That is right. You don't necessarily need high rpm. What you are after is load. The more load there is (to a point), the harder the rings are pushing against the cylinder walls shaping and getting the job done.

Under no load, the few lbs of outward pressure the spring factor of the rings puts on the cylinder wall won't do it.

I know it is conventional wisdom to think that cranks, bearings, rod bearings or bushings need plenty of time to loosen up before you apply tremendous load to them but I think that applied to the engines of yesteryear. Casting and machining technologies are far more advanced than when conventional wisdom was born so IMHO tight parts in new engines are not normal.

You are exactly right when you say this subject is controversial. I always just ask people who suggest the methods I have come to use are incorrect, why? I only get one answer..........The manual says so. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] The whole thing is pretty tough to prove, I must say but I get the benefit of avoiding the frustrating break-in proceedures by adhering to this school of thought![img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] J/K

 

I am going to use the process above. I will do leak down and compression test before and after breakin, and post results.

Thank You to everyone for there input.

 

Good Choice! It will work great!

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

 

In a hundred zillion break-in posts, this is the first time I have seen someone mention this.!!!
I totally agree with you.
I saw a race engine about a year ago that was rebuilt and broken in fat. The thing did not have that many laps on it but I could tell from the ports that the thing was fat as a pig. When the heads came off the cylinders were polished. It was bad news. Ran like a pig.
I also don't agree with some peoples idea of running a 20 to 1 mix on the first tank of a two stroke either. I personally think they are screwing up the ring seal and filling their pipe up with oil.