If this is entered into evidence then I want to enter the fact that I have run my XS1100 Yamaha motorcycle to 110,000 miles todate on conventional, regular old shelf oil (most of it was the horrid SE and SF grades of 10W40 that did cause the rings to stick...LOL) and it too, has not needed a valve adjustment in all that time. I check them and they are fine. So...if the lack of any necessary valvetrain maintenance is evidence that the engine is not wearing and that that validates the oil as "good" then I have proved that conventional oil works just as well....!!! LOL LOL
2005 Corvette
- Thread starter DThumper
- Start date
- Status
That is nuthin....you run them that way over lunch just to break them in.... the high speed endurance engines run for almost 300 hours are continuous full throttle, max load, max RPM. No idling, no part throttle...just flat out running. I have often, of late, seen a SC Northstar or LS7 in the dyno cell at full load/6500 RPM screaming away when I left for the day and it was sitting there, still screaming away the next morning when you come into work...and this happens day after day to accumulate 300 hours.
This is a hold-over from the days of flat tappet cams and the massive amount of moly grease you have to blob on the cam to get it to survive. Turned the oil a nice shade of grey too.
Modern roller cams are well broken in by the time you get the car in your hands and don't need anything other than plain old oil when born.
bbobynski, here is the link that many throw around regarding break-in. Kind of similar to what you suggested only a bit more harsh.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
bbobynski...
We have noticed higher copper readings from early UOAs on GM engines vs. other manufacturers. Are you aware of anything inside the engine that might lead to higher copper wear numbers? No one has ever correlated higher copper readings to decreased longevity....but it is interesting that most of the GM engines have higher copper.
I have a 2004 5.3L and it runs great. Great power, smooth, quiet and decent fuel economy. My copper readings were lower than some comparable engines, but higher than other manufacturers. I don't believe it is anything harmful....but I would be interested on your thoughts.
We have noticed higher copper readings from early UOAs on GM engines vs. other manufacturers. Are you aware of anything inside the engine that might lead to higher copper wear numbers? No one has ever correlated higher copper readings to decreased longevity....but it is interesting that most of the GM engines have higher copper.
I have a 2004 5.3L and it runs great. Great power, smooth, quiet and decent fuel economy. My copper readings were lower than some comparable engines, but higher than other manufacturers. I don't believe it is anything harmful....but I would be interested on your thoughts.
This would go a long way to explaining why you see some lead in a UOA on a so called "aluminum bearing" engine. Also, IIRC, reading an article from one of the bearing manufacturers that descibe the bearing material as an "aluminum alloy". With one of the alloy materials being lead.
Good info here on the abuse a modern motor can handle and with rings being sealed (For the most part) when your car arrives at the dealership.
I remember the old tails of Chryslers dyno operators pulling the handle on the 426 Hemi to redline and leaving it their as they went to lunch!
I remember the old tails of Chryslers dyno operators pulling the handle on the 426 Hemi to redline and leaving it their as they went to lunch!
Yes that is how is starts but it sure lasts more that a few minutes like GM claims. Mine will do it till the engine reachs operating temp, sometimes as long 15 minutes, if I let it idle. If I run it hard it pings like crazy, on premiun fuel.
A friends 2001 Chevy 5.3L will never stop doing it now, it rattles all the time. At first it was only for 5 minutes but gradually got worse over time. He does had nearly 100,000 miles on it without problems but the noise makes it sound like its a piece of junk. He said they once cleaned out the carbon and the engine made no noise for many miles but slowly came back. Now he if off warranty all he can do it hope its like you say.
I think GM is not handling this issue as best as they could and I know of several guys who dumped their GM trucks becuase of this. 75% of the problem was the dealers attitude about it, just brushing it off as normal is little comfort for some guy who spent 30g for a new truck and nows has to listen to this for as long as he owns it.
the LS1
[ April 22, 2005, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Mike ]
Mike, I think you are right about carbon being at least part of the problem. The buildup eventually causes interference with the piston/head and you hear it all the time. Pinging on premium another indication that carbon has built up and increased the compression ratio.
This isn't just a GM problem. Climate and fuel additives I think can worsen it.
In the old days they let the engine inhale plain water. It shatters the carbon from thermal shock and flushes it out. Still works (find a small vacuum line). Or you can use GM's top engine cleaner (or some such) or SeaFoam, pour into sparkplug holes and let soak overnight. Crank engine without plugs in to make sure you don't have fluid in the cylinders.
This isn't just a GM problem. Climate and fuel additives I think can worsen it.
In the old days they let the engine inhale plain water. It shatters the carbon from thermal shock and flushes it out. Still works (find a small vacuum line). Or you can use GM's top engine cleaner (or some such) or SeaFoam, pour into sparkplug holes and let soak overnight. Crank engine without plugs in to make sure you don't have fluid in the cylinders.
Just wondering what the cicumstances of the problems you had were.
For carbon buildup in the CCs, use Fuel Power.
Having one of its engineers blather interminably about why an engine that sounds like crap - especially compared to its competitors - is really 'just fine' offers some insight about why GM is in the hole it's in...
I say this as an LS6 owner and GM advocate.
I say this as an LS6 owner and GM advocate.
If the Corvette was my car, I would stick with Mobil 1 and the factory spec viscosity.
I'd change the oil at 75% of the factory interval or monitor interval.
Follow the factory break in, and do the first drain at 3000 miles.
I'd change the oil at 75% of the factory interval or monitor interval.
Follow the factory break in, and do the first drain at 3000 miles.
This is essentially what I was told 25 years ago by the machine shop that I used to when I built motors...I have followed it ever since. the only difference was they advised a higher gear and full throttle , without lugging the engine and then full vacuum.
But that link specifically says not to use synthetic oil during break in which ties into the claim that engines should be run hard during break-in. bb/jestel claimed that synthetic is perfectly fine from Day 1 so there is also no reason to run the engine hard during break-in. One is correct and one isn't.quote:
Originally posted by buster:
bbobynski, here is the link that many throw around regarding break-in. Kind of similar to what you suggested only a bit more harsh.
http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm
This was a very informative thread, and I reckon it deserves a bump.
I can't compete with General Motors in volume and R & D. But when I overhaul an engine (I've overhauled hundreds of diesel engines and just a few dozen gasoline engines), my break-in procedure is this: I idle the thing and run it in the shop until I've confirmed that there are no leaks, any final adjustments are made, and the vehicle is safe to drive on the road or dyno. Then I run the [censored] out of it.
If it's a truck engine, I'll run the truck on a chassis dyno for about an hour- mostly under full-throttle. If it's a tractor engine, I'll hook up the PTO dyno and run the [censored] out of it for an hour. If it's an automotive engine, or in construction equipment, or some application that I can't really put on a dyno- then I'll just drive it like I stole it for an hour- accelerate hard, run it against the brakes... generally TRY to break it.
If it breaks, then it never would've held anyway. And I want to know about any leaks or other problems before it leaves the shop. Probably good for breaking in rings, too.
I can't compete with General Motors in volume and R & D. But when I overhaul an engine (I've overhauled hundreds of diesel engines and just a few dozen gasoline engines), my break-in procedure is this: I idle the thing and run it in the shop until I've confirmed that there are no leaks, any final adjustments are made, and the vehicle is safe to drive on the road or dyno. Then I run the [censored] out of it.
If it's a truck engine, I'll run the truck on a chassis dyno for about an hour- mostly under full-throttle. If it's a tractor engine, I'll hook up the PTO dyno and run the [censored] out of it for an hour. If it's an automotive engine, or in construction equipment, or some application that I can't really put on a dyno- then I'll just drive it like I stole it for an hour- accelerate hard, run it against the brakes... generally TRY to break it.
If it breaks, then it never would've held anyway. And I want to know about any leaks or other problems before it leaves the shop. Probably good for breaking in rings, too.
JHZR2
Staff member
Good idea with the bump. IMO the Pb and Cu UOA results are things That are great points in here that im not sure were ever resolved.
Great info here...
Originally Posted By: onion
This was a very informative thread, and I reckon it deserves a bump.
I can't compete with General Motors in volume and R & D. But when I overhaul an engine (I've overhauled hundreds of diesel engines and just a few dozen gasoline engines), my break-in procedure is this: I idle the thing and run it in the shop until I've confirmed that there are no leaks, any final adjustments are made, and the vehicle is safe to drive on the road or dyno. Then I run the [censored] out of it.
If it's a truck engine, I'll run the truck on a chassis dyno for about an hour- mostly under full-throttle. If it's a tractor engine, I'll hook up the PTO dyno and run the [censored] out of it for an hour. If it's an automotive engine, or in construction equipment, or some application that I can't really put on a dyno- then I'll just drive it like I stole it for an hour- accelerate hard, run it against the brakes... generally TRY to break it.
If it breaks, then it never would've held anyway. And I want to know about any leaks or other problems before it leaves the shop. Probably good for breaking in rings, too.
You're on the right track for diesel engine break-in. When I worked at Cummins, we had a rule that a new engine had to get to rated power in the first 20 minutes of running to get the rings broken in. Otherwise, the liners would glaze, and it would have high oil consumption nigh onto forever.
This was a very informative thread, and I reckon it deserves a bump.
I can't compete with General Motors in volume and R & D. But when I overhaul an engine (I've overhauled hundreds of diesel engines and just a few dozen gasoline engines), my break-in procedure is this: I idle the thing and run it in the shop until I've confirmed that there are no leaks, any final adjustments are made, and the vehicle is safe to drive on the road or dyno. Then I run the [censored] out of it.
If it's a truck engine, I'll run the truck on a chassis dyno for about an hour- mostly under full-throttle. If it's a tractor engine, I'll hook up the PTO dyno and run the [censored] out of it for an hour. If it's an automotive engine, or in construction equipment, or some application that I can't really put on a dyno- then I'll just drive it like I stole it for an hour- accelerate hard, run it against the brakes... generally TRY to break it.
If it breaks, then it never would've held anyway. And I want to know about any leaks or other problems before it leaves the shop. Probably good for breaking in rings, too.
You're on the right track for diesel engine break-in. When I worked at Cummins, we had a rule that a new engine had to get to rated power in the first 20 minutes of running to get the rings broken in. Otherwise, the liners would glaze, and it would have high oil consumption nigh onto forever.
Originally Posted By: NEPA_Z
Having one of its engineers blather interminably about why an engine that sounds like [censored] - especially compared to its competitors - is really 'just fine' offers some insight about why GM is in the hole it's in...
I say this as an LS6 owner and GM advocate.
Maybe so, but I'd bet that Z06 is/was making more than it's 405 rated at the crank ponies (if it's latter one), at the REAR WHEELS.
Having one of its engineers blather interminably about why an engine that sounds like [censored] - especially compared to its competitors - is really 'just fine' offers some insight about why GM is in the hole it's in...
I say this as an LS6 owner and GM advocate.
Maybe so, but I'd bet that Z06 is/was making more than it's 405 rated at the crank ponies (if it's latter one), at the REAR WHEELS.
- Status
Similar threads
