Ben992200 wrote:Sorry for aiding in the pollution of your thread, it was only to clarify the already existent pollution.
Word, I didn't get in until it got hard to breathe
<img src=http://hometown.aol.com/yogiandbooboo7/images/french.jpg>
Jesus H f--king Christ WHAT the f--k did I just say !?!?! HUH !!!!! HOW many F--king ways do you want me to put it?!?!? I Am so sick of this lets attack me s--t its not even f--king funny anymore!!!!! HOW about this Event I could give a fat f--king rats ass less what the s--t Chris has to say!! God f--king damn why the f--k can't you guys let s--t drop???? I said I was F--KING wrong about the damn raceing engines but thats NOT what YOU started this post as. Its what YOU decided To turn it into once you were shown an n/a engine CAN NOT do as you suggested. Then you bring in racing engines and I even re-phrase my statement to be "NORMAL" engines as raceing engines are NOT "NORMAL" engines but you kept throwing my mistake in my face like a bunch of kids. What The F--k more do you want me to do Event ??? Huh what seriously dude this s--t is getting old. I said I was wrong about the racing engines
but when it comes to "NORMAL" regular everyday run of the mill production engines found in every car on the road today NO they DO NOT run at 100% and they never will unless boosted. PERIOD!! End of it they can not!! Have you ever heard of a thing known as diminishing returns? Basicly a normal regular run of the mill everyday car engine found in the normal everyday runn of the mill cars on the road today is not worth it to even try it on cause it would not be cost effective. THIS is the EXACT thing YOUR good buddy Chris the all knowing engine god of the galexy said to me on the phone.
And if he denies he said it hes a lyer. He said that the BEST race engines are the ONLY ones who can do this. And I already said I was wrong about them So what more do you want ?? Seriously dude you must be looking for something? How about this Saturday I bring you a big f--king cookie for proveing HALF of your arguement. Dear god man I thought I knew you better then this but I guess not. I was warned by people that you can NEVER EVER EVER be told your wrong or made a mistake and sure enough this would apeare to be completely true. I was man enouh to say I was wrong on the whole race car issue I was even man enough to say where the other formula for v.e. at altitude was not wrong and that its a draw on this issue so WHY if everyone else has dropped this do you feel the overwhelming need to rub my face in my mistakes??
I have I few therios as to why this is but I'm not gonna go there.
I just want to know Event what more do you want? I'm half right as are you but you don't see me acting like you are do you? I tried to bow out gracefully as the evidece provided says what we had been argueing all along but for some unexplained reason you feel the need to continue on and on and on.
So There big guy I'm the one who changed up? HUH interesting as I thouhgt this post was about the 2.2 pos engine in your car NOT F1 or raceing engines. I said NO engine in the mistaken idea that you would be able to stay on your own topic but this would seem to much for you to do. God forbid the all knowing Event be proven wrong to all his faithfull followers right? Whatever man ok whatever Go ahead keep thinking your 2.2 can do as you claim but when I walk past you with my far less efficent ECOtec engine in my car then dont bother to even ask what just happened.
And just in case your wondering your damn right I'm pissed. I thought this place was somewhere to go meet new people have fun and learn new things but its apparent that this is so not the case.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope, okay, now I'm going to say it. You're a prick.
jackalope ( a.k.a. the prick ) wrote:you can NEVER EVER EVER be told your wrong or made a mistake and sure enough this would apeare to be completely true.
Although, judging by this line, you may be schizophrenic. Please, for the sake of everyone around you, consult a psychiatrist.
Also, I have seen Event admit his mistakes numerous times.
You have your beliefs, and everyone else has their belief, we'll just leave it at that. We all understand what you're trying to say, we're just trying to show that it goes against accepted terminolgy.
Oh, and let's not try to make this into a 2.2 vs ecotec war (we already have one in the boost forum, feel free to join in.
Maybe some thread lock would be in order here, as everything has been cleared up.
<img src=http://hometown.aol.com/yogiandbooboo7/images/french.jpg>
Quote:
I'm half right as are you but you don't see me acting like you are do you?
lets look at how you ARE acting...
jackalope wrote:1) HOW about this Event I could give a fat f--king rats ass less what the s--t Chris has to say!!
2)HUH interesting as I thouhgt this post was about the 2.2 pos engine in your car
3)THIS is the EXACT thing YOUR good buddy Chris the all knowing engine god of the galexy said to me on the phone.
4)Whatever man ok whatever Go ahead keep thinking your 2.2 can do as you claim but when I walk past you with my far less efficent ECOtec engine in my car then dont bother to even ask what just happened.
i could have sworn you were a certain other person from columbia who flys off the handle.....
i also believe it was you this past weekend and the first weekend i met you saying you dont get pissed off online.
bottom line is this....
i added examples, and every time i said something i backed it up with definitions, links, PROOF...
in the end it boiled down to you, making some of the comments i just quoted above. i said and i quote myself:
myself wrote:notice it says mechanical system. if you feel, me or chris is wrong.... then please, feel free to post up the links, proof, or any articles that creating resonance from an intake manifold makes your engine NOT N/A
instead you;ve chosen to act childish, immature, and talking about your ecotec gonna beat my POS, and you dont give a damn about what chris says, when on the page before, you were sitting there trying to back your claims up with what CHRIS ALREADY SAID. if you dont give a F___ then why bother posting what he said to you?
but as it stands,
you are 35 F'in YEARS OLD if you cant deal with someone questioning your statements in a discussion on something technical without acting like a 16 year old kid, getting pissed off online calling peoples engines POS, and how your ecotec is gonna do this and that.... then why post?
you said you were wrong about the racing engines, YES WE ALREADY KNEW THAT.....
but the main thing i questioned you on in the last post was "who the f___ considers resonance as legit BOOST which would make an engine NOT an N/A engine????"
that of which you didnt answer, but went into this spiel about "oh you can never be wrong", and all this
put it this way, if what YOU or anyone says doesnt match up with whats in tech books, companies websites, and other legit sources. i;m gonna question it. if you cant MAN UP and put down proof. dont bother to post.
OHV notec wrote:Ben992200 wrote:Sorry for aiding in the pollution of your thread, it was only to clarify the already existent pollution.
Word, I didn't get in until it got hard to breathe
nah its cool, slowolej corrected me on the torque deal. MOST of the rest of it boiled down to one person saying its impossible on any engine, then its possible, but not on a normal engine, then going even more off the original thing. the post was about the engines here, but when someone states ANY engine, then of course you open the door to ANY engine.
but its no big deal. hopefully the next tech post goes smoother and people wont get butt hurt if someone questions em...
didnt fully read all the name calling on the previous pages or when he changed his name to (aka the prick) and how that came to be, but F it.... for a 35 year old "male" to make a post like the last one.... that sums up his final posts.
Event yes I got pissed. Why you ask would a 35 year old male get so pissed? Well
lets see, First I clearly admit to being wrong about the racing engines but yet you persist in continueing to throw it in my face that I had made a mistake. Childish on your part my friend, very. Then I state that I fully know intack resonance IS NOT a form of forced induction at all rather I was trying to mess with you a little bit, You know have some fun. And what do you post almost DIRECTLY after I stated that I know its not forced induction? That I'm wrong. That I'm wrong about everything and I don't know what I'm talking about at all. Your friend Chris posts that I'm wrong and its not forced induction. And then throw in for good measure how I'll get laughed at if I say this to anyone who knows about engines at all. Hmm, now how does this make you sound? I admit to being wrong and clearly give the win in the racing engine arguement to you and you continue to go on about how wrong I am. I admit that I fully know intake resonance is not any kind of forced induction and that I was basicly just screwing with you. But then you again with the aid of your friend Chris again tell me how wrong I am
and that its not. Even tho I had already admited to this. So that leaves me with 1 of 2
possible conclusions about your post from 7:10 last night. Either #1 You didn't bother to read my other posts where I VERY CLEARLY state I know its not a form of boost.
#2 Are a sore winner who likes to keep rubbing peoples face in things even after they've admited thet're wrong. Now if you would be so kind as to let me know which it was #1 or #2. If its #1 then perhaps you should actualy read the post of the person your dabating so as not to make yourself appear a sore winner. If its #2 then I must say bad form Event very bad indeed. And it would appear that YES Event you do get mad and take your ball and go home as evidenced by your apparent need to continualy be told just how right you actualy are. Why do I say this? Lets see after I introduce of
goofball theroy as to how intake resonance is forced induction you stoped posting
Poof gone and when you come back you've brought back-up with you. All over something that I was only JOKING about in the first place and you both stand there and tell me how wrong I am in all my wrongness. Sorry Event but YOU are as childish as I am. We both sunk to a level that is WAAAAY beneth both of us and for that I am sorry.
And I would like to appoligize to you for it. But after what you posted and in manner you did it I would venture to say you have some appoligizeing to do as well. If you can't see it .......... Well then what can I say but have a nice day.
Now that I have made COMPLETELY CRYSTAL CLEAR my being wrong about raceing engines I just hope your not going to once again tell me how wrong I am or you will
not get that cookie I promissed you.
I would also hope that you have learned where your original post and title are equally as wrong as I am, You know being your buddy Chris even said and I quote.........
" A normal everyday engine will not ever see anything close to 100% eff. "
Are we done here now?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Excuse me Jack-O-Lantern, I could care less about volumetric efficiency and any of these silly banterings but I do get upset when I see you take the Lord's name in vein. That tells me a lot about your character. You need to clean up a bit my friend.
That being said, if you ever want me to go over the salvation message with you I would prefer to discuss that over cars and engines any day of the week.
Chris Crossont
A.H.M. Performance
Baltimore, MD
http://www.ahmperformance.com
Chris you are absolutly 100% correct and I would like to appologize to you and everyone else whom I may have offended by my totaly un-called for rantings. No I'm being a smartass I'm being sincear in my appology as I should not have let it get to me to the point I allowed it to. I had other VERY bad news waiting for me when I got home yesterday and I guess I vented it in the wrong direction. Again I am Sorry I will try to never let it happen again and I hope you can ecept my most humble appoligy's. Not just you but evreyone here as well. I had a bad day, got hit by bad news at home and to top it off I'm sick as ---- right now.
So guys seriously all joking and kidding aside I am sorry.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
first off i dont need to be told i am right or wrong, thats YOUR assumption. i clearly am trying to find the facts on this issue for my own knowledge.
secondly this isnt about being right or wrong, this is about ME and maybe OTHERS learning something. if something is conflicting with anything i read, you ask questions. thats how life works or atleast is supposed to.
if you are in school and what the teacher is teaching does match up with the book, you ask questions. simple as that nothing more nothing less.
thirdly, MY post near the top of page 5 was around 7-8 am (even though it states 9:47am).. YOU made 2 posts right after me, and i answer all posts in the order they are given. to which you wrote.
Quote:
Event your last quote shows it. It says that intake reonance has a mild forced induction effect but that its not considered true forced induction. But as you can see it is a type of forced induction none the less. And forced induction means not n/a.
So let me go back to my original statement that kept getting thrown in my face that
is NO n/a engine is gonna hit 100% or exceed it. EVER
in bold you are saying its NOT boost, but it makes the engine NON N/A?!?!
WTF? yes that is contradictory. and thats what i questioned. and then it went back to "NO n/a engine is gonna hit 100% or exceed it"
Quote:
That if you wanted to split hairs and argue over samantics such as an F1 cars eff. over that of a 2.2's then I could take it a step further as well and by useing the termiology provided by Chris that the intake resonance forces air into the cylinders then i could argue its anouther form of forced induction.
thats the problem. we all know its NOT forced induction, but yet joking or not you keep reverting back to saying
Quote:
But as you can see it is a type of forced induction none the less. And forced induction means not n/a
thats not joking, nor do i feel any of the other stuff was, no matter how pissed you were last night. as it stands i didnt call you a prick, arse, or any other names, havent talked sh* on your car, telling you "it will never do what you claim".
Quite frankly, it will do everydamn thing i said it will do, as its already been done. i dont make claims like some do... "my car will run this, or my car will do that".... everything i say my car does, it already HAS done... thats how i know it does it.
Quote:
I would also hope that you have learned where your original post and title are equally as wrong as I am, You know being your buddy Chris even said and I quote.........
" A normal everyday engine will not ever see anything close to 100% eff. "
i truly think and now know.... you missed the point of this post.
it was to find how many cfm that is taken in at 100% VE and 110% VE..... so no the title isnt wrong in any way.
if you know what those specs are, one can choose a TB thats capable of flowing enough if the engine was reaching 100%, without going WAY overboard with EXTREMELY OVERSIZED TB which lose all low end and gain a bit back in top end.
even if they arent close to 100%, that TB will support up to 100-110% VE... dont know how many times i have to say that through 6 pages, however there it is once again.
Quote:
Why do I say this? Lets see after I introduce of
goofball theroy as to how intake resonance is forced induction you stoped posting
Poof gone and when you come back you've brought back-up with you.
poof? gone?
so how many times have i already stated in columbia... i work full time as a teacher and part time as a marketing and advertising rep?
you were in the car, you saw all the extra stuff i carry around for my part time.
i dont have time to make a reply exactly right after you make a post, nor will i break my neck to do so...
and i am not gonna stop in the middle of the day just to make a post back. my part time alone has me working close to 38-40 hours during adchange week , around 20 during the other 3 of the month in addition to the afterschool hours i teach 4 days a week and working the lesson plans and being internet support for the speech and debate league, which is my full time...
thats not getting mad at taking my ball home, thats someone who has the damn priorities straight. cars are fun, but in the end, its a hobby. nothing more.
jackalope wrote:And it would appear that YES Event you do get mad and take your ball and go home as evidenced by your apparent need to continualy be told just how right you actualy are.
thats full of BS... as i already stated....
Quote:
secondly this isnt about being right or wrong, this is about ME and maybe OTHERS learning something. if something is conflicting with anything i read, you ask questions. thats how life works or atleast is supposed to.
if you are in school and what the teacher is teaching does match up with the book, you ask questions. simple as that nothing more nothing less.
but you however keep wanting to joke around and add in "goofball theories"....
you know... with all the remedial "whats the best intake, who makes the best exhaust"
BS.... it actually refreshing for some to read a post thats actually a bit more tech minded. and yea its cool to joke around, but to constantly goof off in the post is damn near pointless. yea make a joke here or there, thats fine.... but then you come out and say:
Quote:
All over something that I was only JOKING about in the first place and you both stand there and tell me how wrong I am in all my wrongness.
WTF...
theres no "J/P" to say just playin, or smiley faces to denote joking around. posts like this i actually take a bit more seriously. off topic i wouldnt care much or take it seriously, but now its joking around.....and you only get pissed when someone just flat out says you are wrong on something. slowolej told me i was wrong, i asked him why and redid the equation and adjusted the input on it. i didnt get pissed off and and blow up on a post back and forth calling each other a prick or anything. as it stands i have yet to do so here......
just leave it at that....
and do note that post was made after you and chris posted.... so its not some "i am comming back to kick you when you are down or after you said something else"
and for those who MUST know, i started this post, then i pooped and then i showered before work.... then i cam and finished my post before i get ready to leave for the day...
Ok Event appoligy accepted.
Have a great day at work. What kind of cookie did you want?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jackalope ( a.k.a. the prick ) wrote:Chris you are absolutly 100% correct and I would like to appologize to you and everyone else whom I may have offended by my totaly un-called for rantings. No I'm being a smartass I'm being sincear in my appology as I should not have let it get to me to the point I allowed it to. I had other VERY bad news waiting for me when I got home yesterday and I guess I vented it in the wrong direction. Again I am Sorry I will try to never let it happen again and I hope you can ecept my most humble appoligy's. Not just you but evreyone here as well. I had a bad day, got hit by bad news at home and to top it off I'm sick as ---- right now.
So guys seriously all joking and kidding aside I am sorry.
I call for an end to the discussion then. Apology is accepted on my end.
Chris Crossont
A.H.M. Performance
Baltimore, MD
http://www.ahmperformance.com
And I didn't know you needed those "j/k" 's or smilyes all the time to understand where I was coming from so for that my bad I'll always remember the
from now on.
You still need to let me know what kind of cookie or you'll just get chocolet chip.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jackalope ( a.k.a. the prick ) wrote:And I didn't know you needed those "j/k" 's or smilyes all the time to understand where I was coming from so for that my bad I'll always remember the from now on.
You don't always need them, but when you've changed your opinion 50-odd times over already, it would help
I like to throw them in for a margin of safety
<img src=http://hometown.aol.com/yogiandbooboo7/images/french.jpg>
Are we all still friends or is this a deal breaker ? Just wanted to know cause I'm kinda
over it just wanted to make sure you guys were too.
I'm tooo sick to care about a silly arguement over the internet and I hope we can all still be friends. Event, hug me. I love you man. Your like a big teddy bear.
I hope the
was used properly.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Hey Notech, I didn't change my stance at all. I was corrected and shown to be wrong
and after that ......... well I guess it did change. but its not like just randomly did it when I wanted to. And if it sounded that way it was not my intent.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jackalope ( a.k.a. the prick ) wrote:Hey Notech, I didn't change my stance at all. I was corrected and shown to be wrong
and after that ......... well I guess it did change. but its not like just randomly did it when I wanted to. And if it sounded that way it was not my intent.
That's probably what it was. Just the way you said things, it often seemed like you'd agree, and then disagree the next post, things like that.
As far as I'm concerned, everything's gravy.
<img src=http://hometown.aol.com/yogiandbooboo7/images/french.jpg>
Cool, Sorry for any confusion.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
