My opinion is that engines like revs. Even production engines like revs. I know that stop and go wrecks these production engine. But the reason i have behind this is that more lubrication gets to the engines bore and crank. And also my opinion is less friction when the pistons are going faster. The piston is more like "gliding" along the cylinder walls.

Does anybody agree with me on this??

just seeing if i am right....

 

I don't even know where to begin with this one. I suppose an engine would last the longest at the rpm point at which its oil pump was most efficient, and the most ideal conditions of heat and oil pressure were attained. This is going to vary from engine to engine. Higher than optimal RPM's would not be a better condition IMO for friction between cylinder walls and rings. A motor that cools efficiently and has sufficient oil pressure at 3k rpms is not going to experience less cylinder wear at 20k rpms, even if the rotating assembly could handle the stress.

 

well yea of course motors have a point in rpms they can't exceed (redline)

but the theory i am trying to get at is more of the "glide" theory
for example if you are scrubing something slowly you feel everything but when you are scrubing something faster you dont feel as much.
that is the theory i am trying to get at here....

 

When you scrub something, you are applying force toward the object. When you attempt to scrub faster, you are transferring some of that force horizontal to the surface, which should in turn 'feel' like the work is less. The work is not less, you have just shifted the amount of force applied toward the friction surface.

Motors on the other hand do not purposely direct force toward the cylinder walls, but rather up and down. In my opinion, your analogy has little or no purpose when referring to a piston motor's ring to cylinder stress.

And... Even if it did, cylinder wear from ring friction is not a common culprit of blowing motors, it is generally either failure of moving load bearing parts or friction bearings. Which brings us back to oil pressure and the maxium amount of stress that the rotating assembly can take before failure.

 

wow...i mean...wow....dude you amaze me with every post.

you are a genius, why arent you a millionaire by now.

 

screw you kyle

and thanks for the info Rich

and no i didn't make this all up i got it out of a textbook i read oh well we'll see what happens

 

end yourself....




i always wanted to say that...

 

well hope you got it out of your system

 

I'd say...take your theory to the rotary guys...my understanding of rotary engines is there's less stress due to up-down motion, which is replaced by simply rotating. So maybe they'd be able to offer more insight.

 

think about a diesel engine, they never rev. over 3k and alot of tractor-trailers have almost 1,000,000 miles on them and are still going. i used to drive a 1982 ford f-7000 with a walker 3208 diesel in it and it had over 500,000 miles on it and have never had a problem with it but an exhaust manifole, and doing the usual maintence.