Report on 991S Break-In Results
01-27-2013, 12:47 PM
#16
I'm not fully convinced by the available data. 2-5x differences at ppm level compared with averages? What is the measurement accuracy? Would be interesting to see a comparison between an engine broken in according to Porsche recommendations and one that was driven like stolen from the beginning, under the same external environmental influences. Guess we have to convince a rennlister to volunteer to buy two identical cars and perform the experiment....https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif
As for comparing two cars, nobody would be that idiotic ... Again ... : ) I bought two 997.1 GT3's in 2007 ... when they were super hot, it was easy to sell the first one and get into the second one "for free." The first car was driven "energetically" and the second car was nurtured and babied through the break-in. The first one was at the track the day I picked it up from the dealer, the second one was cosseted in the garage with rose petals under its tires. The first one was flawless, the second one developed the RMS weep. The first one has PCCBs, which I really missed on the second one. As for the break-in, the first was UOA'd and the second one had one UOA, but after the initial comparison, about 2000, I lost track of the records (which I stupidly kept on computer instead of hard copy) so it's hardly settled science, but satisfied my curiosity.
01-27-2013, 01:35 PM
#17
We've already agreed to disagree about engines needing break-in. Porsche does nothing to enforce their recommendation, so it's up to each owner. You pay your money and you make your own decision on how to treat the car.
But I'm not sure how your economics theory fits the modern warranty that has us not doing the first oil change until 20,000 miles or two years. Factory recommendations keep getting longer.
I am old-school personally, and don't like to go more than ten thousand without an oil change. After break-in, I usually change the oil every seven if only to keep track of changes in the oil analysis. To me, it's cheap, and a good practice to monitor events inside the engine. But I called attention to the oil condition in that report because it supports people who prefer longer intervals.
I should add however that the condition report only tells us about the base stock. The additive package is what deals with oil contaminants. It would require a separate analysis that I did not order to determine how quickly the additives are being consumed in their various roles. Obviously, I don't care since I plan to change at that fairly short 7k interval, but fleet operators, who care a lot, do that analysis to decide their policy.
Gary
But I'm not sure how your economics theory fits the modern warranty that has us not doing the first oil change until 20,000 miles or two years. Factory recommendations keep getting longer.
I am old-school personally, and don't like to go more than ten thousand without an oil change. After break-in, I usually change the oil every seven if only to keep track of changes in the oil analysis. To me, it's cheap, and a good practice to monitor events inside the engine. But I called attention to the oil condition in that report because it supports people who prefer longer intervals.
I should add however that the condition report only tells us about the base stock. The additive package is what deals with oil contaminants. It would require a separate analysis that I did not order to determine how quickly the additives are being consumed in their various roles. Obviously, I don't care since I plan to change at that fairly short 7k interval, but fleet operators, who care a lot, do that analysis to decide their policy.
Gary
This is a well-worn topic in diesel discussions. Different filters, by-pass, cooling, additives, EGR, self-cleaning, etc. All subject to religious beliefs rather than facts and figures.
There's a recent post here on Rennlist about an oil additive that produced dyno hp gains. Anything's possible.
In diesels, it's just on a larger scale, so it's a more tangible problem and the miles rack up, so there's more continuity. I just clocked 100K on my current diesel. Nothing more than regular scheduled maintenance, no after-market upgrades, and it was tested last week, passing with a clean bill of health on all counts (except for a weary turbo, which I don't mind upgrading at this stage.)
01-27-2013, 03:52 PM
#19
It was more important to post the results of those suspension comparisons back to back, but that day also was the occasion of getting my first service on my new Cabriolet.
Some have expressed doubt about the need for break-in with modern manufacturing techniques. My own position is that break-in is desirable and this oil analysis shows why I feel that way. Note the high levels of metals (at the rows where I placed an arrow) and the low "average at this location" in the shaded column. That column includes only a single oil analysis from my 997S. It was taken at about 20,000 miles I believe. Cindy needed my attention at home after that and I had no chance to take further samples with that car. Without boring people with the arithmetic, those values mean the other car (already past break-in) was exhibiting levels below the "universal averages" in the right column. That also means the high levels of this first sample from my new car are caused by break-in. As expected, those levels are higher than they will be later, but still much lower than they would be in less expensive engines. See the remarks by the technician who did the analysis.
It's also interesting to note that an expert I discussed this with is correct about the base stock of the Mobil 1 factory fill being quite capable of going a long interval without breaking down at all. After 4700 miles, the base stock is just fine. See the circled evaluation. I change my oil after break-in simply because it makes my skin itch to leave all those by-products of break-in circulating. (In other words, I'm a stubborn old man. My engineering persona can go to heck.)
Gary
Some have expressed doubt about the need for break-in with modern manufacturing techniques. My own position is that break-in is desirable and this oil analysis shows why I feel that way. Note the high levels of metals (at the rows where I placed an arrow) and the low "average at this location" in the shaded column. That column includes only a single oil analysis from my 997S. It was taken at about 20,000 miles I believe. Cindy needed my attention at home after that and I had no chance to take further samples with that car. Without boring people with the arithmetic, those values mean the other car (already past break-in) was exhibiting levels below the "universal averages" in the right column. That also means the high levels of this first sample from my new car are caused by break-in. As expected, those levels are higher than they will be later, but still much lower than they would be in less expensive engines. See the remarks by the technician who did the analysis.
It's also interesting to note that an expert I discussed this with is correct about the base stock of the Mobil 1 factory fill being quite capable of going a long interval without breaking down at all. After 4700 miles, the base stock is just fine. See the circled evaluation. I change my oil after break-in simply because it makes my skin itch to leave all those by-products of break-in circulating. (In other words, I'm a stubborn old man. My engineering persona can go to heck.)
Gary
J
01-27-2013, 04:12 PM
#20
Instructor
It's hardly scientific, but for the purposes of making an informed decision, I think it's solid.
As for comparing two cars, nobody would be that idiotic ... Again ... : ) I bought two 997.1 GT3's in 2007 ... when they were super hot, it was easy to sell the first one and get into the second one "for free." The first car was driven "energetically" and the second car was nurtured and babied through the break-in. The first one was at the track the day I picked it up from the dealer, the second one was cosseted in the garage with rose petals under its tires. The first one was flawless, the second one developed the RMS weep. The first one has PCCBs, which I really missed on the second one. As for the break-in, the first was UOA'd and the second one had one UOA, but after the initial comparison, about 2000, I lost track of the records (which I stupidly kept on computer instead of hard copy) so it's hardly settled science, but satisfied my curiosity.
As for comparing two cars, nobody would be that idiotic ... Again ... : ) I bought two 997.1 GT3's in 2007 ... when they were super hot, it was easy to sell the first one and get into the second one "for free." The first car was driven "energetically" and the second car was nurtured and babied through the break-in. The first one was at the track the day I picked it up from the dealer, the second one was cosseted in the garage with rose petals under its tires. The first one was flawless, the second one developed the RMS weep. The first one has PCCBs, which I really missed on the second one. As for the break-in, the first was UOA'd and the second one had one UOA, but after the initial comparison, about 2000, I lost track of the records (which I stupidly kept on computer instead of hard copy) so it's hardly settled science, but satisfied my curiosity.
And I always listen to and highly value the work of engineers (this is part of my job).
01-27-2013, 05:40 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
Offhand, I don't volunteer for that one.
That sort of test would take... Oh, I don't know, maybe a manufacturer! Who could summarize the results and make a recommendation for us.
Gary
01-27-2013, 06:16 PM
#22
You might want to temper your remarks a bit, Gary. After all, the only way to read this is you putting yourself up as the final no appeals authority on what is "proper" and what is "abuse." While that might pass muster if we were talking about the guy who wanted to know which model is better for burnouts, the premise here is completely different. While it is far from settled, its hard to see how it helps to promote understanding by slandering those who happen to hold the opposing view.
01-27-2013, 07:16 PM
#23
Instructor
You might want to temper your remarks a bit, Gary. After all, the only way to read this is you putting yourself up as the final no appeals authority on what is "proper" and what is "abuse." While that might pass muster if we were talking about the guy who wanted to know which model is better for burnouts, the premise here is completely different. While it is far from settled, its hard to see how it helps to promote understanding by slandering those who happen to hold the opposing view.
01-27-2013, 07:25 PM
#24
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
15 Posts
You might want to temper your remarks a bit, Gary. After all, the only way to read this is you putting yourself up as the final no appeals authority on what is "proper" and what is "abuse." While that might pass muster if we were talking about the guy who wanted to know which model is better for burnouts, the premise here is completely different. While it is far from settled, its hard to see how it helps to promote understanding by slandering those who happen to hold the opposing view.
My real point, disguised as humor, is that having multiple cars studied to decide how or whether to perform break-in doesn't settle the argument. Porsche does and have done and no one cares. It is an article of faith among buyers -- in the most literal sense -- that they know how cars 'like' to be treated. It isn't a technical question for them. People just throw up arguments hoping to refute the opinion of experts to make themselves feel more rational for not following their advice. My uncle felt the same way about doctors. (And he lived to 93, so obviously he seated the rings.)
The arguments must be for themselves, because we don't care as I may have mentioned. And we certainly are not to going to change our own professional opinions because a layman disagrees.
Yes, I break in my machinery. Yes, it is my professional opinion that all machinery is better for it. No, I don't care even a little bit what others do with their own machinery. Not even a little. That's why I can joke about it.
I don't think less of people who don't follow the advice. I don't even think they are wrong, because it's no one else's business how they treat their machinery. Like people who put horns on their cars in front or ***** in back or carpet on top of the finish. None of our business. Of course, we may form a judgment about their taste...
Gary
01-29-2013, 06:20 AM
#25
Instructor
Taste and broad-mindedness apart, it would be interesting to see more statistics of different engine's peak and long term performance as a function of break in according to manufacturer's recommendations and more aggressive, yet not abusive, break in. Not sure if this data set is readily available. My personal opinion for those interested is: follow break in recommendations. After all Porsche has the most data on their engines in my opinion. After the break in period a more aggressive usage could be beneficial - and much more fun. I remember reading in Excellence that 996 and 997's which are regular tracked are less prone to the infamous RMS issue than garage queens. You could speculate that this is due to residues being transported by liquid to get absorbed in various seals, thus
Still not convinced that an oil change after break in has any measurable impact on anything - but now we are back to opinion
Still not convinced that an oil change after break in has any measurable impact on anything - but now we are back to opinion
02-26-2013, 12:27 AM
#26
Being an engineer ( although not an automotive engineer) I tend to follow the experts recommendations-in this case Porsche. Also, I have heard from two separate Porsche head mechanics that the break in oil should be left in there for the recommended period as there are certain additives that promote break in. I do know this was the case with my S2000 and well documented all over the place for Hondas. My local dealer dealt with two 997.2 engine failures. Both cars were completely babied and oil changes were done at 1-2k miles and only driven a very light 4-5k miles a year. Not sure if his is tue but I don't see any reason for them to make this up as it would only loose them business.
02-26-2013, 06:19 AM
#27
