Now and then but ONLY when its fully warmed up. Hit the rev limiter a couple of times- near me theres a moderately steepish bank with dual carriageway as it comes off a large roundabout. Does no harm to boot it in second up there. I always think it keeps things in working condition- if a modern engine couldn't rev reliably to its limiter time and time again do you honestly think any manufacturer would release it? The warranty costs would be horrendous to replace all those blown up engines.
|
|
|
Yes,I also run my car to the red line at least once a journey when it`s fully warmed up. I have actually hit the limiter once or twice.
IMHO it`s better to rev an engine up now and again than to mimse about at 4k,thus avoid a ridge forming on the bore.
We all know of engines driven by little old ladies that soon develop an appetite for oil if driven with brio by younger people.
|
cant see the point to be honest
i only red line cars that are going to the scrappies
|
I try to get the Prelude past 5300 most trips to give the VTEC a work-out and get up to about 7000 now and again. Rev limiter cuts in at 8300. Yeeeha!
On a more sober note, I've only seen 4k on the XJS so far. That was quite fast (and thirsty) enough...
|
|
Now and then on a warm engine. Sometimes to the red line, occasionally to the limiter which is about 200rpm past. Not concerned, I doubt the gauge is reading especially accurately at that point and the ECU knows what the limit is.
|
Note made not to buy any cars advertised on the classified section, tbh it's threads like these that make me want to buy new.
Next thing they'll be telling us that this new ''whizzo xtra viscol super semi liquol oil'' lasts for ever...cos the adverts told 'em so.
Why would you want to thrash your engine's for no reason, surely not all of those that do are 'barry's'?
Flippin hooligans the lot of 'em.
|
I've had it up to 5k once when somebody has annoyed me. I do try and clam down now instead of reving the pistons away.
|
|
|
As long as it's done with the engine oil at operating temperature, and of course of the right grade and within its recommended service life, I can't see how a brief flirtation with the red line does a modern, conservatively rev limited engine any damage at all. I've always done this on occasion, and often with 150+k mileages, and not once have I suffered engine failure, funny noises or any other ill effects. I don't do it cold, and all my cars are well serviced. I think these are the most important factors.
|
|
As DP says. I'm quite disappointed that my current car has the cut-out set at 6800, with maximum output at 6500. Don't hit the limiter that often - once or maybe twice on a local run, more often if x-country e.g M1 via Silverstone, towards Bicester:) Tempted to buy an old style Civic Type R to get to 8000 as much as possible, compatible with keeping points free. Still doesn't use much oil at 50,000 - quite young for an iVtec. Properly warmed and well maintained.
|
|
|
if its done at the wrong time with the wrong engine and there is a bit of float in gudgeon pin there is a possibility you will hit the top ring on the untouched bore and shatter it
its a recipe for disaster the more miles an engine does
or for cooking engines
you boys carry on,i dont mind
|
you boys carry on i dont mind
I agree. What's the point of revving the nuts off an engine? It's worse than a waste of time.
|
|
Lets think about this.... the manufacturers spend a fortune testing to destruction.
they run the engines at high revs, under test conditions.
they then decide where the red line should be....
Surely if running the engine at the red line caused damage, the red line would be lower?
Im not saying you should drive the length of the M1 at the red line of course....
edit....(a knackered engine, or one low of oil, or with old oil in, of course would be more likely to go bang!)
Edited by the swiss tony on 05/08/2009 at 23:17
|
Surely if running the engine at the red line caused damage the red line would be lower?
Ok, if...
Im not saying you should drive the length of the M1 at the red line of course....
Then why not?
|
|
Reving the engine what is the point? Err the lovely sound of a petrol engine as I accelerate faster than the Audi A4 which was taigating me for doing 29.8mph in a 30. It is all about making a 1.2 16v 64bhp engine making you smile as much as legaly possible.
|
Manufacturers regularly test engines at maximum revs for days on end.
Days on end.
I'd worry more about the ancillaries going pop than the engine itself.
If the cooling system is in good working order and the lubrication side of things is ok, most engines could quite safely travel up the M6 in 2nd gear at 60mph all the way.
You'd be stopping every 120miles for fuel however....
|
If the cooling system is in good working order and the lubrication side of things is ok most engines could quite safely travel up the M6 in 2nd gear at 60mph all the way. You'd be stopping every 120miles for fuel however....
Exactly!
and.... you would probably be deaf by the end....
BTW... which is longer, the M1, or M6?
|
I bet after 100miles, the relief you'd feel after shifting into 5th would be similar to that felt after being stuck on a bus for 4 hours following a 'gallon' in the bar.
M6 = 230 miles
M1 = 159 miles
Edited by Lygonos on 05/08/2009 at 23:36
|
I regularly take my A4 TDi to the red line and clear the exhaust out a bit! To be honest its a bit of a non event as all power dies at about 3,600rpm - somewhat off the 4,500 that it goes into the red!!!
I do use the revs a lot in my TF however - particularly as its the VVC engine it spins to the limiter at 7250 revs in no time and makes a fantastic noise as well in the process. I do make sure the oil temperature is above 80degrees before pushing it too far though!
Last month we went to Italy in it and I pushed it to just over 7000rpm in 5th gear for 10 mins or so on a quiet stretch of autobahn and did just over 120 miles in an hour which streched it a bit!
Some people would say I am not very kind to my cars but at the same time keep them serviced when they need to be and look after them- infact my TF gets an oil change every 6 months or 2,000 miles with the right spec. My Audi has done 160,000 miles now and dont think twice to pushing it on when I am in a bit of a rush!
|
>> Im not saying you should drive the length of the M1 at the red line of course.... Then why not?
Because, the redline is regarded as a maximum, and if you care to read (most) handbooks, they state NOT to operate at the redline for extended periods.
That said, as I was trying to say in my earlier post, there will be a safety margin... allowing for less than perfect operating conditions.
in the dim and distant past, I have allowed engines to exceed the red line whilst accelerating hard, and of those engines, I never had ANY give problems... (mostly motorcycles, although I had a tuned 1.1 Fiesta that regularly revved to 5800 (IIRC red line was 5400) and I put 35k on that with NO issues at all.)
|
An engineering investigation I've written about on here before;
Experiments on engine revving were done on an instrumented Granada. The engine speed when people changed up was recorded. The car was lent to members of the public who were not told about the purpose of the test. I think they were asked to report back about how they thought the car drove!
The results were presented as a graph comparing the change up revs and the performance curves of the engine. The engine was good for 6000 rpm, but few people went beyond 3500, and virtually none went above 4500.
They were upsetting data - engine designers, stress analysts, fluid dynamics engineers, and valve train engineers put huge effort into making engines deliver at high speed, and virtually nobody used it!
At the time, more tests were planned to measure the noise of the engine to see if there was something people heard that put them off, and made them think they had to change up - I don't know what the outcome of that extra work was.
The extra complication of multi-valve engines exists purely to allow the engine to breath better at high engine speeds. They are sportier engines, and there is no benefit to be had out of them unless they are revved.
|
The engine was good for 6000 rpm but few people went beyond 3500 and virtually none went above 4500. They were upsetting data - engine designers stress analysts fluid dynamics engineers and valve train engineers put huge effort into making engines deliver at high speed and virtually nobody used it!
Ah, the "designers" were actually being shown what the real world is actually like and not what they thought it was... and were suitably disappointed... there's a shock... perhaps if more car "designers" actually lived in the real world we may have some cars that were actually practical rather than trying to look flash... then the drivers of a certain "good in the city" car could actually see out of the back ok!
Car Designers... pah!
|
>>Car Designers... pah!
Yes, I'm sure you would do a much better job.
|
Yes I'm sure you would do a much better job.
On the basis that I'd actually look at the practicalities of how people use their cars such as getting in and out, loading and unloading goods, and ride comfort (think low profile tyres) amongst many other things, then yes I would... and so would many others, probably you included, NC!
Designing a beautiful looking sports car, no I wouldn't...
Sometimes I wonder if those that design normal family cars think they are actually designing that sports car, its the only way I can explain narrow loading bays, high lips, poor reward vision, the list goes on in what is supposed to be a practical family car...
|
>>think they are actually designing that sports car
It could be that your blame is misdirected.
It would be a bold manufacturer indeed who would ignore the handling and power bias of most motoring journalists and TV presenters.
I fully agree that rejecting the wet dreams of these fools would give cars which ride better, and which needed less stiff bodyshells, hence easing access, and improving vision.
In terms of engine use and misuse, if people did use more of their engines capability, we would not be in the situation where most engines are ridiculously oversized - the power required for cruise being much less than the power available for lazy high gear acceleration.
|
I had a tuned 1.1 Fiesta that regularly revved to 5800 (IIRC red line was 5400) and I put 35k on that with NO issues at all.)
>>>>>>>> sorry but i dont agree
the 1100 fiesta engine was a classic case of breaking rings if thrashed
the rings were 65 quid a set,
done loads
and its hardly an ideal engine to tune
,in fact its a waste of time engine to tune,you should have gone for the 1300 ohv lump
at least these had a proper crank and a workeable head
me thinks you tease
|
the 1100 fiesta engine was a classic case of breaking rings if thrashed the rings were 65 quid a set done loads and its hardly an ideal engine to tune in fact its a waste of time engine to tune you should have gone for the 1300 ohv lump at least these had a proper crank and a workeable head me thinks you tease
1300 OHV?... naw they needed LOADS of money thrown at them to improve performance.
the 1.1 Valencia was a peach when tuned, using the Ford RS kit.
the kit comprised of a twin choke Weber, on a special manifold, and a 4 branch exhaust.
fitting those upped the power by 20% (according to Fords own figures)
the Valencia had a 3 main bearing crank, which meant they picked up revs very quickly!
I used to upset 2.0 Capris quite often, which was fun!
I did make sure the car was regularly serviced, and as I said it NEVER gave any problems.
FYI i still have a copy of the RS catalogue listing the kit, and others that Ford did, including the 3.0 Capri triple carb set up.........
|
sorry dont like the 1100
forgot its called a valencia though
im chucking a 2 part driveshaft out for one of these tommorow should i keep it and frame it?
off a mk1 fezza i think?1300 sport? cant remember its been in storage 15 years+
|
im chucking a 2 part driveshaft out for one of these tommorow should i keep it and frame it? off a mk1 fezza i think?1300 sport? cant remember its been in storage 15 years+
2 part off an Mk1? deffo a 1300.... the sport with the 1.3 was only a trim level, not tuned at all....
exactly same power as a 1.3 Ghia....
BTW, RS did a parts list to make a Mk1 1.6 BEFORE the XR2..... using a federal block..... not many people knew that!
Stick it on Ebay... theres still a few 1.3s about......
Edited by the swiss tony on 06/08/2009 at 00:16
|
i did
i was an avid reader of cars and car conversions
i also tried to convert an escort 11 engine to fwd but failed
re the driveshaft-- no interest on selling on ebay,unfortunately i would rather send it to china,i see enough idiots without having hippies round too
Edited by bell boy on 06/08/2009 at 00:20
|
i also tried to convert an escort 11 engine to fwd but failed
you would have done... the blocks were quite different..5 bearing crank in the RWD, ie a Kent, not a Valencia.. the Fiesta 1.3, and XR2 ohv although also Kents, where different to rwd hence using the federal block in the RS mod....(and XR2) although some people did manage to drop BDA'a into Fiestas.... mostly for rally cross, but I did know of 1 road going one.....
there was one Magazine that told people to tune a Fiesta 1.1, to use a manifold off a 1.3.... totally impossible! as the Kents had Siamesed ports on cylinders 2 and 3, the Valencia had separate ports... (better gas flow - one reason they were easier to tune!)
|
i took a 2 litre ohc pintod mk 1 fiesta in swap from a farmers boy many years ago,the shell was rotten to the core but the car was road legal so i took it for a drive,it spun wheels in every gear it was manic.i sold it to a hillbilly
|
|
|
|
|
|
