The extra 1000 to 2000 RPM does make a world of difference. As long as the engine keeps its torque plot up with minimal drops on the extra rev range, this can add more power to the car especially since HP is calculated with torque x RPMs/5252. This is where gearing comes into play. You can multiply the gearing to make more torque or you can keep the gearing and pull longer in each gear.

F1 cars ive seen on tv revs to 18 or 19K RPMs. As far as piston speed is concerned, it may not be that much more than the S2000 since it may have a shorter stroke and a bigger bore.

 

A safe 10k rev limit would be nice... but I always wondered what it would entale do undergo such a project.

As many dyno plots show, power really starts to taper off at 9k, so I wonder if the cams would require a new profile on the VTEC lobes... The valvetrain would need to be beefed up with stiffer springs and then there's the issue with the rev limiter which I believe is built into the ECU, which may require switching over to a standalone, but all of this is just speculation from me... no facts to back up my suspicions. I wonder what the limit of the intake plenum is... would it effectively allow the sheer air velocity that the engine would see at 10k rpms, or would it need a larger, ported unit with a larger TB and such...

Too many questions, not enough I.Q. to answer my own questions. Heck, I'll just wait for UL to post the results.

 

Current F1 engine's max piston speed is at ~40m/sec. Much faster than F20C's max piston speed of ~25m/sec. What is even more amazing is the fact that max acceleration experience by the piston in a F1 engine is about 20 times higher than that of F20C! F1=~100km/sec^2 or ~10,000G, compared to measly ~5km/sec^2 or ~500G in F20C. Good as F20C and F22C is, it's no where near the levels of current F1 engines.

 

NECurve - Are you stating this as fact (in which case please state your sources) or just your opinion (in which case, you know what we say about opinions).

Johninator- Yes F1 engines rev to 19K. And they last one race. And if recent Honda F1 history is taken into account, sometimes less!

 

I know that much was made of the higher piston speeds compared to F1 engines by all the magazines at the release of the S. The difference is the length of the stroke - the F1 engine uses a very short throw while the F20C is similar to other Honda street engines. I'm having a hard time find specs but there's a semi-interesting article at http://www.billzilla.org/2v4v.htm - note the S2000 and the blurb on the motorcycle revving at 19k rpm a couple of paragraphs down. It's the short stroke that makes the difference...

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by johninator
The extra 1000 to 2000 RPM does make a world of difference.

 

WOW,

very interesting thread with many good points.

It will be fun to watch. Unfortunately, if a 2.0 11,000 rpm engine or 2.2 10,000 rpm engine is avail in an S. --> Our cars are going to be more difficult to sell. That's OK, mine will still be up for sale the month before those are avail, cuz I will be on the list!!

 

RedY2KS2k - You've hit the nail on the head. A while back, I posted a thread which asked if there is a way to maintain torque above 8K RPM (on a naturally aspirated F20C). That thread didn't get a single informative answer, so obviously no one knows how to do it. Until you can maintain torque above 8K, there is no point in raising the rev limit.

 

Marketing? Maybe, but not likely. I'm by no means an engine expert, but raising the displacement by about 200 cc with stroke alone can manifest itself into all sorts of issues if nothing else is changed. Sure, Honda could have left the redline where it was and did nothing else but this would have reduced the margin of "safety". And "safety" translates into reliability. We've already got owners who have blown their engines with a mechanical over-rev, which results in valve train damage and other things as well. Imagine raising the stroke and leaving all else the same - how many more blown engines would we see because the extra safety margin has been dipped into to accommodate the extra stroke.
Look, since UL has already posted this elsewhere, I'll just quote it here:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimate lurker
Go for it.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NECurve
This is only my opinion, but I believe that the 2.2L was not allowed to run to 9k because Honda wanted the hp #'s and overall performance of the 03 and 04 to be similar.