johnc

I can't believe how badly the DNC and the Kerry campaign has screwed up: http://www.donaldsensing.com/2004/09/why-is-this-man-laughing-grimacing.html

Any bend reduces flow by some amount. If the tubing is mandrel bent then the flow reduction is small and probably not worth worrying about. BTW... A 180 degree bend is no worse then two 90 degree bends so, if you're 180 bend is replacing two 90 degree bends, it should even out.

http://www.sunbeltperformance.com/ It ain't much and hasn't been updated for years...

Search on all of these questions. Lots of answers...

Don't start down this path of confusion, you'll just screw your head up! Don't compare chassis dyno runs from different shops with different dyno operators on different days. The numbers ARE NOT COMPARABLE despite all the BS you read in SCC, Hot Rod, etc.! As Keith said, tune your car and compare it against others on a race track. Nobody races on dynos.

And I think that comparison will show that the differences will have more to do with external environment, driving style, and fuel quality variances then anything inherent in either cylinder head. But, that's just another opinion thrown onto the large opinion pile. The pile's starting to stink a bit too.

'Course, then there's the OS Giken DOHC head... (ducking)

In the above example, a modified P90 is "probably" better then a stock N42, and I agree. But, now we're talking about comparing apples to oranges. Again, stock N42 to stock P90 the choice comes down to application. Comparing modified N42 and P90 heads you can't say one modified N42 is better then another modified P90 unless the mods are identical. And even then, is this for a NA or a Turbo application? I'm no saying either head is better (or for that matter the E88, E31, N47, P79). I don't care which one is better. What I'm trying to say is that NO ONE can say which head is better without knowing the application, mods necessary, usage, etc. Head selection cannot be done in isolation based on a 3 digit code and Internet expertise.

Really? We're in this huge thread about aerodynamics and you don't understand how engine load differs based on road speed? I know you're smarter then that! Start with the basics.

My 810 does the same thing temp wise and a 1972 240Z I had also showed the same behavior. Your engine is operating under a load so its generating more BTUs. Unless its a cool day you will most likely see a temp increase in the gauge while driving with the engine at 2,500 rpm. But, just in case... Make sure ALL the air entering the grill is going through the radiator. Seal any gaps between the radiator and the core support. Even gaps as small as 1/8" will allow a lot of air to bypass the radiator - especially gaps toward the bottom. Also, try adding some kind of seal on top of the core support that will seal it to the hood.

An air or electric powered hydraulic ram would be perfect.

According to Sunbelt, the P90 and the N42 heads both flow the same in stock form. And, in stock form, both heads are very good and the only thing that should make a person choose between one of the other is desired compression ratio. So, for a turbo application, P90. For a normally aspirated applicaiton, N42 - amazing how Nissan figured that out umpteen years ago. Now, if you start talking about modifying the heads (shaving, porting, etc.) then the head choice is meaningless. Both need basically the same porting and polishing and the desired quench is most often achieved through piston selection.

If you look at a lot of diffuser installs on full bodied cars, they are not completely integrated with the floor of the vehicle and they stick out behind the vehicle some amount. The high pressure air that's creating the downforce is the air just above the diffuser itself. I know its a subtle distinction but its important to keep it in mind to ensure you're not creating another low pressure area just above the diffuser.

Tim's like the crazy old lady in every neighborhood that collects and feeds all the stray cats. Only Tim collects stray cars. Pretty soon, he won't have to go to those El Segundo car shows. He can just line up all his strays and have his own show.

I think that was your problem. My car was running 225/50-15 Yoko A008IIs and I got just a medium chirp with a 3,500 rpm launch while slipping the clutch a bit. I also speed shifted (engine had a rev limiter) and I cut a pretty good light.

From: http://large-regular.blogspot.com/2004/08/dead-parrot-redux-john-edwards-enters.html Dead Parrot Redux John Edwards enters Terry McAuliffe's (DNC Chairman) office with John Kerry in tow. Edwards: Hello, I wish to register a complaint. (McAuliffe does not respond.) Edwards: Hello, Miss? McAuliffe: What do you mean "miss"? Edwards: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint! McAuliffe: We're closin' for lunch. Edwards: Never mind that. I wish to complain about this candidate that I got teamed with not two months ago from this very office. McAuliffe: Oh yes, the, uh, the Boston Blueblood Vietnam Veteran Protester ...What's,uh...What's wrong with him? Edwards: I'll tell you what's wrong with him. He's politically dead, that's what's wrong with him! McAuliffe: No, no, he's uh,...he's resting. Edwards: Look, I know a politically dead candidate when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now. McAuliffe: No no he's not politically dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable candidate, the Boston Blueblood Vietnam Veteran Protester. Beautiful to watch when he's wind-surfing! Edwards: The wind-surfing don't enter into it. He's stone politically dead. And I know stone politically dead because I campaigned against Kucinich. McAuliffe: No no no no, no, no! He's just resting! Edwards: All right then, if he's just resting, I'll wake him up! (shouting at Kerry) Hello, Mister War Hero! I've got a lovely story of Halliburton making billions. McAuliffe: There, he moved! Edwards: No, he didn't. McAuliffe: Yes he did! Edwards: (yelling and hitting Kerry on the arm repeatedly) HELLO JOHNNY!!!!!Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! Jane Fonda's on the phone. Alec Baldwin wants to speak with you. This is your nine o'clock wake-up call! (Takes Unfit for Duty off McAuliffe's desk and hits Kerry on the head with it.) Edwards: Now that's what I call a politically dead candidate. McAuliffe: No, no.....No, he's just stunned! Edwards: STUNNED?!? McAuliffe: Yeah! The Swift Boat ads stunned him, just as he was getting his momentum after the DNC! Boston Blueblood Vietnam Veteran Protesters stun easily, John. Edwards: Um...now look...now look, Terry, I've definitely had enough of this. This ticket is definitely deceased, and when I signed on not two months ago, you assured me that his total lack of charisma was due to him being tired and wiped out following a prolonged primary season. McAuliffe: Well, he's...he's, ah...probably pining for the fjords. Edwards: PININ' for the FJORDS?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?, Look, why did he fall flat on his back the moment the DNC was over? McAuliffe: The Boston Blueblood Vietnam Veteran Protester prefers campaigning on it's back! Remarkable candidate - isn't he? He's a great skateboarder! Edwards: Look, I took the liberty of examining the poll numbers when I got home from the DNC,and I discovered the only reason that he had been sitting on his top of the ticket perch in the first place was that he had been NAILED there by the New York Times and by you. (pause) McAuliffe: Of course he was put up at the top of the ticket! If I hadn't nailed him up at the top of the ticket, then "VOOM" his wife and George Soros would have withdrawn all their money from this campaign! Edwards: "VOOM"?!? Terry, this guy wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through him! Face it - the ticket is friggin' demised! McAuliffe: No no! He's just pining! Edwards: He's not pining! He's history! This ticket is no more! We have ceased to be! He's making Mondale look good! He's a stiff! Bereft of honesty! He makes people yearn for Dukakis!! THIS IS AN EX-CANDIDATE!! (pause) McAuliffe: Well, I'd better replace it, then (he takes a quick peek in a folder on his desk). McAuliffe: Sorry John, I've had a look around and uh, we're right out of candidates. Edwards: I see. I see, I get the picture. McAuliffe: I got a Tom Harkin. (pause) Edwards: (sweet as sugar) Pray, does he have a combat history? McAuliffe: Nnnnot really. Edwards: WELL HE'S HARDLY A FRIGGIN' REPLACEMENT, IS HE?!!???!!? McAuliffe: Look, if you wait four years - maybe I can hook you up with Hillary. Edwards: Hillary, eh? Very well.

Well, I know I can get a well rebuilt L28 (N42/N42 or F54/P90) with forged pistons for less then $2,900 here in the States. A very basic rebuild with new cast pistons is around $1,400.

OK, better picture. Weld looks good and the bevel's there because its thick materials. Good weld, if you can do that consistently you're cherry picker will be a thing of beauty.

Something's odd. Maybe its how the picture is taken, but the puddles seem to have a small lip as shown in the puddle next to the penny. There's also not much of a contrast between the normal discoloration in the HAZ and the base metal. What base material? What filler? How thick is the material? Why the bevel? I'm not being critical, just curious.

FDR was cited as an example of a president who effectively handled the biggest war we ever were involved in. Not as a example of other aspects of his administrations. A president can be brilliant in one area and ignorant in another.

383 was the earliest report I could find that had some numbers to calcualte drag and thus determine energy values. When you do a search on the NASA Tech Reports Server and enter "wing" and "drag" you get back thousands of results. I think pretty much 100% of the "give back" to the wing from the air is drag. Heat becomes an issue at higher velocities but at the extremely low speeds (relative to flight) we're talking about I don't think thermal changes can be measured.

And always remember too, the Executive is traditionally the weakest branch of the US government. There are only three conditions when the Executive reaches par with the Legislative and Judicial branches: 1) when the President wins an election by a large margin, 2) when both houses of the Legislature is controlled by the president's party, and 3) when the nation is at war. 2004 might see a confluence of al three of these conditions. I think FDR was the last president to enjoy this alignment. The country didn't fall apart as a result back then and it won't under Bush.

No, the basic problem surfaced in 2003 when an intake valve fell into the combustion chamber. Fixing the engine cost me $5K (although Sunbelt didn't charge me for any of their labor). At OTC when I saw you guys I was still trying to solve the bleed off of the inevitable outgassing (and get the blown Penske shock fixed). Because of the engine repositioning, the lowered C&R radiator, and other changes I had to move the bleed to the top of the thermostat outlet and then run it to the top of the tank back on the firewall. Once I did that and bypassed the additional inlet bleed I had no more cooling problems. We figured that out at the Sears Point stop during the event. Since then, the engine coolant and oil temps stay happily at 190 to 210 degrees all day long - even in 100 degree Buttonwillow weather.

That's an odd statement. Lincoln never served in the military, Wilson served but never saw war, FDR never served, Truman served but never saw war, Clinton never served. Eisenhower, JFK, and LBJ served and saw war and all three directly got us involved and escalated the war in Vietnam. Carter served and saw war and screwed up the Iran rescue mission (Desert One) by requiring all field decisions to go through the White House. Nixon never served and took 6 years to pull out of Vietnam. My point is that military service has NEVER been a determining factor in how well a president conducts a war. That's somehting that is well known by every historian and is mentioned in almost all presidential biographies. Why does the media propogate BS like this? I just finished reading (for the second time) "Dereliction of Duty" by HR McMaster. Its a very good alaysis of the lies and political decisions that JFK, LBJ, McNamera, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff did to get us into the Vietnam war. It got outstanding reviews by the NYT Book Review, WaPost, Washington Monthly, the New Yorker, and many others. I highly recommend the book. As always, do your own research and look to history to find out what's going to happen in the future.

I think looking at this assuming the air is moving is wrong and also thinking of the air as a bunch of separate molecules is wrong. In reality, air is a compressable fluid (for purposes of this discussion) and the wing is moving through it. It takes energy to separate the fluid, with the fluid above the wing being compressed, and that energy comes from the moving wing and is referred to as drag. The fluid is not loosing energy, it is gaining energy from the movement of the wing. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1932/naca-report-383/ http://aerodyn.org/Drag/speed-drag.html