thought that was particularly important when running in.

Mario149 said: One more thing on a slightly different note, what is the typical % increase in power over the running in period from the first power run you do to the final one? Usually about 5%, occasionally as much as 10% You also need to bear in mind engine power outputs vary engine to engine (even if they are nominally the same unit). A top spec Cayman S engine could, theoretically, produce more power than a low spec GTS! We also correct power figures for air temp and air pressure. An engine will produce more power on a cold high pressure day at sea level than it will on a warm day low day at high altitude.

Mario149 said: Interesting, thanks. In your basic advice above, how should engine speed feature? When you say wide open throttle occasionally after 15 hours, are implying WOT to max revs occasionally? Or just WOT for a few secs below a certain engine speed? Could you also specify what you mean by occasionally e.g. once an hour? Edited by Mario149 on Monday 22 June 14:17 Occasionally and how long... take a cross country road trip of an hour and overtake 3-4 times, use WOT to overtake, you'll run out of road before the engine is bothered. So change down, floor it, change up before you hit rev limiter, fall back in to queue of traffic. A good analogy, if your were going out for an hour's jog, you could afford to do a few sprints, but too many you'd be tired to quick; none, you'd be bored.

bcr5784 said: Interesting comments about PDK. Many of us with PDK are surprised what low revs are used on occasion. 7th down to 1100 or 1200 revs on occasion on light throttle. Some have suggested that is too low - and certainly, left to its own devices, it does allow the engine to labour - albeit very briefly, before changing down - if you try to maintain speed up an incline for example. Personally I anticipate that situation and manually change down. I would have thought that was particularly important when running in. If Porsche thought that was an issue they wouldn't let the car run like that... its OK.

engineermk said: An engine will produce more power on a cold high pressure day at sea level than it will on a warm day low day at high altitude. Not true for Porsche turbo engines from 2006 onwards, they will adjust for ambient conditions to produce target torque numbers - with the exception of very warm days where the higher IAT after prolonged loading will mean reduced torque (for engine protection purposes)

Thanks for the answers engineermk

TB993tt said: Not true for Porsche turbo engines from 2006 onwards, they will adjust for ambient conditions to produce target torque numbers - with the exception of very warm days where the higher IAT after prolonged loading will mean reduced torque (for engine protection purposes) Yes I agree, I should have said a naturally aspirated engine has these characteristics. Engines with forced induction can compensate with in the limits of their boost control.

engineermk said: Yes I agree, I should have said a naturally aspirated engine has these characteristics. Engines with forced induction can compensate with in the limits of their boost control. Most "dyno" operators still use the various correction factors (DIN/EWG 80/1269) when testing these turbo engines I find it quite fascinating to try get a definitive answer on the rights and wrongs of doing this. On an engine dyno which uses a water cooled intercooler to control (post turbo) intake temperature at a certain level (water temp can be taken into account by adjusting water flow) then it seems valid to use ambient temperature in a correction factor since the variation should be taken into account. Correction for pressure is a bit more difficult to justify as subject to the turbo running within its efficiency range the ambient pressure should be adjusted for by the ECU.... My engine guys use DIN 70020 and have done for many years it is integrated into their engine dyno software and weather station so they say all their build results are comparable they go on to say that they strive to match the HP readings Porsche quote and their set up replicates these well. Occasionally a customer who has paid a lot of money for some big hp will insist that the engine is taken up the road to Weissach (in the back of a van) to be power tested by Porsche, they have always been pretty spot on......

a little bit of googling suggests that correction factors should not be used where the engine/ecu can correct for itself especially turbo engines. Bert

BertBert said: a little bit of googling suggests that correction factors should not be used where the engine/ecu can correct for itself especially turbo engines. Bert Yup, but its a bit more complicated than that with turbo engines since it's about how the measurement is done especially how post turbo intake temps are controlled and at what level they are at when max power is tested (with the engine being braked at full load for a number of seconds until stable). If you look at the detail of the latest EU standard EWG80/1269 which was actually written in 1980 by the looks of it http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri... Item 5.2.4.2.2.1 There is no provision for the post turbo intake temperature other than testers notes (from what I can see ?) and this is totally key particularly on a 500+hp turbo engine. Everyone knows Porsche turbo horses are stronger than others and I think the way they measure the power has a lot to do with this, Porsche have their own methods which I do not know but they will conform with the EU directive I know my engine guys match Porsche's numbers using their set up + the (now out dated) DIN 70020 CF which seems weird and highlights the ambiguity. And then we have the 8 second chassis dyno runs which lots of "tuners" like to use

Don't let the engine labour at 1,000 revs as it will in PDK auto mode just because that is how it is programmed. It is programmed to do that for CO2 testing reasons, and (to the decision-makers at Porsche) that takes priority over preventing slowly accumulated wear and a small risk of failure in the early years. Porsche does not give a crap about the longevity of your engine - it just wants to sell you a car and hit CO2 targets.

ORD said: Don't let the engine labour at 1,000 revs as it will in PDK auto mode just because that is how it is programmed. It is programmed to do that for CO2 testing reasons, and (to the decision-makers at Porsche) that takes priority over preventing slowly accumulated wear and a small risk of failure in the early years. Porsche does not give a crap about the longevity of your engine - it just wants to sell you a car and hit CO2 targets. Because some very critical statements from yourself and Mr D, I thought it interesting to ask the question of engineermk, since, from the sound of things he has considerably more experience than any of us in this area. Interesting that he doesn't consider it an issue - or perhaps Porsche are one of his customers and he is reluctant to be critical.

TB993tt said: engineermk said: Yes I agree, I should have said a naturally aspirated engine has these characteristics. Engines with forced induction can compensate with in the limits of their boost control. Most "dyno" operators still use the various correction factors (DIN/EWG 80/1269) when testing these turbo engines I find it quite fascinating to try get a definitive answer on the rights and wrongs of doing this. On an engine dyno which uses a water cooled intercooler to control (post turbo) intake temperature at a certain level (water temp can be taken into account by adjusting water flow) then it seems valid to use ambient temperature in a correction factor since the variation should be taken into account. Correction for pressure is a bit more difficult to justify as subject to the turbo running within its efficiency range the ambient pressure should be adjusted for by the ECU.... My engine guys use DIN 70020 and have done for many years it is integrated into their engine dyno software and weather station so they say all their build results are comparable they go on to say that they strive to match the HP readings Porsche quote and their set up replicates these well. Occasionally a customer who has paid a lot of money for some big hp will insist that the engine is taken up the road to Weissach (in the back of a van) to be power tested by Porsche, they have always been pretty spot on...... DIN70020... great standard to use to get that extra 1, 2 or 3 PS (not BHP or kW) so you can quote a 1000PS from your Bugatti W16. All test laboratories that quote power outputs have to measure them to known standards on calibrated test equipment independently verified by organisations such as the VCA, TNO or TUV. I'm referring to working in a test laboratory, not a tuning company's dyno. Unless the test measuring equipment is calibrate to traceable standards, such as ISO 17025, the number produced can be very inaccurate.

engineermk said: DIN70020... great standard to use to get that extra 1, 2 or 3 PS (not BHP or kW) so you can quote a 1000PS from your Bugatti W16. engineermk said: All test laboratories that quote power outputs have to measure them to known standards on calibrated test equipment independently verified by organisations such as the VCA, TNO or TUV. I'm referring to working in a test laboratory, not a tuning company's dyno. Unless the test measuring equipment is calibrate to traceable standards, such as ISO 17025, the number produced can be very inaccurate. Could you comment on the intake air temp control on high power turbo petrol engines, is there a standard for the cooling used (which presumably is supposed to replicate maximum power on the road at maximum speed ?) or do they (TUV etc) accept what the manufacturer determines to be the correct IAT for a full power test as long as it seems reasonable ?

Everything is corrected for an AIT of 25degC

An insight to my work... http://www.intertek.com/automotive/miltonkeynes/

engineermk said: Everything is corrected for an AIT of 25degC What does that mean for testing a turbo car in terms of intercooling effectiveness ? How would your (very impressive) facility test max power on a high power turbo gasoline engine how would you control the post turbo intake temp ? Is it a case of blasting 25C air through the intercooler cores at a given speed (if so what is the given speed) ?

engineermk said: I work in car engine development, we test engines (without the car) in laboratories that can simulate a granny driving to the shops or a racing driver lapping the nurburgring and anything in between. Typically our clients (manufactures, not private individuals) are from the luxury/super car market. It usually takes 40-50 hours to run an engine in. We run the engines over a wide range of speeds and loads, gently increasing them from 25-50% load to 100% load over the first 20 hours. Every 10 hours we run a power curve, its takes about 2hours to complete that! When two consecutive power curves match the engine is 'run-in'. My basic advice to you has to be, drive the car to warm it up (don't sit on the drive way at idle) don't labour the engine or rev it to very high speeds in the first 10-20 hours. Give it the very occasional wide open throttle accel after 15 hours, but most of the time just drive it sensibly following the car in front. Basically; don't be a hooligan, be sensible, and your car will run in OK. If you choose PDK you can pretty much drive and forget (with the exception of using kick down) as the transmission ECU will make sure you neither labour or over rev the engine. Manufacturing tolerances are so good now that the running in your Dad had to do on his 1978 Cortina is obsolete. Just keep an eye on the oil level (most cars do that for you these days) as it will use some in the first few thousand miles. The oil doesn't need changing at 2,500miles, it will easily cope with 20,000miles Great post. This is how I've always run my brand new cars in....nice to have it confirmed as being the correct way by a professional! I remember my old 987.2 2.9 Cayman drank nearly all it's oil in the first 5,000 miles, then proceeded to never need topping up between the 20K services from that point on.

I had a quick look at that impressive site and read that you test to ECE regulation 85. A quick google and near the bottom of this document: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29... One gets the testing requirement for turboed engine's intercooling..... so looks like it's blasting 25C air through the intercoolers or if the manufacturer prefers a water cooled intercooler like my guys use. Still doesn't specify what post turbo IAT can be used (a water cooled intercooler can produce whatever temp the manufacturer wants within reason) and I'd still like to know what the Weissach turbo testing bed uses 9 Charge air cooled engines shall be tested with charge air cooling, whether liquid or air cooled, but if the engine manufacturer prefers, a test bench system may replace the air cooled cooler. In either case, the measurement of power at each speed shall be made with the same pressure drop and temperature drop of the engine air across the charge air cooler on the test bench system as those specified by the manufacturer for the system on the complete vehicle. Edited by TB993tt on Tuesday 23 June 19:00

Enjoying reading the Intertek site, came across the blurb below which looks like they have "chilled fluid control" for controlling IATs so looks like they use a water (or some other fluid) type intercooler just like my guys I still want to know eg what target post intercooler IAT would they aim for on eg a 620PS 997GT2RS engine, Porsche know what numbers they use but this information is the Porsche hp difference

TB993tt said: I still want to know eg what target post intercooler IAT would they aim for on eg a 620PS 997GT2RS engine, Porsche know what numbers they use but this information is the Porsche hp difference The post IAT depends on the manufacturers spec, they will specify what they want us to control it to. The target temp will have been derived from previous on road test data and in in-house test specs and varies from customer to customer. I don't know what temp Porsche specify.

bcr5784 said: Because some very critical statements from yourself and Mr D, I thought it interesting to ask the question of engineermk, since, from the sound of things he has considerably more experience than any of us in this area. Interesting that he doesn't consider it an issue - or perhaps Porsche are one of his customers and he is reluctant to be critical. Confidentiality agreements prevent me from saying who our clients are, confirming or deigning any client that hasn't publically acknowledged us would result in me loosing my job. I can say our newest labs are capable of testing any road car engine up to approx 800kW (petrol, diesel or hybrid) and we would not have invested in them if we didn't have work for them! Having worked in vehicle emissions for many years I am very critical of the European drive cycle test that produces the magic CO2 data politicians love so much. I know how to 'cheat' the test to get a good result. And I know how manufactures use every loop hole to get that good result.

engineermk said: Having worked in vehicle emissions for many years I am very critical of the European drive cycle test that produces the magic CO2 data politicians love so much. I know how to 'cheat' the test to get a good result. And I know how manufactures use every loop hole to get that good result. The argument that is being put forward is that manufacturers of automatics in particular might cause the engine to run at lower revs than is desirable for the durability of the engine JUST to achieve the magic CO2 figures. Some are adamant that this is the case (though I don't think they have facts to back it up)- I have an open mind at the moment. But it sounds like you have some knowledge about how far they are prepared to go.

bcr5784 said: The argument that is being put forward is that manufacturers of automatics in particular might cause the engine to run at lower revs than is desirable for the durability of the engine JUST to achieve the magic CO2 figures. Some are adamant that this is the case (though I don't think they have facts to back it up)- I have an open mind at the moment. But it sounds like you have some knowledge about how far they are prepared to go. I agree, auto transmission cars will be programmed to keep engine revs low, this gives low CO2 results. That's why you have a sport button, to get the car into a more driver friendly mode. But don't assume the low revs damage the engine, the drive cycle test 'hills' (accelerations) are so pedestrian an asthmatic pensioner on a push bike could achieve them. in real life driving the transmission will be programmed to change down if it needs to. The drive cycle speed load sites are well below where most of us drive even in congested traffic. The ECU is calibrated to give a good test result and drive well (without damaging the engine) for how the car is driven on the road. Manual transmission drivers get the worst deal. The drive cycle says what gear you must be in for the test speeds so the only thing manufactures can do to get low CO2 numbers is fit high gear ratios. There's new legislation coming to stop this cheat... its called PEMS. Soon cars will be tested on the road to determine their real world emission... google 'PEMS horiba' or 'PEMS AVL' to see more.

engineermk said: I agree, auto transmission cars will be programmed to keep engine revs low, this gives low CO2 results. That's why you have a sport button, to get the car into a more driver friendly mode. But don't assume the low revs damage the engine, the drive cycle test 'hills' (accelerations) are so pedestrian an asthmatic pensioner on a push bike could achieve them. in real life driving the transmission will be programmed to change down if it needs to. The drive cycle speed load sites are well below where most of us drive even in congested traffic. The ECU is calibrated to give a good test result and drive well (without damaging the engine) for how the car is driven on the road. Manual transmission drivers get the worst deal. The drive cycle says what gear you must be in for the test speeds so the only thing manufactures can do to get low CO2 numbers is fit high gear ratios. There's new legislation coming to stop this cheat... its called PEMS. Soon cars will be tested on the road to determine their real world emission... google 'PEMS horiba' or 'PEMS AVL' to see more. Thanks for sharing all you have so far. As has just discussed, engine labouring is what I try and avoid be it manual or automatic. PDK is adamant about jumping into 7th gear at 1100rpm which then generates a deep reasonace from the engine, I personally can't see how it is healthy for the engine or drivetrain (dual mass flywheel in particular) so I always stick it in sport mode to wake it up a bit.

Surely that's just self respect. No Porsche engine should be running at those revs unless it's stationary?

BertBert said: Surely that's just self respect. No Porsche engine should be running at those revs unless it's stationary? What do you mean self respect? In automatic the gearbox operates automatically, and it wants to jump into 7th as soon as possible which puts the revs at about 1100. Porsche are not the only manufacturer to do this, my Ford manual (diesel) has a gearshift indicator and that wants me in 6th @ 1100rpm, of course I ignore it and use 4th instead which is about 1,750rpm.

SkinnyPete said: Thanks for sharing all you have so far. As has just discussed, engine labouring is what I try and avoid be it manual or automatic. PDK is adamant about jumping into 7th gear at 1100rpm which then generates a deep reasonace from the engine, I personally can't see how it is healthy for the engine or drivetrain (dual mass flywheel in particular) so I always stick it in sport mode to wake it up a bit. Thanks from me too mk for sharing. Only get any resonance when I try to hold speed (in auto) up an incline - and then only briefly as I've said, before it changes down. All that said I find sport mode a pain in the neck. It's a bit like an over-excited puppy revving quite needlessly and over-blipping on down changes (which I suspect slows, rather than speeds, the gearchange). I always choose to go manual over sport (auto). Don't use sport manual either because of the over-blipping.

Nothing here to change my view that preventing excessive wear from very low rev operation will be very low down the list of priorities. Anyone who doesn't think that these engines are labouring at 1000 revs under loads doesn't have a very good sense of hearing or any feel though their buttocks. The engine is unhappy at anything under 1500 (with any load).

A slight digression - but does anyone have any tips on service intervals? I had an oil change at 2k miles/4 months, after a run in and a few Sport+ ventures. Now the car is a year old I'm wondering what to do - do I take it for another service at the year mark (will be just over now), or wait another year and stick to the 2 year first service interval? What's the general consensus from a cost/resale perspective?

A lot of people reckon the 2 year service intervals are more about perceived cost of ownership than reflecting the most appropriate plan. A yearly service is a bit pointless (given that minor services involve f@ck all anyway) but an oil and filters change might be sensible, especially if the car gets driven hard and/or in traffic a lot. An oil and filter change costs not much less than a minor service, so I may as we'll get that stamp I suppose (although it means nothing if you know what a minor involves).

sfboy said: A slight digression - but does anyone have any tips on service intervals? I had an oil change at 2k miles/4 months, after a run in and a few Sport+ ventures. Now the car is a year old I'm wondering what to do - do I take it for another service at the year mark (will be just over now), or wait another year and stick to the 2 year first service interval? What's the general consensus from a cost/resale perspective? Provided you have it done at the required (2 year) interval I can't see it having any impact whatsoever on what a dealer might offer you. A private buyer might be impressed that you are a careful owner - but whether it's worth the 600 odd quid that an OPC will charge I very much doubt. Is it necessary - I doubt it unless the car is subject to particularly arduous (or little or no) use or highish miles (but I assume not or you wouldn't be asking the question).

engineermk said: I work in car engine development, we test engines (without the car) in laboratories that can simulate a granny driving to the shops or a racing driver lapping the nurburgring and anything in between. Typically our clients (manufactures, not private individuals) are from the luxury/super car market. It usually takes 40-50 hours to run an engine in. We run the engines over a wide range of speeds and loads, gently increasing them from 25-50% load to 100% load over the first 20 hours. Every 10 hours we run a power curve, its takes about 2hours to complete that! When two consecutive power curves match the engine is 'run-in'. My basic advice to you has to be, drive the car to warm it up (don't sit on the drive way at idle) don't labour the engine or rev it to very high speeds in the first 10-20 hours. Give it the very occasional wide open throttle accel after 15 hours, but most of the time just drive it sensibly following the car in front. Basically; don't be a hooligan, be sensible, and your car will run in OK. If you choose PDK you can pretty much drive and forget (with the exception of using kick down) as the transmission ECU will make sure you neither labour or over rev the engine. Manufacturing tolerances are so good now that the running in your Dad had to do on his 1978 Cortina is obsolete. Just keep an eye on the oil level (most cars do that for you these days) as it will use some in the first few thousand miles. The oil doesn't need changing at 2,500miles, it will easily cope with 20,000miles Uh, no. I have no idea why anyone would chose to follow your "run in" advice which is contrary to that put forth by the factory. BTW, tolerances are about the same now as they have been for years. It is not the tolerances that play a role in break in but the fact that new engines produce higher levels of friction which among other things produces heat. Additionally, freshly machined/cast surfaces shed lots of material. One can run his hand over a freshly machined surface and it will come away with tiny metal particles visible on the skin. These are shed during running in. At too high speeds/loads the particles can come away too fast and result in galling as the gaps between sliding/rotating bearing surfaces is very small. The idea is to over time let these particles be shed at a slower rate so they do not result in any galling. Furthermore, the rings and cylinders must adapt -- wear in -- to one another and develop surfaces that promote adequate oil film retention for proper lubrication under all operating conditions. This takes time. And in the meantime high engine loads and high engine speeds are to be avoided. While automakers guidelines allow for long interval oil changes, including the 1st one, my experience is that the initial factory fill oil becomes quite filthy with debris. The filter of course captures this but it can't capture the contamination that also comes from a new engine arising from the less than ideal ring/piston/cylinder sealing. Unless forbidden by the owners manual/factory my advice is to change the oil early in a new engine. After starting and running a rebuilt engine I was taught to after say 30 minutes of running in to drain the oil and change the filter. Then with this fresh oil and filter to drive the car for 500 miles or so and then repeat the oil/filter service then fall into the regular oil/filter service schedule. As I think I have mentioned before, I changed the oil in my 2008 Cayman S at 750 miles and the filter housing oil was filthy/loaded with particulate matter, mostly very fine aluminum, to the point the oil looked like metal flake paint. A second oil/filter service at almost 1500 miles found the particulate level in the oil filter oil very very light, to the point it would not photograph with my digital camera. At the end of "break in" (2000 miles) I had the oil/filter service done again but this time at the dealer and neither I or the tech bothered to capture the oil from the housing. The oil draining from the engine looked very good. No way I'd want to run that initial factory fill oil for 20K miles. My 2002 Boxster received an early oil/filter service -- at around 4K miles (prompted by an oil analysis that found 7% water contamination courtesy of the mid-western (USA) winter temps and the fact these engines are rather cold blooded, difficult to get fully up to temperature in cold weather) -- and 5K mile oil/filter services ever since and the engine now has over 291K miles and runs as good as it ever did. I might add that I followed the break in guidelines put forth by Porsche, too.

Rockster said: Uh, no. I have no idea why anyone would chose to follow your "run in" advice which is contrary to that put forth by the factory. Which part of the advice?

Rockster said: Uh, no. I have no idea why anyone would chose to follow your "run in" advice which is contrary to that put forth by the factory. I agree, follow the Porsche run-in advice, but don't get too hung up on it... Most people's day-to-day driving is suitable for running in with out any special measures. Oil Changes - that's up to you if you want to carry out a post run in change.

Really? What has that got to do with it? I presume you are not saying that engines get assembled with these freshly machined components? The ones I build certainly don't! Rockster said: Additionally, freshly machined/cast surfaces shed lots of material. One can run his hand over a freshly machined surface and it will come away with tiny metal particles visible on the skin. These are shed during running in.