Just returned from a 600+ mile trip with the new Sonata. It had just over
600 miles on it when I left and we put on another 630 or so. Fuel mileage
down was 27.0, on the return, 26.7. I'd expect to get even more if I
maintained a bit lower speed, but that is not bad with some driving at 80 -
85 mph, then 5 mph on the GS Parkway, then back to 75 - 80. .

I was very pleased with the way it handles at highway speed. Now that I
have some miles on it, I'll be able to try out some of the performance
characteristics. IMO, those first 2k or so miles with an easy break in help
with the longevity of the engine.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

 

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

> I was very pleased with the way it handles at highway speed. Now that I
> have some miles on it, I'll be able to try out some of the performance
> characteristics. IMO, those first 2k or so miles with an easy break in help
> with the longevity of the engine.

Interestingly, I also believed that for many years, but now believe that
you should drive the engine from the start the way you plan to drive it
later. I came to this conclusion after looking at the break-in
procedures for airplane engines and also the general lack of break-in
procedures specified for most new cars - other than to avoid prolonged
operation at a constant RPM.


Matt

 

"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
>
> Interestingly, I also believed that for many years, but now believe that
> you should drive the engine from the start the way you plan to drive it
> later. I came to this conclusion after looking at the break-in procedures
> for airplane engines and also the general lack of break-in procedures
> specified for most new cars - other than to avoid prolonged operation at a
> constant RPM.

Back in the 50's, break-in was a slow procedure. I'm sure with modern
lubricants and much better alloys, it is not such a big deal. While I do
drive "normally", I don't take the rpm up too high at first, "just in case",
if for no other reason. IIRC, years ago the first oil change was at 500
miles.

 

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
>
>>Interestingly, I also believed that for many years, but now believe that
>>you should drive the engine from the start the way you plan to drive it
>>later. I came to this conclusion after looking at the break-in procedures
>>for airplane engines and also the general lack of break-in procedures
>>specified for most new cars - other than to avoid prolonged operation at a
>>constant RPM.
>
>
> Back in the 50's, break-in was a slow procedure. I'm sure with modern
> lubricants and much better alloys, it is not such a big deal. While I do
> drive "normally", I don't take the rpm up too high at first, "just in case",
> if for no other reason. IIRC, years ago the first oil change was at 500
> miles.

What about high RPM do you think would cause harm?

Matt

 

"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
>
> What about high RPM do you think would cause harm?
>
> Matt

High rpm with tight fit = friction = more heat buildup.

 

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
>
>>What about high RPM do you think would cause harm?
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> High rpm with tight fit = friction = more heat buildup.

Yes, I certainly wouldn't run for hours at high RPM, but acclerating at
high RPM is actually helpful in breaking in a new engine. The higher
cylinder pressures push the compression rings against the cylinders
harder thus breaking things in before a layer of glaze can develop. I
ran my Sonata up to 6,000 RPM several times during break-in, but tend to
shift at 3,000 most times now.


Matt

 

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:19:09 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net>
wrote:

> I ran my Sonata up to 6,000 RPM several times during break-in


You go Matt! Maybe NASCAR is in your future!

I think Ed is right on target, and so are you.

Manufacturers used to struggle just to maintain tolerances and nice
round bores using the clunky non-computerized machines of the day. To
produce anything close to today's precision engines probably would
have taken all day just to manufacture 1 engine.

There's a principle in wear surface break in which the bulk of it (and
most critical part) occurs in a very short time. Assuming all the
parts are properly lubed, the first 25 miles of running probably
accounts for 50% of the break in. Each successive 10% of break in
takes longer that the previous 10%.

A chart may look like this. Hypothetical of course, but it illustrates
the way break in works:

25 miles = 50% break in
100 miles = 75%
250 miles = 87%
750 miles = 95%
1500 miles = 97%
5000 miles = 99% (A question for the ages: do you ever get to 100%?)

A chart on an engine of the 1950's would probably show 2x the mileage
at each step.

No wonder modern engines don't use a quart of oil before the first
change, a they commonly did in the 1950's.

-

Bob

 

Bob Adkins wrote:

> No wonder modern engines don't use a quart of oil before the first
> change, a they commonly did in the 1950's.

Actually, I've had a couple of auto engineers tell me that the greatest
reason for the reduction in oil use is the PCV system, not what gets
past the rings and value stems.

Matt

 

"Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
> A chart may look like this. Hypothetical of course, but it illustrates
> the way break in works:

> 1500 miles = 97%
> 5000 miles = 99% (A question for the ages: do you ever get to 100%?)

I guess I'm at 98% now. Just got back from another trip and it erased and
doubts as to why I hate the NJ Turnpike. It is a good run for breaking it a
car because you do get brief stretches of 75 mph, followed by long periods
of 10 mph. On the NY Thruway though, I was able to cruise nicely at 80 to 85
and the car felt very solid and in control.

As for you question about 100%, I guess that is a brief moment on the bell
curve from breaking in to wearing out.

 

80 - 85 on the NYS Thruway will get you a very expensive ticket plus an
insurance surcharge that will make the speeding ticket look like the $2.00
it takes to ride the subway.

"Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
news6EWg.11440$GR.1028@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
> "Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
>> A chart may look like this. Hypothetical of course, but it illustrates
>> the way break in works:
>
>> 1500 miles = 97%
>> 5000 miles = 99% (A question for the ages: do you ever get to 100%?)
>
> I guess I'm at 98% now. Just got back from another trip and it erased and
> doubts as to why I hate the NJ Turnpike. It is a good run for breaking it
> a car because you do get brief stretches of 75 mph, followed by long
> periods of 10 mph. On the NY Thruway though, I was able to cruise nicely
> at 80 to 85 and the car felt very solid and in control.
>
> As for you question about 100%, I guess that is a brief moment on the bell
> curve from breaking in to wearing out.
>

 

"El Jefe" <eljefe@37.com> wrote in message
news:OmEWg.5189$Lv3.838@newsread1.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> 80 - 85 on the NYS Thruway will get you a very expensive ticket plus an
> insurance surcharge that will make the speeding ticket look like the $2.00
> it takes to ride the subway.
>

I was going to try for 100 but it can get too expensive so I passed. At
80-, they could have stopped hundreds of cars. I was just going with
traffic.

 

My fiance' purchased a 2007 Sonata last week. When we drove it,
examined it and priced it, it was the clear choice winner over her other
favorites (Milan and Camry).

I told her to read the manual (which, btw, is the most complete, well
organized and best illustrated guide I have ever seen) and become
familiar with the break-in requirements. A couple days ago I asked her
about this and she said the manual said no break-in is required but
rather drive it like you normally do. She said there was a footnote
concerning recommendations while the car is still new such as no sudden
stops, variable speed considerations, etc. Basically, drive with common
sense at first but no mandates.

This shows that the manufacturer believes strongly in the quality of the
motor. And my fiance' tells me this motor purrs! I hope to drive it a
bit more myself but I have a 2006 Honda Ridgeline truck and it is pretty
hard to get me from behind the wheel of that baby!!

My fiance' (and I) are very pleased with her purchase and we were not
thinking "resale" value when the decision to buy was made. What is
resale value anyway? It does not come into play when you negotiate a
trade with a dealer as he will either low ball the trade, bring out the
wholesale price telling you that is the only way he can get rid of it,
or, make it up at the other end on the new car. Resale value also does
not come into play when you sell to a private individual because it all
depends on how bad you want to sell it and how bad the other guy wants
it. The dealer will offer less than what the book says and the private
party will usually pay a little more than what the book says. So I
would not worry about "resale" value too much, certainly not if you plan
on keeping a car over six or seven years.

MARTY

 

"Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in
news6EWg.11440$GR.1028@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t:

>
> "Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
>> A chart may look like this. Hypothetical of course, but it
>> illustrates the way break in works:
>
>> 1500 miles = 97%
>> 5000 miles = 99% (A question for the ages: do you ever get to 100%?)
>
> I guess I'm at 98% now. Just got back from another trip and it erased
> and doubts as to why I hate the NJ Turnpike. It is a good run for
> breaking it a car because you do get brief stretches of 75 mph,
> followed by long periods of 10 mph. On the NY Thruway though, I was
> able to cruise nicely at 80 to 85 and the car felt very solid and in
> control.
>
> As for you question about 100%, I guess that is a brief moment on the
> bell curve from breaking in to wearing out.

Just curious, but what part of the NJTP are you traveling? I guess from
about exit 7A up to 8A can be a bit brutal at times (I live about 10 miles
off 7A myself), but I rarely have any other problems on the road except for
the occasional traffic jam caused by an accident, or a hot woman changing a
tire :-)

Eric

 

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 13:29:03 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net>
wrote:

>Bob Adkins wrote:
>
>> No wonder modern engines don't use a quart of oil before the first
>> change, a they commonly did in the 1950's.
>
>Actually, I've had a couple of auto engineers tell me that the greatest
>reason for the reduction in oil use is the PCV system, not what gets
>past the rings and value stems.

True, but the PCV won't totally stop poorly sealing rings and
cylinders from losing oil.
-

Bob

 

"Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
>
> Just curious, but what part of the NJTP are you traveling? I guess from
> about exit 7A up to 8A can be a bit brutal at times (I live about 10 miles
> off 7A myself), but I rarely have any other problems on the road except
> for
> the occasional traffic jam caused by an accident, or a hot woman changing
> a
> tire :-)
>
> Eric

Heading South Sunday, the tie up was in the northbound lanes at the end, but
that did not bother me as I was heading the other way. Then at about 2
miles before the merge back to a single roadway, it was stop and go to just
below exit 7. I got off at 6 to the PA Pike

'
Coming back yesterday, it was 15 mph from 7A to the split (accident) and I
got off at 11. The GS parkway was very slow from a140 to 160. Then 287 was
backed up to the exit ramp so instead of taking hte Tappan Zee, I headed
north to Newburgh to cross to CT. Longer miles, but it moved.

I have to make the same trip again in two weeks. I used to do it
frequently, but I've not been back to the NJ/PA area for five years and
don't miss the ride. Actual driving time should be 5 hours, but yesterday
it was 7. My personal record is one Thanksgiving Wednesday of 9.5 hours.