Page 1 of 1

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 12:40 pm Apr 29 2015
by ckelly33
Will your bike really run different until you break the head in?

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 01:09 pm Apr 29 2015
by Tedh98
I've never heard that asked before but - No.

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 03:06 pm Apr 29 2015
by pumpguy
When you say "head", do you mean cylinder head, the part that bolts to the top of the cylinder above the piston, or something else?

If you really mean cylinder head, the answer is no. If you mean cylinder and piston, then yes, the engine should be operated carefully for a while until they're broke in.

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 03:17 pm Apr 29 2015
by Tedh98
pumpguy wrote: the engine should be operated carefully for a while until they're broke in.
Or you can get the engine up to operating temperature and then run the snot out of it. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 03:26 pm Apr 29 2015
by IDRIDR
Tedh98 wrote:
pumpguy wrote: the engine should be operated carefully for a while until they're broke in.
Or you can get the engine up to operating temperature and then run the snot out of it. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I've wondered if MotoMan's Break In Secrets apply to 2T. Why wouldn't they?

http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 03:51 pm Apr 29 2015
by Tedh98
This is a topic that could easily fall into the "which oil to use" type of debate. In the end you have to go with the approach that you are comfortable with.

With that being said, I've been doing the hard break in for years with only success and no problems. It makes sense to me.

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 04:02 pm Apr 29 2015
by KDXohio
Will definitely turn into a debate now!

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 05:35 pm Apr 29 2015
by adam728
Not if the op really means cylinder head. No break in on that.

As for Motoman's method, its not bad, but man that guy likes to toot his own horn. The whole website reads like he's the smartest guy in the universe because he does things differently. And hardly any real data to be found anywhere either.

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 09:18 pm Apr 29 2015
by Sullyfam
adam728 wrote:Not if the op really means cylinder head. No break in on that.

As for Motoman's method, its not bad, but man that guy likes to toot his own horn. The whole website reads like he's the smartest guy in the universe because he does things differently. And hardly any real data to be found anywhere either.
Or maybe he IS a genius because there are no facts to prove he is not!? [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 12:36 pm Apr 30 2015
by fuzzy
Been discussed to death on here since the dawn of this site. I'm a proponent of rapid break-in. I like to call it ring seat instead of break in, because that's all you're doing. If you're breaking in another part, you did something wrong (in this day and age).

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 03:42 pm Apr 30 2015
by Julien D
fuzzy wrote:Been discussed to death on here since the dawn of this site. I'm a proponent of rapid break-in. I like to call it ring seat instead of break in, because that's all you're doing. If you're breaking in another part, you did something wrong (in this day and age).
I concur, completely.

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 09:30 am May 01 2015
by ohgood
IDRIDR wrote:
Tedh98 wrote:
pumpguy wrote: the engine should be operated carefully for a while until they're broke in.
Or you can get the engine up to operating temperature and then run the snot out of it. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I've wondered if MotoMan's Break In Secrets apply to 2T. Why wouldn't they?

http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm

it started out as just a joke, but then people started to believe it, and argue about it, so he's laughed his ass off about the unintended troll for years now.

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 06:34 am May 02 2015
by Julien D
There are similar methods described in automotive publications, as well as aviation and high performance race publications. The one thing they have in common with Motoman is heavy throttle at varying (high) RPM, and the importance of seating the rings as quickly as possible. Regardless of your opinion of motomans article, there are plenty of other sources of similar information. Just like any other debatable subject, you can find loads of information to support whichever method you wish to validate.

does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 12:10 pm May 02 2015
by pne
his method suggests that within a few miles your crosshatching is all worn down and there is nothing left to seat the rings. Yet how many motors have you seen torn apart where the cross hatching looks perfect? If the hatching really wore that fast the only way to properly do a top end would be to hone the top end each time new rings are put in. With nikasil lined cylinders they are so dam hard thats not necessary.

Re: does the head have to be "broke in"?

Posted: 06:22 pm May 02 2015
by adam728
pne wrote:his method suggests that within a few miles your crosshatching is all worn down and there is nothing left to seat the rings. Yet how many motors have you seen torn apart where the cross hatching looks perfect? If the hatching really wore that fast the only way to properly do a top end would be to hone the top end each time new rings are put in. With nikasil lined cylinders they are so dam hard thats not necessary.
His method talks about glazing the cylinder, I believe. So it's not about the cross hatching being worn off, but rather glazed over so it cannot then be utilized.