Thanks .

 

What xviper said. And another thing is the "asshole" factor. People that rev engines for no reason, whether on cars or motorcycles, are typically just making noise pollution, making their neighbors say "there goes that asshole revving his engine again". It's immature, that should be the second reason after the possible mechanical wear and tear. Yes I'm an old fart but at least my neighbors like me.

 

interesting question... have to wonder why BMW thinks it is bad for owners of the new 333hp M3 engine to rev under no load... they have requested owners not do it.

 

Is that like a Bit#$$%ch slap for people who rev too much?

 

Not everyone that revs their engine needlessly up does so to gain attention. I'll admit to revving it in neutral just so I can hear that beautiful V-Tec wail out the exhaust pipes!

Bummer that there's a price to be paid in that over time the cummulative effects of doing so will cost extra $ to fix. Oh well... live and learn.

 

WORST CASE SCENARIO:
Anybody remember that add a while ago from a brand of motor oil? It might have been Castrol Syntec.
They had bunches of engines on engine stands, not loaded, just hooked up to ventilation and a cooling system. Each engine had a different brand and type of oil. They ran them all at high rpm till they started to drop dead. Of course, their brand was the last engine running. I recall that the last engine was still running after "hundreds" of hours so all the rest crapped out before that. Why do you suppose they didn't do this test with the engines in cars under load? The test would take too long. They specifically picked a scenario (no load, high rpm) that would almost guaranty engine failure in a reasonable amount of time so they could show that their oil worked the best. So, do you only want your engine to last a few hundred hours? And again, don't get all worked up about this. A couple second blip won't kill your engine.
(Again, this is a "WORST CASE" scenario.)

 

The bicycle example is only the same if you are driving hard on the highway and keep your foot on the thottle and then you slam down the clutch. Otherwise revving from a standstill in neutral is the same as just peddling a bicycle with no load. from the get go which will not hurt your knees. Also, then not being on the throttle and coasting down an incline is also bad then. Or even worse it's actually loading the opposite way - drivetrain pulling the engine. I don't buy that.

To me this is like the debate over engine braking. One camp says bad, the other says not bad. And both sides have reasons and examples behind their thinking. But there is no real actual proof either way. Myself, I have never had problems with the engines in any of my cars except for unrelated issues (ie a/c, windows, etc). Am I lucky...maybe, maybe not. I engine brake alot, double clutch a lot, and rev also.

In the end, does it really matter if your car only lasts till 200k miles instead of the 300k miles that it may have? I doubt anybody here will still own the car by then.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B]Well, I'll be the "old timer" to give you a reason.

 

I totally agree.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B][B]And again, don't get all worked up about this.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by red97gsr
[B]In the end, does it really matter if your car only lasts till 200k miles instead of the 300k miles that it may have?

 

I am not really disagreeing with xviper, but I think that extremely high RPMs are going to increase wear regardless of load. Also, when driving fast, the engine is going to spend quite a bit of time at high RPMs with no load (between gears). I think it would be a bad idea to hold the RPMs high without load (for the reasons xviper listed), but if the revs are brought up quickly, then allowed to fall, the flywheel will provide both positive and negative load. If you floor it at idle, it will actually take all the engine's power to spin up the flywheel in the time it takes to hit redline.