Thread: 289 vs. 302
View Single Post
Old 03-08-2002, 10:39 AM   #10
PKRWUD
Junior Member
 
PKRWUD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ventura, California
Posts: 8,981
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 72grande
Rev quicker?!? Think about that, when the clutch is engaged, and teh engine is conected to the transmition, the only way for the engine to rev quicker (assuming no gearing changes) is to have more power. Period.

When they first started making aluminum flywheels for probes, there was a lot of debate about this on my probe board. But if you think about it, reving quicker would mean acelerating quicker, and the only way to acelerate quicker is to have more power.
Wrong, but nice try. With that logic, bigger engines would always be faster, and they're not. probably the single biggest factor in how fast an engine revs is it's stroke. The shorter the stroke, the faster it revs. Let's say you have two identical engines, except for the stroke (ie: 289 & 302). To make this simpler, let's say engine one has a stroke of 4 inches, and engine two has a stroke of 3 inches. The energy required to rotate engine one 4 times will rotate engine two 5 times. That means that engine two will reach 5000 rpms in the exact same amount of time as it takes for engine one to reach 4000 rpms. The same energy expelled will yield quicker results with the shorter stroke. This is why "de-stroking" engines was the hot trick in the "good old days". There are dozens of books on this at bookstores everywhere. if you are still in doubt, check out your local Barnes and Noble.

Take care,
-Chris
__________________
Webmaster:
Rice Haters Club
Jim Porter Racing
Peckerwoods Pit Stop


Support Your Local
RED & WHITE!
PKRWUD is offline   Reply With Quote