Opinions please, mototuneusa.com break_in_secrets

Entire world: "ride smooth during break-in period"
Him: "ride hard during break-in period"

Hmmm... Who to believe?

Probably wrong but............

I have always rode them hard right from the start. Up to operating temp first of corse. Found it to be very good on two strokes. Longer life on the rings with the run it hard program but dont know about the 4 strokes. Thats the way I did my last two bergs and the first lasted longer than many others of its vintage (2001) and my new one too soon to tell.

I'm no engine builder/tuner and it's been a while since I visited the mototune website -but when I did read it it seemed that much of what he was providing as evidence to prove his case leaned quite far towards anecdotal rather than empirical.

I'm sure that manufacturer break-in procedures are probably on the conservative side, but I have a strong suspicion that the power a bike ultimately makes has more to do with manufacturing tolerances (things like cam timing variances etc) than with how it was broken in.

For the race engine builder to say that because he breaks in motors in hard they make more power -well it seems to me that given the fact that they've (hopefully) taken the time to dial in the motor it will make more power. The hard break-in is likely a necessity - who has time to break in a race motor over a couple of thousand moderate kilometers after each rebuild?

Comparing wear of parts between 2 bikes seems a bit futile unless said bikes were subject to the same conditions, loads and maintenance (all variables identical except for the variable being tested for) over the duration of the experiment.

I take the middle road (I don't wring the piss out of it from new, but I don't lug it around either) and I haven't had any complaints or issues so far. I believe it's a somewhat logical approach, but at the end of the day it's still just my opinion - and worth exactly what I charge for it

I'm not for a second going to argue that a hard & fast break-in is the wrong approach (I really haven't the expertise to do so) but I will happily argue that anything I've seen to date presented as "evidence" to support it really isn't quality evidence

Personally,I've always had better luck with machinery I've broken in "reasonably"hard than with those where I've gone right by the manufacturers recomendations both from a performance and longevity standpoint.Maybe just coincidence but then again,maybe not.

My guess is that its a trade off either way. I think that a hard break in period is probably best to fully seat the rings but not so great on the bearings. Conversely an easy run in would be better for the bearings but not great for ring seating.

If the above is factually correct I would opt for better bearing life, which I have.