[s-cars] On the Road Again - Sorry

[Djdawson2 at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/27/2006 6:54:45 PM Mountain Standard Time,  
calvinlc at earthlink.net writes:

I have purposely stayed away from  this dyno debate in the past, because it's 
just not that  significant.

 
Ah, but why?  The dyno debate itself is not significant, but I would  argue 
that the numbers themselves are very significant.  They are our only  REAL (and 
repeatable) quantitative analysis on various modifications... and a  very 
valuable tool.  Needless to say, much of the debate has centered  around using 
SAE correction factors on turbocharged engines.  This is  exactly why I went to 
the strip... to test SAE correction vs. the widely  accepted dragstrip trap 
speed.  The results came in... it is virtually a  wash.  These tests cost me a 
$3000 CRB 6 speed, a Centerforce clutch, a  blown torsen rear diff... and 
considerable free time.
 
That being said... what's really important?  Well, certainly not peak  hp.  
If someone wants to win the peak hp battle, they need simply to bolt  up a 
bigger turbo.  Yep... seen 'em at the dyno... surging away until  4500rpm.  Fast, 
yes... streetable, no.  What matters is area under the  curve.  Peak hp at 
7000rpm is worthless on the street.
 


Why on earth would I think Hap is  lying?  He, along with the rest of the 
people on this list, have never  been anything but nice to me and I have no 
reason to doubt anyone's  credibility.  Questioning numbers in an equation is not 
questioning  someone's integrity.

 
Well, the "tone" seems to question (once again) the validity of the  numbers. 
 To me, this is unreasonable.  We go to the dyno for  quantitative facts.  If 
we present those facts, and then get questioned,  what are we questioning?  
If we are simply questioning "how does it do  that?"... cool.  If we are 
speculating on the figures themselves... then  we're questioning honesty.
 


That being said, I don't think it should  be considered "bad" to question 
results/numbers/statistics, etc.  It  certainly shouldn't be construed as an 
attack of any sort.  I am always  trying to learn, and a lot of times I learn by 
posing questions and debating  answers.

 
 
IMHO, questions are certainly never bad.  Again, "how did he do  that?"... 
great.  "Are the numbers real... that can't be."... no  good.  To me, that 
crosses the line of questioning someone's  integrity.
 


 
Dave, I am truly sorry if I said something  that infers I think anyone here 
is lying.


 
You don't need to apologize... and if you really feel like you do... it is  
well accepted.  I'm here for the fun of it... putting what I've been taught  to 
a practical test.
 
My major gripe... the reluctance of many on the list to separate facts from  
idle speculation.  The Stromung exhaust is my favorite target.  This  is NOT 
personal... and I commend Jeff P. for offering us a simple and light  weight 
solution.  However, how many folks will go buy a $xxxx system  without ANY 
proven benefit?  Obviously lots, but not me.  I've never  seen any data supporting 
a power gain from implementing that system.  In  fact, my car (and one other 
I've developed for a friend) have routinely "out  dynoed" many a Stromung 
equipped car... when our cars were equipped with full  stock exhausts and cats.  I 
would be willing to bet a significant amount of  money that if we pulled one 
car up on the dyno with a stock system... then  swapped to a Stromung, we would 
see no significant gain... and quite possibly a  loss.
 
I like facts... they're the only tool we have to reach a set goal.   That's 
it.  Anything else is a waste of breath... "hearsay" it's called in  court... 
and thus thrown out.
 
No worries, Calvin.  I'd like to think we're all predominantly friends  here. 
 Hell, I've met Pizzo in person, and he IS a nice guy.
 
Take care,
Dave