2009 Porsche 997

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

In this case, all you've got is an unshakeable belief that a lower amplitude, lower frequency series of pressure waves is more destructive than a higher amplitude, higher frequency series of pressure waves.

Then you trot out some guy who makes it clear he has no idea what he is talking about - as a proof point!

So what is there to discuss?

Bruce

Again show me where I made the destructive comparison between low rpm / high load and high rpm / high load.

Second, there are numerous threads throughout the internet that discusses "lugging". This was why the other threads were pulled in.

Your "method" of debate seems to be say something as if it were the gospel and challenge the intellect of those that disagree.

Show the SAE paper.....I would love to read it. Let's some data into this discussion.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Again show me where I made the destructive comparison between low rpm / high load and high rpm / high load.

Posts 104 and 109 in this string.

Originally Posted by T Bone

Your "method" of debate seems to be say something as if it were the gospel and challenge the intellect of those that disagree.

In this case, I'm getting there. Got anything else?

Originally Posted by T Bone

Show the SAE paper.....I would love to read it. Let's some data into this discussion.

Never saw the paper. He was interviewed in one of the magazines.

Anything else?

Bruce

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Posts 104 and 109 in this string.



In this case, I'm getting there. Got anything else?



Never saw the paper. He was interviewed in one of the magazines.

Anything else?

Bruce

Nope any data would be great.... And perhaps you need to polish up your reading skills...posts 104 / 109 doesn't contain anything that can be inferred where I say low rpm / high load is worse for the engine than high rpm / high load.... Maybe if you want to restate it again, you can read this meaning into my words....

Let me know if there is anything else on your side.

Try not to trip on your ego

[devo]

Originally Posted by dechoong

You should be looking at the updated 997tt if in-gear acceleration is that important to you. The updated 997S won't "come alive" till past 4000rpm.

I am.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Nope any data would be great.... And perhaps you need to polish up your reading skills...posts 104 / 109 doesn't contain anything that can be inferred where I say low rpm / high load is worse for the engine than high rpm / high load.... Maybe if you want to restate it again, you can read this meaning into my words....

Well, I went back and re-read those posts - and sure enough, they say gassing it at low rpm is bad, but it's fine further up the rev range. I don't know how to interpret the following any other way:

"People don't realize high load, low rpm (i.e. stepping on the gas in low rpms) is really bad on engines. This leads to premature head gasket failure.

So get off your butts and shift before you step on it. (this is why I don't care about low end torque)."

Did you mean to say something else?

Originally Posted by T Bone

Let me know if there is anything else on your side.

Not exactly, but you still haven't responded as to just how a lower amplitude, lower frequency series of pressure waves is more destructive than a higher amplitude, higher frequency series of pressure waves.

Can you explain in some way how that is so?

Originally Posted by T Bone

Try not to trip on your ego

Not a chance. When I take a position and am shown to be wrong (which has happened often enough in my life so that I am not embarrassed about it), I'll freely admit it - and apologize if I've been boorish.

So, will you tell me how a lower amplitude, lower frequency series of pressure waves is more destructive than a higher amplitude, higher frequency series of pressure waves? Please?

So far, after many discussions and much reading on the topic, what I've learned is that the only (only!) downside of using copious throttle from the lower end of the tach is that, if you do this routinely, over time you'll have slightly more cylinder and ring wear than with an engine that doesn't see heavy throttle at all until operating in the midrange. The reason is that the rings are traveling more slowly down the cylinder walls while being fully loaded, and so will take longer (move further) before they can do the "surf's up!" thing, and ride the oil wave until they let back down near BDC, when they're lightly loaded and it doesn't matter much, and can't be avoided anyway. This presumes modern, fuel injected, computer controlled cars, of course - although lugging (short of ping) won't hurt old-timers much either.

So I'm serious with the "please". I don't think you've got anything here, but I sincerely hope you do. I'll have learned something.

Bruce

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

So I'm serious with the "please". I don't think you've got anything here, but I sincerely hope you do. I'll have learned something.

Bruce

OK, great, I do enjoy healthy debates here. I will go look up some old articles and suggest you do the same.