n/a half bridge
10-21-04, 07:47 PM
#26
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10k is streetable if your wallet is big enough to make the motor last up there. The porting is not all you have to take into consideration. If the ports close at the stock 80 (anything over 85 is wasting charge anyhow no matter how high you rev it) degrees there is no difference in duration, only a difference in runner velocity/port area, depending on manifold design you could strech that power range down to a much lower peak if you want. The runner size of a siameased 6-port isnt all that much bigger then a 13b-RE and much smaller then a PP.
12-22-04, 05:45 PM
#27
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done the right thing and searched for half bridges, i see that some one said a haif is when you only port the primaries or secondaries right. Someone also said that it would be dumb to port the primaries, if you only wanted the lumpy style idle, could you just do the primary and just extend the secondary, this is one a 13bt btw. Because the way i see it the secondary injectors dont come on until 3800 or something so bridging the secdaries wont give it the idle.
WTF right or wrong?
WTF right or wrong?
12-22-04, 09:08 PM
#28
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Freeport, Maine
Posts: 1,225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what's wrong with making a 6 port a 4 port? the turbo has a 4 port. and the 6 port has better port timing. . best of both worlds. maybe not? please explain to me why this is not good. I'm not trying to be a dink, i would actually like to learn why, because that is the port style i was looking at for my engine. thanks.
Dom
Dom
12-22-04, 09:15 PM
#29
kill it with BOOMSTICK!
The reason the aux ports are seperate from the primary ports is that the sleaves restrict airflow, making the engine atomize fuel more effectively (same air through less space = higher velocity) and therefore gives better bottom end torque, and then at the top end the aux ports open allowing the engine to breathe more. In the end, it all comes down to bottom end torque being the reason. Turbo's have 4 ports, true, but they also have a turbo to force the air in, defeating the purpose of the aux ports in the first place.
12-22-04, 09:25 PM
#30
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Freeport, Maine
Posts: 1,225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i understand the low end torque issue. . but that's not an issue for me. My question is, While a 6 port converted to 4 port yeild more power overall than just a street ported 6 port? i think it would but am no expert.
Dom
Dom
12-22-04, 09:33 PM
#31
Fabricator and builder
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Innisfil, Ontario
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I've read turning a 6 port into a 4 port will completely screw up your mixture to the point that any reasonable idle is out of the question. Not to mention there is no way that the stock computer will be able to cope with it.
Aaron, that's a huge secondary port, I'm really interested to hear how it works out. Mine is street ported a little smaller than that and it runs good but I'm already thinking about the next step.
Aaron, that's a huge secondary port, I'm really interested to hear how it works out. Mine is street ported a little smaller than that and it runs good but I'm already thinking about the next step.
Last edited by brent clement; 12-22-04 at 09:38 PM.
12-22-04, 10:15 PM
#32
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Freeport, Maine
Posts: 1,225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yea idle will be afected, but i can't see how it will be too drastic due to that fact that most of the porting would be on the secondary's and aux. ports. I can't see how it would be any worse of an idle than with a half bridge. What i'm asking though is if a 6 port to 4 port streeport conversion would yeild more power that just a 6 port street port.
12-23-04, 10:48 AM
#33
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 110 Likes
on
93 Posts
I half bridge technically bridges only the secondary ports (the ones on the end plates).
A full bridge would bridge the primary ports as well (the ones on the intermediate plate).
VERY GENERALLY SPEAKING, a half bridge is much better for the street due to drivability reasons. A full bridge is like driving a PP.
Now, a half bridge normally covers most or all of the secondary parts. I only did the upper half because I wanted to minimize overlap. If you're going to maximum power, you will do the bottom half of the port as well.
A full bridge would bridge the primary ports as well (the ones on the intermediate plate).
VERY GENERALLY SPEAKING, a half bridge is much better for the street due to drivability reasons. A full bridge is like driving a PP.
Now, a half bridge normally covers most or all of the secondary parts. I only did the upper half because I wanted to minimize overlap. If you're going to maximum power, you will do the bottom half of the port as well.
12-23-04, 04:22 PM
#34
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: LA
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vipers
lol.....in cali, you do anything to the block, and its bye bye emissions! even mild streetports tend to not pass (on a rare occasion they do)...
a guy i know has what was described as a "mazdatrix agressive street port" and when they put the catalytic converter/split air pipe/factory manifold emissions stuff back on, he was able to smog his car without a problem.
12-23-04, 10:13 PM
#36
Originally Posted by Dom_C
i understand the low end torque issue. . but that's not an issue for me. My question is, While a 6 port converted to 4 port yeild more power overall than just a street ported 6 port? i think it would but am no expert.
Dom
Dom
The second problem with hogging these out is that you have drastically changed the way air behaves in the intake runners. On the stock housing, the 2 runners and ports stay totally separate. At low rpm's when the auxilary port actuator is closed, all of the air flowing through the manifold is forced into the small secondary port. This speeds the air up as it enters the engine and helps with low end power. When the auxillary port opens, air still does this to an extent. When the rotor starts closes the bottom port, all of the air in the manifold which is moving towards the engine, is forced to all flow through the upper port. Since the air at these engine speeds have alot of inertia, they ram themselves through this upper port and have greater flow through this port right up until it fully closes. This really increases the volumetric efficiency of the engine.
When you hog these out into one big port, the low end suffers obviously because the upper port is always open, but more importantly you've also killed the top end. As the rotor turns and starts to close this now huge port, when it gets halfway up where the secondary port originally closed, the air is never totally blocked and all forced to go through a small intake runner. It just flows pretty steady. Although you have a port capable of high flow, the inertia of the air in the manifold as the rotor opens and closes over the port is less than stock. What happens is that you now have a huge *** port that is great to brag about on the internet but in truth makes less power everywhere due to lack of inertial ramcharging! Bigger is not better. What people need to realize is that you want to use the smallest ports and runners that you can to reach your target. You need to have realistic expectations though. I constantly see people claim their mega sized streetports will yield a ton of power but we still never see higher power numbers than anyone else's more mild port jobs. We just see less average power. Average power is where performance is at. Peak numbers only sell product but do nothing to make you fast.
Here are 2 very good examples of how NOT to port a 6 port engine. I pulled this from a certain well known rotary person's website. You couldn't pay me to let this guy port one of my engines. This is a prime example of flow guessing. I have a flowbench and actually flow test. What you think may work good may not work good at all. Common sense doesn't always apply to airflow. Sounds strange. You wouldn't know this unless you actually saw it firsthand though.
12-23-04, 11:11 PM
#37
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
If you are just referring to hogging it out into one big port like the attached picture, it's a very bad idea. The problem isn't that it doesn't flow good. It does but you can have too much flow. I wish more people understood this. When you hog out the runners to a very large one you have done 2 very bad things. The first of which is that you have increased the area of the intake runner in the block to be very much larger then the runner in the intake manifold. When the air flowing from the manifold hits this larger area, it really slows down. You need air velocity to make good low end power. Unfortunately the engine has to be spinning very fast to overcome this and even then it newer really does.
The second problem with hogging these out is that you have drastically changed the way air behaves in the intake runners. On the stock housing, the 2 runners and ports stay totally separate. At low rpm's when the auxilary port actuator is closed, all of the air flowing through the manifold is forced into the small secondary port. This speeds the air up as it enters the engine and helps with low end power. When the auxillary port opens, air still does this to an extent. When the rotor starts closes the bottom port, all of the air in the manifold which is moving towards the engine, is forced to all flow through the upper port. Since the air at these engine speeds have alot of inertia, they ram themselves through this upper port and have greater flow through this port right up until it fully closes. This really increases the volumetric efficiency of the engine.
When you hog these out into one big port, the low end suffers obviously because the upper port is always open, but more importantly you've also killed the top end. As the rotor turns and starts to close this now huge port, when it gets halfway up where the secondary port originally closed, the air is never totally blocked and all forced to go through a small intake runner. It just flows pretty steady. Although you have a port capable of high flow, the inertia of the air in the manifold as the rotor opens and closes over the port is less than stock. What happens is that you now have a huge *** port that is great to brag about on the internet but in truth makes less power everywhere due to lack of inertial ramcharging! Bigger is not better. What people need to realize is that you want to use the smallest ports and runners that you can to reach your target. You need to have realistic expectations though. I constantly see people claim their mega sized streetports will yield a ton of power but we still never see higher power numbers than anyone else's more mild port jobs. We just see less average power. Average power is where performance is at. Peak numbers only sell product but do nothing to make you fast.
Here are 2 very good examples of how NOT to port a 6 port engine. I pulled this from a certain well known rotary person's website. You couldn't pay me to let this guy port one of my engines. This is a prime example of flow guessing. I have a flowbench and actually flow test. What you think may work good may not work good at all. Common sense doesn't always apply to airflow. Sounds strange. You wouldn't know this unless you actually saw it firsthand though.
The second problem with hogging these out is that you have drastically changed the way air behaves in the intake runners. On the stock housing, the 2 runners and ports stay totally separate. At low rpm's when the auxilary port actuator is closed, all of the air flowing through the manifold is forced into the small secondary port. This speeds the air up as it enters the engine and helps with low end power. When the auxillary port opens, air still does this to an extent. When the rotor starts closes the bottom port, all of the air in the manifold which is moving towards the engine, is forced to all flow through the upper port. Since the air at these engine speeds have alot of inertia, they ram themselves through this upper port and have greater flow through this port right up until it fully closes. This really increases the volumetric efficiency of the engine.
When you hog these out into one big port, the low end suffers obviously because the upper port is always open, but more importantly you've also killed the top end. As the rotor turns and starts to close this now huge port, when it gets halfway up where the secondary port originally closed, the air is never totally blocked and all forced to go through a small intake runner. It just flows pretty steady. Although you have a port capable of high flow, the inertia of the air in the manifold as the rotor opens and closes over the port is less than stock. What happens is that you now have a huge *** port that is great to brag about on the internet but in truth makes less power everywhere due to lack of inertial ramcharging! Bigger is not better. What people need to realize is that you want to use the smallest ports and runners that you can to reach your target. You need to have realistic expectations though. I constantly see people claim their mega sized streetports will yield a ton of power but we still never see higher power numbers than anyone else's more mild port jobs. We just see less average power. Average power is where performance is at. Peak numbers only sell product but do nothing to make you fast.
Here are 2 very good examples of how NOT to port a 6 port engine. I pulled this from a certain well known rotary person's website. You couldn't pay me to let this guy port one of my engines. This is a prime example of flow guessing. I have a flowbench and actually flow test. What you think may work good may not work good at all. Common sense doesn't always apply to airflow. Sounds strange. You wouldn't know this unless you actually saw it firsthand though.
12-23-04, 11:34 PM
#38
The problem is that absolutely nobody uses a properly sized intake manifold. At least no one here. They just hog out ports as large as they can and expect them to get more power. Even a new manifold can't be made to work with the stock ecu anyways. The afm only has 5 sq. in. of flow area and even that is trapped behind a spring loaded flapper door. A higher powerband with less low end of this type of setup is not a viable alternative for a street driven car anyways. I don't care who claims otherwise. If you want to build an engine this way that has a usable rpm range of 7K+ and are willing to use a standalone ecu (not that bs bandaid S-AFC pos), then this form of porting may possibly be a viable alternative in some racing classes not allowing bridge or peripheral porting. It has no place on the street and certainly no place on a stock manifold and ecu car.
12-23-04, 11:39 PM
#39
i am legendary
Rotarygod, I really think you need to shut up.
I did a port exactly like the 2nd one you posted where the divider is removed. Now that the break-in is over I can tell you I'm pulling hard all the way to the rev limiter and it's an extreme improvement over stock. I have the removed divider for the secondaries with a mild primary port, not a much just ported a bit, and it is doing great. Idle is fine, power is great, and it's pulling like no other.
Where are you getting the fact that those ports are so terrible? I've seen tons of examples of ports like that, and BIGGER, over at nopistons.com with GOOD criticism by JudgeITO, Lynn and other experienced rotary engine builders. I think I tend to trust them more than you.
By the way, by law what you're doing is actually defemation of character. This is only if you can prove beyond all doubt the ports are so terrible as you claim, otherwise it falls into the definition of "False statement that tends to harm the person in personal or business affairs." For it to be defemation it must also be published, which you have now done.
I did a port exactly like the 2nd one you posted where the divider is removed. Now that the break-in is over I can tell you I'm pulling hard all the way to the rev limiter and it's an extreme improvement over stock. I have the removed divider for the secondaries with a mild primary port, not a much just ported a bit, and it is doing great. Idle is fine, power is great, and it's pulling like no other.
Where are you getting the fact that those ports are so terrible? I've seen tons of examples of ports like that, and BIGGER, over at nopistons.com with GOOD criticism by JudgeITO, Lynn and other experienced rotary engine builders. I think I tend to trust them more than you.
By the way, by law what you're doing is actually defemation of character. This is only if you can prove beyond all doubt the ports are so terrible as you claim, otherwise it falls into the definition of "False statement that tends to harm the person in personal or business affairs." For it to be defemation it must also be published, which you have now done.
Last edited by ddub; 12-23-04 at 11:41 PM.
12-23-04, 11:45 PM
#40
I've got just one thing to say to you. PROVE IT!!! Show me proof that your car makes more power than any other street port job. You can't. So until you can, don't get mad at me. BTW: Show me one of those people who actually flow tests anything. I don't doubt they can do well with rotary engines but if they aren't testing, they are guessing. You may be faster than stock but I guarantee that you could have been just as fast with a smaller port.
12-23-04, 11:46 PM
#41
Originally Posted by dDuB
By the way, by law what you're doing is actually defemation of character. This is only if you can prove beyond all doubt the ports are so terrible as you claim, otherwise it falls into the definition of "False statement that tends to harm the person in personal or business affairs." For it to be defemation it must also be published, which you have now done.
12-23-04, 11:47 PM
#42
i am legendary
Did I say it was better than "any other street port job." Nope, just said it is extremely better than stock and I'm very happy with it.
You want me to prove it? How about you ******* prove it since you're such a god damned expert? Like I said, the builders and gurus over at nopistons have commented on ports similar to these, and larger, with no displeasure, and until you prove to me you're smarter than them, which I doubt you will, I tend to trust them more than you.
You want me to prove it? How about you ******* prove it since you're such a god damned expert? Like I said, the builders and gurus over at nopistons have commented on ports similar to these, and larger, with no displeasure, and until you prove to me you're smarter than them, which I doubt you will, I tend to trust them more than you.
12-23-04, 11:48 PM
#43
i am legendary
No but you did steal pictures from his website and it's pretty obvious who you're talking about if you've gone to his site. Plus you're taking HIS pictures and publishing them on this forum and bashing them. Never said you could be sued, you just fit the profile for defemation of character.
12-24-04, 12:38 AM
#44
Since your the only one insulting anyone, and that person is me (duh!), who are you to judge me? So what you are saying is that absolutely no one here has ever cut and paste a picture from another website to here ever? Is that what you are saying? Are you saying you yourself have never cut and paste any pictures from another website to here? Not even once? Does it matter what is said if you are still stealing their pictures? This after all is your standard so there must be no way you could have ever done this. I didn't say whose they were, I didn't insult them as a person, nor did I name this person or their site in any way. Therefore there was no defamation of character. You're the only one doing that. Do I really need a disclaimer for every single little thing that I type so some random person in the world isn't insulted? Welcome to the internet. I said how I would do it and how I say not to do it. The internet is full of opinions. Sorry to bring reality into this. It doesn't mean you'll always agree with it. If you know where the pictures came from then good for you. You are definitely in the know when it comes to online rotary websites. Don't assume everyone else necessarily knows everything you know though. I did nothing wrong. I posted pictures of how I feel they shouldn't be done. Do I really need to waste my time ruining a housing so I can post my own picture that shows the exact same thing? Not going to do it. You are just finding ways to get personal against me so you can make me mad. That's fine.
If your car is faster than stock, great! Cool! I'm happy for you. No sarcasm intended by that statement. If you didn't hog out both runners into one large runner but only did the port then this may very well be the case. The whole point is to not make the runner and port into 1 larger unit. You still lost flow at certain spots though. On a piston engine these are the equivalent of "low lift" flow. Maybe the gains at others (the "high lift" on a piston engine) has more than offset it which is why you have a power increase. How do I know this? I have ported a plate like this before and thought that it must make more power because it can flow better. When you test it with an intake manifold on you suddenly see a very different picture. After I ruin a plate though, I get rid of them. They are a waste of space. I know certain things because I can test them and verify it. Does it matter that I don't have my own shop if I can still get the test done? Here's a nice page you should read. Maybe you'll start thinking a little differently about who you trust and why. Again, not insulting anyone on your trusted list. I have no doubts they can build nice engines and are great people. I actually get along with them. One of them might not be too fond of me but I have no problems in return. Lots of people can build great engines. Most of them we've probably never heard of either. Congrats on the new engine build.
http://www.yawpower.com/Flow%20Testing.html
If your car is faster than stock, great! Cool! I'm happy for you. No sarcasm intended by that statement. If you didn't hog out both runners into one large runner but only did the port then this may very well be the case. The whole point is to not make the runner and port into 1 larger unit. You still lost flow at certain spots though. On a piston engine these are the equivalent of "low lift" flow. Maybe the gains at others (the "high lift" on a piston engine) has more than offset it which is why you have a power increase. How do I know this? I have ported a plate like this before and thought that it must make more power because it can flow better. When you test it with an intake manifold on you suddenly see a very different picture. After I ruin a plate though, I get rid of them. They are a waste of space. I know certain things because I can test them and verify it. Does it matter that I don't have my own shop if I can still get the test done? Here's a nice page you should read. Maybe you'll start thinking a little differently about who you trust and why. Again, not insulting anyone on your trusted list. I have no doubts they can build nice engines and are great people. I actually get along with them. One of them might not be too fond of me but I have no problems in return. Lots of people can build great engines. Most of them we've probably never heard of either. Congrats on the new engine build.
http://www.yawpower.com/Flow%20Testing.html
12-24-04, 12:45 AM
#45
i am legendary
I don't need to argue with you anymore in this thread, that was not the point of it.
But as my last thought, if larger is not better as you are saying, then how come every major rotary engine builder that are highly thought of in the race world as well as street/light race performance always go huge? Like JudgeITO's extreme streetport templates that he was selling?
Besides I'd still like proof from you, you haven't given any hard evidence to anything you've stated so far.
But as my last thought, if larger is not better as you are saying, then how come every major rotary engine builder that are highly thought of in the race world as well as street/light race performance always go huge? Like JudgeITO's extreme streetport templates that he was selling?
Besides I'd still like proof from you, you haven't given any hard evidence to anything you've stated so far.
12-24-04, 01:01 AM
#46
What you are overlooking is that larger does not mean as large as it can get. I have no problem with a larger port. The largest port you can possibly make does not always make the most power with every setup. Depending on your setup, it is in fact possible to make less. Did you read the article in the link? Now tell me how bigger is always better? Not every top rotary builder recommends the biggest port you can get. They also take into consideration the rest of the system such as intake manifold, exhaust, ecu, streetability, race use, desired rpm range, etc...
Might I ask what ecu and intake manifold are you running and what is your primary vehicle use? You'd better not say stock to any part of that. You can't supply your own proof as to how a big huge giganto port is always best so now you're going to throw the question back at me? lol Go ask any of your experts why biggest is always the best under every circumstance. What good is having a large intake port that stalls out at 10,000 rpm when your intake manifold is only good to 8000? Should have made it smaller in this scenario. Greater average power. Should we get into how the stock gear ratio isn't appropriate for a higher rpm range next?
Just get over it. You disagree with my comments. I disagree with how you ported your engine. Tough. 2 different opinions. It happens.
Might I ask what ecu and intake manifold are you running and what is your primary vehicle use? You'd better not say stock to any part of that. You can't supply your own proof as to how a big huge giganto port is always best so now you're going to throw the question back at me? lol Go ask any of your experts why biggest is always the best under every circumstance. What good is having a large intake port that stalls out at 10,000 rpm when your intake manifold is only good to 8000? Should have made it smaller in this scenario. Greater average power. Should we get into how the stock gear ratio isn't appropriate for a higher rpm range next?
Just get over it. You disagree with my comments. I disagree with how you ported your engine. Tough. 2 different opinions. It happens.
12-24-04, 01:35 AM
#47
Here are 2 very good examples of how NOT to port a 6 port engine. I pulled this from a certain well known rotary person's website. You couldn't pay me to let this guy port one of my engines. This is a prime example of flow guessing. I have a flowbench and actually flow test. What you think may work good may not work good at all. Common sense doesn't always apply to airflow. Sounds strange. You wouldn't know this unless you actually saw it firsthand though.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? Sure, you seem to be a smart guy, and have a lot of rotary experience, I won't question or debate that. That's all well and fine, I'm happy for you, but that doesnt give you the right to call me out on this forum (by name or not, it's obvious regardless). And even if you are right about the subject matter (i'm not conceding that you are, just humoring the idea), the way you came forward with this is bullshit. You don't start bashing on someone else's work to support yourself or your claims, that's unprofessional and immature. IF you want to sit here and carry on a technical conversation, compare theories and results, that's great, but don't make an *** out of yourself by trying to degrade my work. If you want to disagree with my methods or theories on a professional level then go right ahead.
To take MY pictures off MY website for the sole purpose of talking **** is f*cking ignorant, and worse yet that's known to most as THEFT.
They've been posted as attatchments in this thread (to accomplish this you had to rip them from my site onto your own HD then upload them back to the forum server and post here) and this cannot be changed to my knowledge. I advise that you not do it again without my consent.
12-24-04, 04:01 AM
#48
I really don't care if you know who I am or not. I have no clue who you are other than the fact you are on a forum on the internet and have your own website. Yay. Who doesn't? I really don't care either. If I start my own website, type a few words, post a few pictures, and give myself a company name and maybe even a mission statement, will I be credible to everyone then? This isn't a slam against you but hopefully the point is made about being known or visible on the internet. It means squat. You don't have to own a business to have the knowledge.
First of all Kevin, apparently those pictures are yours. Nice of you to admit that. How do you know that I actually got them from you or your site directly? You don't. For all you know I copied and pasted them from someone somewhere else who copied them from you and all I know is that they are originally from someone fairly well known or unknown which is why I typed it the way I did. (That was a hell of a run on sentence!) That's the brilliance of the internet. Everyone uses everyone elses stuff. If you think this can't be done then you really need to learn about computers. I don't know crap about them and don't hide it but I know how to click the right mouse button, highlight something, and press copy. If you don't want anyone doing this to your site, set it up so no one can. Get over it and learn to take criticism. I've actually had those pictures saved for several months. I've got many others of various other people's ports too. Is that wrong? Nope, because I'm not claiming they are mine nor am I claiming it is my work. Think about it, if I had asked for permission to use someone else's pictures to show how not to do something, do you really think I'd get permission? No. It's easier to apologize than ask permission anyways. What's done is done. Simple really.
If I had called you out, I would have directly named you. That's why I didn't name you. I wasn't calling you out. You'll know if I do. Since you responded in such a manner, now everyone knows who you are and how you port 6 port engines. They also know I disagree with you. So what? Some may still agree with you and some may see it my way. If no one does, I really don't care. FWIW your T-II ports look nice! I didn't want to say something bad and affect your reputation to those who don't know you and hence your name both personal and website stayed out. Those who do know you won't be convinced of anything from one random stranger on the internet anyways. Basically this in no way affected you whatsoever until you posted and admitted it was you and even then it probably did nothing. Not my fault. I kept direct mention of you out of it. I find it sad that many people believe major manufacturers outrageous impossible dyno claims on some products. Intakes are a good example. It helps sell products but doesn't teach anyone anything useful. Please note I am not talking about you. Again, I won't name them because I don't want every company on the planet getting on here yelling at me saying I don't know how to post on the internet and am immature and saying I am hurting their name. Boohoo. The world is full of opinions. I'll probably have K&N, Greddy, HKS, or others yell at me now because I mentioned intakes and they sell them.
Thanks for permission to disagree with your methods. At least I'm allowed to publicly do that now.
You crack me up Kevin. I personally don't care what anyone thinks about me. If someone has a problem with me, it's their problem. If they don't agree with me, that's fine too. Since I apparently "talks a big ****" (Who the hell talks like that??? Is that a sentence???), prove me wrong. Test it for yourself. Only you know the results. Anyone can screw with dyno or airflow numbers in order to post results on the internet. Get your own conclusions.
First of all Kevin, apparently those pictures are yours. Nice of you to admit that. How do you know that I actually got them from you or your site directly? You don't. For all you know I copied and pasted them from someone somewhere else who copied them from you and all I know is that they are originally from someone fairly well known or unknown which is why I typed it the way I did. (That was a hell of a run on sentence!) That's the brilliance of the internet. Everyone uses everyone elses stuff. If you think this can't be done then you really need to learn about computers. I don't know crap about them and don't hide it but I know how to click the right mouse button, highlight something, and press copy. If you don't want anyone doing this to your site, set it up so no one can. Get over it and learn to take criticism. I've actually had those pictures saved for several months. I've got many others of various other people's ports too. Is that wrong? Nope, because I'm not claiming they are mine nor am I claiming it is my work. Think about it, if I had asked for permission to use someone else's pictures to show how not to do something, do you really think I'd get permission? No. It's easier to apologize than ask permission anyways. What's done is done. Simple really.
If I had called you out, I would have directly named you. That's why I didn't name you. I wasn't calling you out. You'll know if I do. Since you responded in such a manner, now everyone knows who you are and how you port 6 port engines. They also know I disagree with you. So what? Some may still agree with you and some may see it my way. If no one does, I really don't care. FWIW your T-II ports look nice! I didn't want to say something bad and affect your reputation to those who don't know you and hence your name both personal and website stayed out. Those who do know you won't be convinced of anything from one random stranger on the internet anyways. Basically this in no way affected you whatsoever until you posted and admitted it was you and even then it probably did nothing. Not my fault. I kept direct mention of you out of it. I find it sad that many people believe major manufacturers outrageous impossible dyno claims on some products. Intakes are a good example. It helps sell products but doesn't teach anyone anything useful. Please note I am not talking about you. Again, I won't name them because I don't want every company on the planet getting on here yelling at me saying I don't know how to post on the internet and am immature and saying I am hurting their name. Boohoo. The world is full of opinions. I'll probably have K&N, Greddy, HKS, or others yell at me now because I mentioned intakes and they sell them.
Thanks for permission to disagree with your methods. At least I'm allowed to publicly do that now.
You crack me up Kevin. I personally don't care what anyone thinks about me. If someone has a problem with me, it's their problem. If they don't agree with me, that's fine too. Since I apparently "talks a big ****" (Who the hell talks like that??? Is that a sentence???), prove me wrong. Test it for yourself. Only you know the results. Anyone can screw with dyno or airflow numbers in order to post results on the internet. Get your own conclusions.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post