Why isn't "number of engine revolutions" a metric tracked by your car? I feel like it makes more sense than miles in terms of engine wear.
selling my FERD F150 only 94596112394850586868116923e3 revs no lowballing I know what I got
Engine on hours and idling hours are a proxy for this. But yeah, there should be some sort of way to track instances of high load/high revs. Vehicles with launch control tend to come with internal counters so you can see how many times it was launched but you either need a scan tool or dealer software to access it
>>28929572It would incentivize lugging
>100k miles at 65 mph = 1538.5 hours = 92307.7 minutes >2000 rpm average * 92307.7 min = 184,615,384.6 engine revolutions for 100k miles of highway drivingIs that right? Seems low to me.
>>28929608Sounds right.It just makes much more sense to measure engine revs than "transmission output shaft revs" you know what im sayin
>>28929572Running hours is a better metric
>>28929572Hello red"dit retard
>>28929633not OP but dunno why you think this is a gotcha; that pic has been floating around the interwebs for years. it'd be more unusual if it didn't appear on reddit at this point
Idg why all engines dont go by hours.Youre on the right track but hours is the industrial standard.
>>28929572Actually the total amount of fuel burned would be a good measurement - it tracks idling hours and goes up significantly when using full power.But people lie...
>>28929572i don't mean to brag. but my van will do 4,500 engine revolutions in a minute.but my bike (one of them) 19,500.
>>28929806>19,500RD500?
>>28929846cbr250r mc19
>>28929732TT/OT is pretty much the standard outside of the automotive realm.I still get people asking "what mileage should I change my oil" on a tractor though.
