ls911

Read into it my post all you like. The fact is I advised to follow the manual guide lines on proper warm up, that is start and drive, no idling. Not that Porsche engineers are never wrong, never change anything, etc, etc...
If they change their recommendations I will change with them. No need to call them out on everything that they have done wrong in the past.
As a side note, I did talk to a P-car tech (a few weeks ago) who advised me against idle warm up in cold weather due to uneven warm up of some of the other components of the car, not just the engine. This is why more than likely my RMS leaked at times when I did so and totally stopped when I discontinued that practice. I am NOTsaying it will cause all RMS to do so.
By the way, Porsche is not the only auto manufacturer that recommends against this practice.
I am surprised you think P-car quality today is much lower than other cars in their category. If I thought that I would move on to another high end sports car, whatever that would be.

Macster

for a length of time is rodent infestation.

Mice can and will get into the car, build a nest, chew up stuff, wiring harnesses are favored, and generally just wreck havoc.

I've seen a few Cayennes -- when I visited F-J Porsche in Fremont CA -- in the shop for new wiring harnesses due to rodent damage. The task is very involved and the bill steep, if insurance doesn't cover it.

Sincerely,

Macster.

Macster

While the cylinders/rings/pistons can be dry of oil too these items do not experience nearly the load at start up time as do the camshaft lobe and lifter faces.

Sincerely,

Macster.

Macster

extended periods of time.

What can happen is if the engine sits long enough unused and if the oil has any compromise in corrosion resistence a spot of corrosion on a spring can develop that will lead to spring failure when the engine started again. Maybe not at first start, but at some point.

At some point, letting the car sit vs. driving it just trades off degradation of the car due to exposure to the elements outside to degradation to the car due to exposure to the elements inside.

These cars are well built and well designed for bad weather -- within reason -- heavy snow can of course cause them grief as with other low gorund clearance cars -- and can tolerate the winter weather just fine with some proper preparation (proper tires for one thing) and intelligent winter care. I grant you that paint and window pitting from grit on the roads in the snow belt can be a bit harsh but the window can be replaced if necessary and for me as long as the paint's ability to keep corrosion from occuring to the underlying (and so far unexposed metal) is not worth worrying about.

I've driven my car in all kinds of weather. While its paint and glass have suffered some the car when cleaned up still looks good and the body and mechanicals have suffered no degradation from sitting that never happened and very little -- not even noticable to me -- degradation from the almost constant usage.

Sincerely,

Macster.

JDSStudios

Thanks to every single one of you.
There is a lot of accurate information here, and some not so.
These are the times I wish I had studied Mechanical Engineering, instead of Electronics Engineering.
My father was a Mechanical Engineer at GM, and I learned a lot from him, but he passed away
a few years ago, and I miss getting his detailed explanations to my questions.

One of the reasons I posted this thread was a conversation I recently had with a respectable
and knowledgeable mechanic, that simply stated that there is no better way than to just drive the car,
if not daily, at least weekly.

He also just drove a collection of Ferraris from a local to change tires on all of them, and he
described the "flap" sound these tires made from not being driven, and had flat spots. He also
mentioned the floor in this collector's garage had some sort of cork material to prevent flat spots on tires,
but it simply did not work; some of these Ferraris had very low miles, and were rarely driven-
one of them over three years.

I drove my C4S all last Winter, and until December this Winter, however this is the last time
I store for the Winter. I will avoid snowy days in the highway, so that big trucks don't send
a sand and salt storm on my hood, but once all is clear, I am driving it.

As for salt, touch-less wash (Winter only) to lose the salt.
Worse case scenario, Every 3 days one wash is around $70.00 or so per month, is reasonable,
and out weighs the damage from long period storage. Last but not least, fun factor.

Sooo, that's it for me; except for a few severe weather days,
I am done with the garage queen thing:
I am driving my Porsche.

BruceP

I'm just saying to this guy, if you're getting conflicting advice, default to the manual. It's good advice, even just based on probabilities. The manual is bound to be right more than half the time; bickering strangers on the internet, well...

As for the rest of your post, I have to say that sometimes you make me think you must have been fired by Porsche at some point. I'm not going to get into a quality argument with you here; nobody is disputing that these cars exact a price in mechanical quirkiness for the pleasure they provide. If you don't think it's worth it, don't drive the car. As for them "admitting" their mistakes, well, it might surprise you to learn that all car companies are constantly updating their products, mid-series, even mid-year. This, alone, proves nothing about Porsche's supposed malicious incompetence.

I repeat my question: Why do you drive one? The bashing is just a buzzkill and, as I say, makes me think you have an axe to grind.

Tippy

That is something I have never thought of but he is spot on. Different expansion rates of parts, maybe minimal but could affect parts over time with these short interval warm-ups. In Aviation, this is critical to engines and is handled by specific instructions.

1999Porsche911

Who's bashing Porsche? Is talking about problems considered bashing? I also never stated that Porsche's mistakes were malicious. I also never said it was not worth it. I know how to properly care for my cars and simply do not have the problems with my Porsches that many others do. Part of that reason is that I do not follow many of the recommendations that Porsche has made.

I have also read both my 99 996 and 04 GT3 manuals cover to cover and nowhere in those manuals does it comment on not starting your engine when in storage so I have no idea where people are getting the idea that Porsche has taken a position on this.

No owner follows all the requirements and recommendations in the manual. That includes you. I wonder what powers you have that enable you to decide which of Porche's recommendations are correct and which are not, while, according to you, someone like me is incapable of having those same powers?


The manual is bound to be right more than half the time; bickering strangers on the internet, well...

Which half of recommendations in the manual are right and which one's are wrong?

BruceP

So much flawed logic, so little time...

On your first point, nobody here has come even close to the persistent blanket condemnation of Porsche's engineering that you constantly cleave to, so, sorry. You're a basher. You don't need to accuse them of malice to qualify. Accusing Porsche of comprehensive incompetence in a forum full of guys that love their cars, that will do nicely.

On your second point, that's correlation, not causation. I follow Porsche's recommendations religiously and also have no problems. This bit of logic, alone, is enough to impugn any other observational evidence you might ever offer. Or, if you like, I can sell you some of my elephant repellent. I use it daily, and have not seen a single pachyderm in my living room once, ever.

On your third point, I don't know where to start, it's so loony. Everything on earth is imperfect in some way. Take the law, for example. Using your logic, you'd be fully Unabomber at this point, basis that courts have made some mistakes over the years and therefore are completely untrustworthy. Jeezus. Maintaining a car is much like anything else in life: the best you can do is get most of it right most of the time. Unless you have another consistently irrefutable source (and that ain't you, stranger), or you have a priori expertise yourself, sticking to the manufacturer's recommendations is the best way to do that. Because none of us have the 'powers' as you call them to consistently outguess Porsche and be right. To think otherwise is delusional.

The pity of it is that there are times you say things that I can corroborate elsewhere and which make intuitive sense. But your overall negativity, your complete lack of affection for the car and its maker, and your bullheaded unwillingness to discuss this stuff - despite not having a scintilla of evidence to support your alternative points of view beyond "Because I say so" - cheapens your advice.

Now that, my hating friend, is ironic, don't you think?

1999Porsche911

I won't bother responding to your other points as they make no sense.. However, I will bet you the price of a new Porsche of your choice that you do not follow Porsche's recommendations religiously. Why do you make such stupid comments when you know they are not true and your postings on this forum prove that they are not?

I'll let you continue debating this thread by yourself since it is more important to you to attack me than debate the issues.

BruceP

They make perfect sense. The logic is, in fact, flawless. Perhaps the problem is literacy. As for how I maintain my car, you don't have a clue about that, so this adds evidence to the hypothesis that you might be talking out of your rectum most of the time.

As for attacking, again, I think we have a semantics problem. Calling me a stupid liar, that's an attack.

Here's the thing: Your position is opposed to the status quo. That obligates you to prove your antithesis. In the years I've been on this board, I've never seen you cite one example of a real life situation (never mind actually provide proof) that supports your flat-earth bleatings. Not one oil related engine failure. Not one coolant related engine failure. No science to explain why you know more than anyone else about those things. Your credibility is zero.

Maybe this is why Porsche fired you.

It's getting dark, now. Maybe you should put your tin foil hat on.

Macster

there are components more sensitive to this than others.

Primarily, what one wants to avoid is quickly heating up the pistons, especially the piston crown (which is of course the portion of the piston that receives the heat from the combustion) too fast to avoid the possibility the piston will seize in the cylinder.

It won't of course seize sufficiently to cause the engine to die/stall (well almost never under perhaps very exceptional circumstances that I don't think the Porsche engine will see) but cylinder wall, piston and ring damage can occur.

In the most severe cases the seizure can be severe enough galling occurs -- the heat from the excessive friction creating tiny spots of molten metal on the cylinder wall and piston sides that in brief instances of time join and the separate. As soon as these molten and then solidified areas separate apart tiny pieces of metal are torn from the cylinder wall or the piston, sometimes both.

This results in cylinder wall and piston side scoring which degrades cylinder/piston sealing and subjects the rings to higher temperatures because hot combustion gases now have a groove albeit tiny through which they can flow and get closer to maybe even contact the top ring more than they normally can do.

In some cases if this scoring occurs between the ring grooves a tiny piece of metal can cause a ring to break.

By idling the engine a moment or two after a cold start this gives the piston crowns and surrounding cylinder metal time to come up to temperature with as little difference as possible. They'll come up to temperature at different rates but the difference should be small enough that sufficient clearance will exist always.

Remember the top of the cylinder is surrounded by coolant and this coolant, even if not flowing, can absorb a lot of heat.

By driving a car away immediately after starting a cold engine, more fuel is being burned, more work is being done, more heat is being generated and thus these engine components warm up faster and can warm up at even much different rates.

While letting a cold engine idle until fully warm (or even barely tepid) is not of course necessary driving away with a dead cold engine is not without some peril. There have been reports of other vehicles, other engines suffering some sort of mild seizure after a few minutes of driving after a cold start from the sudden opening of the thermostat which allows extremely cold coolant to flow through the engine and this can cause cylinder shrinkage to the the point the very tight clearances present between the cylinder and piston (now quite warm) diminish to the point the two lock up.

The possibility of this happening can be compounded by automakers seeking to run lighter oils (to help CAFE numbers) which require smaller clearances between cylinder walls and pistons. Tighter clearances have another advantate in that they work to minimize blowby and thus reduce emissions (cold start emissions especially which is where a large portion of emissions come from now) and lastly reduce engine noise (cold pistons can 'slap' -- and automakers -- luxury ones anyhow -- are always sensitive about engine/car noise).

Anyhow, giving the cold engine a moment or two of idling time helps lessen the heat differences of these very critical engine components and if followed by reasonable driving will see these components come up to operating temperature none the worse for the experience.

Over and over again.

Sincerely,

Macster.

1999Porsche911

If it walks like a duck...........I did not use the word liar, but your are right, I should have since you DID lie. You DONT follow all of Porsche recommendations...period, so why did you say you do? Since you stated you did and you don't.... That is not a personal attack but a fact you proved on this forum yourself.

Now I see the type of guy you are. You follow the crowd or the status quo, as you put it. Speak volumes about you.


I never have been employed by Porsche and I don't even pronounce the word correctly so better find something else to accuse me of.

I suggest you stop making assumptions about people and start thinking about what you say and maybe you'll find that the staus quo is a losers game. Stop making up stories to try to bolster your side of an arguement. These forums can be a great place to learn if you listen to all side of a debate. Some may not agree with all opinions, but, if the mental capicity exists, the reader can make his or her own choice on the direction to take.

I guess you think that only you have the ability to choose which Porsche recommendations to follow, yet, none of us can challenge those recommendations. Classic!!

BruceP

Quod errat demonstrandum. You are a raving lunatic. And unless you're a stalker besides, again, you have no f-ing idea what I do with my car, so I can't fathom why you keep harping on about it. This outburst, filled as it is with rambling fictions, spelling mistakes and pre-adolescent emotional heat, proves that your counsel is worthless.

I'll stick to the manual.

1999Porsche911

But you don't follow the manual.


All people have to do is look at you posts and it clearing shows that YOU DO NOT follow all of Porche recommendations. When you calm down, I think you'll realize that.

Are you off your medications?

BTW, if you are going to try to impress me with a foreign frase, you should at least get the spelling correct.

I'm no going to bother with you til you sober up.