Highest Rev's on the stock Engine.

[1fast97gsx]

if you want to rev to 9k's, go buy a b16. They come stock with an 8500 rpm redline.

this is true but those cars are impossible to make fast. Reving high is nice but I'd rather make a ton more power.

 

[na90dsm]

so what would you gusy recomend to safely rev to 9k without any prblems. would single springs cut it or dual springs strongly recomended inthat situation?

 

[kpt4321]

And yes without a bigger turbo you are just losing power. Honestly as long as you shift and your rpms don't drop below 3k you will have plenty of power throughout the gear.

WTF? You don't want to shift to "keep your rpm's above 3k."

With a properly built motor (which, considering how good the 4G63 is, doesn't take much) you want to keep the engine speed up near 6000-9000 all the time. You make twice as much power at 6000 rpm as you do at 3000 rpm.

 

[pinknuggit]

so what would you gusy recomend to safely rev to 9k without any prblems. would single springs cut it or dual springs strongly recomended inthat situation?

You can rev to 9k stock, but don't expect your engine to last long while doing it. It doesn't matter what springs you choose (single or double), just make sure they have more seat and open pressure at the height of lift of your cam. I would reccomend balancing your rotating assembly before you build a motor that revs to 9k.

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

Just because you do it, doesn't mean that it's safe and that you can advise others to.

I rev my stock 5.9 in my truck to 5700. It's definately not safe and i don't reccomend others do it.

The stock valvesprings in a 4g63 will hate life above 8k. Also, mitsubishi doesn't balance the rotating assembly that well from the factory. 9k on a stock engine is not safe in the least bit. Balance your rotating assembly and get some stout valvesprings and you can rev that high safely.
I think it's kind of funny (no offense) the way you worded that post. "yeah it's safe to rev to 9k, but i buried a valve doing it, but its perfectly safe". :laugh: I seriously doubt that you've been shifting at 9k all the time for 240k miles.

a 4g63 is not made to rev high. Sure, it can do it, but if you want to rev to 9k's, go buy a b16. They come stock with an 8500 rpm redline.

I don't understand how you manage to sound somewhat educated while spouting off nonsense.

I love how you say:

"I think it's kind of funny (no offense) the way you worded that post. "yeah it's safe to rev to 9k, but i buried a valve doing it, but its perfectly safe". "

When I say:

" I have shifted at 9 every time I raced for a long time, runnign 11's, but I buried it racing a bike last week and bent a valve on cylinder 3 at a hair over 10k."

Not only are you stupid, but your in such a hurry to sound smart, you cannot properly read a post. I bent it as I hit my revlimiter at 10000

I have been running 11's for along time at north of 120 MPH on my 240k mile short block, with a head that has never been seperated from it, has seen 9k numerous times, back to back, during 60 miles of road racing in the desert.

Scot Grey, who is, as much as I hate to admit it, smarter then anyone who has posted in this thread, has seen as high as 9800 once and 9000 on a regular basis for years on a stock head. And those years involve runnign 11.3's@126 monthly and road racing all the time. He's the black 1g in the USCC.

I find it endlessly amusing that the people who make up issues that don't exist ignore all the pages of people who do it successfully on a daily basis. Theories with no backing are fun, but reality always wins in the end.

With all this said, i found out that I did NOT bend a valve, but that I collapsed a lifter. I put in one new lifter and the car is still running great, now at 241k, and I hit 9k about a dozen times on the way home from my girlfriends 15 minutes ago.

 

[pinknuggit]

Thank you for calling me stupid. I appreciate that. It's bad that you have to resort to name calling. I would expect a higher level of maturity than that.

I'm not the one who's running their engine at 2k above redline every day. I don't care how many miles your engine has on it, piston velocity at 9k will eventually cause the motor to wear out. So you're telling me that since your engine had Zero miles on it, you take it to 9k 15 times a day? Do you have any idea of what kind of vibrations a poorly balanced engine sees at 9k rpm? Do you know the affects of those vibrations?I mean, you know, the 4g63 was kinda designed by Engineers. And since You're not an engineer who designed the 4g63, I'm sure that they put the stock redline at a SAFE ~7000 for a reason, obviously unbeknown to you.

Point being, If it was SAFE to rev to 9k, mitsubishi would have bumped up the factory rev limeter. A B16 loves high revs, and guess what, honda made the stock redline at a tad shy of 9k. B16 = 4g63? No.

Like I said, Some people do it with success, and More fockin' Power To Em!!. I'm not ignoring them. But not everyone is going to have a car that reacts the same way. Please get off of your high horse and adsorb that bit of information. You're not a mitsubishi engineer, so you don't have the right to say that it is perfectly SAFE to rev a stock 4g63 to 9k daily. There are just as many people who have had something break at high revs as there are people who are revving high without breaking. I turn my 5.9 over to 5700 rpm only when i'm racing. I know people who have grenaded rods from revving to 5500, and I know tons of people who smacked valves doing the same... But do I go around telling all my dodge friends that it's perfectly safe to rev their 5.9 to almost 6k stock? NO

You're saying that what I said was a theory? What makes it set in stone that just because you can rev that high, that everyone else can? It sounds to me like You're the one who is spittin' out this "theory" that a 4g63 is safe to rev to 9k because you do it all the time.
Point is, I don't care who rev'd to 9k for how long. FACT is that revs that high are NOT safe on a stock motor. That's all I've said since the first word. How is that "Theory"???????
You go and ask any real mechanic with SENSE, and they will totally laugh in your face. How much experience have you had in actually building engines? It seems to me like you don't have very much. It's always easy to tell the difference between people who beat on their cars without them breaking vs. people who have sense.

I can't belive you're the one who is saying I'm stupid. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

"Theories with no backing are always fun, but in the end reality wins".
Hello... Pot? This is kettle.... Pot, are you there?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I have the whole engineering team who hath designed the 4g63 in the past backing my "theory". Who's backing yours? A few people who are lucky??? :laugh:

"I bent it as I hit my rev limiter at 10000"
You bent what? a valve?
"With all this said, I found out that i did NOT bend a valve, but that I collapsed a lifter"
Well, which one is it?!?! Did you bend a valve or collapse a lifter?!?! Or did you bend a lifter? :laugh:
Can't make your mind? :laugh: Both from the same post, at that.
I'm calling BS. :laugh:


I Do think it's kind of funny how you take my quote of your quote out of context. It amused me how you stated how safe it was to rev high, yet in the same sentence, commented how you broke something while revving high.

So If I go rev my 4G to 9k and it breaks, will you be held responsible? I mean after all, you told me it was perfectly safe...

 

[coltboostin]

b16=never be fatser then a talon unless over 5 grand is spent.

Honda=slower than colt unless a hell of alot more is spent.


Dont be freaking ricers and rev to 9k to say hey, I rev to 9k. their is no need for anything abouve 8k unless you have something 60-1 or bigger, and a set of 272.

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

I collapsed a lifter at around 10k flat. With that said, Pinknuggit can be safely ignored. Saying valve springs will be hating life over 8k with all the empirical evidence saying you are wrong is stupid.

Remember everyone, Mitsubishi engineers are the pinnacle of engineering genius. ::rolls eyes:: Like anyone on this site cares about the original intentions of the worst engineers in ####ing Japan. Especially when those engineers had entirely different aim's then us, half of which is related to powerband and torque curve neways. The EVO 8 comes from the factory with stock springs that have about half the seat pressure of a a 240k mile spring out of my head, and it still has a 7k redline.

Once again, for you it's theory, backing me is everyone who has ever done it.

It's not like I just drag race eitheir, the car has seen 9k repeatedly during 60 miles of road racing in the desert.

All your arguements are a kind of sophistry, like

"I Do think it's kind of funny how you take my quote of your quote out of context. It amused me how you stated how safe it was to rev high, yet in the same sentence, commented how you broke something while revving high. "

When "high" in one case is 9k and in another is 10k, but you just group it all together to win.

End the sophistry, talk to those who know, and try to learn something.

 

[pinknuggit]

no, an evo valvespring does not have half the seat pressure as a 4g63 head. I don't know where you came up with that. I worked in a head shop longer than i'd care to admit, and I know that you are false on that one.
Yeah, how many EVO's do you see revving to 9k daily? Guess what, they're practically the same engine that is in your car.

Are you retarded? It's Not theory on my end. You're going to try and tell me that mitsubishi engineers are Wrong and you're right because a few people run their motors at high rpm? I guess you and the handful of people who turn 9k daily should write a letter to mitsubishi and get them to issue a TSB for all dsm's with a 4g63 to raise the redline to 9k. I'm sure that will go over well. Get a clue.

Saying that mitsubishi engineers are the worst in japan just goes more to contradict what you're saying!! If they are so bad, then howcome the 4g63 has made its own bed as becoming a diehard engine? If they are so horrible at designing engines, then howcome your stock 7k redline engine can rev to 9k without blowing up?
Common sense > you. :laugh:

I'm not even concerned with the head. I'm stating my point about the bottom end of a stock motor. You never answered my question. What kind of experience do you have building motors? How many motors have you built and raced?

Son, You need to stop trying to preach what you don't know.

I sure as hell know that, based on what I've observed, I would kill myself if you ever became an engineer for mitsubishi!!! Do you understand how physics work?

I'm done with this. If you want to go on and belive that you're better than mitsubishi engineers, so be it. It's obvious that you can't be skewed from your dim-witted point of view. I hope that when you finally get some common sense, you will look back on this post and realize how dumb you actually look. You can't convince the retarded that they are stupid.

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

You can't convince the retarded that they are stupid.

I have realized this in our conversation. I have called you stupid many times.

EVO valvesprings are light, go try checking again, I woudn't recomend going over 8 with them....although the do have rediculously light retainers.

You think that your narrow POV encapsulates all the reasons the car has a 7k redline? Alot more goes into the decision then you seem to be aware of. You keep qouting 14 y/o engineers and Ill just stick with what I have proven on the multiple 11 second DSM's I have owned, the many I have built, and the fact that have never once heard of an issue from the treatment I give 4G63's. Will it become an issue in 50 thousand miles? It's may....but anyone with a setup that makes power at 9k is likely not going to be on a stock engine for 75 thousand miles anyways.

As for specilization, Im not going to get into it, except to say that I have and could go back to work on cars at the shops that you buy parts from.

I am quite aware of how physics works, and aware of what could in theory become an issue on a DSM at high RPM....but the fact of the matter is that I work on DSM's for a living, it's my only job, and I have yet to encounter any issues with the treatment I give my own motor. Sure, additional sideload occurs, sure, in theory bearings could get unhappy, and sure, piston speeds get pretty high....but in practice, it simply has yet to matter once in all the DSM race/street cars I have dealt with. My car is currently getting a 2.35 liter, it will be interesting to see how it responds with its shittier 1.5 r/s....but I will continue to beat the shit out of it until something breaks, unfortuneatley nothing ever does. Car's sense fear.

I have been treating both my 11 sec talon and my 11 second eclipse the same way for a long time, and I have never had anything fail, except for one lifter, and thats only arguably related to high RPM's, which was north of 9.5k and a self-admitted mistake in the first place.

I have practice, you claim to not have theory, but even your proposition about Mitsubishi engineers is a theory about their intentions you simply don't know. Where is the Mitsubishi engineer you are quoting about the tolerance of our engines? As far as Im concerned our 7k redline has alot more to do with tuning theory and pre-cam timing engines and the ability of a manufacturer to make power effectively at 9k. In addition, the motor was designed for rally racing, extremely long and strenuous and not directly comparable to occasional 9k sprints for 20 minute road racing sessions or 11 and 10 second passes.

So you have single wide spread theory you could equally apply to any engine. You have zero knowledge or even theory that applies specifically to the 4G63. In addition, half your theory is based on the minds of Japanese Engineers controlled by Japanese economists whose intentions and abilities you simply d not know.

 

[pinknuggit]

no, what i'm preaching is Common Sense, not theory.

It's not Prectical Or Smart for ever single person to rev their bone stock dsm to 9k. It's Common Sense that if the engieers thought it safe, they would have made a higher factory redline. That's all i'm trying to say. It's simple, really.

Why won't you get into your specializatoin? So you work on dsm's for a living? What shop do you work at? What kind of training have you had? I'm just wondering. I've asked you that in every single post, but you alwayd avoid it. How can you make vague statements, and think they will hold merit? You think you work at shops that I buy parts from? I work at the machine shop that will do the work on your block that you supposedly build. If you built the motor, then why does it have 240k stock miles?
It isn't making sense in my mind how someone who supposedly builds motors and works on cars for a profession, slaps a big turbo on a 240K mile car and beats it to hell. In addition, they reccomend average joes to do the same? I've never met a guru in my life that would even think of such blasphemy, let alone reccomending it. Talk about lack of common sense?

You're completely right when you say "As far as Im concerned our 7k redline has alot more to do with tuning theory", but the rest of that paragraph is purely your opinion. A stock motor does not have good powerband charachteristics up to 9k. You can port the head, get big cams, a SMIM, a big turbo, and balance the bottom end and I wouldn't doubt it if you could turn over 11k safely. But that's not a stock motor. Ever notice how a stock powerband peaks at 6k rpm? The b16 and other high revving honda motors have a powerband that extends up to almost 10 rpm. Stock. They also have a rod stroke ratio of 1.74 (heaven), so it does not put as much physical strain on the motor when it revs high as opposed to a 4g63. The plain simple fact is that the camshaft, powerband, and bottom end charachteristics of a stock 4g63 are not efficient in the upper RPM range. You can disagree with me till you're blue in the face, but that's fact.

Where did you come up with rally being the invention of the 4g63? The Evo was what sparked mitsubishi's rally hunger, and in '90, the EVO RS was a lancer with a galant engine and drivetrain. The engine in the evo was Based off of the 4g63 from the galant, except it got a lighter crank, better rods, higher compression pistons, and new port geometry. That's a fact, not "theory". Again, the history of the 4g63 as you state it ("The motor was designed for rally racing") is vague and holds no merit. I might not have quotes from engineers who designed the motor, but you don't Either. You, your boy scott gray, and a few others might have success revving their motor to hell, but I Don't see them on here preaching that it's perfectly safe on a stock motor. There's a difference between being a follower and being a leader.

what are your mods? your profile just says 20G, 720's, and an afc with an 11.999 @118 timeslip that is a bogus link. Here, two weeks ago, it says you have a 50 trim and run 12.24 on a 239k motor and you only rev to 8500? Is it 239, 240, or 241 k miles? Is it 8500, 9000 or 10000 rpm that you rev to while racing? Did you bend a valve or collapse a lifer? You run "north" of 120mph traps (from this thread), but even your fastest "timeslip" says 118?? i've seen all three spread around. You have no credibility on here.

It's easy to sit there and say "yeah, i know what i'm talking about", but that doesn't mean you really do.

What turbo and what mods do you have? Oh yeah, you have a Stock motor, so you just have boltons. Apprently, you've only spent 1600 on mods, so that's not alot.
Let's take a look at scott gray's mods, Right from his website.

Forced Performance "GREEN" Turbo
HKS 264 intake, 272 exhaust cams
ARP Head Studs
Ported 95 Exhaust Manifold
TIAL 40mm External Wastegate
3" RRE O2 Eliminator Downpipe
Carsound 3" High-flow Cat
3" Road Race Engineering Exhaust with Dynomax SuperTurbo Muffler (17793)
MSD DIS-2 Ignition Amplifier and 2 Stage Rev Limiter
Magnecore plug wires
NGK BP7E plugs gapped to .028
Redline MTL in Transmission
Redline Shock-Proof in transfer case
Road Race Engineering Race Built Transmission
Quaife front and center LSD
Road Race Service Race Built 2.3 Liter (stroker) Engine
AEM Cone Air Filter mounted in the fenderwell
Road Race Engineering custom 2.5" IC piping
HKS front mount intercooler
Crushed Stock BOV
AEM EMS Standalone Engine Management
AEM 3.5 BAR MAP Sensor
Greddy Profec-B Boost Controller
Greddy Turbo timer
Defi-Link Gauges
Zeitronix ZT-2 Wideband Oxygen Sensor
Denso 660cc injectors
Walbro 255Lph in-tank Fuel pump (Hardwired)
CarTech External Adjustable Fuel Pressure Regulator
PWR Performance bolt-on racing radiator
Road Race Engineering custom JIC Coil-over Suspension (tuned by John Mueller)
Road Race Engineering Adjustable front Camber Plates with added Caster
Suspension Techniques Rear Sway Bar with Poly Bushings
Road Race Engineering Front Strut Tower Brace
Extreme Motorsports Rear Strut Tower Brace
StopTech Braking System (front)
Pagid Orange Brake Pads
Sparco Torino Sport Seats
Schroth AutoControl 4 Point Harnesses
Gram Light 57C 17x7 Wheels with 30mm offset

That's alot of mods. I would belive him if he said that he turned over 9k rpms. He has the engine buildup and the powerband charachteristics to do it. He also doesn't have a stock motor.

There's a difference between being a leader and being a follower.

 

[Kevin Jewer]

This has now become arguing just for the sake of argument. Poeple have safely reved to 8500 on a regular basis. They wouldnt set the rev limit to 7500 from the factory if that was the critical limit. They have warranty claims to worry about. And there was no point in going over that point on a stock setup that doesnt make any power up there, so why risk it. Its that simple.

But there has been plenty of argument on both sides of the issue, I think each person can make up his or her own mind about how high they should go.

 

[FireyIce01]

Saying that mitsubishi engineers are the worst in japan just goes more to contradict what you're saying!! If they are so bad, then howcome the 4g63 has made its own bed as becoming a diehard engine? If they are so horrible at designing engines, then howcome your stock 7k redline engine can rev to 9k without blowing up?
Common sense > you. :laugh:

Well, I'd like to point out there's more people posting that they have successfully ran their stock engines up to 9k+ rpms without blowing up the bottom end or bending up the valvetrain, so apparently the motors CAN handle it... AND most of the time engineers design engines, and then set limits that are heavily on the safe side... running at 9k could break something, it's a possibility, but I could walk outside and get hit by a bus... doesn't mean it's going to happen... it's just more likely to happen if I walk in the street than if I'm on my porch, and even then it doesn't mean it will... the 4g63 is more likely to frag at 9k than it is at 7k, and so, the redline is set at 7k, where it's highly unlikely to frag, and I don't walk in the street, I stick to sidewalks and patios, where busses are unlikely to be driving.

My point is, just because the engineers set the redline at 7k, doesn't mean that the engine wasn't designed to handle 9k... I don't know about you, but I'm not a mitsu engineer, and I don't know what they built this motor to handle, I just know what it can handle...

And to throw in my .02 on the question this thread was started to answer. I wouldn't run it past 8500 unless you build it, balance it, get everything machined to very tight tolerances, and get proper parts where needed (lightened rods, forged pistons, cams & springs, bigger turbo, etc...) But it should be able to take 9k if you really want it to. If it frags, then you'll know it wasn't one of the ones that could handle those revs.

 

[pinknuggit]

exactly what I said. The engineers obviously overengineered the engine, but that doesn't combat the point of being "safe".
I never said the engine won't do it. It can, but it's not 100% safe. That's all i'm trying to say.


Food for thought

 

[billdo_83]

Unless he has cams and a big turbo there is absolutely no need for him to be revving his engine that high anyways.

I'm liking the ownage also

 

[RipperXX]

I think the guys a fuggin idiot. If his engine really is "Stock" this means your on the stock intake manifold. You claim to run a 11sec pass runing to 10,000 rpm on a "stock" motor. I say BS. Even if you had the fuel support for it I say BS. I have ran to 7k in the 1/4 in 3rd gear with my old 90 AWD TSi I sold. And theres absolutely no power up there without cams and a larger turbo. Your full of shit right there buddy. If the "stock" engine is that weak at 7k I dont see it pulling it's self to 10k in 3rd or 4th in the time it takes to run the 1/4 and your claiming a 11 sec pass.


STFU and go away, even if it was safe and it's not. I still wouldn't do it. Why? Because I love my car and it's engine, I treat it well, sure I beat on it at times, but im not some dumb #### that runs around everywhere reving to 10k.


Infact if I knew where you lived I would be tempted to smack you in the face with a 9 iron. Anyone that cares about there car wouldn't abuse it like that.

You :thumbdown

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

no, what i'm preaching is Common Sense, not theory.

It's not Prectical Or Smart for ever single person to rev their bone stock dsm to 9k. It's Common Sense that if the engieers thought it safe, they would have made a higher factory redline. That's all i'm trying to say. It's simple, really.

Why won't you get into your specializatoin? So you work on dsm's for a living? What shop do you work at? What kind of training have you had? I'm just wondering. I've asked you that in every single post, but you alwayd avoid it. How can you make vague statements, and think they will hold merit? You think you work at shops that I buy parts from? I work at the machine shop that will do the work on your block that you supposedly build. If you built the motor, then why does it have 240k stock miles?
It isn't making sense in my mind how someone who supposedly builds motors and works on cars for a profession, slaps a big turbo on a 240K mile car and beats it to hell. In addition, they reccomend average joes to do the same? I've never met a guru in my life that would even think of such blasphemy, let alone reccomending it. Talk about lack of common sense?

Me? I hardly have ever claimed to be a guru. Clearly my title does not say wise man. I don't build engines. I pull them out and dissassemble them relatively often. I'm a mechanic, not a machinist. It doesn't matter, this is just an ad hominum attack.

Anyone who actually managed to get their car to 9k, which takes a significant investment in time nd money in terms of making the car powerful enough to go there followed by getting an ecu that allows you too.....It's not something some kid will read and then go try. Anyone who gets it done will be wise enoguh to consider the potential consequences. Would I warranty a stock engine with a 9k redline? Probably not. But that doesn't change the fact that i have dealt with the situation alot and have yet to see any issues. I tell people my experiances, which involve a boat load of 4G63's, and you tell people "knowledge" you have that does not relate to the 4G63 in any direct form

You're completely right when you say "As far as Im concerned our 7k redline has alot more to do with tuning theory", but the rest of that paragraph is purely your opinion. A stock motor does not have good powerband charachteristics up to 9k. You can port the head, get big cams, a SMIM, a big turbo, and balance the bottom end and I wouldn't doubt it if you could turn over 11k safely. But that's not a stock motor. Ever notice how a stock powerband peaks at 6k rpm? The b16 and other high revving honda motors have a powerband that extends up to almost 10 rpm. Stock. They also have a rod stroke ratio of 1.74 (heaven), so it does not put as much physical strain on the motor when it revs high as opposed to a 4g63. The plain simple fact is that the camshaft, powerband, and bottom end charachteristics of a stock 4g63 are not efficient in the upper RPM range. You can disagree with me till you're blue in the face, but that's fact.

Why would I disagree with this entire worthless paragraph about powerband. I said it first. I theorize the engine was made to handle 10k and powerband limited them to 7k. True? Probably not, but it hold EQUAL weight to your theory about the Mitsu engineers design. Both are stupid as hell. Your arguementation skills are very poor from a logic standpoint?

"As far as Im concerned our 7k redline has alot more to do with tuning theory and pre-cam timing engines and the ability of a manufacturer to make power effectively at 9k. "

No logic here.

Where did you come up with rally being the invention of the 4g63? The Evo was what sparked mitsubishi's rally hunger, and in '90, the EVO RS was a lancer with a galant engine and drivetrain. The engine in the evo was Based off of the 4g63 from the galant, except it got a lighter crank, better rods, higher compression pistons, and new port geometry. That's a fact, not "theory". Again, the history of the 4g63 as you state it ("The motor was designed for rally racing") is vague and holds no merit. I might not have quotes from engineers who designed the motor, but you don't Either. You, your boy scott gray, and a few others might have success revving their motor to hell, but I Don't see them on here preaching that it's perfectly safe on a stock motor. There's a difference between being a follower and being a leader.

I said it was Rally because the first cars to EVER have a dual cam 4g63 were homologated rally cars as far as I know. If Im wrong I would be curious to know it. The first 4G63 powered car in modern form I know of is the 88 GVR4 in Japan, which was a rally car. About the engineers though....Lets drop them....YOU brought them up, I pointed out it was stupid. Their intent means nothing to me. Especcially since we don't know what ti was. the logic FAILS. As for being a follower, possibly. My setup tend to remain unique though

what are your mods? your profile just says 20G, 720's, and an afc with an 11.999 @118 timeslip that is a bogus link. Here, two weeks ago, it says you have a 50 trim and run 12.24 on a 239k motor and you only rev to 8500? Is it 239, 240, or 241 k miles? Is it 8500, 9000 or 10000 rpm that you rev to while racing? Did you bend a valve or collapse a lifer? You run "north" of 120mph traps (from this thread), but even your fastest "timeslip" says 118?? i've seen all three spread around. You have no credibility on here.

No credibility on DSMTuners, #### shit. Yes, because all my posts are made at the same time! And my time is definitely current!

I shift at 9k in first and 2nd typically and 8500 or soo in every gear after that. I use 9k when racing with turn's if shifting into the next gear is going to screw me up. I also tend to shift higher on race gas...My car has 240800 miles. I drive alot. Every day I world is a 90 mile drive round trip. And I round numbers on occasion. This is all sophistry. You keep bring up extraneous information with no regard to the arguement at hand.

This is all ad hominem. The logic behind your arguement sucks here as well.

It's easy to sit there and say "yeah, i know what i'm talking about", but that doesn't mean you really do.

Hi Pot!

What turbo and what mods do you have? Oh yeah, you have a Stock motor, so you just have boltons. Apprently, you've only spent 1600 on mods, so that's not alot.

Yes, when I talk about what I have done in the past, it certainly means I have done nothing to my car in the interveneing years. This is more sophistry. The logic fails here too.

Let's take a look at scott gray's mods, Right from his website.

Forced Performance "GREEN" Turbo
HKS 264 intake, 272 exhaust cams
ARP Head Studs
Ported 95 Exhaust Manifold
TIAL 40mm External Wastegate
3" RRE O2 Eliminator Downpipe
Carsound 3" High-flow Cat
3" Road Race Engineering Exhaust with Dynomax SuperTurbo Muffler (17793)
MSD DIS-2 Ignition Amplifier and 2 Stage Rev Limiter
Magnecore plug wires
NGK BP7E plugs gapped to .028
Redline MTL in Transmission
Redline Shock-Proof in transfer case
Road Race Engineering Race Built Transmission
Quaife front and center LSD
Road Race Service Race Built 2.3 Liter (stroker) Engine
AEM Cone Air Filter mounted in the fenderwell
Road Race Engineering custom 2.5" IC piping
HKS front mount intercooler
Crushed Stock BOV
AEM EMS Standalone Engine Management
AEM 3.5 BAR MAP Sensor
Greddy Profec-B Boost Controller
Greddy Turbo timer
Defi-Link Gauges
Zeitronix ZT-2 Wideband Oxygen Sensor
Denso 660cc injectors
Walbro 255Lph in-tank Fuel pump (Hardwired)
CarTech External Adjustable Fuel Pressure Regulator
PWR Performance bolt-on racing radiator
Road Race Engineering custom JIC Coil-over Suspension (tuned by John Mueller)
Road Race Engineering Adjustable front Camber Plates with added Caster
Suspension Techniques Rear Sway Bar with Poly Bushings
Road Race Engineering Front Strut Tower Brace
Extreme Motorsports Rear Strut Tower Brace
StopTech Braking System (front)
Pagid Orange Brake Pads
Sparco Torino Sport Seats
Schroth AutoControl 4 Point Harnesses
Gram Light 57C 17x7 Wheels with 30mm offset

That's alot of mods. I would belive him if he said that he turned over 9k rpms. He has the engine buildup and the powerband charachteristics to do it. He also doesn't have a stock motor.

I have every mod you bold, minus the engine, although in slightly different flavors. Slightly different turbo, biger cams, etcetera. You simply don't know what my car has, so this arguement is another illogical attack.

There's a difference between being a leader and being a follower.

Never claimed to be a leader. Just do my thing.

Unless he has cams and a big turbo there is absolutely no need for him to be revving his engine that high anyways.

I'm liking the ownage also

I certainly have those, and more besides, including trans work.

I think the guys a fuggin idiot. If his engine really is "Stock" this means your on the stock intake manifold. You claim to run a 11sec pass runing to 10,000 rpm on a "stock" motor. I say BS. Even if you had the fuel support for it I say BS. I have ran to 7k in the 1/4 in 3rd gear with my old 90 AWD TSi I sold. And theres absolutely no power up there without cams and a larger turbo. Your full of shit right there buddy. If the "stock" engine is that weak at 7k I dont see it pulling it's self to 10k in 3rd or 4th in the time it takes to run the 1/4 and your claiming a 11 sec pass.


STFU and go away, even if it was safe and it's not. I still wouldn't do it. Why? Because I love my car and it's engine, I treat it well, sure I beat on it at times, but im not some dumb #### that runs around everywhere reving to 10k.


Infact if I knew where you lived I would be tempted to smack you in the face with a 9 iron. Anyone that cares about there car wouldn't abuse it like that.

You :thumbdown

Stock in my case refers to the head and block. I do have a SMIM.

As for loving my car being a factor, im sorry you get so emotional about it. I own this car to race it, beat on it and do what I want to do. I certainly love my car, But I hardly worry whether other people think I love it

Lets face it. The only thing I have said is it works, i have done it, and I have been in alot fo cars doing it, and i know people who do it. The only valid attacks at this point are eitheir to claim Im lying, which you can choose to do, in which case, stop posting becuause I will lie indefinitely....or to refute me with empirical evidence. Of which I have seen none.

Quoting common sense, quoting what other people do, quoting the intents of other people we don't know, attacking me....None of this deals with the situation at hand. You have not once said anything to create a valid arguement in all your posts.

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

Man, the more I read that and realize your entire arguement is based on quoting "common sense" and personal attacks with no experiance with this engine....the more amusing it becomes. You would be making the EXACT SAME arguement about any engine with a 7k redline regardless of your personal experiance or knowledge about the platform! Idiot!

 

[Mirage2LTurbo]

Stock engine = head and block

Stock intake manifold = stock intake manifold

Engine != intake manifold

Pinknuggit again proves his stupidity in another thread. We don't care about your what "should" or what "could" happen. This thread asked "HIGHEST REVS ON THE STOCK ENGINE," and clearly, this was answered. I've seen 8500 done on a bone stock engine.

 

[Ryans99OZ]

This is all sophistry. You keep bring up extraneous information with no regard to the arguement at hand.
This is all ad hominem. The logic behind your arguement sucks here as well.
This is more sophistry. The logic fails here too.
....or to refute me with empirical evidence.

.....how much u wanna bet he sat there with a thesaurus next to him while typing all that no nonsense shit

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

.....how much u wanna bet he sat there with a thesaurus next to him while typing all that no nonsense shit

Hard for you to read? Sleep on it.

 

[billdo_83]

Stock engine = head and block

Stock intake manifold = stock intake manifold

Engine != intake manifold

Pinknuggit again proves his stupidity in another thread. We don't care about your what "should" or what "could" happen. This thread asked "HIGHEST REVS ON THE STOCK ENGINE," and clearly, this was answered. I've seen 8500 done on a bone stock engine.

With a stock engine why would you ever want to do that?
There is no gains by revving it out that high.
Unless its a mistake there is no need in the least bit.

I really dont see how this topic could go any further.

 

[ItsStockOfficer]

With a stock engine why would you ever want to do that?
There is no gains by revving it out that high.
Unless its a mistake there is no need in the least bit.

I really dont see how this topic could go any further.

If a stock engine has a big turbo, big cams, smim, and makes power to 9k, then revvng to 9k is beneficial.

 

[RipperXX]

If a stock engine has a big turbo, big cams, smim, and makes power to 9k, then revvng to 9k is beneficial.

, you idiot THATS NOT STOCK!


Stock = Factory parts.

You can not say a WHOLE engine is "stock" if you have moded anything the deals with the engine.

 

[pinknuggit]

Pinknuggit again proves his stupidity in another thread. We don't care about your what "should" or what "could" happen. This thread asked "HIGHEST REVS ON THE STOCK ENGINE," and clearly, this was answered. I've seen 8500 done on a bone stock engine.

oh my GOD... are you people ####ing DUMB?!?!?! I NEVER SAID IT WOULDNT DO IT!!!!! I JUST SAID IT ISN'T 100% SAFE FOR EVERYONE TO DO!!!!!!!
I could care less what everyone thinks, telling people with stock motors that it's safe to rev to 9k is Bad Advice. Remember, not everyone assumes that "STOCK MOTOR" = stock longblock with a big turbo and cams.

Show me where I gave Bad Advice.

officer: "I don't build engines". Thank you. I do. I've been building them since you were in diapers. Experience Speaks. I'll leave it at that.

mirage: How do you properly break in an engine? Oh that's right, you don't know how to. :laugh:
Why am I a dumbass? Because I called you out on something you didn't know about? :laugh: