1992 BMW 325i, 5-speed non-overdrive, 3000rpm at 70mph.
extended running at 3100 rpm
- Thread starter pathfinder
- Start date
- Status
It depends on the engine, how your tranny, whether auto or manual is geared, and the gearing in the rear axle. I have a Ford Ranger pickup with a 3.0 liter V6 rated at 154 hp at the engine (as against at the rear wheels), a 5-speed manual tranny, and a 4.10 rear end axle ratio. I'm at about 3,100 rpm in 5th gear going 70 mph. That rpm won't hurt the engine if you run it there all day long.
TanSedan, I would be gratefull if you cite about those old times more oftenly
I need more perspective on this untold era.
My one point to lean on is the Gary Allan's coment about the stroke. There are also short strokers like 350's, and on this LE2 bore and stroke are the same (about 3.25" if I recall correctly).
My other leaning point is, this thing does not use oil during the suspended hi-speed commutes, while most buddies with smaller engines carry a bottle in the trunk for a similar tempo.
And lastly, it is revving low to begin with, it carbons up rather quicker (than the buddies' Eu cars) in the stop-go and I can't find places to strech it's legs, only long inter-city drives. After a one moth city regimen it responds hi-speed well, idles smoother, gets quieter.
~o~
I inspected other cars manuals of the 70's era as well, like Cutlass, Caddy etc. There were no comments about the rev. for the engine. So what the folks were doing in those untold years? Assuming it is "foolproof" like me?
And, I really need perspective on this one... One may wish he had a 350 on the car, it may have some point. What was the actual reasoning for the longer stoked versions in the 70's? As I know, original versions were the 350s or the alikes. Why they made those 440, 460 etc. for the family sedans with huge strokes? Some say they are less reliable, was the 120 legal? Or were they really silkier, much better for driver fatique?
I have an '84 Chevy. At 75 revs 2800, perhaps I'm a little bit off-limit at any speed higher. 2.84 axle ratio, 3sp. Auto with 1/1 for the 3rd, so despite it is fwd figures look traditional I guess. The rev. thing is -indeed- quite ambigious on these. No tach., nothing in the owners manual, not even a word! So may be I should assume it is foolproof, since at 120 it only revs 4800, and at 60 -in first gear- it is 5200. GM Performance publications says it is OK to see 7000rpm momentarily. Well, for daily practice I better forgot that but I think this may give the idea that this engines are in no way incabaple of revving. I think they got high gears for other -good- reasons.
My one point to lean on is the Gary Allan's coment about the stroke. There are also short strokers like 350's, and on this LE2 bore and stroke are the same (about 3.25" if I recall correctly).
My other leaning point is, this thing does not use oil during the suspended hi-speed commutes, while most buddies with smaller engines carry a bottle in the trunk for a similar tempo.
And lastly, it is revving low to begin with, it carbons up rather quicker (than the buddies' Eu cars) in the stop-go and I can't find places to strech it's legs, only long inter-city drives. After a one moth city regimen it responds hi-speed well, idles smoother, gets quieter.
~o~
I inspected other cars manuals of the 70's era as well, like Cutlass, Caddy etc. There were no comments about the rev. for the engine. So what the folks were doing in those untold years? Assuming it is "foolproof" like me?
And, I really need perspective on this one... One may wish he had a 350 on the car, it may have some point. What was the actual reasoning for the longer stoked versions in the 70's? As I know, original versions were the 350s or the alikes. Why they made those 440, 460 etc. for the family sedans with huge strokes? Some say they are less reliable, was the 120 legal? Or were they really silkier, much better for driver fatique?
i had a buddy in dallas who drag raced an old nova with a cadillac 500 in it. he ran the cad 500 stock with a 100-125 shot of nitrous and had to be very careful not to over rev the engines. he was running as much piston speed at 5k rpms as a 302 mustand at 8250 rpms. 4.304 stroke. dont know os an engine right off have with a longer stroke. the eldorados they came in were geared to run at 2100 rpms at 60.
http://tinyurl.com/dyh3r
http://tinyurl.com/dyh3r
Run my Rodeo at 3-4k RPM's all the way up I-70 from Denver to Grand Junction, been doing it for as long as it is old - almost 9yrs & 152K - not a single issue.
Toyota P-up 22RE 5-speed runs at 4-5k RPM's up the same highway, no issue's there either.
Toyota P-up 22RE 5-speed runs at 4-5k RPM's up the same highway, no issue's there either.
My 87 Samurai is turning 4k in 5th at 70mph. I won it off of ebay. Flew to NJ and drove back to TX. With 60hp and 55 pound of torque driver fatique sat in after about 15 minutes , only 25 hours to go. That trip SUCKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
Cyprs, i think the wax pellet system sucks. I had it when i drove my 90 suzuki sidekick. That thing would cold idle at 3k rpm FOREVER till it warmed up, even when it was HOT out it would idle at 2k. Most people bypass them.
**** that thing would rev at like 4k at 80mph. I drove to florida and back to chicago, then back to georgia in a few months doin 85-90 at 4.5-5k rpm
still runs good!
**** that thing would rev at like 4k at 80mph. I drove to florida and back to chicago, then back to georgia in a few months doin 85-90 at 4.5-5k rpm
still runs good!
- Status
Similar threads
