Why don't more engines rev to 9K+
Originally Posted by Ajs_s2k,Oct 1 2008, 11:05 AM
doesnt the evo rev to 8k?
Ferraris, BMWs, Porsches for the NA.
My mates old Supra was close to 9k rev limit.
Originally Posted by lovegroova,Oct 1 2008, 10:48 AM
Most people are lazy and don't like to rev their engines. Read all the diesel threads in other forums where peole go on and on about not having to rev, waffling about mid-range torque and so on.
Read any thread about a Honda VTEC engine and you'll get loads of "no torque" and "my diesel will do 50-75 quicker in 6th" type comments.
Also, most engine manufacturers cannot make the engines that rev that high reliable.
Read any thread about a Honda VTEC engine and you'll get loads of "no torque" and "my diesel will do 50-75 quicker in 6th" type comments.
Also, most engine manufacturers cannot make the engines that rev that high reliable.
People driving their car are VERY lazy. As such, revving an engine is too much like hard work.
A Turbo Diesel represents the exact performance requirement for Joe Idiot - low rpm, crap throttle response, goes well on the motorway.
A bike, particularly a sportsbike, is a fun item and performance orientated. They don't have stereos, heated seats or electric windows so it's pretty obvious they are there for thrills.
16000rpm with the most bonkers noise and 0-60 in 3 seconds is the order of the day. Fast spinning 4 provides all of that with acceptable reliability/useability.
RX8 is hardly the same 
As usual, Honda led the way in terms of engineering things reliably. Most other manufacturers now offer multi-valve-per-cylinder engines and have some form of variable valve timing. Many are now making engines that rev pretty high too.
Honda was offering clean, reliable 16v 8000rpm engines back in 1989. It took a while for everyone else to catch up.
I remember a "Car" magazine quote from when the S2000 was launched. It went something like "Honda did it because no-one else could"

As usual, Honda led the way in terms of engineering things reliably. Most other manufacturers now offer multi-valve-per-cylinder engines and have some form of variable valve timing. Many are now making engines that rev pretty high too.
Honda was offering clean, reliable 16v 8000rpm engines back in 1989. It took a while for everyone else to catch up.
I remember a "Car" magazine quote from when the S2000 was launched. It went something like "Honda did it because no-one else could"
Originally Posted by lovegroova,Oct 1 2008, 11:24 AM
I remember a "Car" magazine quote from when the S2000 was launched. It went something like "Honda did it because no-one else could"

Shame how people just miss it in favour of other silly numbers.
FTO does 8,250 rpm, and that was in 1994. Did Honda have anything that revved higher at the time (other than bikes)?
Even my Primera does 7Krpm, and that's the GT model with different cams to produce more power at higher rpm than the lesser cars.
Even my Primera does 7Krpm, and that's the GT model with different cams to produce more power at higher rpm than the lesser cars.
Originally Posted by Crusoe,Oct 1 2008, 11:48 AM
long life is the usual answwer, bike engines need regular rebuilds
A model like mine reputedly did 500k miles without any major engine or gearbox work as a courier bike in London.
Plenty VFRs around have gone over 100k without any significant problems.
I'm sure the VFR isn't the only bike this reliable.
few friends with older sports bikes that need rebuilds every 20k miles or so though that's usually several years for most bikers. Might be better on the newer bikes though anything with 150+ bhp per lr and a rev limit of 15k rpm is going to need work regularly i'd have thought.








