Engine Break In from Someone Who Knows
11-13-2012 | 05:18 PM
#16
Thread Starter
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 91
From: Georgetown, TX
You've 100% right.
11-13-2012 | 05:19 PM
#17
Race Director
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,713
Likes: 1,451
From: Clifton, NJ
yup, high performance cars, low performance drivers...especially when unfamiliar with the car.
11-13-2012 | 11:24 PM
#18
Poseur
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,720
Likes: 245
From: Santa Barbara, CA
This topic has gotten a lot of discussion over the years. Many believe that one of the more critical components that needs to get 'broken in' is the operator. That, and suspensions, etc. It's not all about the motor.
11-14-2012 | 10:20 AM
#19
Race Director
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,713
Likes: 1,451
From: Clifton, NJ
well, there is some break in typically recommended for rear end gears, but thats typically heat cycles, which is not in the manual.
11-14-2012 | 05:02 PM
#20
AutoX
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
A good read that is relevant.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
This is the break in method I have used since the early 90's for multiple race bikes and every new car I've owned since then. It has always resulted in trouble free motors that do not burn oil and put out very strong h.p. numbers.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
This is the break in method I have used since the early 90's for multiple race bikes and every new car I've owned since then. It has always resulted in trouble free motors that do not burn oil and put out very strong h.p. numbers.
11-14-2012 | 08:58 PM
#21
Race Director
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,074
Likes: 238
From: North Bay Area, CA
This is one of those topics. IMO, we might as well be discussing politics or religion for all the good it will do. I've yet to see anything other than reasonable (sometimes) speculation and anecdotal declarations that "this is what I've always done, my engines never use oil, and they make tons of power" with respect to which way to go on break-in.
If someone could show me a true scientific study, with a meaningful sample of A:B comparisions of engines that had been tested for power and efficiency then broken down and examined for wear over specific numbers of miles after using both manufacturer recommendations and a drive-it-like-you-stole-it break-in, then I'd know which way was best. I guess it's the skeptic in me.
Failing that, I'll likely continue to follow more or less what the manufacturer suggests, something that has, anecdotally speaking, served me well. YMMV.
If someone could show me a true scientific study, with a meaningful sample of A:B comparisions of engines that had been tested for power and efficiency then broken down and examined for wear over specific numbers of miles after using both manufacturer recommendations and a drive-it-like-you-stole-it break-in, then I'd know which way was best. I guess it's the skeptic in me.
Failing that, I'll likely continue to follow more or less what the manufacturer suggests, something that has, anecdotally speaking, served me well. YMMV.
11-14-2012 | 09:23 PM
#22
Thread Starter
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 91
From: Georgetown, TX
If someone could show me a true scientific study, with a meaningful sample of A:B comparisions of engines that had been tested for power and efficiency then broken down and examined for wear over specific numbers of miles after using both manufacturer recommendations and a drive-it-like-you-stole-it break-in, then I'd know which way was best. I guess it's the skeptic in me.
Failing that, I'll likely continue to follow more or less what the manufacturer suggests, something that has, anecdotally speaking, served me well. YMMV.
Failing that, I'll likely continue to follow more or less what the manufacturer suggests, something that has, anecdotally speaking, served me well. YMMV.
Any suggestions as to why a break in period went from 500 miles to 2000 miles since 1993? I'm not suggesting than someone over rev their engines, but the need to treat it with kid gloves for 2000 miles doesn't make any sense to this old engineer. I truly believe this is actually a means to keep new owners of rear engined cars from spinning of the road soon after leaving the dealership. This was the reason the 911 Turbo was withdrawn from the US market and our litigious society years ago. It's been quite a few years since 911s exhibited such sudden snap oversteer. With changes in suspension design and rear tire widths, the 911 has been tamed or sanitized for our protection. I believe the 2000 mile recommendation is a carry over insisted by the Porsche legal department and not the engine engineering department.
Having said that, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and can drive their car as they please within the law.
11-14-2012 | 09:56 PM
#23
Race Director
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,074
Likes: 238
From: North Bay Area, CA
Short of a double blind study, I'll take the advice of someone actually in the business of building, testing, inspecting and selling engines. My source has been around the block a lot. With engine rebuilds costing upwards from $125k, and the number of rebuilds in the thousands each year, I'd hardly dismiss it as anecdotal.
Any suggestions as to why a break in period went from 500 miles to 2000 miles since 1993? I'm not suggesting than someone over rev their engines, but the need to treat it with kid gloves for 2000 miles doesn't make any sense to this old engineer. I truly believe this is actually a means to keep new owners of rear engined cars from spinning of the road soon after leaving the dealership. This was the reason the 911 Turbo was withdrawn from the US market and our litigious society years ago. It's been quite a few years since 911s exhibited such sudden snap oversteer. With changes in suspension design and rear tire widths, the 911 has been tamed or sanitized for our protection. I believe the 2000 mile recommendation is a carry over insisted by the Porsche legal department and not the engine engineering department.
Having said that, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and can drive their car as they please within the law.
Any suggestions as to why a break in period went from 500 miles to 2000 miles since 1993? I'm not suggesting than someone over rev their engines, but the need to treat it with kid gloves for 2000 miles doesn't make any sense to this old engineer. I truly believe this is actually a means to keep new owners of rear engined cars from spinning of the road soon after leaving the dealership. This was the reason the 911 Turbo was withdrawn from the US market and our litigious society years ago. It's been quite a few years since 911s exhibited such sudden snap oversteer. With changes in suspension design and rear tire widths, the 911 has been tamed or sanitized for our protection. I believe the 2000 mile recommendation is a carry over insisted by the Porsche legal department and not the engine engineering department.
Having said that, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and can drive their car as they please within the law.
Like you, I don't believe in driving for 2000 miles with kid gloves either. I'm not a fanatic on the subject, which is why I said I follow manufacturer's recommendations more or less. But it also goes against my grain to run the engine to redline right out of the box, which some suggest is appropriate.
Everyone's comfort level is different and as you point out, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And to that point, I still hear a lot of opinion around this topic and not enough hard data to suit me.
Last edited by Mike in CA; 11-14-2012 at 10:13 PM.
11-14-2012 | 10:18 PM
#24
Pro
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 579
Likes: 41
From: Charlotte /Wilmington NC
Fred R's buddy is correct, modern engines do not require break in. Machining and materials have improved to such a level, you will notice practically zero metal shavings in your filter element. Blackstone oil samples will confirm this as well. Race engines go from the build shop to the dyno and run at full load, there is no measureable wear during tear down. Today, failures are almost completely valve train related, mostly valve spring failures.
Mark
Mark
11-14-2012 | 11:08 PM
#25
Rennlist Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 15
From: Southern California
I might as well post what I just said on the 991 forum in response to a polite question:
[...]while we're talking about experience, I might as well comment on break-in. I remember when this argument raged in the letter columns of Popular Mechanix back in the fifties and the positions were the same. The positions and the people, who were just as inflexible then as now. It's a polarizing issue. For what it's worth then, here's my take after ... omigod, after 47 years as an engineer. (I could have done without that arithmetic tonight. Now stuff hurts. I may have to go take an Advil...
)
I was mostly in the space business with some aircraft work, and otherwise naval/military equipment. Never consumer products of any sort. And essentially everything we built in the space business was intended for single use. No chance to break in an Atlas booster. It either works the first time at full power or we have to break it ten thousand feet above the Pacific. Ditto satellites. And don't even think about Minuteman III.
You might suppose I'd scoff at break-in procedures. Well, with the finest machinists in the world creating our parts with tolerances down to spooky levels, the last step is worth noting. Assembly of parts that would move against each other always included hand lapping them. You put on a mild abrasive, put the parts together, and carefully mimic the motions expected in operational use. Sometimes they wouldn't go together at all. Tolerances so tight can mean two pieces on opposite ends of their tolerance range will not fit, so we had ... well, never mind. Too much detail.
Having lapped for a prescribed period, the compound is then washed off with an appropriate solvent, and a finer abrasive applied, ending with a polishing compound when we wanted them that well mated. (We often have specs to prevent them being too well mated. A phenomenon called vacuum welding must be avoided if the two materials in contact are susceptible to it.) Basically, for lack of gentle early operations, we substituted human manipulation to achieve break-in.
I'll stick with the book recommendation for my Porsche, adapted only slightly with some techniques I learned years ago.
)I was mostly in the space business with some aircraft work, and otherwise naval/military equipment. Never consumer products of any sort. And essentially everything we built in the space business was intended for single use. No chance to break in an Atlas booster. It either works the first time at full power or we have to break it ten thousand feet above the Pacific. Ditto satellites. And don't even think about Minuteman III.
You might suppose I'd scoff at break-in procedures. Well, with the finest machinists in the world creating our parts with tolerances down to spooky levels, the last step is worth noting. Assembly of parts that would move against each other always included hand lapping them. You put on a mild abrasive, put the parts together, and carefully mimic the motions expected in operational use. Sometimes they wouldn't go together at all. Tolerances so tight can mean two pieces on opposite ends of their tolerance range will not fit, so we had ... well, never mind. Too much detail.
Having lapped for a prescribed period, the compound is then washed off with an appropriate solvent, and a finer abrasive applied, ending with a polishing compound when we wanted them that well mated. (We often have specs to prevent them being too well mated. A phenomenon called vacuum welding must be avoided if the two materials in contact are susceptible to it.) Basically, for lack of gentle early operations, we substituted human manipulation to achieve break-in.
I'll stick with the book recommendation for my Porsche, adapted only slightly with some techniques I learned years ago.
Gary
11-14-2012 | 11:21 PM
#26
Pro
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 606
Likes: 40
From: Pasadena
Here's my two cents,
The factory routinely takes engines off the assembly line and dynos them to check performance. I think I saw this in the megafactory video on Porsche.
Do you think they break these engines in first? No that would take forever. They simply warm them up then hit them full power to see how they perform. Then the engines go back on the line and into a car.
So baby the engine if you like, but it seems the factory doesn't do it.
The factory routinely takes engines off the assembly line and dynos them to check performance. I think I saw this in the megafactory video on Porsche.
Do you think they break these engines in first? No that would take forever. They simply warm them up then hit them full power to see how they perform. Then the engines go back on the line and into a car.
So baby the engine if you like, but it seems the factory doesn't do it.
11-14-2012 | 11:26 PM
#27
Rennlist Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,429
Likes: 15
From: Southern California
Here's my two cents,
The factory routinely takes engines off the assembly line and dynos them to check performance. I think I saw this in the megafactory video on Porsche.
Do you think they break these engines in first? No that would take forever. They simply warm them up then hit them full power to see how they perform. Then the engines go back on the line and into a car.
So baby the engine if you like, but it seems the factory doesn't do it.
The factory routinely takes engines off the assembly line and dynos them to check performance. I think I saw this in the megafactory video on Porsche.
Do you think they break these engines in first? No that would take forever. They simply warm them up then hit them full power to see how they perform. Then the engines go back on the line and into a car.
So baby the engine if you like, but it seems the factory doesn't do it.
Gary
11-16-2012 | 03:53 PM
#28
Rennlist Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Ok, I have to add my two-cents worth. Sure, I have opinions on break-in but I have no data, just opinions. The VERY BEST thing we can provide here is different opinions and of course data is always preferable when data exists. Judging from my brief experience here, we have a diverse community and the input is fantastic, especially when the input differs. When the input is all the same, I feel like I haven't got the full spectrum of input I need to make my own decision.
11-16-2012 | 04:21 PM
#29
.org
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 7,635
Likes: 0
From: Reality
11-16-2012 | 04:32 PM
#30
Pro
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 677
Likes: 3
From: Minnesota
I bought my car off of the showroom floor. When I took it out for a test drive it had about 150 miles on it.
The salesman came with on this drive. I red lined it on every shift I could and really drove it as hard as I could. The salesman never said you know this car is not broken in yet you might hurt it. By the time I bought it about a week later it had another 50 miles on it. I never paid any attention to the break in procedure. It now has 6000 miles on it. Uses no oil. I have changed oil twice once at 2000 miles and at 6000 miles. I always send my oil in for analysis. Results of analysis are perfect. YMMV
The salesman came with on this drive. I red lined it on every shift I could and really drove it as hard as I could. The salesman never said you know this car is not broken in yet you might hurt it. By the time I bought it about a week later it had another 50 miles on it. I never paid any attention to the break in procedure. It now has 6000 miles on it. Uses no oil. I have changed oil twice once at 2000 miles and at 6000 miles. I always send my oil in for analysis. Results of analysis are perfect. YMMV