17 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHSpare the accelerator, spoil the car?
Leading reported evidence
Check effects
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I'm no expert on this subject, I was just trying to caution someone who chips, to check the effects on other componants.
Leading evidence: 'Check effects' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check effects' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I don't have first hand knowledge for an opinion ( position), however: The failure discussed in the article concerned failure of crank bearing housing bolts at points over recommended revs.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I hope he changed the crank bolts, pcars don't like to go over 6500rpm..
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It is still harmless, but thanks for trying to change our minds.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I guess that's why Porsche set the redline at 7300?
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I don't have first hand knowledge for an opinion ( position), however: The failure discussed in the article concerned failure of crank bearing housing bolts at points over recommended revs.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
17 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T020439Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Or something similar goes thru my head when I hear the only way to keep a p-car "happy" is to drive it "hard". What exactly does driving hard mean? Is it beating the crap out of it everyday in every way (go fast, stop faster, etc..) or is it driving at 8/10ths everyday (spirited twisty road kinda driving) or is it just avoiding the stop and go of daily driving (which basically makes it a weekender). So:
1. What is driving hard?
2. Why is that good for the p-car (assuming that it is better than not driving hard)?
Nope, not a slow at work. Quite the contrary. Just need a break
Driving the car hard does not only apply to a Porsche, but all piston engines. The frequent increase in cylinder pressure and exhaust flow help keep the entire system clean. The varying heat ranges you get when driving the car hard at higher rpm's helps keeps the cylinders properly honed by increasing the pressure of the rings against them. Without obtaining the high heat that can only be obtained by driving the car at high Rpm's, you are inviting carbon biuldup in on the pistons and valves.
Abusing the car and driving it hard are too differnet things. Bouncing regularly off the rev limiter is NOT abuse.
I think it is everything you mentioned. It would be a sin if I didn't drive mine almost everyday. I always find a way to have a spirited drive daily. It's what these cars were meant for, they love it. You can literally beat on these things all day and you're not going to break them. SC's, case in point.
And to that point, if you have a car that is sluggish and symptomatic of having a bad tank of gas, even though that's not the case, one of the best things to do is take it to the track and run it hard...
Thank you for confirming what I had sort of suspected. Now if I can only convince the rest of Chicago to part ways so that I can achieve speeds upwards of 17 mph on any part of my commute
Isn't there a law somewhere that says p-cars get their own lanes? There should be one
I know many here consider it harmless, but hitting the rev limiter on a regular basis is not recommended and is, IMHO,
definitely
abuse. If you're hitting the limiter, you might want to do more listening and feeling of the car to avoid this. Also, whacking the limiter is recorded by the DME and can be pulled up by the dealer. They might not appreciate seeing all of the times you've been rough with the motor.
You eyes, ears and brain are the real rev limiter. The one supplied by Porsche is a back up system.
I think "driving hard" means using full throttle and most of the rev range. Obviously, you can't do that very much in urban areas. I don't think it means keeping the engine boiling at 5000 rpm when driving on the highway. Maybe "don't baby the car" is a better instruction, and applies from day one. AS
Amen Torags
How do the con. rods like the stretch? are the valve springs still alert?
My C2 loses torque at that speed anyway so it's time for another gear.
I guess that's why Porsche set the redline at 7300? They want to break the crank bolts? You should really do a little research before you spout off like that. Why would you make yourself look so ignorant about the subject?
I got the number from recollection from a renntech article about owners who chip withot regard to how other componants fit with the chip.. I might have misspoke.
But that's the reason I would never buy a car from a smart guy like you....
I don't have first hand knowledge for an opinion ( position), however: The failure discussed in the article concerned failure of crank bearing housing bolts at points over recommended revs.
Bolts sold by PAG were specially colored to indentify as the stronger bolts. These colored bolts may be used in the turbo to handle higher revs.
I'm no expert on this subject, I was just trying to caution someone who chips, to check the effects on other componants. I'll see if I can dig up the link on renntech, to dig me out of the hole.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.