Engine Break In info

[mva]

Originally Posted By: Fred H.
Well, I guess I was hoping someone had a white paper on the subject or some real research.

Interestingly, Honda tells owners NOT to change the oil in an Accord until 8k miles are on the car. Not even to to dino oil. They want you to leave the factory oil in for the first full 8K. Which just astounds me, cause anyone who has ever drained the oil on a new engine and has seen all the metal glitter in it, knows that you want to get that stuff out of the crankcase.

Or do you?



The Honda factory fill has very high levels of moly as shown on many UOA's. Also, Honda engines tend to have very good UOA results on this site therefore, on a new Honda, I would recommend you follow the factory recommendation to a tee.

As far as switching to synthetic, I would wait until the second oil change unless the manufacturer calls for synthetic.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Fred H.


Interestingly, Honda tells owners NOT to change the oil in an Accord until 8k miles are on the car.


It would be a mistake to assume that every such recommendation is actually based on an engineering analysis. A lot of the recommendations that manufacturers provide are a combination of statistical analysis and some engineering.

I'm not saying this is the case with Honda (although I'd bet a steak dinner it's something along these lines...):

Suppose an automaker does an analysis of warranty claims and discovers that 20% of the early engine failures are due to owners putting incorrect or inadequate oil in their cars early in the break-in process instead of just switching to regular oil, and 5% of the warranty claims are due to excessive wear from contamination in the factory fill oil. Engineering wise, the best thing to do might be to have owners perform an early drain and re-fill with a top quality oil, but a) you can't force owners to do that, b) it makes your car "look bad" because it "needs" an oil change sooner than your competitors, and c( you can't readily deny warranty claims on one brand of oil over another without expensive and ugly battles with oil makers and your customers. But you CAN deny a claim if they don't "leave in the factory fill," and although you'll still replace a few engines due to excessive wear from break-in contaminants, you'll replace fewer engines overall and you'll avoid haggling over whether the owner used a bad oil or a good oil. So even though its not the best engineering solution, the CHEAPEST solution overall for the manufacturer is just to put in a clause that allows them to *void* the warranty if an owner changes the oil "too soon" rather than "to a [censored] oil."

 

[BerndV]

The following link provides some very interesting, albeit controversial, break-in information: http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
I have used this break-in procedure with my ZX-14 and FJR1300 as well as my 2005 Sequoia with excellent results.

 

[Fred H.]

Originally Posted By: BerndV
The following link provides some very interesting, albeit controversial, break-in information: http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
I have used this break-in procedure with my ZX-14 and FJR1300 as well as my 2005 Sequoia with excellent results.


Yes, I have seen that site, and I think it is a bunch of bull. It assumes that the only thing in your engine that happens when you break it in, is the rings seating. Every single bearing surface and the transmission gears and every moving part in the engine is getting broken in. Running at too high of an rpm or too high of a load can cause hot spots and a glaze to form on bearings.

If the rings were the only part in your engine, this *might makes sense, but they aren't. And all advice from every auto and motorcycle manufacture in the world disagrees with this one persons recommendation. Who do you think knows your engine better, one guy with a website, or the company who built your motorcycle engine and transmission?

There is a very good reason for the RPM restrictions and recommendations NOT to do full throttle starts on a new engine. Will this guy who put up this website warranty your engine if it is damaged due to his break in advice? I didn't think so.

Sometimes you have to use a little common sense. When you hear something that sounds "too good to be true" or "goes against all common sense" then you should run away from it. Don't get suckered by this kind of junk.

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: hal
break in with dino, definitely! many car manufacturers require this. u can switch to synthetic after 3000 miles, which essentially is the end of the extended break-in period. i would personally wait till 5-6k to switch to synthetic, unless the factory fill was synth which GM does in some cars as well as BMW and probably some others. better safe than sorry. and be sure to always use the proper weight.


This is not an argument, by any means. But what car manufacturers require this? I'd like to see it in writing just so if somebody asks me, I have it in print.

 

[BerndV]

Fred,
Having used the break-in procedure described, my ZX-14 consistently outperforms my best friend's identical machine even though I weigh 210 and he weighs 190. At the end of the quarter mile, I am never less than two bike lengths ahead of him, much to his chagrin. My Sequoia was purchased new and now has over 80,000 miles of hard driving and uses virtually zero oil (Redline 5W-30) over the course of 10k oil change intervals and runs like a raped ape. So, while you may think this break-in procedure is a "bunch of bull", my actual experience indicates quite the opposite.

 

[ChiTDI]

Manufacturers may state no need for "break-in" oil or a need for an early OCI on a new engine. New materials and better equipment ...
Problem is, many of us have seen what "accidently" goes into an engine in the factory and don't want that remote issue to deal with.
If it's my thirty to fifty grand involved in a new vehicle, guess what fluid is coming out at around 1000 miles? (Unless they use a specific break-in oil and state emphatically to leave it for a specific interval, ala Honda.)

 

[Fred H.]

Originally Posted By: BerndV
Fred,
Having used the break-in procedure described, my ZX-14 consistently outperforms my best friend's identical machine even though I weigh 210 and he weighs 190. At the end of the quarter mile, I am never less than two bike lengths ahead of him, much to his chagrin. My Sequoia was purchased new and now has over 80,000 miles of hard driving and uses virtually zero oil (Redline 5W-30) over the course of 10k oil change intervals and runs like a raped ape. So, while you may think this break-in procedure is a "bunch of bull", my actual experience indicates quite the opposite.


This kind of speculative comparison has absolutely no value whatsoever in showing that the engine break in procedures used made any difference (better or worse).

Not one single engine manufacture in the world endorses this type of break in procedure, and they tell you the exact opposite. So who do you think knows more about your engine and how it needs to be broken in?

 

[Beary]

Originally Posted By: Fred H.

If the rings were the only part in your engine, this *might makes sense, but they aren't. And all advice from every auto and motorcycle manufacture in the world disagrees with this one persons recommendation. Who do you think knows your engine better, one guy with a website, or the company who built your motorcycle engine and transmission?


The defense for the manufacturers is that some folks would push a hard break in too far when most folks are satisfied with the performance of a weaker engine. If the vehicles perform 80% to 90% with an easy break in, and most folks are happy with that, then there is no reason to suggest a break in that would put the driver closer to over abuse. Some folks would just push the break-in too far.

As for the bearings, how would they be at a greater risk during break in than any other time from the same demands from the engine. When we break in Airplanes, we ask the pilot to perform a good hard climb out for several minutes (provide the temps hold), which is about the same as the mototuneusa break in on a bike. I've never seen an engine come back with a bearing problem.

You might be surprised to learn that most cars today do burn some oil. GM comes out and says that a corvette could burn as much as a quart of oil per 1000 miles after break in. That is a lot in my book. I have also noticed that a car with a standard transmission is less likely to burn oil than and a car with an auto Transmission. There is no data for this, but I think driving a standard gives a harder natural break in on the engine because pushing to higher RPMs than the auto tranny, but more importantly from the higher cylinder pressure when letting off the gas. That auto transmission doesn't give that high back pressure.

Beary

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: Fred H.
Originally Posted By: BerndV
The following link provides some very interesting, albeit controversial, break-in information: http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
I have used this break-in procedure with my ZX-14 and FJR1300 as well as my 2005 Sequoia with excellent results.


Yes, I have seen that site, and I think it is a bunch of bull. It assumes that the only thing in your engine that happens when you break it in, is the rings seating. Every single bearing surface and the transmission gears and every moving part in the engine is getting broken in.


I also think that "process" is a bit over-the top. But to be honest, engine bearings and transmission gears don't really break in, at least not in the way that the rings do. Bearings are a soft metal-on-hard metal junction, and they're also precisely fitted with a predetermined clearance on a highly polished crank journal, and pressure lubricated. They are essentially ready for full speed and load as soon as they're put together.

Rings, on the other hand, are a hard metal-on-hard metal contact point, one surface is deliberately rough (cylinder wall finish-honing texture), the contact force is pre-loaded rather than having a clearance (the rings are compressed during installation so that they mechanically expand and apply a constant force to the cylinder wall), and to top it off they are splash lubricated and deliberately designed to scrape away excess oil so that the compression rings run almost dry on the cylinder wall. The engine is built with the deliberate plan of having the rings "wear in" against the cylinder wall in the first hours of operation. Nothing else in the engine, unless it has a flat-tappet cam, undergoes the same sort of rapid wear-in process. Flat tappet cams are even more critical than rings, although much less actual weight of metal is removed. With a flat tappet cam the contact force per unit area is another couple of orders of magnitude higher than rings, and you're talking about an interface between two surface-hardened metal pieces in that case.

 

[Fred H.]

It is the bedding in of two surfaces to each other, much like brake pads bed into rotors. The high spots wear down and both surfaces polish each other out. This is best done under light loading conditions to prevent hot spots and glazing, just like when you bed in brake pads.

The notion that you need to use high pressure on the rings to the cylinder walls to get them to bed in also flies in the face of everything known and published about micro polishing of surfaces. The entire concept is flawed.

If you want to run the [censored] out of your brand new engine, go right ahead. Just because it doesn't blow up is not any indication that was the proper way to break it in. You can choose to either follow the advice given by virtually every auto and motorcycle manufacturer in the world, or you can listen to something one person posted on the internet with great claims of success.

 

[vinu_neuro]

You guys may be interested in knowing how engines are tested in the factory post-production. I did a few internships with one of the Big 3 diesel engine suppliers. One summer was in manufacturing. Most engine makers have switched to cold-tests (no real combustion) now because they're much much quicker and simpler, but a small fraction of the engines are still fully tested in the factory. Guess what, these engines are taken max load at low, medium and max engine speeds..within minutes. And these are engines that see tremendous cylinder pressures.

This may or may not be beneficial with modern bore finishes, but it's certainly not harmful.

 

[Fred H.]

Next time you polish your car, take a high speed buffer and run it up to top speed, and then press it against the paint as hard as you can, and see what kind of results you get.

 

[BerndV]

Pads and rotors that are designed to create friction are not a very good analogy. Neither is a high speed buffer which, again, is designed to create friction. My results, which you fail to address, far surpass simply not blowing-up.

 

[gtx510]

Originally Posted By: vinu_neuro
You guys may be interested in knowing how engines are tested in the factory post-production. I did a few internships with one of the Big 3 diesel engine suppliers. One summer was in manufacturing. Most engine makers have switched to cold-tests (no real combustion) now because they're much much quicker and simpler, but a small fraction of the engines are still fully tested in the factory. Guess what, these engines are taken max load at low, medium and max engine speeds..within minutes. And these are engines that see tremendous cylinder pressures.

This may or may not be beneficial with modern bore finishes, but it's certainly not harmful.

Look into how high-end engines (like AMG, Ferrari, etc) are broken in on an engine dyno.
They don't start with max load but they eventually work their way up to it.

 

[Beary]

Originally Posted By: Fred H.
Next time you polish your car, take a high speed buffer and run it up to top speed, and then press it against the paint as hard as you can, and see what kind of results you get.


With most bearings if they are touching metal, you have worse problems. Bearings are seperated with thin film of oil to prevent metal to metal contact. In fact the greatest abuse on bearing is when starting the engine because there is no oil pressure and the oil has drained out of the bearings. That is why proffionals don't rev up their engines right after the start, give the engine a few seconds to oil up the bearings.

And why do folks have to respond with things like "If you want to run the [censored] out of your brand new engine, go right ahead" when someone else says something different. Be an adult and just calmly agree to disagree. My experience and knowledge are different from yours thats all. The forum is a collection of ideas and opinions. No body is forced to follow the adice of others here, but its nice to get a few different opinions just to discuss the differences. Shessh, take a break and get some fresh air.

Beary

 

[Kruse]

Well said. And there are different types of bearings and pistons rings out there. The break-in procedure is completely different when you compare old chrome piston rings to modern moly rings.
You probably won't find chrome rings on a new car, but if overhauling an old farm tractor, it might be the only thing available.

 

[Fred H.]

Originally Posted By: BerndV
Pads and rotors that are designed to create friction are not a very good analogy. Neither is a high speed buffer which, again, is designed to create friction. My results, which you fail to address, far surpass simply not blowing-up.


I fail to address your results because there is simply no way you can draw a conclusion that engine break in had anything to do with the fact that your bike ran faster than your buddies. There are way too many variables involved that could account for this, and to simply say it was because of the way it was broken in is complete speculation.

When two surfaces rub on each other, they bed in and transfer metal to/from each other and remove high spots, regardless of what they are made of. This applies to gears in your transmission, crank bearings, cam bearings, rod bearings etc etc. Every surface in your engine is breaking in, not just the piston rings.

Not to mention the fact that all these metal parts that have been machined, have been left with internal stresses in them, and need to be heat cycled.

If you really want to break an engine in properly, it should be heat cycled by running it long enough to heat the oil up fully and then allowed to cool off for 4-6 hours before being run again. Heat cycling will allow internal stresses in the metal to work themselves out, much like tempering does.

 

[BerndV]

Interesting that you mention "heat cycling". Here is an interesting quote: There is no need to "heat cycle" a new engine. The term "heat cycle" comes from the idea that the new engine components are being "heat treated" as the engine is run. Heat treating the metal parts is a very different process, and it's already done at the factory before the engines are assembled. The temperatures required for heat treating are much higher than an engine will ever reach during operation. The idea of breaking the engine in using "heat cycles" is a myth that came from the misunderstanding of the concept of "heat treating".

 

[Fred H.]

I'm not talking about heat treating. I am talking about relieving stresses built up in parts from the machining processes (stamp, cut, grind etc) that can make them want to bend or warp when heated.

Heat treating refers to surface hardening, which is a whole other animal, and yes they are correct, engine parts would never get hot enough for that to occur.