Originally Posted by elp_jc
Do you actually believe that crap? You should educate yourself before spewing crap like that as fact.
Do you realize a racing engine's purpose is the complete opposite of a street engine
? It's designed to run flat out and last for a few races, so you break it in for maximum power, not longevity. A street engine like the S65 should last 100K miles, not 1K. As a side comment, most of these outrageous comments come from folks who don't even own an M3
First off thanks.
Actually I think my education in the automotive field is pretty well rounded. I've worked in many technical niches, from supercar design to top 10 Indycar teams (designing again), to sales, aftermarket installation, aftermarket parts engineering etc.
I am pretty well aware of the different purposes of racing engine and a street engine, I've worked around them for a long time. The connection that you're making is honestly one of the most naive views I've ever heard. While a street engine and a racing engine have different purposes, the break in doesn't care how the hell you're going to be using the engine. Your point is irrelevant.
With regard to your comment about my not driving an M3, I'm the process of upgrading to e92 M3 spec as commuter car. Besides that I have a tuned supercar who's major stock competition is a Bugatti Veyron and it's competitors, and other tuned supercars. I also own race cars so I'm no stranger to hardcore vehicles if you think that means anything.
With that said every single piece of info I've posted about the M3 break in, I've fact checked with engineers for F1 teams that I know through the racing world. Breaking in a car in is serious business and it's not something you want to get wrong, so I want to make sure what I post has some validity. If you'd like to refute any of my claims please include which multi-million dollar automotive entity you've engineered for and which field you PHD is in, because those were my standards of info.
Originally Posted by Singletrack
Legion5 - You do realize that your argument is totally illogical right?
You state that the best way to break-in the engine is to run it hard.
You state that BMW tells you not to break it in hard to "minimize damage" and "reduce risk". Risk of what? You just said running it hard was the best way to get "extra reliability".
Also - various manufacturers do use additional additives in the factory oil. Subaru for one used a specific oil in my 04 STi. I dont know if BWM does or not, but I wouldn't assume anything.
You're confusing the information I posed. Running the engine hard with multiple fluid changes in the first few dozen miles will improve the engine in every way. Running the engine consistently hard for the full 1200 miles without fluid changes will risk issues, due to the fluids being bad, this is what BMW doesn't want you to do and what basically constitutes their break in, avoiding bad fluids being run. Running the engine somewhat hard for the first few dozen miles in a very specific way and then running it as mildly as possible until the 1200 mile fluid change will improve performance, without significantly increasing the risk of running on bad fluids.
There are a few different ways to construct an engine that causes it to require a special break in oil. The 04 STI definitely require a special break in oil. The M3 based on my conversation with an M3 racing team that frequently rebuilds our engines, and researching the engine specs and consulting a few other people does not have any of the special conditions that require a special break in oil. It's just unlikely BMW made these engines require special additives.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a professional engine builder, I just KNOW some of the world's top engine builders, and have built a few engines, and made an atempt at a fair post that I fact checked but don't make off base points with only the most basic information.
Anyway I hope all this helps set some people straight.