Frank Ball wrote:
>
> Lowering the redline does reduce the horsepowewr. Either the rpm limit is
> below the horsepower peak or it gets a milder cam. Less power either
> way.
In the case of the Ford/Yamaha SHO motor, it got a milder cam,
restrictive
exhaust and intake, as well as an rev limiter. If you're theory is
correct then simply removing the rev limiter would produce the said
300hp in the SHO motor and that's not was I was saying. I concur that
limiting RPMs is one way to reduce available power, but in this case
it is only part of the story.
> I didn't see "Yamaha" in the intial post.
Sorry, I must have taken for granted that everyone participating in this
discussion was aware that Yamaha was involved in the development and
production of the engine.
> } What's misleading? Ford and Yamaha developed the engine. Show me
> } any factory alternator that likes to be attached to an engine running
> } 8000-9000 RPMs!
>
> My Yamaha YZF600R alternator spins 13,000+ rpm no problem (it is mounted
> on the left end of the crankshaft). Kawasaki makes several 14,000 rpm
> street bikes with alternators also spinning at crank speed.......
I should have qualified my request by saying AUTOMOBILE alternator. Of
course a motorcycle alternator turns these kinds of RPMs but what kind
of amperage do they produce?
> Once they have gone to the expense of designing an engine like that
> it is stupid not to finish the job by designing the accesories for it.
I agree. Maybe you should take a second to read my profile on the
website
and then my signature below. Could it be that I was tired of putting up
with shit from Ford? I won't go so far as to call the car a complete
piece
of shit because it never left me on the side of the road, and didn't
have
alot of the problems some people have with AMERICAN cars, but I've come
to be fond of Dodge products and it was time for a change.
cheers,
Phil
'97 Dakota
'67 Charger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:07:44 EDT