mg-t
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: T cruising speed

To: "Ray" <spook01@comcast.net>, "Dave & Liz DuBois"
Subject: Re: T cruising speed
From: "Blair J. Weiss" <blair@ifd.mv.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:25:01 -0400
Is there somewhere this magical number of 2500 ft / min came from? I've
heard it quoted often, but never the source. With a 3.49" stroke, 2500 ft /
min is the average speed, if the piston through it's cycle at 4310rpm. but
there are instantanious speeds much higher, the piston is going around 4000
ft / min at 90deg  and 180deg  ie, 3 o clock and 9 o clock. .

If I take the stroke (3.4in) * 2 (up and down) convert if to feet  = .58 ft,
so the piston moves .58 ft / rev ,
so 2500 ft./min / .58 ft. / rev
= 4310 rev / min.

Blair



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray" <spook01@comcast.net>
To: "Dave & Liz DuBois" <ddubois@sinclair.net>
Cc: "Mike Duvall" <duvallcom@sbcglobal.net>; <mg-t@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: T cruising speed


> I think <61.18 MPH at a piston speed of 2500><This is the piston speed
> generally agreed on as
> the point above which excessive wear occurs> bears out the statement that
you
> are on the edge at 60 MPH cruise speed.
> In fact, the 2500 fpm limit can be extended with chromed bores and Teflon
> coated pistons, and modern lubricants, along with proper balancing.
> The XPAG engine really did not have as its design parameters max rpm
> continuously.  Or, so as to not overstate, not even close to it.  Having
said
> that, I think we can all agree that these are robust long stroke engines.
> In closing, I suspect that your TBO extension is more likely due to
improved
> lubrication with modern oils.
> Monstra mihi pecuniam!
> Ray
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Dave & Liz DuBois
>   To: Ray
>   Cc: Mike Duvall ; mg-t@autox.team.net
>   Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 3:47 PM
>   Subject: Re: T cruising speed
>
>
>   Ray,
>
>   While it is correct that piston speed in FPM determines wear in the
>   engines, the Blower's manual quotes 61.18 MPH at a piston speed of 2500
>   FPM (this can all be calculated out, but it is much easier to depend on
>   Mr. Blower) for the TD.  This is the piston speed generally agreed on as
>   the point above which excessive wear occurs.  61.18 MPH is equal to an
>   engine speed of 4240 RPM with a 5.125 rear axle ratio and the correct
>   sized tires of the day on it.  For the TF with a 4.875 rear axle ratio
>   and the correct tires, the figures are 64.3 MPH at the same engine
>   speed.  The engine speed that I am running at, while not quite giving me
>   60 MPH is almost right on the level for 2500 FPM of piston speed.  The
>   last time I had to overhaul my engine, I had put close to 70,000 miles
>   on it, which I wouldn't consider excessive wear for an engine that was
>   originally recommended for overhaul at 50,000 miles.  I am quite sure
>   that the MG factory did not put out vehicles with engines in them that
>   would be destroyed by running them at speeds where the maximum HP was
>   being developed (5200 RPM for the TD and 5500 RPM for the TF).  While I
>   would not run my TD up in that range nowadays (Primarily due to the
>   expense of overhauling the engine), I do not submit to the attitude that
>   "these engines cannot withstand speeds in the range of 4000 RPM".  I
>   still maintain that the cars can withstand the high RPM levels far
>   better than the nerves of the drivers of today.  We here in America,
>   particularly, have spent too many years in cars with big, slow revving,
>   totally inefficient V8s to be comfortable with the higher revving small
>   engines of European cars (or Japanese cars for that matter).
>
>   Cheers,
>   Dave

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/mg-t


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>