Groan - running-in again... nuance vs misunderstanding?
- Thread starter B-Road Explorer
- Start date
pathfinder
Registered user
If you're changing your bike every two years I wouldn't bother running it in
Most of em wont have done over 6000 miles by then anyway
B-Road Explorer
Registered user
Thanks to all for the many and varied replies 
I titled the thread "nuance vs misunderstandings" and we got the full set that I was thinking of. Many offered advice on what I should actually do. What I was asking was whether "full throttle" and high revs were intended to mean the same thing in the MotoMan method? I was trying to explore the possiblity that they are not.
Some people question why I would think of disregarding the book. I'm not arguing with the book, I'm trying to clarify what it is that the book really says/means. As far as I can see it does not tell you how much throttle to use, it just gives a rev limit. I suspect some people do not consider this factor at all, just rev ceilings.
Some people talk about having finished running in - at 600 miles. Someone asked me why I want to do a 'better job' this time? My experience with my 2008 GS is that after 600 miles it was run in - in the book sense, but with 7500 miles on the clock today I don't consider it fully run in because it still needs a top up of oil regularly. Many say this is normal, but there are plenty on this thread alone that have managed to run their bikes in such that they don't use enough to require a top up between 6000 mile service intervals.
It's also interesting to note that people think it's normal to top up with oil, and they think it's normal for the bike to stop using oil around 10-12k miles. But they think it's odd for someone to take steps to get to the 2nd condition from the start.
Someone else questioned whether I would be able to tell the difference. Compared to the 2010 GSA demo bike with just 850 miles on the clock, I feel my 7500 mile 2008 GS is noticably more powerful, and I'm pretty sure it has some way to go. And I'm sure when that 2010 has some proper miles on the clock it will show my old 2008 a clean tail-pipe!
I totally see GSmonkey's point about not bothering with running it in if you change bikes every 2 years. This is going to be my 2nd GS - an A this time. At this point I'm hoping I'll keep it longer. The first bike was a standard GS, and I bought it because I wasn't sure if I would really get on with the big twin engine or trail styling, coming from a VFR, but I always hankered after the GSA. The thing I like least about buying a new R1200 is the thought that I could be riding it for 2 or 3 years just basically running it in, reaching the magic 12k miles just in time to hand it over to someone else! So I'm keen to get there as early as possible.
I do appreciate everyone's comments, thanks for taking the time to offer guidance, information and support The links provided by SKON (with help from roddy) and topbanana were just amazing. Let me repeat them:
I implore anyone who feels "follow the book" (whatever that really means) is the only game in town to read at least the 1st of those 2. If that link was quoted instead of the MotoMan link in future threads, I don't think we would have these discussions at all. MotoMan's bravado is fun, but the sensationalist style and web-of-'93 presentation massively undermines his credibility. The Ash On Bikes article gives all the science behind it as well as the technique - without the mystique. It even has lengthy quotes from a man from Castrol Technology Centre supporting the points - touche Mr BMW manual writer!
The 2nd link, to Puma Racing, is helpful too, with more on technique but a focus on cars.
I haven't made up my mind yet about the full-throttle stuff - I've got until Friday morning so plenty more thinking time. But my plan beyond the first 100 miles is to take 2 or 3 days off work for a trip to the Peak District to ride some real hills. I've only passed through the area once before, so any advice on roads to ride and places to stay would be most welcome.
I titled the thread "nuance vs misunderstandings" and we got the full set that I was thinking of. Many offered advice on what I should actually do. What I was asking was whether "full throttle" and high revs were intended to mean the same thing in the MotoMan method? I was trying to explore the possiblity that they are not.
Some people question why I would think of disregarding the book. I'm not arguing with the book, I'm trying to clarify what it is that the book really says/means. As far as I can see it does not tell you how much throttle to use, it just gives a rev limit. I suspect some people do not consider this factor at all, just rev ceilings.
Some people talk about having finished running in - at 600 miles. Someone asked me why I want to do a 'better job' this time? My experience with my 2008 GS is that after 600 miles it was run in - in the book sense, but with 7500 miles on the clock today I don't consider it fully run in because it still needs a top up of oil regularly. Many say this is normal, but there are plenty on this thread alone that have managed to run their bikes in such that they don't use enough to require a top up between 6000 mile service intervals.
It's also interesting to note that people think it's normal to top up with oil, and they think it's normal for the bike to stop using oil around 10-12k miles. But they think it's odd for someone to take steps to get to the 2nd condition from the start.
Someone else questioned whether I would be able to tell the difference. Compared to the 2010 GSA demo bike with just 850 miles on the clock, I feel my 7500 mile 2008 GS is noticably more powerful, and I'm pretty sure it has some way to go. And I'm sure when that 2010 has some proper miles on the clock it will show my old 2008 a clean tail-pipe!
I totally see GSmonkey's point about not bothering with running it in if you change bikes every 2 years. This is going to be my 2nd GS - an A this time. At this point I'm hoping I'll keep it longer. The first bike was a standard GS, and I bought it because I wasn't sure if I would really get on with the big twin engine or trail styling, coming from a VFR, but I always hankered after the GSA. The thing I like least about buying a new R1200 is the thought that I could be riding it for 2 or 3 years just basically running it in, reaching the magic 12k miles just in time to hand it over to someone else! So I'm keen to get there as early as possible.
I do appreciate everyone's comments, thanks for taking the time to offer guidance, information and support
The links provided by SKON (with help from roddy) and topbanana were just amazing. Let me repeat them:I implore anyone who feels "follow the book" (whatever that really means) is the only game in town to read at least the 1st of those 2. If that link was quoted instead of the MotoMan link in future threads, I don't think we would have these discussions at all. MotoMan's bravado is fun, but the sensationalist style and web-of-'93 presentation massively undermines his credibility. The Ash On Bikes article gives all the science behind it as well as the technique - without the mystique. It even has lengthy quotes from a man from Castrol Technology Centre supporting the points - touche Mr BMW manual writer!
The 2nd link, to Puma Racing, is helpful too, with more on technique but a focus on cars.
I haven't made up my mind yet about the full-throttle stuff - I've got until Friday morning so plenty more thinking time. But my plan beyond the first 100 miles is to take 2 or 3 days off work for a trip to the Peak District to ride some real hills. I've only passed through the area once before, so any advice on roads to ride and places to stay would be most welcome.
Deleted account 190920001
Registered user
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,368
- Reaction score
- 0
There are two things you are running in on an engine. 1 is the rings, these require acceleration/pressure to force them against the cylinders to get them to bed in. If done properly the rings should be bedded in on a modern engine within a couple of hundred miles. If you don't do this part right then at best it will take a while to run in and use oil and at worst you will glaze the bores leading to a lot of oil use and lower performance for the rest of the engines life or until it is taken apart, bores honed and new rings fitted. Best way to do this is by using the throttle and as Steptoe said never sit at constant revs on the motorway. 2nd thing needing run in are all the other running surfaces like the bearings and pistons. Basically the worst thing you could do for this is to let the engine and parts inside overheat. New engines get hot because of the friction from all the high part left from machining caused by high revs. Keep the revs reasonable and you will keep the localised overheating at bay. This part isnt really a big problem in a modern engine because of the better materials and more accurate machining these days. What is a problem with the boxer is that it is still aircooled leaving the front of the cylinders cooler than the rear so expansion isn't exactly even.
So from all that use the throttle and get the engine stressed but keep the revs down a bit, don't let it overheat and enjoy yourself.
So from all that use the throttle and get the engine stressed but keep the revs down a bit, don't let it overheat and enjoy yourself.
Deleted account 211025001
Registered user
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2005
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 10
Why don't modern cars need running in 
Andres
Andres
Deleted account 190920001
Registered user
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,368
- Reaction score
- 0
quality materials and accurate machining couple with water cooling so they are dimensionaly and thermally much more stable. Air cooled engines will be cooler at the front than the back leading the the back expanding slightly more so the bore will go very slightly oval.
snerkler
Registered user
+1
I can't remember what the manual says about running the engine in exactly now, but doesn't it say to load the engine?
My opinion is follow the manual. The R&D team have spent a fortune on what's best for the bike, so I think they should know best. The arrogance/ignorance of others professing to know better than the people who designed the bloody thing is bemusing
Having said that, even the manual leaves certain things to interpretation. It tells you what the rev limits you should go to, but not how quickly you should reach those limits, or how much load you should put through the engine to get to the limits, or how wide to open the throttle. I think this is the area where most misunderstandings arise. So the amount of load or how wide you open the throttle is up for debate. But the worst thing you can do is labour the engine and/or ride it at constant revs. Regarding how wide you open the throttle, my feeling is the first time you go up to a particular rev range do it gentle-ish, and then after that get there reasonably hard and load the engine (awaiting childish remarks
)
snerkler
Registered user
Why don't modern cars need running in
Andres
Some do, especially the high performance ones. I had to run my Scooby in, and it was run in on running in oil, whatever that is
Deleted account 190920001
Registered user
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,368
- Reaction score
- 0
Loading the engine is not the worst thing you can do at all its needed to load the rings and as your not using full revs your not getting full power anyway. What on earth do you think is going to get harmed by loading it? Go search youtube for running in on a Dyno and you will see what I mean. Nothing I said contradicts what the owners book states all I did was fill in the mechanics of why it needs done that way.
snerkler
Registered user
My opinion is follow the manual. The R&D team have spent a fortune on what's best for the bike, so I think they should know best. The arrogance/ignorance of others professing to know better than the people who designed the bloody thing is bemusing
You're right, the R&D team know best.
But I bet that the R&D procedure for running the bike in is not the same as the compromised "one size fits all" procedure that has been put in the manual. Manufacturers can't trust your typical bike buying numpty (i.e. the average bloke on the street) to follow the best instructions because getting it wrong could well make the bike worse overall. So, they advise a second-best procedure that people can follow. The most important criteria for that procedure will be to make sure that it is easy to follow and that warranty claims are minimised.
The R&D team know what's best for the bike, but the lawyers and accountants know what's best for the company's bottom line, and that's what determines the contents of the manual. I would rather have an informed discussion about the topic and understand the issues involved than blindly accept what some lawyer had insisted on going in the manual because there was a lower risk of litigation.
