[Sven59]

Originally Posted by hashtag

If your ZL1 is not modified & grenades you will be getting a new motor under warranty!!! GM Declining a motor claim because you failed to break in engine 😂

They denied it for a catch can.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[hashtag]

Originally Posted by Sven59

They denied it for a catch can.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

That would be modified! I emphasize the word non-modified engine. GM will blame any modification for failure

[Sven59]

Yes it would be modified, but a catch can? If they can get you for a catch can, they can probably get you for not following the break in.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Sven59

Yes it would be modified, but a catch can? If they can get you for a catch can, they can probably get you for not following the break in.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

The first step towards that would be to suspect abuse based on the evidence of failure. They can tell if an engine has been used properly or not. Then, if they wish to pursue such a claim of "abuse during break-in" they would need significant amounts of data to prove that. It would be a very hard sell. Much harder than pointing at a non-factory part, for instance....


I think it is important to note that the break-in is not ever presented in such a way, that it claims the engine will blow up or be damaged unless followed...but rather: the engineers claim that following the 1500mi break in procedure will result in the best possible long-term performance in terms of hp retention, oil consumption, and fuel economy. There's a subtle difference between the two.

So nearly every time this gets debated...both parties are correct...but the only thing that following the break-in harms is a little bit of patience.

[hashtag]

I spoke to the tech at work. These are the guys that give the feedback to the engineers @ GM through reports & Pictures that the service advisers take. There is a procedure and Investigation process. Oil level - - maintenance history. modifications are looked for as well. At no time is Engine Breakin part of the investigation process. If engine blows with 50 miles on the odometer it is absolutely considered defective. Not the driver though ��

[Sven59]

Originally Posted by hashtag

I spoke to the tech at work. These are the guys that give the feedback to the engineers @ GM through reports & Pictures that the service advisers take. There is a procedure and Investigation process. Oil level - - maintenance history. modifications are looked for as well. At no time is Engine Breakin part of the investigation process. If engine blows with 50 miles on the odometer it is absolutely considered defective. Not the driver though ��

It makes sense that they wouldn't be looking at the breakin. Al O
Said they could tell if you installed a CAI. If they can tell that I would think they could tell some other things too. Say a person blew up the engine with 500 miles, they diagnose the failure and they see the person bumped up against the rev limiter 300 times and the engine failed at redline? The only reason I even bring it up is there are people who will take others word when they say drive it like you stole it. Just like the catch can, everyone is doing it so it must be ok, right?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Rusty35]

Originally Posted by speedyman

LOL! Seriously? I could care less. Who the hell drives a car like this for 300,000 miles, get real.

So your theory is , Don't worry about the recommended break in procedure, just be sure to dump the car before you start having problems?

[speedyman]

Originally Posted by Rusty35

So your theory is , Don't worry about the recommended break in procedure, just be sure to dump the car before you start having problems?

I have a an old friend who has been an engineer at Ford. He was deeply involved with their SVT program for years and had a Ford GT as his company car at one time. He laughs at "breakin" guidelines. These engines would not be warrantied the way they are if they were that fragile. Ya wanna baby your car for 1500 miles then enjoy. Interesting to note that the LT4 in a Z06 has 500 mile suggested breakin guidelines where the same engine in a Camaro is to babied for 1500 miles, ridiculous.

[Rusty35]

Originally Posted by speedyman

I have a an old friend who has been an engineer at Ford. He was deeply involved with their SVT program for years and had a Ford GT as his company car at one time. He laughs at "breakin" guidelines. These engines would not be warrantied the way they are if they were that fragile. Ya wanna baby your car for 1500 miles then enjoy. Interesting to note that the LT4 in a Z06 has 500 mile suggested breakin guidelines where the same engine in a Camaro is to babied for 1500 miles, ridiculous.

I was just just thinking these engines would be warrantied for a lot longer if they were not so fragile.

The question is does the recommended break in help the the vehicle live longer with less problems.
You say it doesn't help, then you say you just dump the car long before it matters.

[Rusty35]

Originally Posted by speedyman

I have a an old friend who has been an engineer at Ford. He was deeply involved with their SVT program for years and had a Ford GT as his company car at one time. He laughs at "breakin" guidelines. These engines would not be warrantied the way they are if they were that fragile. Ya wanna baby your car for 1500 miles then enjoy. Interesting to note that the LT4 in a Z06 has 500 mile suggested breakin guidelines where the same engine in a Camaro is to babied for 1500 miles, ridiculous.

I forgot to mention,
I have an old friend who was an engineer for GM, he says the engineers at Ford are not all that smart.

[Infern0]

If it were a completely black and white issue of failure or not by break-in there would be a far more prominent warning, and perhaps even disclosure and agreement at the time of purchase. There would also be an indisputable method for GM to determine the break-in process that was or wasn't followed.

Last time I saw the manual I thought it still said recommended break-in procedures. Again, if it were that black and white of an issue would be a lot stronger language than that. A recommendation is not a "thou shall not" statement.

[Evolvedx27]

Originally Posted by Rusty35

I forgot to mention,
I have an old friend who was an engineer for GM, he says the engineers at Ford are not all that smart.

LMAO

[archer1965]

Originally Posted by speedyman

Ya wanna baby your car for 1500 miles then enjoy.

I followed the break-in to the letter; no big deal. I hope to have this car until I die and will it to one of my kids. So this one might get over 100,000 miles, I sure hope so
That 72 CJ5 in my sig pic has 98,000 miles. It will also go well over 100,000K

[Rusty35]

Originally Posted by Infern0

If it were a completely black and white issue of failure or not by break-in there would be a far more prominent warning, and perhaps even disclosure and agreement at the time of purchase. There would also be an indisputable method for GM to determine the break-in process that was or wasn't followed.

Last time I saw the manual I thought it still said recommended break-in procedures. Again, if it were that black and white of an issue would be a lot stronger language than that. A recommendation is not a "thou shall not" statement.

Exactly right, these cars are going to last for the length of the warranty pretty easy no matter how you break it in.
It up to you to figure out how to keep it going after that.