Max RPM - 1200 Vs. 1500 engine

R

rogtwo@aol.com

Guest
While trying to find torque information for Triumph engines, I found this web
site:

http://www.totallytriumph.net/

At it I found some information about the 1147 and 1500 engines that I thought
was interesting.

Form this page, I found the following:

http://www.totallytriumph.net/spitfire/engine_building.shtml

"The 1147 & 1300s can all rev much higher* than a 1500, the 1500 due to its
bigger capacity has more low down pulling Torque."

"The 1500 is a low revving, high Torque engine. In a fully stock motor avoid
revs above 5500.
A prepared engine, balanced with stronger rod bolts can be safe to 6000 Rpm.
Still, remember that its not an engine for thrashing at high Rpm."

* This web site recommends, for an engine in stock form, a maximum RPM of
6000 for the 1147 & 1300 and 5500 RPM for the 1500. I think the "much higher"
comment was meant for race engines, where there is a larger difference.

Further, on this page drivers voted for what they thought the maximum
sustained speed should be for the 1500 engine. Of the 20 people that voted,
they all
thought that the 1500 engine should not be run at a sustained speed over 4800
RPM (70 mph in an Amphi). Many weren't welling to run them this fast.

http://www.totallytriumph.net/dcforum/DCForumID7/148.shtml

I have no personal experience with or knowledge of the 1500 engine, I am just
passing along the information from this web site.

Roger
White '63
Seattle


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
L

lah20car@aol.com

Guest
Hi everyone, since this engine thingy is up again--I have two of these
Spitfire engines mostly because they were in my backyard and at one time had
thought
of putting one in my car but now want to get rid of them for what they cost
me--$400 each. Both were running and one a recent rebuild, both are complete,
intake, exhaust and transmissions. Only thing is-- I won't get involved in
shipping these, but will deliver to New Orleans or Dallas or Houston for a small
cost. If you are interested or want pictures contact me offline before I put
them on Ebay--Thanks--and remember winter only last for a little while-- at
least here--Ken


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
J

John Friese

Guest
Hi Ken,

What size are these engines 1147's, 1296's or 1500's?

John


--- In amphicar-lovers@yahoogroups.com, lah20car@a... wrote:
> Hi everyone, since this engine thingy is up again--I have two of
these
> Spitfire engines mostly because they were in my backyard and at one
time had thought
> of putting one in my car but now want to get rid of them for what
they cost
> me--$400 each. Both were running and one a recent rebuild, both are
complete,
> intake, exhaust and transmissions. Only thing is-- I won't get
involved in
> shipping these, but will deliver to New Orleans or Dallas or
Houston for a small
> cost. If you are interested or want pictures contact me offline
before I put
> them on Ebay--Thanks--and remember winter only last for a little
while-- at
> least here--Ken
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
A

a_colo_native

Guest
The reason you don't want to over rev a 1500 is because they are a
stroked 1300. The pistons travel furter in the same amount of time
each rev and therefore are moving faster. If the piston speed is too
fast, it will eventually disentegrate the piston(s) every time. For
this reason, the 1500 is not a good choice in an Amphi.

John
RMA
 
D

David Chapman

Guest
Re: Re: Max RPM - 1200 Vs. 1500 engine

>The reason you don't want to over rev a 1500 is because they are a
>stroked 1300. The pistons travel furter in the same amount of time
>each rev and therefore are moving faster. If the piston speed is too
>fast, it will eventually disentegrate the piston(s) every time. For
>this reason, the 1500 is not a good choice in an Amphi.

John
RMA

True, but the issue with the 1500 and some 1300s is they have a much larger
crank, introduced at the British Leyland factory around 1970 for
standardisation reasons (ie to save money) so they can never be as smooth
because of all that reciprocating mass. A 1500 will be quicker away from the
lights than an 1147 but top speed will be higher with the smaller engine and
it will be much smoother, quieter and cooler at the normal water cruising
speed of about 2200rpm.

David C
 
A

a_colo_native

Guest
> True, but the issue with the 1500 and some 1300s is they have a
much larger
> crank, introduced at the British Leyland factory around 1970 for
> standardisation reasons (ie to save money) so they can never be as
smooth
> because of all that reciprocating mass. A 1500 will be quicker
away from the
> lights than an 1147 but top speed will be higher with the smaller
engine and
> it will be much smoother, quieter and cooler at the normal water
cruising
> speed of about 2200rpm.


Thanks David, that is a new piece of info I did not know about. The
rotating mass makes perfect sense with reguard to how they will
react differently. What other significant differences are there
between the 2? - JB
 
Top