Sho vs fusion sport

[krewat]

On the one hand, anyone notice the Fusion didn't even have 80 miles on it yet? Hardly broken in at all...

On the other hand, can't stand the Fusion styling to be honest. My Wife can have one if she wants

 

[gimpy]

On the one hand, anyone notice the Fusion didn't even have 80 miles on it yet? Hardly broken in at all..

And...?

If automobiles had performance that improved after mileage was put on it, there would be 18 wheelers with a trap speed in excess of 400mph.

 

[krewat]

Both my SHO's showed improvements in performance after a few thousand miles were put on. Both my 4.6L's, and my V10 did the same thing.

Not BIG improvements, I'm not talking about 4-5 times the max speed like in your example, mind you, but improvements nonetheless.

The entire vehicle, wheel bearings, seals, tranny internals, engine bearings, cylinder bores, rings, everything, has just a tiny bit more friction before it's really broken in. Even the brakes drag a little until they get all nice and shiny

 

[gimpy]

I understand your examples and feelings behind it.

However, contrary to (I guess popular) belief, with how things are machined and in spec to within thousands of an inch, a 'break in' time would/should occur within the first few miles.

Longevity wise, sure it's a good idea to not hammer the ever living **** out of a new vehicle and to rather take it easy for a while.

It may be my luck (although I'm doubting it), but coming from a person who bolted a Vortec to a new Mach-1 with under 1,ooo miles and seeing 0 problems, I'll debate my own statement.

Not debating your statement on how things need to be worn in, per-say. However, would it mean that a NASCAR has performance gains as a race goes on? Or perhaps a top-fuel car (which has its engine rebuilt after every pass) see improvements as well?

Sure a person's car may seem different or 'come more alive' after *** miles, but I'm willing to bet if a car hits the rollers at 100 miles, then again at 2000 miles, if there are any changes, they won't be substantial or even noticeable...except on the dyno graph.

 

[krewat]

Not to belabor the point, and maybe we should take it somewhere else, but ... race cars are notorious for large clearances, low ring tension, etc. and not lasting much longer than a single race before having to be rebuilt Either way, my butt-dyno knows the difference, and I've seem a tenth or two come off a 0-60 time and time again. Oh well, to each his own.

 

[SilverSH0]

I understand your examples and feelings behind it.

However, contrary to (I guess popular) belief, with how things are machined and in spec to within thousands of an inch, a 'break in' time would/should occur within the first few miles.

Longevity wise, sure it's a good idea to not hammer the ever living **** out of a new vehicle and to rather take it easy for a while.

It may be my luck (although I'm doubting it), but coming from a person who bolted a Vortec to a new Mach-1 with under 1,ooo miles and seeing 0 problems, I'll debate my own statement.

Not debating your statement on how things need to be worn in, per-say. However, would it mean that a NASCAR has performance gains as a race goes on? Or perhaps a top-fuel car (which has its engine rebuilt after every pass) see improvements as well?

Sure a person's car may seem different or 'come more alive' after *** miles, but I'm willing to bet if a car hits the rollers at 100 miles, then again at 2000 miles, if there are any changes, they won't be substantial or even noticeable...except on the dyno graph.

Comparing a very specific built engine (from a race car) to one designed for all sorts of environments is in no way relevant.

I guess my question would be if there's no change to the engine, why is there a definitive, substantial, and well documented increase in gas mileage as the engine breaks in? Lets drag on the engine internal components would result in more power.

Some would even argue it's better to hammer the ever living **** out of a new vehicle with 0 miles to make it last longer. The reason is because they no longer run break in oil and run at least semi-synthetic oils from the start. To break it in and have better seals that will last longer, you need to either have more friction (change out for break in oil) or more force (driving it hard) to wear it in.

 

[SHOdded]

Empirical evidence supports the theory that there is breakin, or adjustment, miles, as it is common for vehicles to show improved mpg over time when compared to brand new off the lot. Yes, I am talking about gasoline vehicles built in the last 5 years, and yes, in the Ford family. I am sure there is some adjustment in driving style, but it can even take a few thousand miles for the mpg to settle in. All this before the first required oil change. I think this varies between model lines though.

The more probable question should be: was the PCM broken in before being tested for publication. As we all know, the adaptive nature of the computer makes it difficult to compare back to back with different driving styles.

 

[rubydist]

gimpy, you are wrong on this one. there is a significant period on modern cars during which performance and mileage will improve. for example on the Ranger that I bought new in 03, it took almost 10,000 miles to get to maximum gas mileage and during that time performance also improved.

I've talked about this in other threads before: there is no break in procedure for most modern vehicles because of the precision manufacturing that you discussed, but there is clearly a break in period.

 

[SHOdded]

That's why I highly recommend an early oil change fist time around. Maybe at 1000, then 4500, then 12000 miles. Normal afterwards.

 

[rex aultman]

I have looked at the Fusion Sport and the new Continental........they seem ok but I very happy with what I have.