Gernby

iTrader: (1)

Like I said earlier in the thread, I just drove it "normally" for about 500 miles. I wasn't particularly easy on it, but I didn't flog it either. I definitely did some full throttle accelleration, but not a whole lot.

I'm at 16K now, and am about to change my oil again to see how Mobil 1 5W-20 looks at 3K miles.

combfilter

iTrader: (3)

4500 soon to be more

caymandive

iTrader: (2)

Cool. I just switched to 5W-20 a few weeks back myself. I haven't noticed a difference compared to the 5W-30, so your oil analysis should be interesting. BTW..How much do they charge for that sort of thing?

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

If you are asking about the cost of the UOA, I think it is $25. I will quit doing UOAs once the results are consistent, and I find my "optimum" oil change interval.

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

$32.50 with TBN, unless you pre-purchase in quantity.

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

Lance,

You can't get off that easy! I think you were one of those that pooh-poohed the thing about break in miles increasing power ...

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

And I still do. Depends on your break-in method. My way, there's no difference with more miles.

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

So I guess your first UOA showed really high contents of metals, but every UOA after showed "normal" contents?

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

I did my first UOA at 20k miles after a 10k mile interval. Only iron was elevated compared to "similar" 3.5 liter Toyota engines. It was also less than your UOA at 5k, which stands to reason. Besides, there will always be iron in used oil because the piston rings and cylinder walls are both iron. There is no way around it, you'll have iron in the oil for the entire life of the engine. And wear metals are not any indication of better horsepower. Leakdown numbers are a direct indication of power, and I've never seen an engine have better leakdown after 10k miles compared to 1k miles. The same, yes. Better? Never.

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

Do you ever check out those 30K tests that Car and Driver does? How many of those tests show better accelleration tests at the end of the 30K? I don't think I've ever seen a car that didn't have better accelleration numbers at the end of the 30K.

I would expect EVERY engine to have the best leak down test results at the beginning of its life, and would reduce every stroke from that point on. I can't think of any physics that would support anything else. Of course, I don't see how that would have EVERYTHING to do with power since there's plenty of moving parts that don't contribute to the cylinders sealing.

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

Cylinder sealing is 98% of the battle. Friction is the other 2%. I can certainly see where the driveline has lower friction from wearing in, but at the same time, 30k miles wears the tires down and improves traction and acceleration. There are lots of decent explanations why the magazine guys would see better times at 30k that have nothing to do with the engine breaking in.

Ramon

I agree that there may be many factors in those results... But I can't ignore the posibility that engine break-in is one of those factors.