Nissan-Navara.net banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

Zool

· Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Well I’m a new member, good site guys & nice to meet you all (been reading various posts and getting a 'feel' of some posters personalities etc) - and about to pick up my Navara Aventura 07, in March, from Chorley Nissan nr Wigan Lancs.

Anyone got any running in tips (or things to avoid) whilst running in.

I’m told avoid motorway runs for 1,000 miles - sounds right.
Is the 37mpg a true achievable fig or optimistic dealer spiel?

Regards, Zool
 
Not sure on the running in etc. but 37mpg sounds a tad optomistic to me, depending on the type of driving you do, but I do various trips in a day (motorway, city, stop start, A roads, B roads and Off road) I normally get between 30 - 33, and from reading some others posts on here, I'd say it was about normal, but of course, this will change if you've got heavy boots!

Matt

P.S. Welcome
 
fuel consumption

now clocked up 12000 since last June, averaged 29 to the gallon, mixed driving but mainly A roads.
The service manager at Chorley Nissan say's forget the running in, the vehicle adapts to your driving style etc.
 
I've never understood why they put the info about running in periods into the user manuals when a lot of the time it seems that some dealers tell customers to ignore it.

Why would they put it in the manual for no reason?
 
New engines are generally run in at the factory before building the vehicle.

Running in strictly isn't nescessary anymore for engines, but the rest of the vehicle still needs it. e.g Gearbox,Brakes etc.
It would pay to be kind to the engine and not to overload it for the first 1000 miles also.

The reason for avoiding motorways is that you are runing the engine at a constant speed and running in requires various engine speeds.

Most people can't avoid motorways if you want to get from A-B fast.

Fuel consumption on an Euro 3 model would ave between 32-33 mph and the Euro 4 (yours) should be around 28mpg depending on driving style.
 
Make of this what you will

http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm

Some of it does make sense. So I followed the advice on my old car. (It was a company car so I had nothing to lose ;) )

Later I went on a dyno day with some fellow civic type-r owners.

Mine was completely standard run in using the above method, and the 3 other cars had induction and exhaust kits, but had been run in by the book. The results all ranged between 210 and 213 bhp, mine being 212.

Three options here.
1) The thousand odd the others had spent on aftermarket stuff was pointless
2) The motoman method made a 5% difference, as did the kits
3) The dyno was optomistic, and nothing we did had any effect.

Of course it is a very limited sample size. 5% is sort of within margin of error (standard the Civic was rated at 200bhp). The lowest rated car was actually bought by an OAP that just wanted the "best" civic, and had been pootled around for the first 6 months of it's life before the guy that went on the dyno day had bought it.

Did have to say that the dyno guys were p!ssing themselves laughing when my car scored the same as the others :)

A bit vague but unless someone funds testing this on a few hundred cars, in a controlled and scientific way, we will never know.


Si
 
First impressions are dangerous. I haven't read it all but here's my thoughts.

I have no doubt that there are power gains to be had but at what expense to longevity of the engine.

These are motorcycle engines which rev up to 15000 rpm and the tolerences on bike engines as far as I know are finer than car ones.

Put this into context, a modern day 1000cc motorcycle engine will produce about 170bhp and rev to 13000 rpm and have a top speed of 180mph.

To get this sort of performance your in Ferrari territory.

The engine will require substantial maintenance throughout it's life as it is highly stressed. e.g oil change every 4000 miles and valves done every 24000 miles and probably a full engine rebuild around 40000 miles.

Car engines are getting to 18000 intervals without even an oil change.

The nav doesn't rev anywhere near this and it's a Turbo diesel.

It wouldn't be me :wink:
 
"Add on" components need to be chosen carefully, especially if you are going to add more than one. I learnt this to my cost by adding a pair of Race Cans, K&N Filter and Dynojet kit to a bike.

I then took it to a Dyno and tried to tune it.... I gave up with a compromise after something like 40 odd runs.

What I should have done is add one component and Dyno it to get a benchmark then add another and repeat the process. Once you have changed two variables, it is very difficult to figure out which is working and which isn't. :wink:


Its difficult to compare petrol fuelled bike engines with diesel car engines.

Bikes are generally light weight (compared to a two ton car) have completely different requirements.
 
Discussion starter · #10 ·
i remember onwe of the motorcycle mags in the early nineties having an arguement about the necessity of 'running-in' engines and they did a comparison test whereby they had 2 brand new bikes (GSX-R750's if i recall) and one was run in by the book, as per manual, slight RPM increases as mileage is met .. .. .. .. .. they other bike, on the other hand, left the showroom leaving a long black '******' and lived life near the red-line with little thought to mechanical sympathy.
6 months later the two were compared , on road, track , side by side and on the dyno.
The 'thrashed' bike was apparently in a much healthier state - with more Torque, BHP and driveability.
Side by side it performed above the carefully treated bike.
LESSON: Have fun - stop worrying, me thinks.

So RSV, eh Duggie ?

Opted for the 'Armadillo back', as oposed to a solid lift up - wise move or will i be slitting my wrist with the rattles over every bump (the cab does seem very well soundproof though).
Zool,
Big Black Aventura, Big Black TL1000s, Little Black Kitten
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts