Why do people want a high redline?
#2
I Am Rotary Powered
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, my reason is that it is just a lot more fun. Nothing like a smooth, high revving engine screaming at super high revs. Makes you feel like a champ, and the sound is just heavenly. That and the fact that anybody and his dog can make an engine that can rev to 5-6K RPM, but it takes some serious engineering knowhow to make an engine rev to 8-9K RPM, be smooth doing so, and not break either. There are only a few companies out there with that kind of knowhow.
Low end grunt is nice, but the high revving engines are just way more fun.
Low end grunt is nice, but the high revving engines are just way more fun.
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
high redline = well balanced engine = smooth feel
It also means there is a greater performance potential and has the ability to use a higher ratio differential = quick acceleration.
Oh yeah and it looks cool too
It also means there is a greater performance potential and has the ability to use a higher ratio differential = quick acceleration.
Oh yeah and it looks cool too
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Suwanee. Ga
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a high redline you don't have to shift as early, so you can stay in gear longer and make each gear shorter for better acceleration without lossing top speed.
#5
Originally posted by Mazda Family
With a high redline you don't have to shift as early, so you can stay in gear longer and make each gear shorter for better acceleration without lossing top speed.
With a high redline you don't have to shift as early, so you can stay in gear longer and make each gear shorter for better acceleration without lossing top speed.
Real reason for people liking high revving engines is that they are usually high output per liter engines that weight much less than V6 engines with comparable output... lots of people preffer smaller/lighter cars...
You could actually say that people like less weight in a sports car and only way you can get that from naturally aspired engine is by having high rev engine... its not the best solution really if you want to go fast
Last edited by spwolf; 04-30-2002 at 05:14 PM.
#6
however, its much cheaper to build light vehicle with 1.8-2.0 engine with 180-200hp than V6 with 220 hp...
F1 cars rev up to 16k-20k but have really low low torque, around 200 pounds... but its a built for track so it works great...
I would personally take Nissan's 250 HP V6 over 220 HP Type S (comparable power to weight ratio) for road use
F1 cars rev up to 16k-20k but have really low low torque, around 200 pounds... but its a built for track so it works great...
I would personally take Nissan's 250 HP V6 over 220 HP Type S (comparable power to weight ratio) for road use
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by spwolf
um, with a high redline, you need to shift all the time, because powerband is usually lower
um, with a high redline, you need to shift all the time, because powerband is usually lower
What you may be trying to say is that cars with high redlines often require a downshift when you suddenly want rapid accelaration from cruise. This is misleading and so often bullshit. Yes an S2000 feels horribly Civic like when booted from 2000rpm in fourth. But I can pull over 0.45g longitudal acceleration from 2000rpm to 7750rpm in fourth, which gives me more than enough acceleration for day-to-day purposes. I do gain about 0.1g by downshifting but I only need that for racing and only an idiot wouldnt downshift from 4th for a race anyway.
So what do I gain by having an 8000rpm redline? Well I can run a 4.11:1 diff which mean that I get more ACTUAL (not corrected) torque at the wheels than any low-revving domestic ever made here even though they have more flywheel torque. The result of this is that I have more acceleration through the power band and therefore my car is faster.
#8
no, what i wanted to say is that at 3k, S2000 feels like Civic... to keep it fast, you will need to keep it in narrower rpm range than if you were driving an powerful V6 or V8
now, you are arguing that it doesnt matter anyway since you dont need it to be fast all the time... why not?
based on your post, one would have to wonder why they still make V6 & V8 engines
now, you are arguing that it doesnt matter anyway since you dont need it to be fast all the time... why not?
based on your post, one would have to wonder why they still make V6 & V8 engines
#9
Originally posted by spwolf
um, with a high redline, you need to shift all the time, because powerband is usually lower
um, with a high redline, you need to shift all the time, because powerband is usually lower
Originally posted by spwolf
no, what i wanted to say is that at 3k, S2000 feels like Civic... to keep it fast, you will need to keep it in narrower rpm range than if you were driving an powerful V6 or V8
no, what i wanted to say is that at 3k, S2000 feels like Civic... to keep it fast, you will need to keep it in narrower rpm range than if you were driving an powerful V6 or V8
The s2000 has a range of approx 2750 rpm (5750 - 8500) of 90% peak torque or greater. The vtec's first peak in the torque curve does not hit the 90% mark and the torque actually drops before slowly rising again at 4500 rpm again. This is why the s2000 has had a reputation of being "peaky".
Actually, the most amazing thing about what we have seen come out about the renesis is that it will have "90 percent of peak torque available at 3250 rpm". Assuming that the torque curve doesn't go up and down like the vtec s2000 one, this would mean that there will be 5500 rpms of 90% or greater torque in the Rx-8's powerband!!!!
Given the flat torque curve of rotary engines, would it be accurate to describe an engine with powerband of 5500 rpm with 90% or greater torque as having a "lower powerband"?
Would a driver have to "shift all the time" on such a car? Such statements are what cause others to say: WTF?
Brian
#10
we will not know that until we see nice hp and torque graphs...what we know now is that it will have less torque than RX-7... much less since it is naturally aspired, so having relativly small amounts of torque, even at 90% (beauty of renesis) from 3250 rpm doesnt equal to lots of torque
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
#11
Hi Spwolf,
I believe that the assumptions here are all yours? One would think that on the rx8forum, a discussion on high rpms would not only specifically refer to piston engines where you have to shift all the time because of the narrow powerband but might also refer to the rotary which is known for its wide and flat powerband.
Alear asked why some people want a high redline, rpm_power responded with his personal experience about why he likes his car with a high redline and you ask a ridiculous rhetorical question about why v6 and v8 engines are even in existence?
It appears that you are the one assuming that nobody is aware of the advantages of having a v6 or v8.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) believe that having vtec or vvti put out more power than a v6, v8, v10, or v12.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) are arguing that supercars should have 4 cylinder vtecs.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) think that the only criteria for a car is a higher rpm.
False assumptions, begging the question, rhetorical questions and red herrings. You try to throw everything in there when someone doesn't agree with you huh?
Brian
I believe that the assumptions here are all yours? One would think that on the rx8forum, a discussion on high rpms would not only specifically refer to piston engines where you have to shift all the time because of the narrow powerband but might also refer to the rotary which is known for its wide and flat powerband.
Alear asked why some people want a high redline, rpm_power responded with his personal experience about why he likes his car with a high redline and you ask a ridiculous rhetorical question about why v6 and v8 engines are even in existence?
It appears that you are the one assuming that nobody is aware of the advantages of having a v6 or v8.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) believe that having vtec or vvti put out more power than a v6, v8, v10, or v12.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) are arguing that supercars should have 4 cylinder vtecs.
It appears that you are the one assuming that someone (rpm_power or I?) think that the only criteria for a car is a higher rpm.
False assumptions, begging the question, rhetorical questions and red herrings. You try to throw everything in there when someone doesn't agree with you huh?
Brian
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by spwolf
no, what i wanted to say is that at 3k, S2000 feels like Civic... to keep it fast, you will need to keep it in narrower rpm range than if you were driving an powerful V6 or V8
no, what i wanted to say is that at 3k, S2000 feels like Civic... to keep it fast, you will need to keep it in narrower rpm range than if you were driving an powerful V6 or V8
90% torque lower cut-off 2000rpm
90% torque upper cut-off 4500rpm
operating range: 2500rpm
1993 JDM-only 13b-rew 230hp (redline 8000 rpm)
90% torque lower cut-off 3250rpm
90% torque upper cut-off 6750rpm
operating range: 4500rpm
call that narrow?
Originally posted by spwolf
now, you are arguing that it doesnt matter anyway since you dont need it to be fast all the time... why not?
now, you are arguing that it doesnt matter anyway since you dont need it to be fast all the time... why not?
Originally posted by spwolf
based on your post, one would have to wonder why they still make V6 & V8 engines
based on your post, one would have to wonder why they still make V6 & V8 engines
-pete
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by spwolf
we will not know that until we see nice hp and torque graphs...what we know now is that it will have less torque than RX-7... much less since it is naturally aspired, so having relativly small amounts of torque, even at 90% (beauty of renesis) from 3250 rpm doesnt equal to lots of torque
we will not know that until we see nice hp and torque graphs...what we know now is that it will have less torque than RX-7... much less since it is naturally aspired, so having relativly small amounts of torque, even at 90% (beauty of renesis) from 3250 rpm doesnt equal to lots of torque
Originally posted by spwolf
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
Originally posted by spwolf
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Originally posted by spwolf
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
-pete
#14
well guys, putting japaneese high revvin engine together with european V6/V8 engines is hardly possible...
having 4 cyl engines that rev high brings all kind advantages is all what i was saying, but one of those advantages is not that the car is more usable...
having 4 cyl engines that rev high brings all kind advantages is all what i was saying, but one of those advantages is not that the car is more usable...
#15
Originally posted by Jerome81
Well, my reason is that it is just a lot more fun. Nothing like a smooth, high revving engine screaming at super high revs. Makes you feel like a champ, and the sound is just heavenly. That and the fact that anybody and his dog can make an engine that can rev to 5-6K RPM, but it takes some serious engineering knowhow to make an engine rev to 8-9K RPM, be smooth doing so, and not break either. There are only a few companies out there with that kind of knowhow.
Low end grunt is nice, but the high revving engines are just way more fun.
Well, my reason is that it is just a lot more fun. Nothing like a smooth, high revving engine screaming at super high revs. Makes you feel like a champ, and the sound is just heavenly. That and the fact that anybody and his dog can make an engine that can rev to 5-6K RPM, but it takes some serious engineering knowhow to make an engine rev to 8-9K RPM, be smooth doing so, and not break either. There are only a few companies out there with that kind of knowhow.
Low end grunt is nice, but the high revving engines are just way more fun.
#16
Originally posted by spwolf
we will not know that until we see nice hp and torque graphs...what we know now is that it will have less torque than RX-7... much less since it is naturally aspired, so having relativly small amounts of torque, even at 90% (beauty of renesis) from 3250 rpm doesnt equal to lots of torque
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
we will not know that until we see nice hp and torque graphs...what we know now is that it will have less torque than RX-7... much less since it is naturally aspired, so having relativly small amounts of torque, even at 90% (beauty of renesis) from 3250 rpm doesnt equal to lots of torque
you can say "wtf" as much as you want, but if you are trying to compare conventional (not renesis since we dont know its details yet) vtec or vvti engine to V6, V6 (and V8 and v10 and V12) is far more superior when it comes to sheer power...
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Acura NSX, updated for 2002, peaks at 7100 rpm... while Toyota Celica GTS peaks at 7800 rpm, based on your assumption, is GTS a better engine somehow?
#17
what are you talking about? lotus 4cyl engines are not powerful or great, well first of all they are not lotus engines (122 hp old school rover engine, brrrr)... but lotus chasis is sooo beautifully light that it doesnt matter that you dont have much power... which is what I said anyway, they are good cuz they are light, not cuz they are so powerful
#18
Originally posted by spwolf
what are you talking about? lotus 4cyl engines are not powerful or great, well first of all they are not lotus engines (122 hp old school rover engine, brrrr)... but lotus chasis is sooo beautifully light that it doesnt matter that you dont have much power... which is what I said anyway, they are good cuz they are light, not cuz they are so powerful
what are you talking about? lotus 4cyl engines are not powerful or great, well first of all they are not lotus engines (122 hp old school rover engine, brrrr)... but lotus chasis is sooo beautifully light that it doesnt matter that you dont have much power... which is what I said anyway, they are good cuz they are light, not cuz they are so powerful
"I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-) ".
My point was there are super cars powered by 4 cylinder engines. Going further back in time you can find even more, such as several Ferrari's in the sixties. If you want to direct your search to race as well as road cars, take a look at some turbo era F1 engines, such as the race winning Brabham BMW of the 1980s.
#20
I Am Rotary Powered
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually until about 5 years ago or so, the super Lotus, the Espirit, was powered by a turbo 4 cylinder.
The Elise is also a 4 banger, probably makes about 120hp or so. Goes to 60 in about 5 seconds flat. Light weight is better
The Elise is also a 4 banger, probably makes about 120hp or so. Goes to 60 in about 5 seconds flat. Light weight is better
#21
Originally posted by Jerome81
Actually until about 5 years ago or so, the super Lotus, the Espirit, was powered by a turbo 4 cylinder.
The Elise is also a 4 banger, probably makes about 120hp or so. Goes to 60 in about 5 seconds flat. Light weight is better
Actually until about 5 years ago or so, the super Lotus, the Espirit, was powered by a turbo 4 cylinder.
The Elise is also a 4 banger, probably makes about 120hp or so. Goes to 60 in about 5 seconds flat. Light weight is better
#22
Originally posted by spwolf
umm, actually super lotuses have V8 engines... cheap lotuses have 4 cyl engines ;-)
umm, actually super lotuses have V8 engines... cheap lotuses have 4 cyl engines ;-)
#24
Originally posted by spwolf
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
I cant believe that ppl are tyring to argue this... did you ever see super car or expensive sports car with 4 cylinder high revving vtec engine? no ;-)
Originally posted by cshepley
Try telling the owner of an S4S that they have a 'cheap' lotus and see how they respond.
Try telling the owner of an S4S that they have a 'cheap' lotus and see how they respond.
Originally posted by spwolf
but at the same time, esprit's 4 cy turbo peaked out at 6,500 rpm, so it is hardly part for this discussion ;-))
but at the same time, esprit's 4 cy turbo peaked out at 6,500 rpm, so it is hardly part for this discussion ;-))
Or were you trying to back off and change the subject by pointing out that OLDER Esprit turbos had a lower hp peak and that you didn't want anybody to talk about this anymore?
BTW, the S4S (made for 1995, 1996) that cshepley was talking about had 300 bhp @ 7000 rpm. If you want to, you can look up what the redline was for that car (7500?). Please let us know exactly what is the lowest redline that you want to discuss in this thread so we don't confuse you anymore. ;-)
Brian
#25
Okey, this went way too far...
4 cyl engines are my gods, no matter how high they rev or what kind of car they are in, or if they have an turbo or two... they are simply the most beautiful pieces of engineering ever made.
I submit to them...
... now, I was trying to point that reason people use "high revving engines" (which in most of other car discussions would be 4 cl engines (except for mazda's rotary), peaking above 7,000, redlining above 7,500, mostly naturally aspirated) is because they are lighter (especially) and cheaper than V6 and V8, etc, engines... I got hit by comparisons to Buick V6, Ferrari's, Espirt Turbos (Lotus has spicey version of Elise that revs actually really high, but its pretty pointless), as if I was saying that those 4-cl engines suck.. no, they dont suck, however if you want power and torque, you dont get 4 cly (even with turbos)... even Lotus knows this, thats why they finally made V8 for the Esprit.
Now we might have been sidetracked before, but there it is... it just didnt come to my mind that if some1 asks "why do people like high revving engines", they are thinking of Ferrari's or M3's
4 cyl engines are my gods, no matter how high they rev or what kind of car they are in, or if they have an turbo or two... they are simply the most beautiful pieces of engineering ever made.
I submit to them...
... now, I was trying to point that reason people use "high revving engines" (which in most of other car discussions would be 4 cl engines (except for mazda's rotary), peaking above 7,000, redlining above 7,500, mostly naturally aspirated) is because they are lighter (especially) and cheaper than V6 and V8, etc, engines... I got hit by comparisons to Buick V6, Ferrari's, Espirt Turbos (Lotus has spicey version of Elise that revs actually really high, but its pretty pointless), as if I was saying that those 4-cl engines suck.. no, they dont suck, however if you want power and torque, you dont get 4 cly (even with turbos)... even Lotus knows this, thats why they finally made V8 for the Esprit.
Now we might have been sidetracked before, but there it is... it just didnt come to my mind that if some1 asks "why do people like high revving engines", they are thinking of Ferrari's or M3's