To add some more substance to the equation:
https://www.e90post.com/forums/showp...4&postcount=36
That link has a download for a pdf looking at the technical aspects of the N52.
At 8,000 RPM, the mean piston speed of the N52 (if the stroke is 85mm) is 4,462 feet per minute/22.67 meters per second. The Honda S2000's F20C at 9,000 RPM (84mm stroke) is 4,961 feet per minute/24.6 meters per second.
I bring up the S2000 as it is a factory 9,000 rpm car with all the warranties that go with it. The 4961 mean piston speed is much higher than the 4462 than the N52 would see at 8000 rpm. We could even continue to push the redline higher, but somewhere between 8200-8400 its been noted that the hydraulic lifters start failing.
The N52's smaller bore than the S2000 likely reduces total piston-wristpin weight below the S2000's. Weight optimization in the N52 likely leads to a lighter connecting rod even if its longer, as it has less mass on the end of it.
All this leads me to believe that if we can solve the hydraulic lifters pumping down at high RPMs, we can reliably spin the motor higher than 8000 rpms for extended periods.
This leads to other issues to be addressed before we can add more RPMs and make power.
Harmonics, the big enemy of the straight six. Thankfully, ATI already has an N54/N52 crank damper that fits our application. I was hoping that Fluidampr would have a product for this application but it seems not. This doesn't SOLVE the harmonics but simply mitigates their effects. I don't have ANY idea where the harmonic resonance is on this crank, and crankshaft whip is likely part of that...
The three stage intake manifold stifles power past 6300 as demonstrated on many n52 cars dynographs. The N54 intake manifold does better, especially if the manifold is shifted to better align with the ports in the cylinder head. A custom intake manifold could be drawn up to accommodate high RPM usage.
Cylinder head flow is another POTENTIAL bottleneck. I haven't found any flowbench information on the N52 head. All pictures of the ports show a high quality casting which on the texture level is unlikely to be improved for port injection. Valvetronic complicates valve seat/angle jobs, to what degree I'm not sure. Research and development here will lead to gains, but how much is hard to state.
Camshafts... the biggest way of changing the character of the engine. RiotRacing had some issues with their attempt at N52 cams, the regrinds failing to be useful. I've heard talk of a potential exhaust camshaft development being looked into (to compliment MILVs), but nothing hard nor fast. The exhaust cam set-up is much simpler, potentially leading to easier/cheaper gains there. Intake cam development is more difficult due to valvetronic being used to maintain idle.
Oiling has already popped up but I'll touch on it again. Hydraulic lifter bleed down in the valvetrain is likely the first order that needs to be corrected if a radically increased redline is to be sought. Due to the variable/displacement on demand on the oil pump, I cannot be sure simply porting the pump will increase oil flow... nor have I found any numbers citing potential cavitation at rpm of the pump. If the bleed-down of the lifters is oil pressure, then there might be a way to add a restriction oil flow to the lifters themselves to increase pressure... but this is simply theoretical conjecture.
Hopefully all of this stimulates some conversation.
https://www.e90post.com/forums/showp...4&postcount=36
That link has a download for a pdf looking at the technical aspects of the N52.
At 8,000 RPM, the mean piston speed of the N52 (if the stroke is 85mm) is 4,462 feet per minute/22.67 meters per second. The Honda S2000's F20C at 9,000 RPM (84mm stroke) is 4,961 feet per minute/24.6 meters per second.
I bring up the S2000 as it is a factory 9,000 rpm car with all the warranties that go with it. The 4961 mean piston speed is much higher than the 4462 than the N52 would see at 8000 rpm. We could even continue to push the redline higher, but somewhere between 8200-8400 its been noted that the hydraulic lifters start failing.
The N52's smaller bore than the S2000 likely reduces total piston-wristpin weight below the S2000's. Weight optimization in the N52 likely leads to a lighter connecting rod even if its longer, as it has less mass on the end of it.
All this leads me to believe that if we can solve the hydraulic lifters pumping down at high RPMs, we can reliably spin the motor higher than 8000 rpms for extended periods.
This leads to other issues to be addressed before we can add more RPMs and make power.
Harmonics, the big enemy of the straight six. Thankfully, ATI already has an N54/N52 crank damper that fits our application. I was hoping that Fluidampr would have a product for this application but it seems not. This doesn't SOLVE the harmonics but simply mitigates their effects. I don't have ANY idea where the harmonic resonance is on this crank, and crankshaft whip is likely part of that...
The three stage intake manifold stifles power past 6300 as demonstrated on many n52 cars dynographs. The N54 intake manifold does better, especially if the manifold is shifted to better align with the ports in the cylinder head. A custom intake manifold could be drawn up to accommodate high RPM usage.
Cylinder head flow is another POTENTIAL bottleneck. I haven't found any flowbench information on the N52 head. All pictures of the ports show a high quality casting which on the texture level is unlikely to be improved for port injection. Valvetronic complicates valve seat/angle jobs, to what degree I'm not sure. Research and development here will lead to gains, but how much is hard to state.
Camshafts... the biggest way of changing the character of the engine. RiotRacing had some issues with their attempt at N52 cams, the regrinds failing to be useful. I've heard talk of a potential exhaust camshaft development being looked into (to compliment MILVs), but nothing hard nor fast. The exhaust cam set-up is much simpler, potentially leading to easier/cheaper gains there. Intake cam development is more difficult due to valvetronic being used to maintain idle.
Oiling has already popped up but I'll touch on it again. Hydraulic lifter bleed down in the valvetrain is likely the first order that needs to be corrected if a radically increased redline is to be sought. Due to the variable/displacement on demand on the oil pump, I cannot be sure simply porting the pump will increase oil flow... nor have I found any numbers citing potential cavitation at rpm of the pump. If the bleed-down of the lifters is oil pressure, then there might be a way to add a restriction oil flow to the lifters themselves to increase pressure... but this is simply theoretical conjecture.
Hopefully all of this stimulates some conversation.
Comment