Cruising regularly at 4000 rpm

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by Brink

I think what I'm getting from this is that yes, higher rpms do create more wear, but it's negligible compared to the other sources of engine wear such as cold starts, assuming the higher rpm driving is done when the engine/oil is warmed up properly.

DING-DING-DING ....... ol Brink is catching on .......


humfrz

[Vic4uf]

Originally Posted by ermax

It definitely has a cult following. Just curious, what do you miss and what do you not miss?

I miss the overall build quality of the car. The S2ki community and the open top experience.

I don’t miss the unpredictable snap oversteer. I especially don’t miss the Honda S2k seat thieves. You couldn’t go to a car meet in Miami without worrying that the next morning you would find your soft top cut open and your seats missing.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Vic4uf

I miss the overall build quality of the car. The S2ki community and the open top experience.



I don’t miss the unpredictable snap oversteer. I especially don’t miss the Honda S2k seat thieves. You couldn’t go to a car meet in Miami without worrying that the next morning you would find your soft top cut open and your seats missing.

Oh yeah the seats. I figured that would have died off by now. So you don’t miss the perfectly liner power band or the 8200 redline (you said AP2 if I recall)? You don’t miss the engine sound? How about that amazing shifter (although the twin has a damn good shifter too)? I mean you basically didn’t mention any of the things the S2000 is most known for.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by humfrz

Oh, OK ......my bad ......you did address the question in the post #163.

The question was:

So, allow me to ask a question.

You have two identical 86s, you are going to drive both for 100,000 miles at 60 MPH.

On one car, the revs will be kept at 2,000 rpms.

On the other car, the revs will be kept at 4,000 rpms.

At the end of the experiment, your tear the engines down and inspect for wear.

Which one will show the most wear ...... or will they be the same .....??"

Your response was:

"The difference if any at all the would be so minor that you would not be able to see it.

The numbers look like it should be different but the engine does not care if it is doing 2,000 rpms or 4,000."

Maybe I should have made it multiple choice, because I don't see an answer .....

As far as asking me what I had for dinner last night ...... I answered that by saying that I didn't remember ....... now, it's a day later and I still don't remember. Ask me two years from now and I probably will remember ......

Now, what were we talking about .........


humfrz

You did make it multiple choice and I did give a very clear answer within those choices.
If any at all it would be too small too see.

Originally Posted by humfrz

My question in post #215 was:

"Is it friction, or is it heat caused by friction, that wears out engines .... ??"

Your response is shown up above.

That response didn't answer the question......

Your move .......

PS - the toddler just came to me pulling on the back of her diaper ......that means a poopy one ...... and ma ma is busy with helping the other two with their homework ....... be right back ......


humfrz

I will rephrase my response and ask a question in turn

The heat is caused by friction.
What is the difference in the operating temperature between
2,000 and 4,000 rpms in these cars?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Brink

I think what I'm getting from this is that yes, higher rpms do create more wear, but it's negligible compared to the other sources of engine wear such as cold starts, assuming the higher rpm driving is done when the engine/oil is warmed up properly.

UMMMM that is what I have said all along. It isn't "extra" wear and not a good reason to not drive the car in that range if you wish though.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Is it harsh on the engine? My fiance's Mini is at 1800 rpm, plowing along, meanwhile mine is roaring at 4K rpm at the same speed. Is it safe for prolonged periods? Should I limit my engine speed and slow down? Really dislike this part about the MY17 final drive. Sometimes it really feels like a car better left to the track, not too perfect for daily driving. At green lights, I get left so far behind by normal econoboxes with their CVTs. To keep up I have to shift fast and rev and make all kinds of racket, meanwhile they just whoosh away. Anyway I'm ranting, back to my original question... so is it safe?

Originally Posted by ermax

You are seriously overthinking this. No one is debating or looking for a way to quantify the extra wear. Just admit that there is more wear at higher RPMs than lower RPMs.

The original question was "Is it OK"
Your statement was it was extra wear and unnecessary.

My statement was it was normal wear within the design specs and operating range of the car and not "extra".

If we can't quantify what "extra" wear means then there is no way to debate it.

I have already said repeatedly that there may be more wear at higher RPMs but since the engine changes it's cooling and oiling at the different ranges it would be so small a difference that it would not matter. We are not talking about spending hours at red line here but 500 to 800 RPMs above the normal cruising range in 6th gear.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Your statement was it was extra wear and unnecessary.

And I still stand by that... when cruising.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

My statement was it was normal wear within the design specs and operating range of the car and not "extra".

If we can't quantify what "extra" wear means then there is no way to debate it.

As I said before, no one is debating how much but that there is in fact extra wear. You already admitted that twice now. You do know what the word extra means don't you?

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I have already said repeatedly that there may be more wear at higher RPMs but since the engine changes it's cooling and oiling at the different ranges it would be so small a difference that it would not matter. We are not talking about spending hours at red line here but 500 to 800 RPMs above the normal cruising range in 6th gear.

"More" and "Extra" are two ways to say the same thing. From now on I will drop the use of the word extra and instead your your own word, more. But then you will argue that there isn't more.

In the examples that humfrz presented it wasn't 500 or 800 more/extra RPMs. It's the difference between 2000 and 4000. Double the number of times the metal rings scrap across the metal sleeves in the same period of time.

And about the operating temps. Are you under the impression the temps would go down at 4000 vs 2000. If so you are very sadly mistaken. Have you never looked at data logs from your car?

In closing I stand by my original statement that your better off to "cruise" closer to 2000 vs 4000 if the gear is available. Sure the wear may be negligible (and I have been in agreeance with that all along) but it's still there. Throw in fuel economy (which isn't at all negligible) and it's a no brainer. I'm really sorry if I struck a nerve or offended anyone for suggesting something so outrageous. Here I thought this was manual transmission 101 kind of stuff.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Ok I will play. First you have to tell me what the difference in operating temperature is between 2,000 and 4,000 RPMs. If we are going to say that heat causes "extra" wear then we need to know the dramatic different between the two engine speeds.

I would wager operating temp for both.
The proper question is what is the oil pressure at 2000rpm vs 4000rpm.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

UMMMM that is what I have said all along. It isn't "extra" wear and not a good reason to not drive the car in that range if you wish though.

And again, no one, no one has said they shouldn't.

Maybe I should have taken this approach.

Pros and Cons of "cruising" at higher RPMs:

Pros:
- Sounds better (opinion)
- Closer to the powerband if you need to close the door on someone making a pass in the right lane. (fact)

Cons:
- "More" wear on the sleeves, rings and skirts (fact)
- Burns more fuel (fact)
- Sounds like ass (opinion)
- Drones on some aftermarket exhausts (fact)

People are free to decide what to do on their own. I personally chose to cruise low for these reasons and in this order:
Doesn't sound like ass
Burns less fuel
As an added bonus it will put less wear on the engine

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

I would wager operating temp for both.
The proper question is what is the oil pressure at 2000rpm vs 4000rpm.

Oil temps are higher at 4000. No debate there. You can see that in logs. Oil pressure is dramatically lower at 2000 but well within safe specs. Also lower RPMs don't require as much oiling anyways. At the high end our car is known for not producing as much pressure to the bottom end. I have read that this is due to a heavy bias on VVT. There is a newer timing cover that supposedly changed the size of some galeries no doubt to improve on this. I would love to see the new cover next to mine which is the original cover.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

And I still stand by that... when cruising.



As I said before, no one is debating how much but that there is in fact extra wear. You already admitted that twice now. You do know what the word extra means don't you?



"More" and "Extra" are two ways to say the same thing. From now on I will drop the use of the word extra and instead your your own word, more. But then you will argue that there isn't more.

In the examples that humfrz presented it wasn't 500 or 800 more/extra RPMs. It's the difference between 2000 and 4000. Double the number of times the metal rings scrap across the metal sleeves in the same period of time.

And about the operating temps. Are you under the impression the temps would go down at 4000 vs 2000. If so you are very sadly mistaken. Have you never looked at data logs from your car?

In closing I stand by my original statement that your better off to "cruise" closer to 2000 vs 4000 if the gear is available. Sure the wear may be negligible (and I have been in agreeance with that all along) but it's still there. Throw in fuel economy (which isn't at all negligible) and it's a no brainer. I'm really sorry if I struck a nerve or offended anyone for suggesting something so outrageous. Here I thought this was manual transmission 101 kind of stuff.

Almost everything you said here is a gross distortion of my points and as you said before this is like arguing religion. One side has facts and science to back it and the other has legends and faith. Each of us believe we have the facts and are not going to change the other ones mind.

In closing I will simply state that there is no significant difference between cruising at 2,000 and 4,000 and you are no "better" off. This is all I have said all along.

[Vic4uf]

Originally Posted by ermax

Oh yeah the seats. I figured that would have died off by now. So you don’t miss the perfectly liner power band or the 8200 redline (you said AP2 if I recall)? You don’t miss the engine sound? How about that amazing shifter (although the twin has a damn good shifter too)? I mean you basically didn’t mention any of the things the S2000 is most known for.

I didn’t want to hijack the thread with S2000 talk but simple answer: No.
It’s not like it sounded as good as a Alfa Romeo Twin Cam or Alfa Romeo 4C. The shifting and placement we’re great but you still wanted a short shifter or counter sunk shift knob. MY04 also had to go in for the TSB shifter popping out of 2nd gear. Plus, no one talks about the poor fuel economy for a 4-cylinder and lack of power. It felt so slow until you hit 6500 rpms. The entire time I wanted a Lotus Elise.

[VoltsFRS2013]

Why would anyone cruise regularly @ 4k rpm lol. Maybe I'm spoiled by my auto but when I'm driving with the paddles my Shift Indicator is set at literally 4.5k

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by VoltsFRS2013

Why would anyone cruise regularly @ 4k rpm lol. Maybe I'm spoiled by my auto but when I'm driving with the paddles my Shift Indicator is set at literally 4.5k

The question wasn't "why" the question was "will it hurt the car"? The answer remains no.