Yellow Bullet Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Camshaft Challenge

4 reading
Jump to Latest
1,461 - 1,480 of 1,710 Posts
#1,461 · (Edited)
66427MR said:
I have been following this thread pretty closely and mentioned the other day that I thought he had given Eric the benefit of the doubt in this. More than once. Maybe I’m reading comments wrong. I don’t recall him ever saying anything negative about the dyno operator and it wasn’t him who blamed the heads for the lack of performance of his cam, nor did he blame the air hat. All of that from Eric was as inaccurate as the dyno sheet he provided on that run. At least Eric is consistent there.

After seeing the explanation from Stuska1 on his 388 Ford gaining 20 from changing the ICL from 104 to 108 he pretty much accepted that as the explanation and dropped the simulation talk.

The older I get the more I realize how wise my grandfather was.
Click to expand...
Someone actually has decent reading and comprehension skills. Roll back to posts 1,381 and 1,314. Whoever is texting Eric screenshots of this thread more than likely didn't send those two. You can pretty much bet on it. Edit: Add to those posts 1,234, 1,268, 1,299, 1,294.

I was out all day yesterday, so I'm catching up on things. I'll comment on the situation later.
 
#1,462 · (Edited)
600" BBF said:
Someone actually has decent reading and comprehension skills. Roll back to posts 1,381 and 1,314. Whoever is texting Eric screenshots of this thread more than likely didn't send those two. You can pretty much bet on it. Edit: Add to those posts 1,234, 1,268, 1,299, 1,294.

I was out all day yesterday, so I'm catching up on things. I'll comment on the situation later.
Click to expand...
It appears from the video there was a private conversation between you two. If you read through the pages of comments in this thread from Eric's perspective, you did not make much of an effort to shut down the nonsense talk, and in many cases encouraged it. From the outside looking in, I'm pretty sure your Mike Jones comment was the last straw.

I didn't see Chris Straub say anything, about as close to your cam as possible with NOT surprisingly similar results. Like almost exactly the same power output across a 4 metrics.

You or anyone else 'got screwed', I don't think so. It appears the Dyno, Operator and Organizer of this competition made the best effort to make EVERYTHING Repeatable. Facts
Image


Image
 
#1,469 · (Edited)
Tuptuoasl said:
It appears from the video there was a private conversation between you two. If you read through the pages of comments in this thread from Eric's perspective, you did not make much of an effort to shut down the nonsense talk, and in many cases encouraged it. From the outside looking in, I'm pretty sure your Mike Jones comment was the last straw.
Click to expand...
Fair enough and if that was the "last straw" ok, it's his sandbox, run it as he'd like. I'm good with that.

But the FACTS are, I never talked shit about his dyno operator, I didn't blame the lack of performance on the head specs not being correct, and I was pretty damn clear, more than once, that the air hat was not the reason my cam didn't perform as expected, and more than once, including to your post, stated that my results would have been different had I used a 108 ICL vs a 104. Those are also FACTS.

Lastly, another FACT for you, I never ever use the words "..that wasn't fair". Ever. That's as much of a fact as me not blaming the head specs, or talking shit about Gary. In that private conversation with Eric, he stated " How about I refund your fee since you think it was so unfair..." My response: " Did I say "unfair" ? Maybe unfortunate is a better description."(end quote) "Unfortunate" and "unfair" have different meanings.

Even with Eric erasing me from the record, I don't have an issue with him - His sandbox ... he can run it as he wishes. - Just don't make up stuff that didn't happen, or wasn't stated (edit) as justification for actions.

/
 
#1,473 ·
Tuptuoasl said:
There are at least 6 cams that performed similar to his cam, which just proves the results are consistent. If you can't interpret data right in front of you maybe you need to find a different hobby. That cam did exactly what it should have done, good power down low. Most every cam with a tight LSA, tight ICL, O/L skewed early, and on top of that insufficient split for the head flow characteristics, it made more than it should have. This is before looking at the lobe intensities, which we do not have that information to make a determination.
Click to expand...
"Insufficient split for head flow characteristics".........interesting. lol
 
#1,474 ·
inline6 said:
yes, it was different due to a mistake. what do you suggest be done ? redo the the challenge?
Click to expand...
No, Eric doesn't need to redo the challenge. After the challenge was over Eric did do some additional testing with that engine. All Eric needed to do was retest Jon's cam and give Jon a good dyno sheet.

Stan
 
#1,475 ·
Stan Weiss said:
No, Eric doesn't need to redo the challenge. After the challenge was over Eric did do some additional testing with that engine. All Eric needed to do was retest Jon's cam and give Jon a good dyno sheet.

Stan
Click to expand...
Is that all? Additional testing was done without the air hat so that would have not accomplished anything. The numbers in the 3 left columns were the only ones used for the competition.
You can just use Straubs dyno sheet for the data that had no bearing on the outcome. Their power curves and cams are basically identical. For people all about the data you seem to struggle looking at data.

Image

Image
 
#1,477 ·
stuska1 said:
Unless it was put in incorrectly, like a whole fucking tooth off. Which given all the fuck ups with the air hat and throttle controller is very possible.

In that case Jon got fucked because of incompetence.
Click to expand...
This just goes to show how ignorant you are. It was installed like every other cam. 2 cams with almost the exact same specs had almost the same exact results. A tooth off? Thanks for showing all of us what you really know.
 
#1,478 ·
Tuptuoasl said:
Is that all? Additional testing was done without the air hat so that would have not accomplished anything. The numbers in the 3 left columns were the only ones used for the competition.
You can just use Straubs dyno sheet for the data that had no bearing on the outcome. Their power curves and cams are basically identical. For people all about the data you seem to struggle looking at data.

View attachment 707591
View attachment 707592
Click to expand...
Jon was not looking to have where he finished in the contest changed. He wants a full dyno to try an analyze why his cam performed the way that it did. You know the same information that everyone other then Jon got on their dyno sheet.

Stan
 
#1,479 ·
Stan Weiss said:
Jon was not looking to have where he finished in the contest changed. He wants a full dyno to try an analyze why his cam performed the way that it did. You know the same information that everyone other then Jon got on their dyno sheet.

Stan
Click to expand...
He could just look at his cam events and compare them to everyone else's. It's obvious to everyone else. This is basic engine dynamics.
 
#1,480 ·
Tuptuoasl said:
He could just look at his cam events and compare them to everyone else's. It's obvious to everyone else. This is basic engine dynamics.
Click to expand...
Maybe if everyone's cam was run on Cam DR and each person in the contest got all of that information that would work otherwise no it doesn't work.

Stan
 
1,461 - 1,480 of 1,710 Posts
About this Discussion
1.7K Replies
59 Participants
Last post:
BBF612
Yellow Bullet Forums
posts
24M
members
152K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to drag racing drivers and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about racing, builds, pro mods, hot rods, events, turbos, nitrous, superchargers, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Trash Or Be Trashed Naturally Aspirated Let's Talk Drag Racing Turbo Charged Nitrous - Induction Solutions