427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Locked
SchmidtMotorWorks
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9604
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:30 am
Contact:

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by SchmidtMotorWorks » Fri May 11, 2018 2:22 am

These are some other good resources for engine building and math to guide it.

The BMEP section should be understood before buying any parts for an engine.

http://www.epi-eng.com/piston_engine_te ... ntents.htm
http://www.schmidtmotorworks.com Aerospace Machine Work: Prototypes, Tooling, Molds.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Fri May 11, 2018 2:22 am

SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 2:16 am
GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 2:09 am

NO! This was my question.
Then could you show us how his work will help those having to use a traditional platform SBC engine?
It works for every 4 stroke engine.

Remember when I was complaining about 128 not scaling?
That method scales from garden tools to racing engines.

If the work is too unpleasant for anyone, then, as I mentioned several times in this thread already, my advice in 2018 is that anyone that is involved in engine building should have a 1D software and use it to choose the dimensions of their engine. The cost of it is less than one mistaken component selection if you value your time.
That still doesn't answer how it will help me or others that are dealing with mass produced as cast parts.

Lets stay with your context, I am dumb, you are smart and you are going to school me on engine building.

smeg
Pro
Pro
Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:43 am
Location: melbourne, Australia

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by smeg » Fri May 11, 2018 4:03 am

I was looking at davids dyno sheet and I would like someone to explain to me why the ramp rate is all over the place? How can you get good information with ramp rates like that???

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Fri May 11, 2018 4:12 am

smeg wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:03 am
I was looking at davids dyno sheet and I would like someone to explain to me why the ramp rate is all over the place? How can you get good information with ramp rates like that???
If you stretched it out across the page it would not be as pronounced, but if you look at his or any dyno sheets you see that the numbers are not in order the dyno grabs numbers that bounce up and down as they get higher.

statsystems
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:17 am

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by statsystems » Fri May 11, 2018 4:35 am

SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:34 am
statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:18 am
And I agree...warp has a bunch of one liners but I've yet to see him say anything worthwhile technically speaking. You'd think he was working on top secret shit.
A guy in WarpSpeeds position has to be very careful what he posts.
If his employer believes that they own the data behind any advice he gives, it could be harmful to his career.

He is exposed to some of the best motor-sports related engine development in the USA.
You would be wise to listen to whatever he posts.


No shit Sherlock. But certainly, what some of what is being discussed is so far behind what he is doing he can talk about something no? Is he higher up the food chain than Darin Morgan, who has posted some fairly simple yet interesting stuff to read. And he does it with being so arrogant that if he talked that way to me in public he wouldn't like the outcome.

Stan Weiss is very informative and not arrogant like that. And yes, I get they are not in the same exact situation. Mad Bill is no stooge. I can't think of a single time (in my memory) that Bill has come into a thread, told someone they are doing it wrong and then not point them in the correct direction.

I DAMN sure wouldn't want to pay the bill for what Larry Meaux has posted on this site and still does. I've never seen Larry do the same as you and warp do (the two worst offenders) and I can say with certainty larrys knowledge is no less expensive to learn than anyone else.

Chad Speer also comes to mind. He's not afraid to put his stuff out there, with pictures. And give at least some thumbnail explanation as to what he is doing and why. Yet he has a few dong beaters who track his every post, ridicule his every word and thought and generally denigrate most of what he says.

And what about you Jon? You swing through here, pound your chest, tell us how smart you are all while looking down your nose at everyone you THINK doesn't have a degree or isn't as educated as they should be. Other than a couple of unproven programs and a bunch of double speak, you say very little of value, but you love to run your mouth.

If you have non disclosure agreements that's fine. No one expects you to jepordize your income just for a forum but for fucks sake we get it. You can't contribute much because you know too much and can't say it. Why not just say "hey, that's not how I'd do it, and there are other ways that are more accurate if you look around. I can't give them to you or could lose my employment." Or maybe, instead of just saying you can't do anything without CFD, why not give some other, maybe more crude but still effective way to get to an answer. If you can't, then don't say anything.

The guys who squeal and piss and moan and bitch the most about not enough technical stuff here are the root cause of it. You can't speak, or won't speak for whatever reasons. Time to dust off the looking glass and have a good long gander. Maybe then you'll see the issue.

There is no way I agree with everything DV does. Hell, I don't agree with everything my wife does. But you don't have to be a prick about it. The guy puts his stuff out there for all to see. You may have to buy the book to see it all. If you can't afford the book the shut up about it. You aren't required to post up what you can't, why should DV?

You may not like the way he posts. Too bad. It's how he does it. I can tell you I don't have a single DV book. Not one (sorry David). Not a thing he can say on here will influence me one way or the other to buy his book. I'd bet there are some pretty big named people who read his books and don't admit it. When he writes a book I want to buy, it will have to be written for a professional engine builder level. Not an asscar level, or even Pro Stock because we all know they have more top secret shit than the state department. But because not all of us are interested in pump gas stuff, or we have the ability to duplicate his numbers (or get close enough that our customers are happy) that we just don't need redundant information.

If DV posting like he does gives you butt hurt than that's your fault. You keep coming back for it. I read 20-30 books a year. I never agree totally with the author. Doesn't mean I can't learn something and make the book worth my time. Same with all the guys who post here. Sometimes the numbers that Stan and Larry post take me a bit to get my head around. It is what it is.

The point is this: the issue isn't just with DV. If you can't contribute something to a thread then don't say anything. Or, if you have the absolute uncontrollable impulse to claim someone wrong, add some little detail where you can and let it be.

No one knows everything and none of us are right all the time. Grow up.

Edit: this is why peer review is for the most part worthless. Literally, this forum is nothing more than peer review. It's why I don't give a crap about what most of my "peers" think. For most it's just a way to say something to someone you normally wouldn't unless you expected to get your teeth bashed out.

smeg
Pro
Pro
Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:43 am
Location: melbourne, Australia

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by smeg » Fri May 11, 2018 4:50 am

GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:12 am
smeg wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:03 am
I was looking at davids dyno sheet and I would like someone to explain to me why the ramp rate is all over the place? How can you get good information with ramp rates like that???
If you stretched it out across the page it would not be as pronounced, but if you look at his or any dyno sheets you see that the numbers are not in order the dyno grabs numbers that bounce up and down as they get higher.
Thats not how my dyno sheets look, anyone else want to comment?

Warp Speed
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: NC

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Warp Speed » Fri May 11, 2018 5:08 am

GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:50 pm
novadude wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:40 pm
Warp Speed wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 1:11 pm


There is NO TECH in this thread
That could be said about 50% of what is on speedtalk in 2018. Just scroll down the topic list and read some of the responses to topics getting posted here lately. Sure is different from 6-7 years ago.
Warp, how much does your :roll: contribute to this? I can't say I ever seen you contribute much more than bearing clearance... You are suppose to be the smartest guy here... right?
Don't let your hurt feelings over this situation clog your common sense again!
How can I contribute when there is no technical discussion or topic?
I just pointed out the truth from the grandstands watching all of this. From the threads inception, it was very clear, the intent of the op, and right where this was going to go.
And here we are...............lol
Btw, I'm not the "smartest guy here", not even close. But I'm no daisy either! :wink:

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Fri May 11, 2018 5:19 am

Warp Speed wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 5:08 am
GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:50 pm
novadude wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:40 pm


That could be said about 50% of what is on speedtalk in 2018. Just scroll down the topic list and read some of the responses to topics getting posted here lately. Sure is different from 6-7 years ago.
Warp, how much does your :roll: contribute to this? I can't say I ever seen you contribute much more than bearing clearance... You are suppose to be the smartest guy here... right?
Don't let your hurt feelings over this situation clog your common sense again!
How can I contribute when there is no technical discussion or topic?
I just pointed out the truth from the grandstands watching all of this. From the threads inception, it was very clear, the intent of the op, and right where this was going to go.
And here we are...............lol
Btw, I'm not the "smartest guy here", not even close. But I'm no daisy either! :wink:
Not this thread... All threads you have nothing to share only condescending BS!

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Fri May 11, 2018 5:29 am

smeg wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:50 am
GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:12 am
smeg wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:03 am
I was looking at davids dyno sheet and I would like someone to explain to me why the ramp rate is all over the place? How can you get good information with ramp rates like that???
If you stretched it out across the page it would not be as pronounced, but if you look at his or any dyno sheets you see that the numbers are not in order the dyno grabs numbers that bounce up and down as they get higher.
Thats not how my dyno sheets look, anyone else want to comment?
Many dyno sheets I have ever seen the numbers or up and down to some extent through out the pull, here is a 327 NA, 300 rpm per second and a 357 on a 150 shot. 600 rpm per second. Maybe dyno setting?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Warp Speed
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: NC

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Warp Speed » Fri May 11, 2018 5:35 am

statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:18 am
plovett wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:09 am
fastblackracing wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 11:46 pm


He will be back to fill in the details.....he already stated that once the haters cool of a bit he will
post up.
David makes Speedtalk into a circus. David does this. Consistently. Blaming the people who point it out is a diversion.

JMO,

paulie

You aren't helping. If you don't like the guy, don't open the thread.

And I agree...warp has a bunch of one liners but I've yet to see him say anything worthwhile technically speaking. You'd think he was working on top secret shit.
I do work on top secret shit, and I do contribute, you just apparently never listen because your ears are full of b.s. I guess?!?
And why did this turn to be about me. I'm just sitting here laughing at another one of these useless threads that everyone gets their panties in a bunch about. I just pointed out the obvious, that there is no tech in this thread, and it wasnt the intention of it in the first place. And that Jon Schmidt is correct in his technical views.
So why I'm being focused on I have no idea, but I guess someone has to be at fault for this train wreck! Lol
18+ pages, I have a couple of short posts, just pointing out the obvious, none of them attacking anyone's opinions or theories, but I'm brought up time and time again! Lol #-o
I'm flattered I guess.........? Lol

B Original
Member
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:51 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by B Original » Fri May 11, 2018 5:49 am

SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 1:33 am
GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 1:16 am
SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 1:12 am


Based on your question, I don't think you know what his work was. (That is quite telling)
Then could you show us how his work will help those having to use a traditional platform SBC engine?
Begin by reading any of the articles linked here:

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/RET_Articles.html

Most important relative to specing a cam read the paper I linked previously:

Here it is again.

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/p ... basics.pdf

If anyone finds it difficult to read, I would give my very strongest urging that you redouble your efforts to understand it.
It is really worth the effort.

If the math looks hard to you at first, try doing some of it, before you know it, you will be saying "is that all it is?"
If you got at least C's in high school, you can do the math.

If you find yourself hungering for more the two major books that he authored authored are a life time of reading alone.

If you want still more, the software he developed (or a derivative of it) is used by every serious engine development operation that I know of, including every OEM and racing team. Software like Dynomation, EngMod 4T, Eng Mod 2T, Engine Analyzer Pro, are all based on his work.

He has been a consultant at every OEM that I have worked at, every racing engine engineer that has met him, drops his name in a conversation.

His work is still supported by his associate Hans Herman, he consulted on a project that I worked on this year.
Ask an engineer what time it is and he'll explained to you how a Timex works. Ask me or Gary what time it is and will tell you its 5:33 a.m. eastern standard time and I bet Jon still don't get it. Ask David vizard what time it is and he will ask you what time zone then give you the correct answer then ask you what questions you need answered to help you understand how he arrived at his answer.

And warp speed might be able to help answer this next question considering this is not proprietary information at his top secret lab facility.

My question is if you got in your car and travel faster than the speed of light with your headlights on. Would you die from a fusion reaction created inside the headlights as the energy build up from not being able to leave the light production container. If this is correct would not this counter the time-travel paradox.
Last edited by B Original on Fri May 11, 2018 5:53 am, edited 2 times in total.

Warp Speed
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: NC

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Warp Speed » Fri May 11, 2018 5:50 am

statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:35 am
SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:34 am
statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:18 am
And I agree...warp has a bunch of one liners but I've yet to see him say anything worthwhile technically speaking. You'd think he was working on top secret shit.
A guy in WarpSpeeds position has to be very careful what he posts.
If his employer believes that they own the data behind any advice he gives, it could be harmful to his career.

He is exposed to some of the best motor-sports related engine development in the USA.
You would be wise to listen to whatever he posts.


No shit Sherlock. But certainly, what some of what is being discussed is so far behind what he is doing he can talk about something no? Is he higher up the food chain than Darin Morgan, who has posted some fairly simple yet interesting stuff to read. And he does it with being so arrogant that if he talked that way to me in public he wouldn't like the outcome.

Stan Weiss is very informative and not arrogant like that. And yes, I get they are not in the same exact situation. Mad Bill is no stooge. I can't think of a single time (in my memory) that Bill has come into a thread, told someone they are doing it wrong and then not point them in the correct direction.

I DAMN sure wouldn't want to pay the bill for what Larry Meaux has posted on this site and still does. I've never seen Larry do the same as you and warp do (the two worst offenders) and I can say with certainty larrys knowledge is no less expensive to learn than anyone else.

Chad Speer also comes to mind. He's not afraid to put his stuff out there, with pictures. And give at least some thumbnail explanation as to what he is doing and why. Yet he has a few dong beaters who track his every post, ridicule his every word and thought and generally denigrate most of what he says.

And what about you Jon? You swing through here, pound your chest, tell us how smart you are all while looking down your nose at everyone you THINK doesn't have a degree or isn't as educated as they should be. Other than a couple of unproven programs and a bunch of double speak, you say very little of value, but you love to run your mouth.

If you have non disclosure agreements that's fine. No one expects you to jepordize your income just for a forum but for fucks sake we get it. You can't contribute much because you know too much and can't say it. Why not just say "hey, that's not how I'd do it, and there are other ways that are more accurate if you look around. I can't give them to you or could lose my employment." Or maybe, instead of just saying you can't do anything without CFD, why not give some other, maybe more crude but still effective way to get to an answer. If you can't, then don't say anything.

The guys who squeal and piss and moan and bitch the most about not enough technical stuff here are the root cause of it. You can't speak, or won't speak for whatever reasons. Time to dust off the looking glass and have a good long gander. Maybe then you'll see the issue.

There is no way I agree with everything DV does. Hell, I don't agree with everything my wife does. But you don't have to be a prick about it. The guy puts his stuff out there for all to see. You may have to buy the book to see it all. If you can't afford the book the shut up about it. You aren't required to post up what you can't, why should DV?

You may not like the way he posts. Too bad. It's how he does it. I can tell you I don't have a single DV book. Not one (sorry David). Not a thing he can say on here will influence me one way or the other to buy his book. I'd bet there are some pretty big named people who read his books and don't admit it. When he writes a book I want to buy, it will have to be written for a professional engine builder level. Not an asscar level, or even Pro Stock because we all know they have more top secret shit than the state department. But because not all of us are interested in pump gas stuff, or we have the ability to duplicate his numbers (or get close enough that our customers are happy) that we just don't need redundant information.

If DV posting like he does gives you butt hurt than that's your fault. You keep coming back for it. I read 20-30 books a year. I never agree totally with the author. Doesn't mean I can't learn something and make the book worth my time. Same with all the guys who post here. Sometimes the numbers that Stan and Larry post take me a bit to get my head around. It is what it is.

The point is this: the issue isn't just with DV. If you can't contribute something to a thread then don't say anything. Or, if you have the absolute uncontrollable impulse to claim someone wrong, add some little detail where you can and let it be.

No one knows everything and none of us are right all the time. Grow up.

Edit: this is why peer review is for the most part worthless. Literally, this forum is nothing more than peer review. It's why I don't give a crap about what most of my "peers" think. For most it's just a way to say something to someone you normally wouldn't unless you expected to get your teeth bashed out.
Do.you feel better now?!? Lol
Btw, I've said many times "that's not how I'd do it" and either get attacked, like you did above, or get challenged to post data proving my opinions or shut up.
If you'd open your mind, there is always something to be learned from even the most vague replies.

Warp Speed
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: NC

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Warp Speed » Fri May 11, 2018 5:52 am

GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 5:19 am
Warp Speed wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 5:08 am
GARY C wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 9:50 pm


Warp, how much does your :roll: contribute to this? I can't say I ever seen you contribute much more than bearing clearance... You are suppose to be the smartest guy here... right?
Don't let your hurt feelings over this situation clog your common sense again!
How can I contribute when there is no technical discussion or topic?
I just pointed out the truth from the grandstands watching all of this. From the threads inception, it was very clear, the intent of the op, and right where this was going to go.
And here we are...............lol
Btw, I'm not the "smartest guy here", not even close. But I'm no daisy either! :wink:
Not this thread... All threads you have nothing to share only condescending BS!
That is surely not my intention, but OK! Lol

Warp Speed
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: NC

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by Warp Speed » Fri May 11, 2018 5:53 am

B Original wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 5:49 am
SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 1:33 am
GARY C wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 1:16 am

Then could you show us how his work will help those having to use a traditional platform SBC engine?
Begin by reading any of the articles linked here:

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/RET_Articles.html

Most important relative to specing a cam read the paper I linked previously:

Here it is again.

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/p ... basics.pdf

If anyone finds it difficult to read, I would give my very strongest urging that you redouble your efforts to understand it.
It is really worth the effort.

If the math looks hard to you at first, try doing some of it, before you know it, you will be saying "is that all it is?"
If you got at least C's in high school, you can do the math.

If you find yourself hungering for more the two major books that he authored authored are a life time of reading alone.

If you want still more, the software he developed (or a derivative of it) is used by every serious engine development operation that I know of, including every OEM and racing team. Software like Dynomation, EngMod 4T, Eng Mod 2T, Engine Analyzer Pro, are all based on his work.

He has been a consultant at every OEM that I have worked at, every racing engine engineer that has met him, drops his name in a conversation.

His work is still supported by his associate Hans Herman, he consulted on a project that I worked on this year.
Ask an engineer what time it is and he'll explained to you how a Timex works. Ask me or Gary what time it is and will tell you its 5:33 a.m. eastern standard time and I bet Jon still don't get it. Ask David vizard what time it is and he will ask you what time zone then give you the correct answer then ask you what questions you need answered to help you understand how he arrived at his answer.

And warp speed might be able to help answer this next question considering this is not proprietary information at his top secret

My question is if you got in your car and travel faster than the speed of light with your headlights on. Would you die from a fusion reaction created inside the headlights as the energy build up from not being able to leave the light production container. If this is correct would not this counter the time-travel paradox.
#-o

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4328
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: 427 SBC test debunks 128 debunckers

Post by GARY C » Fri May 11, 2018 6:02 am

statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 4:35 am
SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:34 am
statsystems wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 12:18 am
And I agree...warp has a bunch of one liners but I've yet to see him say anything worthwhile technically speaking. You'd think he was working on top secret shit.
A guy in WarpSpeeds position has to be very careful what he posts.
If his employer believes that they own the data behind any advice he gives, it could be harmful to his career.

He is exposed to some of the best motor-sports related engine development in the USA.
You would be wise to listen to whatever he posts.


No shit Sherlock. But certainly, what some of what is being discussed is so far behind what he is doing he can talk about something no? Is he higher up the food chain than Darin Morgan, who has posted some fairly simple yet interesting stuff to read. And he does it with being so arrogant that if he talked that way to me in public he wouldn't like the outcome.

Stan Weiss is very informative and not arrogant like that. And yes, I get they are not in the same exact situation. Mad Bill is no stooge. I can't think of a single time (in my memory) that Bill has come into a thread, told someone they are doing it wrong and then not point them in the correct direction.

I DAMN sure wouldn't want to pay the bill for what Larry Meaux has posted on this site and still does. I've never seen Larry do the same as you and warp do (the two worst offenders) and I can say with certainty larrys knowledge is no less expensive to learn than anyone else.

Chad Speer also comes to mind. He's not afraid to put his stuff out there, with pictures. And give at least some thumbnail explanation as to what he is doing and why. Yet he has a few dong beaters who track his every post, ridicule his every word and thought and generally denigrate most of what he says.

And what about you Jon? You swing through here, pound your chest, tell us how smart you are all while looking down your nose at everyone you THINK doesn't have a degree or isn't as educated as they should be. Other than a couple of unproven programs and a bunch of double speak, you say very little of value, but you love to run your mouth.

If you have non disclosure agreements that's fine. No one expects you to jepordize your income just for a forum but for fucks sake we get it. You can't contribute much because you know too much and can't say it. Why not just say "hey, that's not how I'd do it, and there are other ways that are more accurate if you look around. I can't give them to you or could lose my employment." Or maybe, instead of just saying you can't do anything without CFD, why not give some other, maybe more crude but still effective way to get to an answer. If you can't, then don't say anything.

The guys who squeal and piss and moan and bitch the most about not enough technical stuff here are the root cause of it. You can't speak, or won't speak for whatever reasons. Time to dust off the looking glass and have a good long gander. Maybe then you'll see the issue.

There is no way I agree with everything DV does. Hell, I don't agree with everything my wife does. But you don't have to be a prick about it. The guy puts his stuff out there for all to see. You may have to buy the book to see it all. If you can't afford the book the shut up about it. You aren't required to post up what you can't, why should DV?

You may not like the way he posts. Too bad. It's how he does it. I can tell you I don't have a single DV book. Not one (sorry David). Not a thing he can say on here will influence me one way or the other to buy his book. I'd bet there are some pretty big named people who read his books and don't admit it. When he writes a book I want to buy, it will have to be written for a professional engine builder level. Not an asscar level, or even Pro Stock because we all know they have more top secret shit than the state department. But because not all of us are interested in pump gas stuff, or we have the ability to duplicate his numbers (or get close enough that our customers are happy) that we just don't need redundant information.

If DV posting like he does gives you butt hurt than that's your fault. You keep coming back for it. I read 20-30 books a year. I never agree totally with the author. Doesn't mean I can't learn something and make the book worth my time. Same with all the guys who post here. Sometimes the numbers that Stan and Larry post take me a bit to get my head around. It is what it is.

The point is this: the issue isn't just with DV. If you can't contribute something to a thread then don't say anything. Or, if you have the absolute uncontrollable impulse to claim someone wrong, add some little detail where you can and let it be.

No one knows everything and none of us are right all the time. Grow up.

Edit: this is why peer review is for the most part worthless. Literally, this forum is nothing more than peer review. It's why I don't give a crap about what most of my "peers" think. For most it's just a way to say something to someone you normally wouldn't unless you expected to get your teeth bashed out.
Post of the year award! =D>

Locked