break in
http://joegibbsdriven.com/products/breakin/index.html
http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/brk.aspx
http://royalpurple.com/breakin-oil.html
Lots of break in oil. Usually the downside to synthetics is cost to dump so quick. It is all about seating the rings. The clean piston was from one that was assembled and used as a "training" bike for 3300 miles on the dyno. The one that is "improper break in" shows how the top ring has not sealed, resulting in lower compression and power. You have a short time to seat the rings and that takes cylinder pressure.
In the 70's (on this side of the pond) it was common practice in racing shops to hand polish each cylinder with it's piston and rings. It was done by hand, on a bench, with diamond powder and light engine oil (sometimes canola oil) after honing the cylinder on a drill press. Then a good rinse with kerosene and we were ready to go.
The better machining surfaces we have today don't allow the 'individual feel' of a better break in method and I suspect we can only play with the wear of the rings, so I rode my new EG the way I expect to ride it after the first oil change, but only taking heat from the cylinders into account. Now it's perfect.
Now it's a 103 and I broke it in the same way. 500 miles and again, very strong tight motor.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
What Motoman is missing however is the fact that this pressure that seats the rings and the movement that causes this wear to seat in changes little whether you are turning 2000 or 5000. Granted if you buzz it up to 5000 ever gear shift it will indeed break in faster. However if you drive like that all the time it's just going to wear out faster simple because the engine did a whole lot more revolutions for the amount of miles you have gone if say you never turn much over 2800 rpm and got into the higher gears sooner.
Another interesting fact is that the way the rings seal causes the groove in the piston to get wider. Once the groove gets too wide you loose this seal. The wear in the cylinder and on the piston OD will still not really look all that bad. Of course the piston is trash because the groove is too wide and the cylinder needs bored since the 1" long wear area would leave the cylinder out of round belled out in this area if you tried to rehone it for your crosshatch.
This is why I believe it make little difference in how you break it in. However it is just my opinion.
Last edited by Jackie Paper; Dec 1, 2011 at 10:47 AM.
Last edited by A Seabee; Dec 1, 2011 at 11:12 AM.
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
http://joegibbsdriven.com/products/breakin/index.html
http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/brk.aspx
http://royalpurple.com/breakin-oil.html
Lots of break in oil. Usually the downside to synthetics is cost to dump so quick. It is all about seating the rings. The clean piston was from one that was assembled and used as a "training" bike for 3300 miles on the dyno. The one that is "improper break in" shows how the top ring has not sealed, resulting in lower compression and power. You have a short time to seat the rings and that takes cylinder pressure.
In the 70's (on this side of the pond) it was common practice in racing shops to hand polish each cylinder with it's piston and rings. It was done by hand, on a bench, with diamond powder and light engine oil (sometimes canola oil) after honing the cylinder on a drill press. Then a good rinse with kerosene and we were ready to go.
The better machining surfaces we have today don't allow the 'individual feel' of a better break in method and I suspect we can only play with the wear of the rings, so I rode my new EG the way I expect to ride it after the first oil change, but only taking heat from the cylinders into account. Now it's perfect.
After reading the information provided I'm still not sure this isn't just some marketing scheme. On one hand they all say you want a "controlled" wear for seating the rings, but you still need maximum protection from wear for the other rotating assemblies, specifically the cams and lifters. These two characteristics seem mutually exclusive to me. How does the same oil provide for controlled wear of one surface while completely preventing wear of another surface? One of the links actually said the additive package contained no friction modifiers and then later stated high levels of zinc and phosphorus. Aren't zinc and phosphorus anti-wear friction modifiers?
I'll never have the resources or time to test all of these oils myself so I'll have to form my opinions based on the research of others. When analyzing the claims presented by those doing the research, there are some claims that make perfect sense and others that seem questionable. Like anything else, you can't simply accept what others say with blinders on, you have to access the information and form your own opinions.
At this point in time, my opinion is that any high quality motor oil is more than likely adequate for engine break-in, just like any high quality oil is adequate for everday usage. Are there differences between oils evident in laboratory tests? Absolutely! But in the real world those differences become harder to detect.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
Steve at GMR broke it in on the dyno when the 107" was built.
Bike ran great both ways.









