Breaking in new engine. run ?

Thanks Roger - your patience is remarkable.

I think you miss my point - it's not so much in Cruise, its in Take-Off role & Climb Out, where the rpm should be (advised by Rotax) minimum 5200 rpm which fits the torque delivery curve.

Example: The engine is reaching Max  5800 rpm as the aircraft rotates for Climb Out (CO). Load increase due to angle of climb & aircraft increasing speed - rpm reduces - torque goes up all the way to 5200 rpm. 

Should the rpm reduce below, or not get above, 5200, torque reduces, stress on engine markedly increases and critically the pilot has reduced his options to lowering the nose to increase engine rpm & air speed - not so good if you want to clear that power line.

IF you have the luxury of consistently operating from nice long, flat, paved runways, with minimal terrain clearance issues, sure! you can get away with long ground roles, shallow climb outs ie a low static rpm setting. 

Hi Sean,

I never get bothered by debate. That's how we learn.

If you get 5200 rpm at take off then your up to around 5800 at WOT in level flight. If we had a variable pitch prop then we could use 5800 rpm for take off and then change the pitch in cruise. Since many of us only have a fixed pitch or ground adjustable prop we can't do that so we have to pick a balanced rpm that complements climb, cruise, fuel economy and engine temps. You'll have to ask the thousands of Rotax users why they don't get between 5200 - 5800 on climb out at WOT. They've been doing it this way since the early 1990's. They don't seem to be having any real issues. Most of the aircraft MFG's of Light Sport aircraft set it up this way too. Something must be working since thousands do it this way.

If we all could use a variable pitch prop then we could all benefit from from different rpm settings during different flight times, but that isn't real life for thousands of Rotax users..