Quote:
Originally Posted by pdmracing
Jim, im the guy who posed the car craft article about the 5.3 .Check out Hot rod magazine site , they have a series on the big mootor & had been dyno testing different heads , intakes & such, then went to power adders, later in the series. I think it might help you in your research.
Funny i had ignored both theos mags for decaes until I got a chepo subscription, I cant believe th wealth of info in those pubs lately & on there web site. Seem they went back to their roots.
Peter m
|
Peter: I agree about the mags becoming much better lately! You still have to look very carefully at some of the articles to check for bad assumptions or tricky omissions, but they HAVE been a lot more useful lately! Thanks for drawing our attention to them here on the board. Good stuff there for thopse willing to analyze it.
You DO have to be very careful with some of them. For example, that "Hot Rod Engines" (Spring 2008) has what COULD have been a really good article documenting work that Ken Duttweiler did on the 6.0 liter, BUT the organizational logic and presentation were so amateur hour that it was laughable and also impossible to follow properly.
As one simple example of the the kind of foolishness in that article, the Power table, which purported to compare the power achieved, by rpm, for each of the 8 combinations tried, actually STOPPED at 5600 rpm - 1300 rpm BEFORE their top killer combination, the carbureted setup, made its power!! So, if you looked at the damn table and compared power produced, you would MISS it entirely!!
The torque was displayed for all the combos as a graph that DID go to 6900, but because it was torque versus horsepower, the torque reading for that carb combo was "low" by 6900 rpm, BUT still high enough, because of the ultra high rpm, to be the TOP number for power produced. Since most people don't do the torque versus power math in their heads, they would NOT see that. In afct, the ONLY way you could see it is if you read the text a page later VERY closely.
It's this kind of crap that makes me wonder who writes these darn articles. This is also just the latest in a string of Duttweiler screwups too. Either he works with really bad writers who don't really understand what they are documenting, or he himself is sloppy. Neither is good for his reputation.
Jim G
