-Russ
I think he was referring to the loaded vs noload rpm max capabilties.
Please correct me on this if I'm wrong. From what I understand (I love this stuff) is that an engine is going to develop harmonic vibrations no matter how well its balanced. A flywheel helps (by its mass and inertia) to smooth or reduce these vibrations. Most engine/flywheel combos are designed with flywheel mass (weight) and a load in mind. (A load also acts like a flywheel by damping vibration and harmonics.) When an engine is ran no load, you've lost "x" amount of damping/inertia that the designers were counting on.
So you think to yourself, "Oh, big deal- my engine will vibrate more...", but harmonics can twist/shatter and weaken solid objects if they are strong enough. (The Memerex commercial with the champagne glass, for instance.) Usually the harmonics are much higher frequency than the primary vibrations and I guess they're a force to be reckoned with.
Now I'm by NO way saying that all engines must have load to run at their rated rpm, but when a load is ran on the motor, it's safer.
Part 2 of this is that a motor that's designed to spin at "x" rpm with "x" load will obviously spin much faster with no load applied. The you run the risk of failure due to explanation #1 above, and that the motor is spinning/vibrating at a higher rate than intended.
I'm sure that most of these motors can spin quite a bit faster under load than the default "3600 rpm", but I'm also sure the manufacturers won't support it at all for legal reasons, and sometimes I wonder if some of these motors are designed for 3600 rpm with little leeway for excess. (Cheapness.) So we all have to rely on personal experience (Russian Roulette Experimentation) or the "I heard/read blah blah blah..."
Kinda frustrating, huh?
Sorry to babble on.