Is there any actual proof?

[jackka]

I am picking up my new Camaro next monday and I still haven't been able to decide whether to do a hard break in or a soft break in.

Is there any actual proof of the advantage of a hard break in that is permanently unattainable with a soft break in? (ie. dyno number differences between a soft break in and a hard break in after the soft break in has had enough miles on it )

I would do a hard break in and I believe that the car rapidly gains more power during a hard break in.

But the fact that engine engineers from GM, Ford, and Honda in a car magazine article have discredited any significant gain from a hard break in method kind of makes me think that Darin's method of break in is simply speeding up the process that would happen eventually with a soft break in anyway.

The only way to prove that a hard break in has a real advantage over a soft break in and not simply speeding up the break in process would be to compare dyno results with a car fully broken in with the soft method.

I was wondering if anyone has actually seen or felt such differences in performance.

[maxhunter]

I am thinking it will be hard to get one person or shop to answer your question...if they believe that doing a break in one way is ultimately better than another why would they break in a motor in the completely opposite way and risk being proven wrong? Proven with their own results......
I will be watching to see if you get a real answer to this. Asking HOW TO....wax your car, break in your engine....paper or plastic. You are going to get a group of folks that swear one way is the best...and others that swear that you are wasting your time.

I know what has worked for me for over 30 years of engine building and new motor break ins. I don't have dyno numbers to prove anything. I will keep my opinions to myself....but I will be watching to see if anyone can put up some proof either way.
GOOD LUCK with this