well, I regularly rev my other honda to 14,000 r.p.m., and it's doing
great. the car's specs are a little off, but honda can handle the
technology. the r.p.m. levels are no big deal at all. neither is carbon
build up, at least in a street tuned (i.e. oem) motor. now, if somebody
takes it and turns it into a track only, 500 r.p.m. powerband, _huge_ rad
monster, you _might_, only possibly see some carbon problems. maybe. the
e.f.i. and synthetic oil combo is just a little too hard to get around,
and you'd have to hog out the clearances. no, the revs and general
maintenance/reliability isn't going to be a problem, those were fixed 30
years ago.
the problem is going to be like joe (or someone else) said--will drivers
deal with having to rev it to go? I think so. most people either never
drove a light car with real torque or were born after they weren't built
anymore. the miata sells like hotcakes, and it's gutless. I can go on:
talon/laser/eclipse, mr2, z3, integra, etc. people love these things, and
by now, there isn't much else to choose from. don't get me wrong, I'd buy
a turbo mr2 like my brother has if I have a spare $15,000 dropped into my
lap, but it isn't a 427 cobra, or even my mustang. in the end, there
really isn't a replacement for cubic inches (or millimeters, as it were)
if you're into that sort of thing. I don't think a lot of people care
that much anymore.
but, if you want a 427 cobra, buy a superformance replica and be happy.
scott
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Joe Curry wrote:
>
> I guess the real test is to see if the engine holds together over the
> long haul.. That kind of rpm usage is not commonly found on a street
> car. Whats more, it it isn't used at those rpm levels, will it suffer
> other problems, like carbon build up.
|