break in hints?

[cpurvis]

Slomo, 5 times, every hour or two of operation? Seems excessive, and I am curious where does the 5 comes from.
Why not 7 or 3? (I have a fear of even numbers).

Could you share your thinking and explain why a still working filter needs to be swapped out after
an hour or two of operation? I you make a good case for it. I may give your method a shot. Although my mower already
has 3 hours on it, so it could be already shot...

Do you expect the already trapped contaminants in the filter media are able to work loose and come out again
and contaminate the oil stream, unless you remove the filter? Afaik, they are safely embedded in there and cannot go anywhere.

Or, do you expect such a massive number of wear metal particles to be shedded that they totally clog up the filter during a single mow?

I Think of the filter as having holes/little pockets in filter media. Once a contaminant particle , metal or otherwise is captured in there, it is
held there. As long as you have enough empty "holes" left, the filter continues to do its job without imposing undue
restriction.

A filter not only continues to do its job, it does a better job of filtering as it catches debris. With the exception of a clogged, bypassing oil filter, a new filter is actually doing the poorest job of filtering; the very best job of filtering it can do will be at the end of its life.

You are not doing your engine any favors by changing your oil any more frequently than the manufacturer recommends, especially during break-in.

 

[coder]

Born2Mow, it is not clear what question you refer to when you say "The basis of your question". Would you mind clarifying?
If you refer to any Questions I asked of Slomo above, I was practicing the Socratic method.

I do not doubt that the product design and engineering team knows a lot more about the product than the layman.
But they do not necessarily share their wisdom with us, esp. the rationale why they recommend what they do.
If they decide to disclose some apparently useful information, such as a spark plug torque spec I am all over that,
and I am thankful.

Unfortunately, the motivation of those who tell us what products we should use, is often tainted by profit motive.
For example if they happen to make or rebadge an oil filter, lubricant, air filter, etc. they would naturally suggest that we should use
their products. But, color me cynical, could there be a profit motive here?

Our interests are not necessarily aligned. I want my cars, lawn equipment etc. to last until I decide that I am done with them, which is typically a long time.
Manufacturers are more into planned obsolescence. The cult of "good enough", rushing me into throwing away the old, and buying something new.

A Korean auto maker who shall remain nameless, is famous for recommending their OEM filters for their cars, while refusing to disclose the filtering efficiency
and dirt holding capacity of these filters. IMO there are better 3rd party filters available, with published specs
(Mobil-1, Fram UG/XG Synthetic media filters, to name a few). If I blindly "trust the engineers who know best", I would miss out
on the goodness of the aftermarket filters.

There is no substitute for doing our own research and critical thinking. I will gladly bow to rational argument or useful data,
but blind faith? I seem to have some BS-sense, which sometimes get tripped. A little voice that says "this does not make any sense to me".
In those cases, I tend to question, engage in some research, seek the opinion of the community.

 

[coder]

Well put, Cpurvis, thanks.

I do follow the manufacturer's suggestions, unless they suggest something that contradicts common sense, (or when I see an apparent ulterior motive).
I respectfully put forward that I do not expect manufacturers to be interested in prolonging their product's useful life much past the warranty period.
And that is a pretty low bar. I think we can do better.

If I was merely shooting for lasting through the warranty, minimalist maintenance standards should suit me just fine.

It is not that they do not know. It is more that they do not care, (not to the same the extent a hard nosed user would care).