12-31-2025, 08:58 PM
i think Joe Huff would be the one to talk to about this.
my main concern would be the valve train being designed for an additional 18% RPM plus margin. this isnt an unreasonable RPM for the sake of the engine design looking at an automotive point of view. our displacement and rotating mass weight is light enough this could support the acceleration forces at the piston. i Know Joe addresses his piston weight/increase in acceleration forces in his stroked out 172's by using lighter and shorter piston skirts. maybe a similar piston used in an original 162F would render safer operation at higher RPM.
another major factor to consider is we are a single cam Push Rod engine so there is that in the engine design that goes against High RPM operation, and we are not talking about an automotive momentary rev up to 7000 like they are designed to do, we operate at a sustained continuous 4250 which is a high rpm for cruise in any car. 5000 is asking for trouble even if you used a subaru engine for hours on hours. i actually like the idea of the 3900 RPM engines over the 4250 engines because of decreased cyclic loads over time reducing wear but would take some modification to maintain the same power.
hope i gave some food for thought.
my main concern would be the valve train being designed for an additional 18% RPM plus margin. this isnt an unreasonable RPM for the sake of the engine design looking at an automotive point of view. our displacement and rotating mass weight is light enough this could support the acceleration forces at the piston. i Know Joe addresses his piston weight/increase in acceleration forces in his stroked out 172's by using lighter and shorter piston skirts. maybe a similar piston used in an original 162F would render safer operation at higher RPM.
another major factor to consider is we are a single cam Push Rod engine so there is that in the engine design that goes against High RPM operation, and we are not talking about an automotive momentary rev up to 7000 like they are designed to do, we operate at a sustained continuous 4250 which is a high rpm for cruise in any car. 5000 is asking for trouble even if you used a subaru engine for hours on hours. i actually like the idea of the 3900 RPM engines over the 4250 engines because of decreased cyclic loads over time reducing wear but would take some modification to maintain the same power.
hope i gave some food for thought.