Jump to content

High RPM's - Good or Bad for engines?


Mike.g

Recommended Posts

My co-owner and I have a friendly disagreement about running an engine in the higher RPM range. Lets assume for this discussion the engine is in good working order with proper temps and fluid levels.

 

  • Opinion 1. Run the engine up to the red line (but short a few hundred from floating valves) is fine for an engine. Major wear and failure comes from when you have higher loads, not high rpms.
  • Opinion 2. Only run it up to 80% to red line. So if red line was 7000rpm, shift at 5600rpm. By not maxing out the Revs every shift you extend the life of the engine.


We are just looking for opinions and feedback on this subject since it is related racing. Thanks!!!

Edited by Mike.g
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mike.g said:

My co-owner and I have a friendly disagreement about running an engine in the higher RPM range. Lets assume for this discussion the engine is in good working order with proper temps and fluid levels.

 

  • Opinion 1. Run the engine up to the red line (but short a few hundred from floating valves) is fine for an engine. Major wear and failure comes from when you have higher loads, not high rpms.
  • Opinion 2. Only run it up to 80% to red line. So if red line was 7000rpm, shift at 5600rpm. By not maxing out the Revs every shift you extend the life of the engine.


We are just looking for opinions and feedback on this subject since it is related racing. Thanks!!!

If it’s a good engine it will run a very long time if you keep it within factory redline and haven’t done anything bad to it (turbo). Run that sucker full throttle right up to redline!

If you are prone to mis-shifts, keeping an 80% shift point will nullify most money shifts and save the engine that way. 

Edited by enginerd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on my small sample size of experience, high rpm (within factory redline) without added power doesn't mean impending doom for an OE engine. Valve springs and lifters have been items which have failed for us in different motors, but now we replace those and don't know what will fail next. Bottom ends have not flown to pieces for us, but we try to run stuff widely regarded as reliable. I am not picking on any makes, but there are some engines that seem less happy with the use case.

 

Interesting links on the topic:

bbobynski  Offline 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 79
Detroit, Michigan
It is a bit off topic but I will share this anecdote if you are worried about breakin on a new production engine.

We did a program back in the mid 90's to determine what sort of engine "hot" tests worked best and to investigate a number of other things. The "test" was done thru Jack Roush's engineering group and contracted on their dynos. It involved taking 150 brand new, 300 HP Northstar engines that had never been fired and running a 2.5 hour hot torture test on them with a post test teardown. The engines were stone green at the start of the test. They were each installed on the dyno and the coolant and lube systems hooked up. Coolant was preheated to 255 F by the test cell equipment and oil was preheated to 285 F. This was done with 50/50 DexCool/water and conventional motor oil...not synthetic. The engine was fired and IMMEDIATELY put at full throttle where it ran at 6000 + RPM at full load with the oil temp controlled at 285 to 300 F. It was harder to get the dyno equipment to live than anything else....LOL.

There were no engine failures at all. None. All engines were torn down and judged to be in "like new" condition on all parts. No scuffed pistons, no damaged bearings, nothing. In fact, it was difficult to tell that most of the bearings had even been used as they absolutely looked brand new even under magnification. To say that it was eye-opening to a lot of people was an understatement. The Roush dyno techs thought that we were nuts and would stop after the first few engines blew up....LOL.

The only caveat here, is that each engine had the oil routed thru the oil heater and oil cooler equipment which necessitated separate filtration so that any debris generated during the first few minutes of operation that might have bypassed the filter otherwise running at 6000 was caught by the external filtration (it was needed to protect the cooler/heater heat exchangers if there was a problem) so the test indicates performance of fits and finishes of a brand new engine and oil capability at those temps and such but doesn't perfectly replecate a car run immediately to full throttle, 6000 RPM and held there for 2.5 hours..as if you could do that somewhere....LOL.

I was the development engineer in charge of this test so I saw it happen, saw the engines at teardown and compiled the results. Anyone concerned about stabbing the throttle during break in can rest easy. Trust me.   (above from this thread: https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/129895/2 )

 

https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/hsx/2009/10/Run-for-the-record---Saab-9000-and-900/2130431.html

 

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1118232_all-srt-products-undergo-24-hours-of-racetrack-endurance-testing

 

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/1779600/1

 

 

We live in a really nice time to be racing used cars... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

High engine speed is going to result in a sorter engine life, but alot depends on what you allow to happen to the engine and how it is made. One some engines you can go a long time. 

 

Most race engines will have a total time at high rpm spec for valve springs. Valves seat surfaces and lifters in some engines have a similar issue. On highly stressed motors once the exhaust valve loses enough contact area (needs valve job) the inability to transfer heat can cause failure at high rpm\load.

 

Some engines with powdered metal rods will have problems with lots of sustained time at high rpm. I think alot depends on piston speed, 7k on a 2.5" stroke vs a 4" stroke makes a huge difference in engine lower end part life. 

 

Don't get it hot, use proper oil control devices, use good rebuild parts and start with a decent motor and it is possible to go seasons on the same motor at readline (for well designed motors). I would argue many high rpm failures we see are oil control related, more so than anything else.

 

 

Edited by Black Magic
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our E30 has never had an issue due to high RPMs.  We shift at ~6k +/-.  It has had many issues due to coolant not staying inside or water pump not pumping and I believe we had two cracked heads (cracks were there prior to racing, not caused by racing).  We have never had a broken rocker or other RPM related issue, but I believe that is typically due to over-rev, not sustained 'high' RPMs.


There is definitely more stress on the internal components at higher RPMS, but I would say for the M20 (and probable all of the BMW M engines) you can regularly shift near factory redline without a massive decrease in life expectancy.  I do not know if that applies to other makes/models, but I would think that as long as you are shifting before factory redline, it would be oil/water issues that would kill most motors before RPM-related failure.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of engine testing under controlled conditions showed that engines live quite nicely as long as they're kept within range on temp and rpm and fed oil with no air in it.

 

Cosworth Vega engine testing:

"Chevrolet require all engines to survive 200 hours at full load. The Cosworth lasted over 500 hours. For a clutch burst test, Cale Wade revved the engine to 9,400 rpm under its own power without damage to clutch or engine. Three cars, in three different configurations, resumed mileage accumulation in September 1974."  

 

It's up to the car builder and the drivers to manage/control those conditions. :)

Edited by mender
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

iv'e been running a stock motor with 109,000 +/-  on it when dropped it in 4 years ago and i'm banging off the rev limiter all the time with no issues. 

change the oil after every event. used mobile 1 for a while now i use valvoline 20w-50 for endurance. 1990 miata 1.6

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stock used engine + auto trans = redline every shift with no over revs, 37ish races with 3 engines have displayed one common failure mode, slow degradation of ring seal manifesting as blow-by/reduced max hp, next failure point has been rod bearings but they usually go glitter and can be changed before crank damage.

 

Results will vary depending on inherent weakness of chosen unit.

Edited by Team Infiniti
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ad3adman said:

iv'e been running a stock motor with 109,000 +/-  on it when dropped it in 4 years ago and i'm banging off the rev limiter all the time with no issues. 

change the oil after every event. used mobile 1 for a while now i use valvoline 20w-50 for endurance. 1990 miata 1.6

 

Same.  junkyard 1.6 , 4 years.  over 80 hrs.  turbo,  >200whp .  engine lives between 4500-7000.  Theoretically, lower revs mean less wear.  Practically, in a race car, it's a non-issue as life expectancy will more likely be cut short by ripping off a cooler/rad or a wreck/mis-shift.  In other words, nice discussion to kill time but inherently meaningless for an amateur race car.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We trashed a used D16 in less than 2 hours at our first race. Spun a bearing. The block original to the car had a hole in it where a rod exited prior to our purchase. While it's probably safe to say that everyone's experience may vary, I'll never touch a D-series Honda again and we keep our B18 below 6K.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, karman1970 said:

We trashed a used D16 in less than 2 hours at our first race. Spun a bearing. The block original to the car had a hole in it where a rod exited prior to our purchase. While it's probably safe to say that everyone's experience may vary, I'll never touch a D-series Honda again and we keep our B18 below 6K.

We've been running our B18B at 7000 rpm so far ... and I won't mention what I did at Portland! :o

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, endura said:

 

Same.  junkyard 1.6 , 4 years.  over 80 hrs.  turbo,  >200whp .  engine lives between 4500-7000.  Theoretically, lower revs mean less wear.  Practically, in a race car, it's a non-issue as life expectancy will more likely be cut short by ripping off a cooler/rad or a wreck/mis-shift.  In other words, nice discussion to kill time but inherently meaningless for an amateur race car.

 

id like to know more about your turbo setup. i have some points to spend. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ad3adman said:

id like to know more about your turbo setup. i have some points to spend. 

 

stock junkyard engine.  coolant reroute/proper ducting at bumper mouth.  Essentially a FM turbo system/MS2.  GT2860RS.  12-14 lbs boost  depending on ambient temps.  water holds @190/oil @240.  Done enough 3 hr enduros, in summer, have no doubt powertrain would survive a full 8 hr event.  Fuel economy is another matter, however.  It would not be competitive unless fuel cell was added. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for everyone replying. I didn't want to say who's opinion was who above, but I was the one who always wanted to run with the limited RPM. But it looks like most people side on the side of that it will not hurt a car to run up to the red line.

 

I know from my personal experience when I ran our car at Road America. Our redline is 6500. I shifted out at 5000, and had the fastest lap time of the weekend. Plus once that saved me during a missed shift when trying to go to 5th gear I went up into 3rd gear, it reved up to mid 6000rpm before I was able realize I screwed up and went into the proper gear. So I had extra room for error with the lower rpm shifts :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee
2 hours ago, Mike.g said:

Thanks for everyone replying. I didn't want to say who's opinion was who above, but I was the one who always wanted to run with the limited RPM. But it looks like most people side on the side of that it will not hurt a car to run up to the red line.

 

I know from my personal experience when I ran our car at Road America. Our redline is 6500. I shifted out at 5000, and had the fastest lap time of the weekend. Plus once that saved me during a missed shift when trying to go to 5th gear I went up into 3rd gear, it reved up to mid 6000rpm before I was able realize I screwed up and went into the proper gear. So I had extra room for error with the lower rpm shifts :)

  just cause the engine will turn 7200 to the chip doesn't mean its making power up there .  I would shift at 5800 ,noticing the tach moving quickly to that point and like waiting for paint to dry from 6 to red line .  Have a teammate that bangs the chip constantly guess who is much faster , of course its me .

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kept under factory redline. most motors will live just fine.  An old timer once told me there are so many RPM's in an engine, revving higher just uses them up faster.....

 

I think the real issues have been touched on:

1) Fuel economy

2) Are more RPM really any faster?

 

As to fuel economy, running at lower RPM will use less fuel.  Are more RPM really faster?  Depends on the motor.  Looking at HP & Torque curves, often the answer is "no".  Depending on the transmission/rear end, often shifting well below redline better utilizes the HP/Torque and saves on fuel.  Lots of RPM sounds cool, but I will shift a little lower, save a bit of fuel, and go just as fast or faster than my co-drivers most days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, craig71188 said:

.  Depending on the transmission/rear end, often shifting well below redline better utilizes the HP/Torque 

 

I thought this was debunked by the fact that torque multiplication and landing higher in the next gear makes a car faster.  The whole S2000s are fast without a high peak torque number because they rev higher than most other cars deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually shift a couple hundred under redline as there isn't much to gain in the upper range.  The only time I really run it to redline is to avoid a quick shift.  But shifting at 80% is just leaving stuff on the table, and since we are racing...:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 12:45 PM, theblue said:

 

I thought this was debunked by the fact that torque multiplication and landing higher in the next gear makes a car faster.  The whole S2000s are fast without a high peak torque number because they rev higher than most other cars deal.

 

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 2:01 PM, wvumtnbkr said:

Tractive force versus engine speed will tell you where to shift for optimum power delivery.

That would be where the dyno sheet is REALLY useful.

 

All depends on the car and data is your friend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...