Heater/A.C. question

Be REAL careful with this one, Budd! Precision and accuracy count.

You're so consistently stupid that I'm already going to say you're wrong.

This place has been very quiet for a couple of years now. But there just something about a stupid clown that gets people excited. You've got this place jumping again. I can't "add" to the argument if someone doesn't start one.

I've been around here a long long time and I can't think of a single time that you "helped" anyone. Generally you are too busy puffing up your chest and struting around posting shit totally off tangent from the subject trying to impress others of what a great wealth of knowlege you are. Unfortunately most of us that come here can read and interpet what we read and you emerge as what you are.

I didn't assume that you were going to start preaching but when I first read your stupid question I did say to myself "The locals are going to have some fun with this one." I will assume that after you get you feelings hurt and run away from here again, as you have done many times in the past, that when you come back you will post another stupid question. As the old saying goes, beauty fades but stupid is forever.

If Twain were around today and read any of your posts he would probably write "It is better to not post at all and be thought a fool than it is to post and remove all doubt."

Never argue with a fool. The bystanders have a hard time figuring out which is which.

beekeep

Budd says that the aviation gasoline is in a wide gas can that doesn't get knocked over so easily.

First off, I never said I didn't like the V-6. Actually, it's an excellent engine ... for what it's capable of doing.

I've even considered the early carbureted version as a swap for the AMC 4.0 in my 88 Cherokee. The 318 the V-6 is based on was a much better engine that the redesign forced on the AMC 258 to make the 4.0.

Secondly, he was wanting the V-6 to run like a bigger V-8 in a heavy truck, get outrageous mpg and I didn't realize it fully until that point.

But you did show who was stupider ... you. By being so juvenile as to drag that up even though you have been far worse in just this thread alone.

Budd

Then your memory is failing. Or have you forgotten my expertise on older, pre fuel injection, Mopar engines?

One thing is certain, Beekeeper, I never called any of your friends names that have never posted in this group.

As for my supposed "leavings and returnings" you also fail to remember there were several changes in ISP's during that time ... new provider = new screen name because the old couldn't drop the username so I could use it with the new ISP, a move from CO to UT and back.

And if that bothers you so much, get over it and grow up. It happens whether you like it or not and may happen again as I'm looking into a cheaper DSL provider.

Budd

ROTFLMBO!!!

OK, you're done.

Budd

No he wasn't.

He said no such thing.

and I didn't realize it fully until that point.

Until what point?

It was years back, and you're only pretending to remember. It stuck in my mind because you were astonishingly rude to the guy. My opinion of you was fully formed that day.

Buddd:

So you're bailing out now?

It never goes over 15,000 feet, and never goes below sea level. Now tell me about setting the timing to compensate for altitude.

Sorry, Budd, but you aren't done.

Magnetos still have to be timed correctly for correct tune or

- Budd

If a plane is known to never go above or below a certion altitude range, for optimum performance you would set the timing.

- Budd

And here's where you failed to answer...

It never goes over 15,000 feet, and never goes below sea level. Now tell me about setting the timing to compensate for altitude.

- Beryl

You seemed pretty insistent about this. You aren't trying to shy away from it now, are you?

Budd:

Yoohoo, Budd?

"Why does aviation gasoline have higher knock resistance than automotive gasoline?" "I'm just an old shade tree wrench twister and I know."

"I'm waiting..."

And I'm still waiting. Hurry up!

And don't forget this: "If a plane is known to never go above or below a certion altitude range, for optimum performance you would set the timing."

"It never goes over 15,000 feet, and never goes below sea level. Now tell me about setting the timing to compensate for altitude."

I'm still waiting on that one too. Everyone's waiting, Budd.

And your certification number is?????

Budd

That's pitiful, Budd. PeterD is on the edge of his seat, waiting for you to deal me a crushing blow, and that's all you got...

Actually, it was just such an instance and I was simply my usual non-politically correct self. If you don't like it, too bad.

I understod the OP to want better that performance modded V-8 results from a V-6 .. sheer stupidity on his part, just you are demonstrating your own low social IQ by trying to use it against me.

Hmm, you must have been hiding under an different screen name back then as well.

The nice thing about not using one is I don't have to remember which one I use where.

Budd

Actually, "until that point" was the opening sentence of your reply. He posted once, asking nothing at all about hot-rodding the V6, and nothing about how much he hoped to improve the mpg.

You're lying.

It's OK. Peter is busy banging Wendy at the moment.

beekeep

As Wendy's much more fun than a moron who thinks he's an expert! Thank goodness for twit filters.

Oh, look, "this is the end of this thread for me" Petey, the EXPERT on correct FAA terminology, is still here.