On Monday, June 03, 2002 10:38 PM Mark Sirota <mark@sirota.org> wrote:
>--On Monday, June 03, 2002 9:34 PM -0400 Dick Rasmussen
><rasmussend@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> It always scares the $h!! out of me to even think about reving an
>> unloaded engine to the rev limiter.
>
>Yeah, me too. But is it actually worse for the engine to rev it up
unloaded
>than it us to rev it up under load?
If you are to believe the owner's manual for the 84 Honda VF500F I used to
have it is.
It redlined at 12,000 RPM, but the manual cautioned to rev to no more than
8,000 (IIRC) if the engine was not under load.
It makes some sense to me: Under load, the crankshaft might be steadily
pushed against its journals at some high, but relatively steady (in
magnitude and direction) force. Without load, the crankshaft might dance
around within its journals at some lower average, but unstable force, and
the additional dynamic component may result in a higher peak force of the
shaft against its bearings.
- Paul Schelling
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/autox-cm
|