there are two types of s2000s. From what I remember one had a higher rev limit than the other.
I am considering this as my next car as my Acura 2001 cls type s 3.2 now has some work that needs to be done.
Wanted to rice up the Acura but I am told parts are sort of hard to find...
What should I do?
>>15355978
AP1 and AP2
now google them
AP1 = Higher rev limiter and more "raw"
AP2 = Lower rev limiter which doesn't matter if you're not a boyracer considering the car is better in almost every way.
>>15355987
>>15355994
>AP2 is better
good meme
>>15355994
boyracer? haha.....
AP1 Japanese version is better, high rev and high compression
>>15356000
>more torque
>same horsepower
>worse
>>15356024
from what i can tell, from what i am reading now is that the ap1 is really more racy.
the ap1 is more for people who dont want to shift as many gears if they get into a race.
seems an ap2 master is into shifting gears more... ?
>>15356046
AP2 is actually made thinking in American roads where high revs are a nuisance to the engine, only real advantage is the drivetrain and probably the gearbox, but the engine in the AP1 is superior imo
>>15356053
from what i am reading, it seems like the ap1 is less reliable.
it says the clutch and transmission case are improved...
>>15356067
I would choose the AP2 if it was more of a commuter than a racer desu
Pretty sure the AP2's body is better braced than the AP1
>>15358377
It is
Obvious solution is an AP2 with a JDM tyte AP1 engine
>>15356031
It doesn't rev as high, so not as fun. Worse.
>>15358587
>implying you'll notice 200 rpm
>>15358587
So why don't you just get a 250cc 4cyl bike that revs to 19k if that's all that matters?
Wasn't a big issue with the AP1 that you had to shift in order? Like you couldn't downshift from 4th gear to 2nd gear or 1st gear to 3rd gear
>>15356031
the torque doesn't magically make it better
it's that it makes more torque at lower rpm, which means more horsepower at lower rpm.
>>15358855
>tfw no Honda CRB250RR
>>15358614
it's about 1000 more RPM. It also has a larger VTEC powerband as a result.
>>15355978
AP1 are 2 L
AP2 are 2.2 L because americains couldn't drive the other since it has no torque at low rpms
>>15356067
Yeah, that normally happens over time with a car model. Too bad those improvements weren't also applied to the AP1 engine.
>>15358587
>rpm
>fun
>>15358939
rpm is fun as fuck if it doesn't end at 5000 rpm like in your pushrod shit motor
>>15358931
>having torque on the higher end
>jap engineering
>>15358969
Not really, if you ever drive a car with low end power you'll understand
>>15359041
are you saying it's not fun, or that it's still fun even when your engine doesn't rev high?
>>15359078
Engines with high redlines sacrifice low end power. If you have next to no power under 7k RPM in a street car you almost never will spend any time in the power band unless you are a boyracer that's had the car for a week.
>>15359098
why do boyracers start short shifting after a week?
>>15359098
when I have fun in my car on the street, I do it on a back road and stay in the powerband as much as possible. I don't really care about making lots of power at low RPMs in traffic because driving in traffic is always shit and I avoid it as much as possible.
>>15359106
How many fast cars do you see on the street? How many of them have you heard being driven near the redline? 1% of them? People grow out of driving like that pretty quickly, not to mention it draws attention from police.
>>15359144
low rpm power is good for three things
- making driving in traffic a bit less annoying
- for people who can't downshift for turns
- for launching
>>15359168
Where do people come up with nonsense like this?
>>15359231
What else is it good for
>>15359247
What are you talking about? Why are you trying to differentiate between "low end power" and "high end power" as if they have some different magic quality? The power goes to the ground either way. Spinning an engine faster causes exponentially more wear and heat, the slower an engine has to spin to make the same amount of power the better. Nobody has EVER driven a car and thought "man I wish the power came on later."
>>15359266
> Spinning an engine faster causes exponentially more wear and heat
no it doesn't lol
>>15359266
And having a fat engine that can't spin fast probably means it's heavy, big, and sucks down more fuel than a smaller engine.
>>15355978
Aside from the 500rpm redline difference, AP1 has a clutch/transmission fault which is prone to failure.
AP2 softens the shift.
Ypu should get a c5z is what you should do.
>>15359271
Do you not know what friction is? Do you not know how an internal combustion engine works?
>>15359283
I was wondering when the
>muh hp/l
would emerge. I thought we were talking about driving quality, how many times are you going to move the goalposts before you feel you've adequately saved face from your initial retarded statement?
>>15359303
>initial retarded statement?
My initial statement was that revving to redline can be fun. Disagreeing with that is retarded.
>>15358969
>drive "shit" pushrod aluminum 5.7l LS1
>redline is 6000, but power starts as soon as the car is moving. just 4000 rpm will make honda fags think its a drag car. pulls like a freight train
>also have glorious Honda D-Series 1.5l D15b6 ef hatch
>redline is 5000 rpm. torque is almost non-existent
why does my 1.5l honda redline so low if it has glorious single-over cam
>>15359247
>tfw make 350 ft-lb N/A at the rear wheels
War, huh, yeah. What is it good for?
>>15359266
>no one has tought "man I wish the car didn't run out of breath after 5k rpm"
yeah, plenty of people do, even pushrod fags
>>15359349
sohc typically has a lower redline than dohc, also it's a econobox motor.
>>15359361
no real answers i guess?
>>15359356
>EF hatch and LS1 T/A
eat shit no car
>>15359367
>Both shitboxes slower than a fucking 650 bike
again, no one cares about your shitboxes anon
>>15359365
>sohc typically has a lower redline than dohc
but we're comparing SOHC and pushrod OHV
>its an econobox motor
>implying a GM LS V8 isn't just a truck engine
a stock 5.3l silverado can rev to 6k, and it is literally designed for low-end pulling
>not having big displacement and high RPM
>tfw no ls stroker
>>15359375
> but we're comparing SOHC and pushrod OHV
you mean you were?
>>15359375
woah this guy is actually fucking retarded
>>15359329
You can rev any engine to redline, what are you trying to say?
>>15359364
Having low end power doesn't mean you don't have high end power.
You guys have to realize, it's very easy to tell you've never driven either a genuinely fast high revving small displacement car or a big displacement car with a wide powerband starting low in the RPM range. Your "arguments" make 0 sense because you are talking about things that you don't understand.
>>15359388
> I've driven more cars than you so I'm right
well you haven't, and you're not.
do you use your trip simply so people can remember how much of a fag you are?
>>15359388
>Having low end power doesn't mean you don't have high end power.
yeah, thats basically what it means, an ICE is configured to make power at an specific portion of the powerband
for example while LS engines can rev up to 7k, they peak at 5k rpm
even sportbike engines peak way before redline and they make no power at "low RPM"
what you are talking about, "low and high" end power is just a retarded way of saying an engine is designed to deliver power at certain RPM level
both the LS engine and the F series have pretty linear powerbands, you feel the s2000 makes no power at "low rpm" simply because its a smaller engine, not because " it doesn't make any power at low rpm"
stop being a retard
>>15359271
lol, of course it does...
The more you rev your engine, the less it'll last.
Why do you think diesel engines last a lot more than petrol ones?
>>15359432
> exponentially
is what i was laughing at
>>15359432
because diesel a shit and you cannot rev them high because of the way the fuel burns?
friction isn't that simple tripfag, a bigger engine spinning at a certain RPM will create the same heat and inertia than a smaller engine spinning at higher RPM
I have a 2003 ap1, if you get an ap1 get a 02 or 03. If you want 2 cupholders get an ap2. If you have a lot money get a CR edition. You will make youre money back.
>>15359396
>I've driven more cars than you
Who said that? I said I can tell you haven't driven cars relevant to the conversation. You being a porter at a Hyundai dealership doesn't have any impact on your knowledge of powerbands in street cars.
>>15359421
Why are the goalposts moving every post? What does your post have to say regarding "a higher redline is more fun"
or "low RPM power is only good for making driving in traffic less annoying"
>say dumb shit
>uh oh someone called me out
>I'll just talk about something else
Next it will be "that was another anon"
Pick one argument and try to support it.
>>15359443
When you have all the torques available low down and all the power available a 1k below the redline you don't really need to rev to 5000 :)
>friction isn't that simple tripfag, a bigger engine spinning at a certain RPM will create the same heat and inertia than a smaller engine spinning at higher RPM
Gee... No shit. Maybe a bigger engine will endure more heat and friction than a smaller one. Have you thought about that?
>>15359508
there are multiple anons posting
but you are pretty retarded and can't read.
you only need a big engine if you're
1: afraid of revving
or
2: can't heel-toe
prove me wrong
>>15359508
no one is moving the goalposts dumbass, that was my first post
>tripfag so dumb he cannot comprehend multiple people are making fun of him
im pointing out that you are a retard for using the "no power down low" argument, because both an s2000 and a trans am make plenty of power low down, the s2000 simply makes less because it is a smaller engine
>>15359515
>you don't really need to rev to 5000 :)
there is no reason to rev a fiat that high considering it will break
>Maybe a bigger engine will endure more heat and friction than a smaller one.
lol no, its literally the opposite
>>15359527
>>15359532
>That wasn't me, I just dropped into the thread to say "you're dumb tripfag" and "muh hp/l"
Ahh, in that case now I can tell you are really intelligent, informed, and have lots of experience with fast cars of various displacements and power bands.
>>15359558
>damage control
kek, typical cuck move
you are a retard for using the "no power down low" argument, deal with it
go ahead, kee digging your hole deeper
>>15359558
tb.h this has been one of the best distractions at work for a while
>>15359561
>conversation happening in thread
>see a tripfag post in reply to someone else
>can't withhold your excitement when you think you have found an opportunity where you are right about something if you take it out of context
>you aren't
>get told
>uhhhh dumb tripfag cuck kek damage control GTR hey guys am I doing it right? Am I fitting in?
Who is digging the hole?
>>15359589
im not the one who got outed as a retard for using le buzzwords, thats you
you said something dumb because you are a dumb person and got corrected, now deal with it
>>15359558
Christ just shut the fuck up already. You and your little argument buddy should just meet up and suck each other's cocks instead of shitting up this board.
>>15359532
>there is no reason to rev a fiat that high considering it will break
Your vtack will probably break sooner.
>lol no, its literally the opposite
Not really, but whatever.
rip anon
>>15359613
he's afraid of going to /o/ meets
>>15359627
>implying i drive a honda
top kek this fiatfag actually thinks fiat is reliable
>Not really
yup, which is why a sportbike engine can rev to 18k and a truck engine can't, but go ahead, keep proving you are dumb
>>15359653
which engine lasts longer?
>>15359660
the one that was correctly designed, assembled and properly maintaned
>>15359664
assuming they both were
>>15359669
then both are going to las equally as long
what kind of dumb question this is anon
>>15359603
>>15359613
>uh oh no amount of mental gymnastics are working
>better just declare myself the winner of an internet argument
>>15359645
I've been to /o/ meets. Am I going to go to a Nor Cal meet so CVPI or a 16 year old in a Saturn can spin into my car? No, but track/autox meets are cool.
>>15359684
>pls pls let me win
lol I don't think so tripfag
why dont you try to back up your retarded claims that an s2000 "makes no power down low" instead of throwing a tantrum like a 12 year dol?
>>15359675
>a truck engine lasts as long as a superbike engine
Nope
>>15359356
>noturnsLOL
>>15359695
yup
http://www.outdoorhub.com/stories/2012/03/14/the-200000-mile-sportbike/
>>15359692
>>15359439
> Nit picking
>>15359701
truck engines can last 10 times that.
>>15359653
Not the target of your ramblings, but do you actually believe that the specific output of heat and loss of kinetic energy due to friction solely dictates the Safe Operating Speed of an engine? That the only difference in Operating Speed between a very high speed four cycle petroleum engine and a high speed four or two cycle commercial diesel engine is caused solely by friction?
And honestly here, do you actually believe that a unit with ten to thirty-fold the surface area of moving mating surfaces will have less loss due to friction of mating surfaces? Have you ever asked yourself why your car engine requires one to two hundred square inches of radiating area with around a thousand litres an hour of Fresh Water flow compared with a thousand or more square inches of radiating area and two or three hundred litres a minute of flow for a larger displacement engine of lower specific output power than your car?
This is some pretty silly shit.
And for the poster saying a single motorbike lasting 200,000 miles can be compared with the expected duration of 800,000 to 1200000 Km expected of a prime mover before in-frame rebuild, you are completely and utterly beyond hope.
![hrdp_1007_11_o%2Bdyno_pull_after_adjusting_the_cam%2B[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/nvTldKE.jpg "hrdp_1007_11_o%2Bdyno_pull_after_adjusting_the_cam%2B[1].jpg")
>>15359705
>it makes no power because I am a dumbass that doesn't understand engines with 2 valve profiles
top fucking kek, that is a pretty linear powerband
pic related, an LS engine with cam phasing, notice the torque dip at the middle?
its a common ocurrence with variable valve engines
now go ahead, keep proving you are a retard
>>15359732
What exactly is your argument? An S2000 makes 70hp at 3000RPM. The LS in your dynograph makes 250hp at 3000RPM. Do you not understand how the two would behave differently in a street car? Wait, let me guess, you are actually going to say something about hp/l as if it was relevant to anything or anybody. Here it comes...
>>15359705
gad dam, only 130hp @ 6k rpm?
That's pathetic Honda...
>>15359684
saturn is always in the back so its fun for everyone else to watch
Daily reminder that V6's are better than V8's.
>>15359714
>but do you actually believe that the specific output of heat and loss of kinetic energy due to friction solely dictates the Safe Operating Speed of an engine?
in what world do you live in that it isn't the major reason?
>That the only difference in Operating Speed between a very high speed four cycle petroleum engine and a high speed four or two cycle commercial diesel engine is caused solely by friction?
what, did you even read the thread, the reason diesel rev slower is because of the fuel, as it was previously stated
also, you are completly igonring the fact that a diesel truck engines need a lot more radiation surface area is due to the fact that they usually operate at the same engine speeds for hours straight, unlike car engines
>>15359750
>im a retard who got proved wrong so im going to pretend a major argument isn't valid
the argument about how they are going to behave in a street car is irrelevant due to the fact that cars have gearing
again, the s2000 makes plenty of power, only a retard like you would say it doesn't because a bigger engine makes more power
>>15359708
> hyperbole makes my argument stronger
revving your engine is bad so i got a v8
![13_HP_tor_ninja_comp[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FwOSpgx.jpg "13_HP_tor_ninja_comp[1].jpg")
>>15359755
>this engine makes no power outside of the range it was designed to make power, it's shit!!
its like you have the downs
>>15359764
>the argument about how they are going to behave in a street car is irrelevant due to the fact that cars have gearing
So you didn't read the thread, or you just chose to ignore the rest of the posts where this convo stemmed out of in hopes of you being right about something?
>>15359098
Nobody drives around at 8k RPM all the time on the street, period.
>>15359764
The real world.
The reason a diesel cannot turn the same Safe Operating Speed as a smaller displacement petroleum engine is due to;
The flame propagation of diesel fuel
The static and dynamic mass of the Rotating Assembly
The Indicated Mean Effective Pressure above the piston crown during the compression cycle
The mass of the Valvetrain and actuating ancillaries that will not operate quickly to begin with, let alone without failure or loss of control of the valve
The length of the stroke of the piston
These factors are then influenced by the coefficient of friction.
You do not understand the difference between a radiator and a heat sink, obviously. Further, what happens on a long highway drive in your shitbox? Is it not operating at a constant RPM for hours straight? Does the laws of physics change to suit the situation, much like your recall of knowledge? Your reasoning is blatantly incorrect.
Try again for double points?
>>15359778
>my feeble engine need to rev to 6k just to move the car, it's not shit!!
I can do what you do, but i'm better at it.
>>15359782
> Nobody drives around at 8k RPM all the time on the street, period.
because on most streets that's illegal in a s2000 unless you're in first
>>15359782
>retarded tripfag still doesn't understand what is being discussed
>retarded tripfag now tries to understand gearing
top kek
engines with "high redlines" don't sacrifice low end power, a 8k redline isn't a "high redline" just because another, bigger engine redlines at 6k
what you posted here >>15359098 is fucking stupid and proves you don't understand what is being discussed here
different engines are designed with different redlines, an s2000 makes more than enough power at low rpm to drive on the stree comfortably
here retard, read about the differences in gear ratios, if cars had a 1.1 gear ratio your retarded tanturm would make sense, but they don't
http://www.s2000.com/forums/engine-tech-drivetrain/2424-ap1-vs-ap2-gear-ratio.html#post13304
http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f110/c5-coupe-gear-ratio-111216/
if you actually belive you have to drive an s2000 at 8k rpm on second gear its because you are stupid, which you are because its what you are sperging about
go ahead, start posting about how evil anons are hurting your feelings again
>>15359822
Well there you go, someone finally found out why anemic high revving engines aren't fun in street cars, only took 100 posts
>>15359806
kek, you are actually retarded
>I can do what you do
no, clearly you can't breathe through your nose, mouthbreather
>>15359832
>literally buzzword argument
heartbreaker is actually digging his hole deeper kek
>muh low end torks
Why not drive a diesel?
Come the fuck on people, comparing a 2l 4banger to a 5-6l v8 is insanity.
>>15359788
>The flame propagation of diesel fuel
>The static and dynamic mass of the Rotating Assembly
>The Indicated Mean Effective Pressure above the piston crown during the compression cycle
>The mass of the Valvetrain and actuating ancillaries that will not operate quickly to begin with, let alone without failure or loss of control of the valve
>The length of the stroke of the piston
thanks for posting what is common knowledge, but it doesn't mean you understand what is being discussed here
>heat sink
what are you even sperging about?
>what happens on a long highway drive in your shitbox?
it overheats?
you've clearly never driven a car at peak power for 12 hours straight, during peak heat hours, like diesel trucks have to do, every day
you can try as hard as you can to sound intelligent, but you are just proving you are autistic by arguing irrelevant points
>>15359825
>retarded tripfag still doesn't understand what is being discussed
Like I said, you either didn't read the thread or are purposely ignoring anything that doesn't relate to the out of context conversation you are having mostly with yourself. What is being discussed is whether engines such as the one found in the S2000 are fun to drive in street cars. Having under 100hp from 1k to 6k RPM is not fun, because that's the RPM range you are in 99% of the time in a street car. The same argument can be had independent of engine size, look at how people build drag cars, longer intake runners, more lift/duration, moving the power band up, then higher stall converters and shorter rear end gears to take advantage of the higher range power band. Now the car sucks to drive on the street (not as much as an S2000, but it's still worse than the same car with the same engine in a factory config).
>>15359869
Welcome to /o/
>>15359832
that's really just a factor of gearing
driving a slow-ass anemic miata can be a hoot
The price of these in the UK has sky rocketed its fucking insane, i live in the middle of the countryside so theres about 1 within 100 miles at a dealership, 2008 £16,500 - thats $22,000... i mean fuckkkk
>>15359653
Fiat engines are pretty much bulletproof.
Keep spewing memes.
>>15359869
yeah, one of them is inefficient and overweight, like most americans
>>15359872
>purpose built drag car doesn't suck as much to drive on the street as an S2000
Now this is quality shit posting
>>15359870
my civic has driven more than 10 hours straight at 3500+ rpm without overheating
>>15359883
Both are built to satisfy different tastes. The Americans soar through magnificent highways in their gas guzzling v8s while you attack corners in your lightweight high revving machine. In the end you're both enthusiasts and you should celebrate that.
>>15359918
STOP BEING RATIONAL REEEEEEE
>>15359918
i'm an american that attacks corners in a no-so-high-revving shitbox
what does that make me
>>15359928
A mistake
>>15359870
If that's common knowledge, why did you get it wrong? Not helping your case here.
So every vehicle that is not an OTR commercial vehicle overheats when operating constantly? Have you ever operated an engine constantly, or is your experience limited from parking space to parking space?
A radiator by definition radiates the same (ideal), more (greater than ideal) or slightly less heat than is inputted to the transfer medium. This rule applies to tube nest heat exchangers as well. A heat sink allows you to sink energy into the device that will be released gradually.
So a radiator will transfer the heat inputted to the exchange medium, which is what happens in a car, truck, alternator set, propulsion unit etc. You are suggesting that cars utilise a heat sink that cannot remove the input heat, and therefore overheat when operated constantly.
That's wrong, champ.
I have driven many hours, and more to the point, I operate six diesel engines for quite literally hundreds of thousands of hours, constantly.
Double points are off the table, but try again to not come across as a simpleton?
>>15359936
i already knew that, anon
>>15359872
Only you, heartbreaker, could fathom someone buying an S2000, then spending 99% of their time below 6k RPM. I'd venture I spent more than 10% of my time between 6 and 9, and that includes daily traffic jams.
>>15359953
because you have to rev that high to get the piece of shit moving
>>15359825
>every editorial and review on s2000 says they suck at city speeds
>>15359953
>boyracer here, my car only has 80hp 90% of the time, the rest I have 130hp or more at my disposal!
>>15359872
>whether engines such as the one found in the S2000 are fun to drive in street cars.
that is what you were arguing with another anon
im not a retard, like you, that arguees subjective points
>Having under 100hp from 1k to 6k RPM is not fun, because that's the RPM range you are in 99% of the time in a street car.
its ok, one day you'll understand those complicated numbers called gear ratios
> look at how people build drag cars, longer intake runners, more lift/duration, moving the power band up
>moving the powerband up
well, there we have it, heartbreaker proving he is a retard once again
how come there are tuning packages for LS engines that increase peak power but don't reduce low end power?
http://www.smokeysdyno.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Eddie-Miner-2007-Corvette-Z06-Baselinewordpress2.jpg
>stock LS7
>325 hp at 400
http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36286
http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo114/JBzdel/680%20Dyno/680vs660r1-1.jpg~original
>680whp LS7
>325hp at 400
whats is this "moving the powerband up" bullshit you are speaking off?
>>15359937
I didn't, keep sperging about radiators tho
>>15359976
it's basically the same as my civic, which is pretty much fine. why do you need more power on city streets when your car doesn't weigh 4000lbs?
>>15360001
> what a boyracer
> i only go to autocross/track meets
>>15360001
>"this is not fair, im too retarde to understand why a smaller engine makes less power!!"
>"stop posting complicated thinsg like gearing or else im going to shitpost!!"
>>15360025
>Not the target of your ramblings, but do you actually believe that the specific output of heat and loss of kinetic energy due to friction solely dictates the Safe Operating Speed of an engine?
in what world do you live in that it isn't the major reason?
>The reason a diesel cannot turn the same Safe Operating Speed as a smaller displacement petroleum engine is due to;
The flame propagation of diesel fuel
The static and dynamic mass of the Rotating Assembly
The Indicated Mean Effective Pressure above the piston crown during the compression cycle
The mass of the Valvetrain and actuating ancillaries that will not operate quickly to begin with, let alone without failure or loss of control of the valve
The length of the stroke of the piston
These factors are then influenced by the coefficient of friction.
thanks for posting what is common knowledge, but it doesn't mean you understand what is being discussed here
Green is not you. Someone here does not understand many things.
It's you.
You seem a little simple, so I'll break it down for you;
You - This is why the thing does the thing
The real world - Not really, this is why.
You - Well duuuuuh, how dum!!!!!! Common knowledge kekekek
Really now, you fail abysmally by stating that a car radiator acts as a heat sink and is unable to transfer heat at constant speed (which is what it does, by definition) then call other posters out?
This is sad, laddio.
>>15360071
can I get a tl;dr version of your rambling?
also, lets be clear, according to you, you think that I think that cars that overheat come with heatsinks, not radiators
thats honestly not my problem anon
a city car driven for hours straight at peak power will overheat, I know, because it happened to me in a friends sonic
>>15360096
You know because it happened to you, one variable, in one car?
That's what you base your arrogant recanting of absolute horseshit on?
Fuck me sideways, you are dumb as a plank and twice as thick.
You, here>>15359870, believe that a car cannot output the heat inputted to the radiator at a rate equal to the input rate. That would make it a heat sink. Doesn't bother me if you can't understand what it is that you have written.
And you did get a TL:DR -
You - This is why the thing does the thing
The real world - Not really, this is why.
You - Well duuuuuh, how dum!!!!!! Common knowledge kekekek
Keep on keeping on man.
>>15360113
i'm not an expert but i'm pretty sure at peak power most cars will overheat after a while
at normal power output the radiator can keep up with it fine, that's what they're designed for
>>15360042
Do you know what a boyracer is? A boyracer is someone who would go out with a group of 18 year olds in stickered up econoboxes and spin his car trying to drive fast on a backroad, not someone that participates in organized events
>>15360043
The S2000 is obviously not geared correctly, the anon that owns one admitted he only spends 10% of the time even close to peak power. Maybe he should get some 9.52 rear end gears or 4 underdrive units so he could actually take advantage of the power band.
>hey anon this car looks fast but it's extremely slow, how come?
>It's only 2 liters! It's really efficient!
>uhhh sorry anon I think I'm going to ride in Chad's Camaro instead
>>15360001
Do you even like cars?
>>15360113
>n-no it can't be, people do not get stranded by the side of the road on stock shitboxes that couldn't cope up with the heat!!
>thats a fantasy, thats a lie!!
you are a retard that tought anyone was talking about heatsinks, you, nobody else
surely beancounters are not going to put the oil and water lines close to the exhaust and other heat sources for the sake of saving money, considering only a small percentage of people are going to drive across a desser at mid-day in a fucking city car shitbox
you need 2 learn about cost cutting
>>15360130
No, you aren't an expert.
Let's put you on the right track.
Find the specific output of the unit under a percentage point of maximum load at a percentage point of maximum speed. Do this for a number of point, preferably greater than ten points across the operating range.
Map this two dimensional graph against the heat exchanger's transfer rate.
????
Profit.
Do you think with honesty that the OEM has not already mapped the specific output of heat and matched the exchanger unit to suit?
Would it pass ISO if the unit was specified with an exchanger unit that was not capable of dissipating the input heat?
How much thermal headroom in the cooling system is present? How many more joules could be exchanged to the transfer medium from the heat exchanger unit? How many more joules of heat energy will be added the jacket water if the requested output power is increased? Will the heat exchanger unit be able to dissipate this extra energy?
If you don't know this information, why do you feel that you can draw a conclusion that is so, so very far out of left field?
>>15360166
Now you have evolved into the next level of mental incapacitation.
Your argument here is that because it is possible for a unit to fail or otherwise become inefficient through lack of maintenance or another fault, then all units behave in this manner.
Far out dude.
>>15360144
I only spent ~10% above 6k because ~80% was spent in traffic. You really think a C5Z would have been more fulfilling in 5-20mph traffic? You continue to astound me.
>>15360144
>The S2000 is obviously not geared correctly
>that anon implied he can drive perfectly at city and highway speeds without having to redline it everytime
>somehow not geared correclty
awww, how cute, now the tripfag is trying to shitpost his way out of the argument
I tought the whole argument as that you needed to redline the car at every stoplight? turns out you don't need to
also, you forgot to answer about the "moving the powerband" bullshit you wrote >>15360025
>>15360176
LOL
plenty of stock cars will overheat or have failures if you run them too hard for too long
>>15360185
Brand new with a functioning cooling system free of scale and buildup, with a fully functioning Fresh Water pump and no buildup in the water jacket galleries?
Then you are eligible for a manufacturer warranty as this is classed a Serious Defect, and has not passed the ISO9001/9002 standard that is applied to the vehicle at the time of manufacture.
>>15360176
>it is possible for a unit to fail or otherwise become inefficient through lack of maintenance or another fault
>or another fault
the fault being in the design, where beancoiunters decided it was not important to have proper heatshielding for long trips at high ambient temperature, which was my original argument
hopefully you already understood your mistake
>>15360200
>Then you are eligible for a manufacturer warranty as this is classed a Serious Defect
the thing is, if you can save more money by designing a faulty cooling and oiling system than by giving some money to the small group of people that are going to cross a desert in a city car, you will receive a massive bonus
thats how bean counting works
>>15360200
maybe that doesn't apply on tracks because it happens all the time when people take stock cars to the track.
also, older turbo cars have warnings not to run under boost for longer periods of time because the turbo will overheat and kill itself
>heartbreaker getting his shit pushed in again
nice
>>15360208
Good lord, it continues!
How would a heat shield, preventing the transfer of heat, increase the heat exchanging unit's ability to transfer heat quickly?
Surely you do not assume that heat will transfer from the engine bay into the cooling system piping efficiently. Surely.
Long and short of it is this;
Coefficient of friction is not what dictates the Safe Operating Speed of a diesel engine. That's your thoughts on the matter.
If a car overheats from continued use at full load, that's a fault. There is a fault in the system.
If the radiator behaved as your describe, then it would be a heat sink.
As long as the heat of the exchange medium does not exceed rated, the radiator will radiate, not sink heat. The ambient heat would be very high to cause this.
>>15360214
Same deal. If there is an overheat condition from blasting around the track, there is a fault in the system. If it is a designed fault, get a warranty done. Otherwise, troubleshoot the fault.
The turbocharger unit heat is somewhat removed from the jacket water heat, even for a unit that is Fresh Water cooled. If the turbocharger is not rated for a high duty cycle that's another issue entirely that does not rely on the Fresh Water cooling system.
Some journal bearing turbochargers are prone to an overheat condition due to the tolerance between the shaft and the bearing surface. Continued use at >80% duty cycle will reduce this tolerance to a foul condition.
>>15360248
>How would a heat shield, preventing the transfer of heat,
by preventing the heat of the engine and exhaust to fuck up the ability of the oil and water cooling system to cool fluids?
just look at the new corvette which needs a heatshield on the cat and a plate between it and the oil filter and oil cooler becuase some retard thought that was a good idea
fucking christ kid, learn a thing or two about real cars instead of sperging what you read on a book
>Coefficient of friction is not what dictates the Safe Operating Speed of a diesel engine.
it absolutely does, not every diesel engine piston moves at the same speed of the diesel flame propagation
> then it would be a heat sink.
or a terribly designed cooling system that uses a water radiator
>"nah bro cars never overheat on a hot day, nah bro"
this guy is delusional
>>15360184
>I tought the whole argument as that you needed to redline the car at every stoplight?
Where was that argument? Are you trying to move the goalposts from what makes a fun street car to whether or not something is physically able to propel itself down the road?
>>15358587
>>15358927
It's more like 800. And it means fucking nothing. As a normal person with an SP2, iredline maybe once a week if I drivE it a lot that week.
>>15360290
So now we are talking about the lubricating system? Right-o.
Yes, you would probably want to maximise the temperature differential between a closed loop cooling system. I take it the Corvette uses a lube oil / fresh water exchanger? This would most likely place the lubricating oil on the outermost edge of the oil cooler. By lowering the heat of the exchanger unit, the differential is maximised. Not as much as an issue with a radiating set, as the exchange medium is quite cool versus the exchange medium being heated fresh water.
No, the coefficient of friction does NOT solely dictate the SOS. And if you believe this so strongly, why did you agree that
> These factors are then influenced by the coefficient of friction.
was common knowledge?
The only nail you are hitting is that yes, a radiating set acting like a heat sink has a fault.
>>15360300
If it's operating correctly then no, they don't overheat. None of our fleet overheat in up to 45 Celsius. Fix your system matey.
>>15360305
>Where was that argument?
>>15359266
>>15359098
>>15359144
>>15359832
I drove one of each back to back when shopping for a roadster. The AP1 was great but only because I drove that one first. The 9k redline is cool but it seemed like forever to get there. The AP2 had alot better powerband.
holy mother of god this is still going on laughing mao
>>15360335
Your interpretation of those posts is I think the S2000 is physically unable to accelerate from a stop?
>ignore all context and every other post in a thread
>make up my own context
>now I can be right about something on an anime imageboard!
Why do you do this, do you lack a lot of attention or validation in your life outside 4chan?
>>15360327
anon, if the temperature of the oil is above the recommended operating procedure, it is overheating
if the temperature of the differential oil is above the recommended one, it is overheating
what are you even talking about overheating oil not being an overheating problem?
>the coefficient of friction does NOT solely dictate the SOS
but it does, you even stated it here >>15359788
>The static and dynamic mass of the Rotating Assembly
>The mass of the Valvetrain and actuating ancillaries that will not operate quickly to begin with, let alone without failure or loss of control of the valve
>The length of the stroke of the piston
>>15359589
You're kinda digging the hole friend, even if you're right, the fact that so many anons are against you says that you've lost. You don't have to be wrong to be a loser
T. AP2 owner that doesnt know everything about powerband and what not, and not afraid to admit it
>>15360366
>backpedaling
kek
>do you lack a lot of attention or validation in your life outside 4chan?
Im not the one tripfagging
keep going
>>15360374
>so many anons
>one anon
>>15360375
Backpedaling how? I've never changed my position, feel free to link to posts and explain how I have if you feel that's the case.
>>15360374
As much as I hate tripfags, heartbreaker is actually right in this case
>>15360372
Your comprehension is poor. Nowhere in >>15360327 was it stated that an overheating lube oil condition is not an overheat. It was stated that maximising the temperature differential between jacket water and lube oil temperature will increase the efficiency of the heat exchanging unit. Perhaps you should try writing fiction instead?
Comprehension is still very poor with the Safe Operating Speed. A number of times it has been said that the coefficient of friction effects the SOS after the primary factors, listed above.
Thus the words 'these factors are THEN influenced by the coefficient of friction.' If you are still having difficulty, that means the the other reasons dictate the SOS to a much larger degree.
You are a straight up and down, dumb person. You cannot comprehend, you cannot follow a trail and you invent whatever suits your argumentative position.
I'm out, I've got a few million joules of heat to dissipate for the next swing.
>>15360390
you can keep controlling the damage all you want, the fact is you belive you need to rev the piss out of an s2000 to be able to drive it on the street,
an LS powered car and an S2000 have different gear ratios
I already linked posts where your retarded ass said so
plus you have been unable to provide any answer to your retardec laim that an s2000 makes "no power down low" and that drag racers "move the powerband up" despite drag build making the same power at low rpms as astock engines
>>15360424
> belive you need to rev the piss out of an s2000 to be able to drive it on the street
I do? You don't even need an engine in an s2000 to drive it on the street, you can have your friend push it. You need to rev the piss out of it to spend a meaningful amount of time in the powerband. The only S2000 owner already confirmed it, as will any other. With an LS1 or larger displacement, lower revving engine you have the power at your disposal at the RPMs you actually spend time in on the street. No matter how you gear an S2000 or similar people will drive them around at 3k RPM, because as I said, winding up any engine on public streets all the time gets old fast. You can bring up hp/l or gear ratios all you want, it's irrelevant to the actual conversation, which was about how fun a high revving car is on the street. I glanced over your wall of text, looks like you found a heavily modded engine that made way more power deep into the RPM range but no more at low RPMs. Not sure what you are getting at. You can look at endless dyno sheets of people putting intakes with longer runners, solid lifters instead of hydraulic and bigger cams in street engines sacrificing low end power for top end. The S2000 doesn't make any power down low, I don't see anyone disagreeing with this but you. Everything you are saying has already been covered, you are talking in circles.
>>15360414
>argh why is no one agreeing with me!!
lets see anon, ill try again
>maximising the temperature differential between jacket water and lube oil temperature will increase the efficiency of the heat exchanging unit
by increasing the temperature of the oil you decrease the temperature differential between the jacket water and oil therefore reducing the efficiency of the heat exhanging unit
which is why a heatshiled between the catalytic converter and the oil cooler and filter helps reduce the temperature of the engine, and increases the efficiency of the heat exchanger
Perhaps YOU should try writting fan fiction, because both aftermarket companies and GM came with similar solutions, that reduce the temperature of the oil which increases the temperature differential between oil and water increasing the efficiency of the heat exhanging unit
basically, you are a retard and reals>your feels, reducing the tmeperature of the oil in the new corvette reduces the temperature of the engine
>these factors are THEN influenced by the coefficient of friction
the factors are not "then influenced" by the coefficient of friction. the characteristics of the engine are what determines its coefficient of friction, given two similar sized diesel engines, made with similar materials the one with bigger stroke will have a heavier crankshat which increased the load in a similarly sized surface area, increasing friction
its the same in any other contact point
lierally lrn 2 Amontons laws
>>15360485
>because as I said, winding up any engine on public streets all the time gets old fast
im just going to interject to call bullshit. Sounds like you're some tired baby boomer trying to make excuses as to why having 700bhp from a 4 tonne cruiser is appropriate.
I've been driving since i could reach the pedals, licensed for 12 years and i still drive like a fucking arsehole. Hell i've just gotten into bikes just so i can rev higher and skip traffic easier.
>>15358927
Which you can switch yourself. Or be a man and get a car that doesn't have to switch cam profiles
>>15360534
I'm not biting to your bait any longer bar your misheld belief that the SOS is solely dictated by the CoF;
A MAK32C has a shorter stroke, smaller bore and lighter RA and valvetrain than EMD645-16. There is 1.4 square meters of bearing surface area in a MAK32C and 1.8666 in an EMD645-16.
EMD 645 SOS is four hundred and sixteen RPM higher.
If the coefficient of friction was the largest factor in dictating SOS, more important than valvetrain mass and geometry, more than the combustion chamber volume and design, more than the IMEP above the crown, then why in this example and many more does the engine with the largest coefficient of friction have the highest SOS?
You're just incorrect text on a message board champ, and with the knowledge you have, that's all you will remain.
Ciao.
>>15360485
>lower revving engine you have the power at your disposal at the RPMs you actually spend time in on the street.
you are a retard, cars aren't geared the same and cars do no have only one 1.1 gear
>matter how you gear an S2000
its absolute matters how you gear it, retard
>You can bring up hp/l or gear ratios all you want, it's irrelevant to the actual conversation
sadly it isn't, no one is even arguing hp/l and leaving out gearing is as stupid as leaving out the wheels
>will drive them around at 3k RPM
while someone in an LS powered car will drive it at 1700, because they do not need to rev it faster due to gearing
>but no more at low RPMs.
something something fixed valve profile, but according to you, engines with variable cam profiles "don't make any power down low"
>sacrificing low end power for top end.
making the same power at the same RPM while making more at higher RPM isn't "sacrificing low end power for top end" retard
>The S2000 doesn't make any power down low,
you already posted a graph where it makes power "down low"
an s2000 doens't magically makes 240hp at 8500rpm while making 0 power at lower engine speeds than that, here let me link you to the image you posted>>15359705
your retarded ass belives the power made in the first lobe is "making no power" despite the fact its making more power with it than with just one valve profile
you are a retard that doesn't know what is talking about, keep digging your hole deeper
>>15360579
>that the SOS is solely dictated by the CoF;
no anon, thats clearly what have been incorrectly understanding, i stated here that the main reason is the speed of the combustion >>15360290 but give similar charateristics, aka getting rid of all variables possible, the engine with the lower coeffiecient of surface will have a higher SOS
>A MAK32C has a shorter stroke, smaller bore and lighter RA and valvetrain than EMD645-16. There is 1.4 square meters of bearing surface area in a MAK32C and 1.8666 in an EMD645-16.
>EMD 645 SOS is four hundred and sixteen RPM higher.
thats nice, but sadly these two engines are not made with the same materials, with the same design and so on which eliminates the countless of variables you are trying to base your argument in moreover, the surface area and mass are different
friction does not depend on the amount of surface area if the two objects have the same mass
given the same surface area, the engine with less mass with a similarly sized contact points will have a lower coeficcient of friction. increasing the SOS
this is pretty much a law
>If the coefficient of friction was the largest factor in dictating SOS, more important than valvetrain mass and geometry, more than the combustion chamber volume and design, more than the IMEP above the crown, then why in this example and many more does the engine with the largest coefficient of friction have the highest SOS?
again, given two engines with similar valvetrain mass and geometry, combustion chamber volume and design, and so on, the engine with the lower mass in contact with the same surface area will have a higher SOS, due to the fact that it will have a lower coefficient of friction
please do grasp at sraws and add more vairables to try to defend your argument
>>15360753
>the engine with the lower coeffiecient of friction* will have a higher SOS
>>15355978
get a 6 speed like me :)
>>15360753
>but do you actually believe that the specific output of heat and loss of kinetic energy due to friction solely dictates the Safe Operating Speed of an engine?
in what world do you live in that it isn't the major reason?
This is you, quite likely, just a few posts ago. Short memory.
More than that, no, the flame propagation is not the main reason. It is but one reason.
Off the top of your head, what is the flame propagation rate? Does it change?
Do you think the DFO flame propagation rate is any faster in MAN 32/44 than it is in CAT 3516C, though they have the same IMEP yet turn one thousand and fifty RPM differently to each other?
Righto then, EMD 567-16 vs 645-16. Shorter stroke in the 567, less main bearing surface area. Same Power Assembly from the liner up. 645-16 has a higher SOS.
lolbutytho? CoF is higher and it's the same powerplant base? Perhaps the CoF is not the main variable dictating SoS? You are hung up on a simple topic covered in the first year of Werkstudent.
Mass does not dictate SOS. It is but one variable. You should know this if you had experience with anything more than a whipper-snipper.
Further yes, it is actually quite easy to base the CoF from surface area of the main bearings. That is what is done by MED's across the globe on a daily basis. You will come within a bee's dick and a half of specified heat output using the surface area of the main bearing in the algorithm.
You are the fool grasping at straws, inserting ad hominem and inventing fiction and fact to repeat an argument in a circular fashion as an attack.
Now I'm truly off to run DFO and HFO engines for the next twelve hours. Stay wise, o master of engines. Perhaps I will see you at the next IMO summit?
i liked driving one, when i got on the highway it still pulls at 6k. As far as city driving it was fine, but i don't drive like a 16 year old who just got his license. It's sharp on mountain roads as well, stays within power band. That with the reliability of Honda is swell too. They have been going up in pricing because its a good platform, anything clean sub-10k should be bought imo. Most go for 13k+.
AP1 has issues with valve retainers, see http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/847563-pics-of-my-cracked-ap1-valve-retainers/
while AP2 was supposed to have this issue addressed. If you do get an AP1, I would consider checking compression, and if you have the tools , to change out the valve retainers/ valve guide seals.
On the plus side we had the top down in the one that i was driving, and some old dude in his truck said it was a nice car when we were at a stop light.
>>15360864
you are fucking autistic.
>>15360864
>let me keep grasping at straws and add variables that are completly unrelated to the subject we are discussing
im going to tell it to you for the last time
if you have two engines, which are exactly the same, the only difference being the mass of the compinents which share a surface area when rotating or moving, the engine with a higher mass will have a higher CoF meaning it won't be able to achieve higher engine speed
the characteristics that dictate flame speed, combustion rate, specific output and so on are IRRELEVANT because both engines are designed to operate under similar conditions
we are not even discussing if the engine with less mass will be able to make power at a higher engine speed, we are discussing the fact that with a lower coefficient of friction the engine will be less prone to damage, which increase its SOS, which all translate into the idea that an engine with a lower CoF will be able to achieve a higher SOS than, the same engine, but with a higher CoF
SOS also implies the engine wont spun a bearing, break apiston pin or whatever failure exist when over-revving an engine
we are discussing CoF, any other vairable is irrelevant
>>15355994
>ap2 is better
better at being a cuckmobile to haul boomers around. softer suspension? more prone to understeer? more "low end torque" for "driveability"
give me snap oversteer mixed with a healthy dosing of 9000rpm any day.
>>15360911
eeeyah, I'm not assburgers. I'm an employed, specialist MAN Diesel and Turbo MED. Also a grouchy old cunt.
>>15361043
And this is straight up garbage. I'm not going to steer you around, but no.
>>15359705
>makes peak hp similar to what my LS makes at like 2600 rpm
MUH RPM BRO
>>15361198
>more prone to understeer
which means it will probably be able to actually corner faster near the limit. understeer is only balanced with induced oversteer
>>15360599
>1700 rpm
that's about right for city driving in my LS1. under 2000 rpm anywhere except for highway. my gearing puts me at 3000 at 70mph
>>15361566
>omg why does this engine that is almost 3 times bigger makes more power
>>15361423
>gets proved wrong
>"t-thats garbage"
stay autistic
>>15355978
Difference between all the years:
http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/755380-s2000-model-year-differences/
Also very useful if you decide to check one out:
http://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/775801-what-to-look-for-when-buying-a-used-s2000-or-just-bought-a-used-s2000/
>>15361646
Son, at least you have a wide collection of animated images of girls to keep your spirits up. If you think the trash you regurgitated is fact, which you do, that's not a real good sign. Doesn't bother me in the slightest as with this attitude, we won't bump into each other, nor will you bump into the other fourteen of us.
End of the day boyo none of this banter will stop me taking a fat ogre shit in the heads, and keep making these few hundred metres of ship keep sailing around the world with a big 'ol MAN that I've rebuilt twice.
>>15361732
look buddy, you can sperg all you want, facts are facts
>first Amontons's law: The force of friction is directly proportional to the applied load.
>second Amontons' law The force of friction is independent of the apparent area of contact.
these are laws, it doesn't matter how much to try to post irrelevant variables, similar engines with different mass and similar surface are in the rotational assembly will have different coeffcient of friction, the lower the mass, the higher the engine speed can be achieved with less risk of damaging engine components
I don't care what you do, you are a thick headed cunt incapable of understanding this simple concept
>>15361646
>omg why does this engine that is almost 3 times bigger makes more power
but i'm also having 3 times more fun every time i step on the pedal
>b-but the engine d-displacement
the S2000 is the most expensive "slow" car you can buy.
enjoy being fucking annihilated by corvette, gto, camaro, trans am, trailblazer SS, any newer mustang, any newer performance dodge. any sporty lexus. etc. etc.
a dodge caravan has more HP.
if "300hp is the new 200hp" then 200hp is the new 108 hp
>>15361787
You’re right, the facts are facts. They are posted above. Which is why I’m so confused as to why you don’t understand them.
That's not the concept that was difficult, by the looks. It was your;
Belief that the CoF is the major factor in dictating the SoS, which is not true. Demonstrated above.
180 degree about face and state that common knowledge is no, the CoF is not the main factor.
180 degree turn again (360 then walk away?) that yes, the CoF is the main factor (which it is not.)
You can post the high school physics for one discreet variable of twenty-six all you want, which is correct. But the CoF is not the biggest contributing factor.
So we once again revisit this example; EMD 567-16 and EMD645-16. Amonton’s law is correct in that the EMD645-16 has a higher CoF due to both more force applied to the mating surface, and more mating surface. Yet the EMD645 has a higher SOS, due to the more important factors listed waaaaay up the top that you took umbrage to.
Yes, the lower the mass of the RA theoretically the higher the SoS. Then you take the other twenty-five factors into account, and you will discover the actual SOS.
Which I have been attempting to share with you for the past few hours?
You can use all the buzzwords you like, bottom line is this; You understand but a poofteenth of which you speak.
Tl;DR keep doing what you are doing, at the level you are at. Must be a special place down there.
If op has a cl type s with the j32 he already has a faster car than a s2000 in a straight line.
OP is your cl the 6spd manual? Why not just save for something better than the s2000? That gen of cl is only like 3100lbs.
>>15359349 and I thought 6800 on my d16y4 was bad
>>15361834
>but i'm also having 3 times more fun every time i step on the pedal
nice buzzwords
> the most expensive "slow" car you can buy.
thats because you are a poorfag
>annihilated by corvette, gto, camaro, trans am, trailblazer SS, any newer mustang, any newer performance dodge
lel
>>15363222
and have another one
>b-but muh pushrodshit veeayte
>muh torqz
![1467361339455[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/ZGyTAfv.gif "1467361339455[1].gif")
>>15363238
>>15363222
GM BTFO!!!!
>>15361834
>Having more torque, and going faster is fun
To each their own.
But driving is about passion. There are different cars for everything. Speed, torque, RPMS, wind in the hair, the experience, the comfort.
Hell, I can enjoy a Lincoln Town car because it's the comfiest car I've been in. I can also enjoy a slammed civic that's riding on bumpstops.
Please /o/, rather than bench racing about 2 cars that no of us own, go out and drive cars. I'm sure you'll even find you enjoy cars like a RX8, even tho it kills you inside to be seen in one.
>>15363222
Yeah but than again you have to buy an american car post 1980.
We all make our choices.
>>15359098
so then you just go through the whole powerband accelerating longer until you need to shift. how is this a problem? you're just displacing when you need to shift not how much acceleration happens.
you guys sound dumb as fuck when you say "rev the fuck out of it". what does that even mean? you realize that having more torque means you are revving faster which is more like revving the fuck out of it, right?
all this anti-f2c logic is so asinine.
