Quote:
Originally Posted by Munit
This makes no sense! Prolonging your peak power (which actually isn't true if you look at the dyno of people with 8600 plus, the power keeps climbinb) but even assuming it prolonged peak power, you prolong "414 or whatever you call peak" for 200 extra RPMS in the lowest gear possible which gives you that 414 hp multiplied by the lower gear mutlipcliation advtage for longer and that means you spend 200 rpms less in the next gear with less of an advantage and you are higher on the power curve meaning also less time at the lowest end of the power band.
Not accounting for whether its a stress to the engine, raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak, OR even a bit less than peak, given the gear multliplicaiton effect of lasting in the gear. So if the m3 held up to 9k structurally and the peak power was flat until 9k, it would be that much faster than a standard m3 at 8400
|
The +300 RPM bump is really insignificant in lower gears where you have the multiplication advantage. You're missing the biggest element in this which is TIME. In first and second (and to some degree third), not only will you have the DME intervening sooner because of the steeper gradient of RPM rise, you'll only be there for a seconds or a fraction thereof.
Same idea with impulse in physics (I=FdeltaT)
Where it makes a difference, is when you're there for a prolonged period of time. The biggest difference would probably be on the 5th to 6th shift when the car with the stock redline shifts at 8,400.
Saying "raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak..." is a pointless statement. Obviously if the power is better or the same it will be beneficial - many engines will have a significant drop in HP at higher RPM's.