Total Motorcycle Community Forums

I've heard lots of guys on forums and in "real life" that swear by this guys theory....I read it a while back and he makes some good points....but I'm not sure that I'd do it with my brand new machine...

IMO I'd stick to the tried and true "take it easy for the first 1000 kms" kind of idea.

...manufacturers spend millions of buckages on testing...I'm sure they've tried many different methods to break it in...and they still say take it easy.

Sounds kinda sketchy to me, i mean, beating the crap out of your engine like that just seems bad..

cruisinflatout wrote: ...manufacturers spend millions of buckages on testing...I'm sure they've tried many different methods to break it in...and they still say take it easy.

It has nothing to do with testing, but rather warranty work and liability. If the owner's manual that came with your shiny new crotch rocket said to toast the motor for the first few hundred miles you'd have so many biker deaths it wouldn't be funny. So instead it says "Don't shift any higher than 3,000rpm for the first 1,000 miles" so you end up putting around slower than hell and get used to the bike before opening it up.

I'm not saying I buy into his method 100%...but since reading it I definitely don't grandma my engines during break-in. I just drive as usual...somewhere in the middle.

The only new motor I ever broke in was a VW beetle build-up, after putting a piston through one cylinder. I put new jugs/pistons/rods/rings...blah, blah blah...basically the whole top end ( or both sides ends ). I drove normally, and obviously couldn't resist checking out the new bigger displacement a little (okay frequently, but with restraint to keep the rpms in the middle of the power band for the first couple hundred miles). I'm not sure I'd personally go to the complicated extremes he's writing...Then again, I don't know. So I shouldn't say. Not too helpful...Sorry.

I've used this method for break-in on dozens of engines, of all sizes(most larger than bike engines) Ran them over thier working life, stripped and rebuilt them again and send them back out into action. I have also used the 'baby it' method on identical(or the same engines) and run them for thier service life.

The 'hard and fast' method engines come apart much cleaner inside(from better ring seal) and showing less wear on the bearings and journals than the 'Babied' ones. The also run better and have more power than thier coddled brothers.

This is a contentious subject, but I am a follower of MotoMan's method. Not from anything I've been told, but from what I have seen and experianced myself, and for years and years before I read MotoMan's pages. I recommend you do what your most comfortable with. If you really have no idea, follow the owners manual. It may not be the best(or it may be..... it's like asking someone thier favorite color, then telling them their answer is wrong ), but it is at least safe. After all, it was written by engineers who work for the manufacturers, and we all know they hold the consumer's best interests closest to thier hearts.....

BuzZz wrote: After all, it was written by engineers who work for the manufacturers, and we all know they hold the consumer's best interests closest to thier hearts.....

What he said ... exactly

This topic came up before our "crash" here, and I pondered it for a while, and then after I bought my Meanstreak, I decided to give it a whirl. I found myself a deserted country road and got to work. It was the craziest ride of my life. No windshield either. I focused on my tach only - not on the speedometer. Once I was ready to shift into 5th gear, I took a quick peek at my speedo, and I was going 120 mph. OMG!!! My feet were barely sticking to the pegs. It's probably the only time my bike will ever go that fast.

Anyway... one thing that I've read to be "normal" on the big Kawasaki engines is a slight, high sounding tick. Kawasaki says that it's not a problem, just a characteristic. Well, my bike had the tick before, but didn't have it after my break in. And my bike runs very smooth.

Unless like Buzz you're able to take apart the engines, there's no good way to prove which technique is truly better for the bike, but what is written about the "fast" way makes sense to me. And with the "slow" way, they don't really give a reason - it's just the manufacturer's recommendation. Personally, I was glad to get it over with so that I could enjoy riding my bike without obsessing over the RPMs.

Cheers,
Loonette

If you think about it, in a way the manufacturers do agree with MotoMan. You'll notice the break-in procedure always recommends avoiding a constant engine speed and encourages frequent changes in speed (usually it says, "Vary your speed for the first 1,000 miles and avoid prolonged travel at any one speed"). They don't come right out and say, "Run the engine to redline and hotrod around during break-in" but the recommendation to vary engine speed is cleary a reference to what MotoMan states about maintaining pressure on the piston rings through frequent acceleration and engine braking (to pressurize both the top and bottom ring). If you were to hop in a brand new car and flip on the cruise control and drive from Maine to California non-stop your engine would experience very little of this pressure on the rings - and would likely lead to a poor seal for the life of the engine. I didn't happen upon MotoMan's site until well after I broke-in my Mean Streak, so I ended up doing the "baby it" method, but I made it a point to vary my speed constantly...accelerating and letting off...accelerating and letting off...for the first 1,000 miles.