Re: 5ktq Mods - Math vs Claims - long

["Randall C. Markarian" <asenna@accessus.net>]

Lawson, Dave wrote:
> 
> In the interest of advancing the frontiers of audi performance science,
> let me
> take my turn stirring the pot, where is that spoon.....
> 
> And I guess the same goes for the source, until some real numbers are
> posted
> from a suitable performance monitoring device, it's just a claim.
> 
> And Randall writes...
> 
> >Much paraphrased/plagiarized text snipped.
> 
> Let me get this straight, performing a numerical analysis with
> algorithms which
> have been used for decades in quantifying turbocharged engine
> performance is
> considered plagiarism? Somehow I don't quite believe this....

No, you misunderstand.  Plugging in huge assumptions for multiple
unknowns will not give good numbers.  Unless you psychic.
> >
> I guarantee that Eric will not sell
> said parts unless it is to go on my car and then it won't be for
> profit.
> >
> 
> Since Eric is not in the business to sell "said parts", lets quit
> stroking
> our wookies and table some details so those of us who actually perform
> numerical analysis on proposed modifications can get the spreadsheets
> calculatin'.
> 
I am not Eric, nor am I speaking on his behalf, but given the attitude
of the know-it-alls who have not been willing to share more than sound
bites and negative responses, I would only share on a private e-mail not
to the list.  I did not make my original post as the defacto info on the
subject.  Maybe next time I will title my post "Subjective
analysis/observations of a newly modified MC based 5000TQ".  Sterile
enough for you?  I think the initial responses were all that were
needed.

All of this reminds me of a song.  Sing along if you know the tune.
ahha ahem...(clearing my throat)

"Anything you can do I can do better!  I can do anything better than
you!"
"No you can't!"
"Yes, I can!"
"No you can't!"
;-)

Randall