mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Engine break in

To: ch155@FreeNet.Buffalo.EDU
Subject: Re: Engine break in
From: mgbob@juno.com (ROBERT G. HOWARD)
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 18:02:43 EDT
Art, 
 Could it be that the new car manufacturers recognise that today's
production tolerances are so small that break-in is no longer required?
After all, they recommend 5-30 oil, pretty thin stuff at the 5 end of the
viscosity spectrum.
 Our MGs are loose by modern standards, one would think. How do the specs
for piston and cylinder size for rebuilds compare with the specs for new,
modern engines?  
  Once upon a time (TD & TF time) the workshop manual spoke of the
different sized (that's right--different sizes!) of pistons that could be
used in a given engine because of the different bore sizes.  Balance? 
What's that word?
 Just my assumptions---no basis in engineering knowledge at all.
Bob
 English major, long time ago.
  Took a math course, once.

On Mon, 6 Oct 1997 10:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Art Pfenninger
<ch155@FreeNet.Buffalo.EDU> writes:
>       Question of the day...After an engine rebuild why do we 
>practice
>the ancient ritual of the dreaded BREAK IN PEROID? It used to be that 
>when
>you bought a new car and drove it off the showroom floor you had to 
>break
>it in. Today you pick up the car and off you go 60 miles an hour. Do 
>any
>of the manufactures still require a break in peroid?
>       I know what the books say about this (they actually don't say 
>much
>if you really read them) some even give a schedule to follow after a
>rebuild. I suspect however that this information is being carried over
>from when this was required by the industry. Unless the companies that
>produce the replacement parts have a stock of old metal that they melt
>down
>I can't see any difference between a rebuilt engine and a new one. 
>Parts
>is parts. Now if the new car companies still require a break in peroid
>then thats another story. 
>...Art
>
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>