On the Kaw FX691V engine, they advertise it has a "High Performance" lubrication system, anyone know exactly what that is. If it was an oil pump, wouldn't they just say that.
Last edited:
What is it? Kawasaki "High performance lubrication system"?
- Thread starter Roll
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Threads
- 286
- Messages
- 6,864
In all honesty, "FX691V with High performance lubrication system" probably Sells better than "FX691V with oil pump".... marketing most likely.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Threads
- 286
- Messages
- 6,864
Yes. Most kawasaki mower engines use a pressurized system.
If it's got a filter, it's got a pump.
If it's got a filter, it's got a pump.
Chevychopper
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Threads
- 3
- Messages
- 40
If it has a secondary by-pass oil filter then I would classify it as
"High Performance"
"High Performance"
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
- Threads
- 118
- Messages
- 12,658
Not according to one the John Deere tech at a local dealer. But at that time that JD was not hiring the brightest techs either. They couldn't even find loose wires or find a bad spark plug.
I had customer to come to complaint about his oil pressure light flashing intermittently no oil pressure. The JD just told customer to ignore because his engine had no oil pump. One look I knew that wrong as I saw an oil filter. Just to be sure I look-up the engine's IPL. It turned to be a bad sensor switch. Five years later I had to rebuild the engine after 3000 hrs because the oil pump wore out but what do you expect at 3000 hrs.
I was surprised at how little the engine had worn considering the number of hours. The engine does use oil but has always use a fair amount.
bertsmobile1
Lawn Royalty
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Threads
- 65
- Messages
- 24,995
It has pressure feed to all 3 crank journals
A lot of mowers only have pressure feed to the big end the top bush gets splash & the bottom runs in the sump
MArketing hype to make the engine sound sofisticated when in reality they are very basic engines .
High performance lubrication for a very low performance engine
Look at the Hp per cc ratio before you start talking about "high" performance
A 125cc Kawakasi motorcycle has more Hp than a 700 cc mower engine.
A lot of mowers only have pressure feed to the big end the top bush gets splash & the bottom runs in the sump
MArketing hype to make the engine sound sofisticated when in reality they are very basic engines .
High performance lubrication for a very low performance engine
Look at the Hp per cc ratio before you start talking about "high" performance
A 125cc Kawakasi motorcycle has more Hp than a 700 cc mower engine.
<<<A 125cc Kawakasi motorcycle has more Hp than a 700 cc mower engine.>>>
It's a tradeoff, isn't it? The mower doesn't need high HP, it needs torque. Hard for me to tell though because I don't see Torque specs on mower engines.
It's a tradeoff, isn't it? The mower doesn't need high HP, it needs torque. Hard for me to tell though because I don't see Torque specs on mower engines.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
- Threads
- 118
- Messages
- 12,658
It is a trade off. The motorcycle engine designed for speed. The lawnmower is design for work at low rpms. Low end torque is what is needed for a burn rubber out on autos. There is no prefect answer as to which is best. Several things can be modified to get say an auto engine to produce a lot low torque while still able to produce top end hp.
Things variable duration lifter and different profiled camshaft can really change the performance of an engine. The 265 cu in engine I rebuilt years ago I had put in a mild racing camshaft and variable duration lift. Installed a 700R4 transmission and free flowed the exhaust. When I did I had both low end due both the differences the lifters and camshaft did to the engine and the gear ratios of the 700R4. Either what I was after mainly was improved fuel ecomony which I got. I went from a combine 16 mpg to 23 mpg. I could takeoff faster than most larger engines yet had my top speed too.
Things variable duration lifter and different profiled camshaft can really change the performance of an engine. The 265 cu in engine I rebuilt years ago I had put in a mild racing camshaft and variable duration lift. Installed a 700R4 transmission and free flowed the exhaust. When I did I had both low end due both the differences the lifters and camshaft did to the engine and the gear ratios of the 700R4. Either what I was after mainly was improved fuel ecomony which I got. I went from a combine 16 mpg to 23 mpg. I could takeoff faster than most larger engines yet had my top speed too.