why break an engine in when nobody broke in the original engine?
 

Let's face it. For most of these cars, either a salesman, a tech, or the original owner must have gone WOT or driven the car hard when there was less than 50 miles on it at least once.

Who would buy a sportscar that costs over $50k in inflation-adjusted dollars without dropping the hammer at least once? I mean I know some people do in fact do that, but if they restrained themselves, the previous guy who testdrove it didn't. Surely Mazda didn't design a motor that would fly to pieces if the shop detailer or oil change bitch went joyriding before delivery to the customer?

So from a technical perspective why is breaking a new engine so important, at least if you have one of those "brand new" Ray Crowe engines or a rebuild with new housings? I mean even the older 2nd and 1st gen motors which lasted longer than FD engines were probably driven hard at some point during the first 100 miles, and those typically lasted 100k+ . I would like an answer beyond "so-and-so trusted source recommends x breakin." Because most of the original motors were not driven with such discipline.

Breaking a motor in is not a mandatory requirement. It is a highly advised recommendation. You could do everything right, break it in for 1000 - 2000 miles and then boost and pop the engine or you could never break it in and drive it like a bat out of hell the first day and the engine lasts for 80,000...

People highly recommend it for obvious reasons given how the seals, side seals and springs work. You have 5,000+ posts so I dont think it is necessary for me to explain how the rotary engine works but the idea and concept is that you just want everything to "seat / sit" properly so you get an even seal on all faces.

I personally did not break my motor in, I boosted after 100 miles and I felt comfortable that everything was functioning properly. I didnt boost to redline but I was getting on it. My engine has been fine so far :)

Don't the Renesis engines have a pre-programmed function to essentially force this issue?

back in the day when i was kicking the tires on a 94 fd new on the lot, the salesman told me that the secondary turbo does not begin to kick in on the sequential system until an x number of miles was recorded on the odometer (in the 1500mi range iirc).

I test drove the car, but at the time was far from educated on the 10-8-10 boost pattern and the way the twin setup was suppose to feel. Was the salesman (who was actually the owner of the dealership) full of shit, or did he know what he was talking about? I had no choice but to believe him but have wondered this ever since.

Maybe some original owners can shed some light on the secondary turbo not coming on line when new?

this is a good ass question i was just thinking about this last night. i know if i were old enough to drive in 93 and was able to buy an FD and were uneducated about them i would have been beatin the brakes off it.

I wonder if Gordon, DjSeven, or maybe Goodfella, might have some insight on this. They seem to be very knowledgeable regarding this jank.

+1

a properly broken in engine (apex seal/piston ring) will seal better, ultimately produce more horsepower in the long run.

The longest lasting engine on most cars is the one off the showroom floor. The one that is least likely to have a disciplined breakin is also that first one. I'm not saying there is a cause-and-effect relationship, nor am I saying we should all go beat the piss out of new/rebuilt motors with good condition parts. But do people make too big a deal out of breaking in a car with good condition rotor housings?

Is there proven long-term harm from neglecting a breakin? I'm not talking about racing a new motor or the opposite which would be never boosting it. I'm talking about just regular old "medium" street driving like you would do under normal circumstances. Is a solidly rebuilt rotary engine sensitive enough that a few WOT pulls or high rpm runs with say 40 miles on the clock would result in a long term loss of compression or engine life?

I don't think comparing a rebuilt engine to a new engine is comparing apples to apples. With a new engine, by definition, everything is new spec. A rebuilt engine is usually mating substantially used parts with new. It's also a matter of heat cycles too.
And I'm also guessing that dedicated race engines, like those in a drag car, have different tolerances than we're used to dealing with.

The argument I've always heard in regard to piston motors, which I feel probably applies somewhat to rotaries, is that it's kind of a matter of luck. Sure you could take it out and beat the piss out of it, but if something isn't seated correctly you run a higher risk of failure. Whether or not that same failure would have occurred with a proper break in would be hard to determine, but that is one part of the argument I've always been presented with. The other part is that if you start beating on it before everything has seated properly you run the risk of reducing the overall life of the engine. So while it *should* have lasted to 100K, maybe it only lasts until 60K. Could this be explained by the majority of FD's needing rebuilds around that mileage? Maybe... Some FD's seem to do fine past the "normal" mileage that the engine starts to break down, by product of the original owner observing a proper break in period? I think it's logical personally. The proponents of "beating on it right out of the box" that I've talked to never seem to care about longevity, they are using motors in race cars, weekend warriors, etc, cars that likely won't see 60K miles of use while they own them, which I guess is a perfectly alright situation for them.

I'm with Gordon though, I would like to see someone like Rich or Ihor weigh on in this, Chris from Banzai?

I am going to call bullshit on this one. From my understanding of the sequential system it is all regulated by vacuum (turbo control solenoid / actuators etc.) -- i guess the only plausible possibility is that they have some kind of semi retarded function entered into the ECU that keeps the car from reaching full boost levels but I find this possibility highly unlikely...

I guess the only people that could really answer this are the people that owned one off the lot.


And again, in reference to the break in - I doubt there is any real conclusive evidence (empirically researched) to support this hypothesis... The real question instead should be, "what do I have to loose by not beating on my engine for the first 1000 miles, even 500!" Probably, if you looked for statistical correlations on engine lifespan in conjunction with the driver / owner of the vehicle, you would be able to draw more validating information than speculation on the effects of the break in. For instance, the individual who practices less restraint and control over his "heavy foot", to resist the temptation of hauling ass on a new motor is probably more likely to be the individual that drives the car like a maniac in all instances, does doughnuts in shopping center parking lots and likes to do launches at every red light he has a chance to just to be seen. Where as the more mature, reserved and in control individual will be more conscious of his driving style and the engine's limits (water temps, oil temps, egt's considered etc.)

Now I have no knowledgeable basis for this statement but from a personal standpoint, I feel this argument is kind of null for the rotary engine in comparison to a piston engine that has substantially more moving parts, seals and gaskets (like the head gasket), bearings, cams that must set... or, the only reason that I could think of that this would be recommended by the manufacturer is in regards to the silicone or glue that is used to seal up these engines... When I got my new motor from Ray, there was still wet silicone in the holes where the engine mount mated with the engine - possibly they just want those heat cycles to help all the silicone properly dry and seal? I dunno

He may be right to some extent. The FSM does state that there is a mileage switch that gets triggered at a certain mileage. Now what is changed and what mileage, I have not a clue. Mazda does have a history for putting these mileage switches in rotary's.

Don't jump the gun hear about calling BS. It is actually very easy for the ecu to be programed to not ground specific solenoids. Simply put if the ecu was programed not to ground the solenoids that controls the secondary turbo control door and the pre-spool door, these doors will stay closed so you have no chance to spool the secondary turbo.

Well guys, Like i said. I was told this buy the owner of the Mazda Dealership, He is a family friend and has no reason to lie to me. Maybe he was misinformed? I would like to know if it is true aswell. We need some original owners to chime in on this. (possibly they might not even know)

I would say if your going to drive slow or normal on a stock clearnced motor break it in before driveing some what fast, but if your going to push a race clearenced and balanced motor tune it on the dyno and let it rip your as ready as it gets!

Whats dumb is to push a stock motor past were its built to go and have a poor tune and rip it everywere you go, that fucks shit up and give rotarys a bad rep!:)

That's not true because a Mazda built stock motor can handle alot more than most people think. What's giving the rotary a bad rep is all the ignorant people who decide to crank up the boost past the stock ecu programing threashold. I don't care how well a rotary engine is built, you start running boost levels higher than the boost levels that was originally programed, you will blow the engine end of story.

^^^^^^^^^^Thats what i was trying to say when i said tune, then theres the balance and clearence difference in stock and race! But your right wrong tune and blow up a new motor!

(sits refreshing the page every 5 minutes waiting for howard to chime in with his AI speech :D )

And atleast you have the peace of mind should it blow that you did everything you could, and took all the recommended precautionary steps to prevent it.

when it comes to this car and all the time/money ive put into it, i will always take the precautionary steps.

Exactly... It is the peace of mind knowing it wasn't your fault. No regrets.

If you follow every precaution; break it in slowly, install AI, and have chrispeed tune it, and then you STILL blow the motor. Hell, even I'd go v8 after that experience.

To be honest, most times when a low mileage motor is blown, it can be traced to something wrong with a peripheral system or a lack of judgement. I haven't seen too many "blown motor" stories that didn't have some solid reason WHY the motor blew. Just because it isn't a 2JZ that can be pushed way beyond reason, does not make it unreliable.

One story comes to mind: Someone posted about a blown motor, then someone asked about their boost level, to which the OP replied "Oh I've been running 19 psi for a year with no issues." Then he was asked what AI he had. He said "What's AI?" ....... That sounds like a reliable motor with an unreliable pilot to me.

This topic comes up on any forum concerning a motorized vehicle. And there are lots of different opinions.. Here's a question: Did they run the motors at the factory during testing? What RPMs? What Load? Boost?

I know that in jap motorcycle production they take every motor beyond redline, at the factory.

I'm not saying we should skip break-ins. What I'm trying to do here is suggest that we should consider giving Mazda more credit than is normally given to them. Did Mazda design a hand-built engine that would be seriously harmed by the inevitable person who doesn't know or care about taking it easy on the motor? Did they design an engine that would be significantly harmed by the one test drive from the guy who is wondering whether this thing is worth his $50k equivalent? Maybe not.

Believe it or not, I find myself more and more impressed with the durability of the rotary every day. When I tore down my engine I was surprised just how good of shape it was in for having been overheated, detonated multiple times (apex seals survived), and run on half [sic] a quart of oil by my dumb ass.

All ferraris are raced on a test track and beaten the shit out of them before them reach the showroom. Could have mazda done something similar back in the day? maybe. Like someone said, a brand new engine with all new parts isn't the same of a newly rebuilt engine with a mixed of old and new parts. Also about 90% of all rebuilts aren't stock ports and aren't going to be pushed to the same 10psi as the stock engine is. So take this in consideration.

For my peace of mind, i broke in my engine for about 900 miles. No regrets.

Also imagined you bought a brand new rx7, and right out of the dealer you pushed it to the limit and broke the engine. You would come back to the dealer and say "this sucks, it just blew". the mechanic would take one look at the odometer and said "well....it wasn't broken in proberly and by doing this you have void the warranty".............

I think I remember Ihor telling me he used to do this when he worked with lambos (or ferraris, I forget which). Must have been alot of fun. It would be awesome if mazda did this as well but I honestly don't think they did. Those expensive exotics are just that, expensive. Im sure they made enough money to take the time to abuse the engine before it was rolled out and not worry if it will blow or not. I don't think the same could be said for mazda.