I hate cars

I don't agree with that engine basics article. Think about it, you have a lot of people that say synthetic oil is only better for extended oil changes. Yet somehow it's too "slippery" for an engine to break-in lol. If a synthetic were that good at reducing wear you would never have any wear on an engine and it would clearly make dino obsolete. I've run synthetic right from the beginning. I use Redline because it's good to have moly in the oil for break-in.

Again, the only real thing that breaks is are the rings to cylinders. The piston skirts barely make contact with the cylinder and that's primarily only on the thrust side. The crown should make zero contact. Some use a plastic or polymer on the skirts that wears quickly upon first startup and "wears" to the correct clearance which I think is a BS band aid.

The journal bearings operate in the hydrodynamic region. The crank floats in the main bearings and the rods on the rod journals. There should be no contact between the crank and bearings so no break-in.

So back to the only real part that breaks in, does anyone really think an oil can stop a high spot from wearing down from two metal surfaces rubbing at a high rate of speed and pressure?

It's not a bad idea to take it easy for an hour or so. I've done leak down tests on a new engine and 30 minutes later after breaking the cam in, never seeing a load, and it went from close to 10% to the usual 1% or less. Of course the TL uses a roller valvetrain so no break-in there.

The hone quality and ring type will have a larger effect on breakin than the oil used.

flexer

The information is out there for anyone to read. NEVER use synthetic on a new motor.

I hate cars

You can read it as long as you don't believe it. My TL had syn on it's first oil change. GN has always had synthetic on first startup. Some new cars come with syn as factory fill. Countless friends and people I know fire them up for the first time on synthetic. It's an old myth that needs to die. Synthetic is no more "slippery" than dino just like ATF has no more detergents than motor oil.

I saw no data to back up the myth on that website. I saw no actual stories of rings not seating due to synthetic. It was just one guys opinion.

subinf

I've run synthetic since day one on every single vehicle I've owned and my family has owned. Zero issues.

Majofo

Credibility... falling.

I hate cars

Going......going.....gone.

To be honest I've used dino for break-in in the early days and I've used it before I went to a roller cam because a flat tappet cam break-in calls for 30 minutes in park and then an oil change. It would be a waste to run an expensive oil for 30 minutes and change it. Otherwise I run syn in every new engine. The thought that an oil can be so slippery that parts don't wear in is weird. I actually WISH that were true.

yungone501

iTrader: (4)

This a highly debated topic and quite honestly, one that's difficult to prove. As IHC said, on a j-series, only the rings are a "break in" component as far as proper seating goes. Factory synthetic oil fills are hard to dispute and this is what mostly made me stop arguing against it. I'm not for it, but not opposed either...to each their own. The one thing I still hold in opinion is the ring seating interval. Honda uses a two step honing process alongside frictionless rings however on their newer engines and I don't think breakin on rings matters much anymore. It's practically at the breakin once built.

flexer

All I want IHC is people to know both opinions. You always spew your information as fact. And my credibility was gone long ago. I know nothing compared to you majofo.

I hate cars

It's just the opposite. I'm always careful to say "I think" or state it's an opinion when it's an opinion. However the dino vs synth at startup is a myth. You can't possibly think that syn is so slippery that it won't allow an engine to break in. Like I said, I wish that were true. You know a lot but you tend to believe anything you read as long as it comes from google or a book. You question everything I say which is fine but you should also question your sources.

flexer

WE just read very different things. I read SAE engineering papers. And there you go again putting it out as fact stating that synthetic is more slippery is a myth. Go read engineering papers on synthetic about how because the molecules are engineered in a lab, they are all the same size. Because of the fact that all are the same size they are able to slightly reduce sliding friction forces. In "engine builder" magazine they did a back to back test of breaking in a motor with synthetic and one without. They found a difference of only 3% on a leak down test, and said that if the motors were ran more that they believed eventually the synthetic motor would break in enough to offer no difference.

For me that's enough. For a manufacturer I get it. 3%....who gives a crap. The dumb owner will never know the difference, and it will eventually break in by 20,000 miles anyway. But lets not be a total fool and think that because they come from the factory with synthetic that we should tell everyone on the forum how its a "myth". Some of us build how performance motors from and don't mind doing everything to get even 3% more. :-)

Majofo

How about some..
1) Common sense
2) Experience

Go read that..

KN_TL

iTrader: (3)

Got my pistons yesterday and just visually looking, there is more distance from the crown to the top ring. The small end width is also 1" which is larger than stock.

Unfortunately, I was called out of town on an emergency so I can't give you more details, but I am going to finalize my rod order with Pauter and order all the bearings and gaskets needed to put it all back together.

The last thing will be delivering the block to a machine shop for a bore check and hone.

I work around some of the smartest engineers and physicists in the semiconductor industry....and based on that, IHC, can you summarize your break in procedure for me? Theory is a great thing but in my experience, real life has more value.

flexer

majofo your answer is actually better than you think. Most of the time it doesn't really matter. The differences we are arguing about are null. The gains barely measurable at best. In-fact most of the time the stuff I read and talk about to you and IHC are more on the level of race car stuff. People looking for every last drop of performance. For me to be spitting it out on a Acura......family 4 door forum is probably ridiculous and therefor the childish comments you respond with majofo are actually more deserved than one might think. Lets use the example of the oil thing. So what if one company found a 3% change....does that mean it will be every time. No. So maybe the difference of using dino oil during break in is only a .5% of a change and basically un-measurable. This causing a real world guy like IHC to say: " its a myth". To me the conclusion I make from this is:
1. Even though stuff might be true, does it really matter if you can't measure it. Engineers are obsessed with efficiency yet need to realize sometimes it just doesn't matter
2. Does it really matter since we are modifying family cars not high dollar race cars?

So there it is. I think I have learned I should correct mistakes said on this forum but keep my responses short and sweet to avoid wasting time since in the end it doesn't matter.

Majofo

Discussion is fine, and you broke down the essence of the argument, although it's just a tangent of your original statement. Your original post regarding the topic was to NEVER use syn.

For years people spewed the myth that syn was going to detrimentally effect the engine if it was used for break-in. It's reasonable to believe that a non-additive dino will break an engine in faster. Is this true, maybe, is this desirable, not in my opinion.

But getting back to the point, there's nothing wrong with using syn. 1%, 3%, 0.5% is hooey, but you're right, the delta makes any gain negligible. Ask yourself how these percentages were determined. There are so many variables for break-in. Don't propagate the myth.

Majofo

Good post KN.. I work around the same types of folk, do we work together?

I won't say I am one of those folk because I'm always humbled.. and it's usually by experience.

maharajamd

iTrader: (1)

http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/...Oils_FAQs.aspx

Majofo

Mobil is such a whore

flexer

Its true. It was foolish of me. Like I said before I will just correct wrong statements, even if their gains are negligible and I will move on. I start with yours majofo. Your statement of breaking the motor in slower is better. Eventually the motor can no longer break in because the cylinder walls glaze, so your motor will always be down 0-3% of power or whatever. So your statement to just use synthetic on break in and get the same results is ignorant. You will be lower on power. Measurable.......maybe, then again, maybe not. The reality is manufactures don't care about the slight loss in power so they just say who cares and run synthetic. There I corrected your false statement and I will now move on. :-)

swoosh

iTrader: (5)

Majofo

I hate cars

Yawn. Do I need to point out the assumptions, guesses, blanket statements, and incorrect info? I'm hoping you realize what you did here and were just trying to win an argument. Maybe if I get bored enough at work I'll take a stab at it but probably not.

One question though, I don't remember you mentioning how many engines you've built, how many you've broken in with conventional and how many you've broken in with synthetic and the leakdown results for each setup.

I hate cars

I fire it up and vary rpm between idle and 3,000 rpm while getting it up to temp and checking for leaks. Varying rpm is more for cylinder wall lubrication since the cylinders are primarily lubed by oil flung from the rods and different rpms can throw a different oil pattern on the cylinders.

Once you drive it, drive it normally. You can take it up to stock full throttle power levels if you choose to. Don't be real nice to it and don't stay at redline for long periods of time. Other than that, just forget it's breaking in and drive it.

I've found that the leakdown results begin to improve after the first 30 minutes. Most of the metal that's going to be in the oil will be in there by now. I would change the oil after the first day and refill with syn or dino making sure it has moly. After the first oil change you won't see much metal anymore and you can follow your normal interval. On the basis of cost alone, you might use dino for the first day if you do the short interval.

More importantly than break-in is the final assembly.

You should have your pistons before the hone is done. Measure every piston and bore. Number each piston to the bore it's closest in size to, taking into consideration piston to cylinder clearance. Use the final hone precisely match each piston to each cylinder. You will find variations in diameter even in high end pistons.

Once the bore is sized to the exact piston that's going in it, you can file the ring end gap, keeping each set of rings with each cylinder.

Don't forget to check ring land to piston ring clearance. This is the cause many times for not breaking in or never sealing properly.

The cylinder finish should be whatever the ring manufacturer recommends. This final process is what will ensure a good break-in and long life much more so than the oil type used or how it's driven on breakin.

yungone501

iTrader: (4)

Flex, first off all, this forum is essentially meant for one thing: discussion of a similar hobby or passion...and for some of us, profession. I respect everyone's post if they're being informative and that's even if they combine that with negative comments or remarks. I never believe one person, one article or one study. Even if there are multiple studies performed, variables and or even unseen factors can hinder truth very easily. I'm probably one of the biggest researchers on the internet when it comes to engines in general but take everything I read with careful examination and if it seems logical, "file" it away as knowledge...not factual. Truth is, nobody here actually KNOWS anything. It's all knowledge we've gained from a combination of logic, experience and our ability to decipher the information with intelligent reason. From this, most of us then see it as a fact. But in reality, it's just a forum of opinions. Some better than others. Sure, IHC can come across as a douche face sometimes but the dude will type up a book in each post he makes and is willing to share both of his knowledge and experience. Wether it be for pride or for genuine concern, who knows. But one thing is for sure, it helps us and we should all appreciate that. Why? Because not many people are willing to be selfless enough to take 15-20 min to type that much and that's appreciable in itself...again, even if he is a douche face sometimes.


Anyhow, here's a new discussion for you guys and one that's without answer based off of the info I've gained. That is:

What would be better a better build in regards to making the most power off a turbo, a big bore short stroke engine or a small bore long stroke engine? Both engines having no limit to either displacement (long stroke) or rev limit (short stroke).

Personally, I'd like to think that there would be no actual winner here due to the limitless potential of displacement and rev potential. However, in reality, the displacement would more than likely be limited before an engines potential to rev. What I mean is this: say that X was the largest liter an engine could be produced in. This motor achieves X by having a decent sized bore but a massive stroke. Example could be (for simplicity purposes) 100mm bore and a 200mm stroke but only revs to 6000 rpms. Its a monster of torque at a track, sure but in regards to shear power its weak in comparison to the next engine. The long stroke engine has its place (generally for hole shot style racing) but would probably get its ass stomped on a road course or 40 roll punch because it lacks the power that a short stroke engine may have at higher revs. The initial punch will be hard and heavy but as the revs climb, so does distance between it and the lead the short stroke will take. Its a great motor but even as Carol Shelby once said, torque is what wins (drag) races. Now you have the short stroke motor that may take the exact opposite in bore and stroke: 200mm bore and a 100mm (roughly equating to the same displacement) but this beeyotch can rev 9000 before tapping out. There's an additional 3000 rpms on the engines potential to make power and again, this is a purpose built engine so it's going to be able to take advantage of that additional spin and thereby creating more power in the process. Sure, the thing may be a pig off the line but even with the right driver and drivetrain/launch equipment, may give the long stroke motor a run for its money given it can leave in its powerband without spinning like mad from the dig. So more than likely the gearing would have to be taller which would hurt the purpose of the engine but it's making tons of power up top compared to the stroker. Let's not even mention on a road coarse or from a roll.

That being said, you bring in forced induction. The volumetric efficiency of each motor just became supernatural. The stroker is making power down low and up top but the engines characteristics are still present. What will happen? And on the destroked engine, it just became a rabid beast. The exhaust pressure, temp and velocity at upper rev range is pushing the spool so heavy that it has a much greater ability to run a much larger turbo than the stroker...or does it? The stroker is pulling and pushing much more air/fuel PER STROKE than the other that will it too maximize the effects of a large compressor?

The whole thing will obviously come down to countless mechanical variables and other specifics but in vague attempt at rendering a fair match between the two engines, what engine would make the most in a forced induction application? Hmmm....

Throttle037

I have absolutely nothing to add to that post, Yungone. It was very well written and I felt compelled to applaud you for that.

flexer

yungon501,

It really is a matter of preference. Since its all about air flow anyway do you want to have big displacement to pull in the air or high revs to pull in the air. Personally I have built both and for a car mainly driven on the street displacement is much more fun. I should also add much easier to get big power out of and much less temperamental. When the revs climb everything just gets that much more stressed......but it is fun to rev something to the moon.
I'm doing a 3.5L build right now, but I wouldn't hesitate to do a 3.6 or 3.7L build in the future.

thisaznboi88

iTrader: (7)

Bump from the dead.. I read all 155 pages..

yungone501

iTrader: (4)

Maybe it was the shear awesomeness of my last post that killed the thread.

I still REALLY want to build that short stroke, 2.9L j-series then smack a huge turbo on it and boost her to the sky! Mmmmmm.....

Xavier Chance

I am DEFINITELY interested in A turbo for my J32A3 3rd Gen TL A-SPEC

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

^^^uhhh, last activity for Banelba was in 2013...His ship has sailed and you wont be getting a kit from that guy or any other person

If you want to turbo the TL, you'll need to pay a shop to fabricate the shit for you....OR learn to TIG weld and do the shit yourself.
You'll also need the ability to tune...if you cant tune your particular car...then there's no point in fabricating or turbo'ing the TL...cuz the shit will just blow up

Majofo

10 years later... still taking them orders boss

Majofo

To be fair, pass and them other dudes didn't know shit about tuning the J.. but how people spending 2-3x times the worth of their ride to make it FI.. trade for a golf or something with FI that actually has support. +Honda transmissions can barely hold stock power.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

some great used FI cars are coming to market!
grab a little beater or something and tune the heck out of it!
like what J did to poopoo brown.

If I werent about assets than liabilities, i'd already have a used FI car sitting in my driveway.

Acura TL Builder

I must have to do with the feeling you get when you get when you’ve researched, sacrificed, and put forth energy into something that there are less of than most supercars.

For example, this morning I took the Type-S out for a drive to Cars and Coffee. Usually I make my daily Folgers coffee, but wanted to splurge, so I got a Venti drip coffee at Starbucks and mixed it myself at the condiment section. You know, that area where Starbucks patrons come over to reach around you and throw out their trash. The cop looking into his computer looked up at me, but didn’t return my nod of respect.

As I walked back to my car with cheese danish and drip coffee in hand, I saw a ruby red 2018 Dodge Challenger drive by. I hopped inside my car and sped off towards the him. Luck was on my side as he got a red light.

As as I pulled up the light turned green and I put it into second gear, we accelerated together, but briskly, which tipped me off that He and his teenage son were down to race. I put it into third gear to not slip the clutch as much and waited for him to WOT, noticing he had a “HEMI” symbol on the side of his car.

As I saw his nose lift and gave it full throttle(though still not in my power band). Instantly, my car began to pull away. I finished third gear, and flashed my hazards twice.

Afterwhich, he passed me and got on the asses of the cars ahead of me as he weaved through traffic.

His teenage son in the passenger seat must have asked Dad why he’s paying so much for an slow car.

zeta

iTrader: (1)

That third gear has a nice suite pull to it, LOL.

Dude, you have to prioritize that clutch replacement.

Acura TL Builder

Your right. I’ll get started on it next this week. I’m trying to get as much yard work finished before the weather becomes too hot.

zeta

iTrader: (1)

How hot does it get up there in the Pacific Northwest again?!?

If you run into questions, with the clutch and need help, let us know.

Acura TL Builder

It takes a while but it warms up usually during July.

Im going to have a lot of questions.

Tem G

I love the look, and I want it just for the look and to read the gauge, because I am worried to mess around with the ECU, and engine. do you think its some i could do or do i need to take it to a techines. also how much it would cost me.

horseshoez

iTrader: (2)

To what are you referring and to whom are you responding?

Acura TL Builder

Its not gonna happen bro, so no use pretending like it’s going to.

If you had what it takes to FI a TL, your talk would walk.