what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((

VF

houndman@phonom.net wrote:
> what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
> sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
> picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
> I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
> down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((

I'd stay on the main road and not give it
a second thought.

We've never really worried about break in
other than being meticulous about the first
couple oil changes. Moderately hard running
should seat the rings better than babying
it.

The last new car we bought was my wife's WRX.
Since it had been on the lot as a demo for
a couple hundred miles, we can only guess
how it had been driven (:

AFAIK the procedure continues to be the same.

I would jump on the interstate but would change the speed up and down
from the 40 or so interstate minimun speed all the way to 70 or so,
avoiding a constant speed.

I continue to think that the initial 1000 miles are critical for all
components, including pistons, bearings, rings, cylinder, transmission,
etc etc., so I would baby it as specified in the owners manual. The
surfaces of all materials that slide over something else will be lapped
during the break in period.

Congrats on your new car

Good luck

houndman@phonom.net wrote:
> what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
> sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
> picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
> I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
> down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((
>
> VF
>

On 23 Aug, 20:21, AS <do...@spame.com> wrote:
> AFAIK the procedure continues to be the same.
>
> I would jump on the interstate but would change the speed up and down
> from the 40 or so interstate minimun speed all the way to 70 or so,
> avoiding a constant speed.
>
> I continue to think that the initial 1000 miles are critical for all
> components, including pistons, bearings, rings, cylinder, transmission,
> etc etc., so I would baby it as specified in the owners manual. The
> surfaces of all materials that slide over something else will be lapped
> during the break in period.
>
> Congrats on your new car
>
> Good luck
>
>
>
> hound...@phonom.net wrote:
> > what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
> > sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
> > picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
> > I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
> > down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((
>
> > VF- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


It's Not Sube Yet, till I pay for it, and get it.

What is strange, I am planing on upping my Ins coverage. With an AWD
car? Guess I'm not that confident, but maybe because I plan to
disconnect the ABS and air bags.))

VF

houndman@phonom.net wrote:
> On 23 Aug, 20:21, AS <do...@spame.com> wrote:
>> AFAIK the procedure continues to be the same.
>>
>> I would jump on the interstate but would change the speed up and down
>> from the 40 or so interstate minimun speed all the way to 70 or so,
>> avoiding a constant speed.
>>
>> I continue to think that the initial 1000 miles are critical for all
>> components, including pistons, bearings, rings, cylinder, transmission,
>> etc etc., so I would baby it as specified in the owners manual. The
>> surfaces of all materials that slide over something else will be lapped
>> during the break in period.
>>
>> Congrats on your new car
>>
>> Good luck
>>
>>
>>
>> hound...@phonom.net wrote:
>>> what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
>>> sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
>>> picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
>>> I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
>>> down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((
>>> VF- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> It's Not Sube Yet, till I pay for it, and get it.
>
> What is strange, I am planing on upping my Ins coverage. With an AWD
> car? Guess I'm not that confident, but maybe because I plan to
> disconnect the ABS and air bags.))
>
> VF
>
Owner's manual should tell you - if you can read. You don't seem too
bright to me
Frank

houndman@phonom.net writes:

> You must like air bags and ABS. Not Me!!

I'm sure all the guys who dislike ABS think they can brake more
effectively in an emergency situation.

Betcha only, oh, I'll be generous--maybe 10% actually can.

--
Todd H.
2001 Legacy Outback Wagon, 2.5L H-4
Chicago, Illinois USA

houndman@phonom.net wrote:
> On 23 Aug, 21:37, Frank <frankdotlogullo@comcastperiodnet> wrote:
>> hound...@phonom.net wrote:
>>> On 23 Aug, 20:21, AS <do...@spame.com> wrote:
>>>> AFAIK the procedure continues to be the same.
>>>> I would jump on the interstate but would change the speed up and down
>>>> from the 40 or so interstate minimun speed all the way to 70 or so,
>>>> avoiding a constant speed.
>>>> I continue to think that the initial 1000 miles are critical for all
>>>> components, including pistons, bearings, rings, cylinder, transmission,
>>>> etc etc., so I would baby it as specified in the owners manual. The
>>>> surfaces of all materials that slide over something else will be lapped
>>>> during the break in period.
>>>> Congrats on your new car
>>>> Good luck
>>>> hound...@phonom.net wrote:
>>>>> what's the latest theory on breaking them in? Last I remember was no
>>>>> sustained high speeds for 1K mi, or something like that. May be
>>>>> picking up a car 120mi away, and the Interstate would be quicker, but
>>>>> I'm thinking secondary roads, and maybe stopping and letting it cool
>>>>> down often. Don't need no head gasket blowing.(((
>>>>> VF- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> It's Not Sube Yet, till I pay for it, and get it.
>>> What is strange, I am planing on upping my Ins coverage. With an AWD
>>> car? Guess I'm not that confident, but maybe because I plan to
>>> disconnect the ABS and air bags.))
>>> VF
>> Owner's manual should tell you - if you can read. You don't seem too
>> bright to me
>> Frank- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> DUH... gota a manuell I can peruze mo on. Ty idn't ive me oen wen I
> ent to ook at the ars. I have factory shop manual. Will that tell me?
> Didn't think so. ..
>
> You must like air bags and ABS. Not Me!!
>
In my Forester manual it's under Driving Tips - Chapter 8. My car's 4
years old but calls for keeping rpms under 4,000 and not driving at
constant speed for first 1,000 miles.

I do like airbags and ABS. Airbags in my first Forester may have saved
me from being hospitalized when dingbat in PT Cruiser hit me head on.
All I had was bruise from seat belt but she had to stay in hospital.
OTOH both airbags going off probably contributed into car's being
totaled which is what happens when repair estimate approaches blue book
value.

On 23 Aug 2007 19:05:16 -0500, subaru@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:

>houndman@phonom.net writes:
>
>> You must like air bags and ABS. Not Me!!
>
>I'm sure all the guys who dislike ABS think they can brake more
>effectively in an emergency situation.
>
>Betcha only, oh, I'll be generous--maybe 10% actually can.


If ABS wasn't an advantage, it wouldn't be illegal in certain racing
bodies. <G>

On 23 Aug, 22:56, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
<DwightSchr...@DunderMifflin.com> wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2007 19:05:16 -0500, sub...@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:
>
> >hound...@phonom.net writes:
>
> >> You must like air bags and ABS. Not Me!!
>
> >I'm sure all the guys who dislike ABS think they can brake more
> >effectively in an emergency situation.
>
> >Betcha only, oh, I'll be generous--maybe 10% actually can.
>
> If ABS wasn't an advantage, it wouldn't be illegal in certain racing
> bodies. <G>

If ABS is illegal in racing, does that mean it is an advantage, and
they do they want drivers to crash into each other??)) I Think they
might not feel it is better, or they would all have it. Wonder why
FWD models are made to into RWD in race cars? What about air bags.??
Surviving 200mph crashes without them, and a 5 or 6point harness
sounds safe to me.

I put seat belts in an old car when they started coming out in new
ones. I used to add all the police options when buying a new car, like
brakes and suspension parts, and opted for oversized brakes with no
power assist, because the brake boost made them too sensitive. Thank
god that cars are now made to have more feel in steering and brakes,
and ride firmer, which I find more comfortable, and less fatiguing.

VF

houndman@phonom.net wrote:
> On 23 Aug, 23:05, sub...@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:
>> hound...@phonom.net writes:
>>> You must like air bags and ABS. Not Me!!
>> I'm sure all the guys who dislike ABS think they can brake more
>> effectively in an emergency situation.
>>
>> Betcha only, oh, I'll be generous--maybe 10% actually can.
>>
>> --
>> Todd H.
>> 2001 Legacy Outback Wagon, 2.5L H-4
>> Chicago, Illinois USA
>
> In 45 yrs of driving I only hit one car, a young girl who hit her
> brakes, and looked like she was going to stop at a 1 way stop sign,
> but came out behind a parked car right in front of me.
>
> I always went for the biggest brakes available on a car, and tires
> that gripped in the rain, or I drove accordingly. I passed on buying a
> 84-86' Mustang SVO that I am still looking at 20yrs later, because
> Ford put GYear Gatorbacks on it, and they were terrible in the rain.
> After owing a car that had Great brakes, I bought a set of cheap pads,
> because the car was old, and it never stopped so well. Now I want pads
> that wear out fast, and stop me car lengths shorter when applying the
> pedal like the harder pads need. First time I stopped with them at
> speed, I stopped 6 lengths shorter than I used to. They don't last as
> long but Sure DO Stop.
>
> Coming off an off ramp of an interstate that was slushy, but iced
> from braking I doubt that ABS would have helped, Since I Read that
> they Don't stop as fast on ice which I Thought was their Main
> advantage. With a car braking like mad in front of me, because a car
> ahead was sideways, I had NO traction, and turning the wheel did
> nothing. I had a choice of trying to grind the fender of my new car
> off on the medial strip, or taking out the 55gal drums narrowing the
> lane. I opted for the drums and inched over onto unslicked snow or
> sleet, and luckily didn't have to mess up my car, because the cars
> ahead got moving.
>
> Give me BIG brakes, and Good tires, and I'll take my chances, AND I
> Like to be able to Lock the wheels When I want to.)) We can debate
> whether hard pads against metal rotors that generate gas, will stop a
> car faster than 3-5K lbs pushing down or rubber tires grinding against
> asphalt or concrete. Since I keep reading that Non ABS cars will stop
> shorter, I think grinding rubber is better. Being able to steer while
> braking doesn't sound like much advantage when rollovers are higher
> with ABS, and with non ABS you can choose.
>
> VF
>

And how was that statistic qualified ??

It can also be said that more cars with 4 wheels rollover that those
with 3 wheels. Even though 3 wheels would appear to be more unstable.