Was wrong then, still wrong now.
Lying about what? This is getting old.
You cant, convert or change without producing something new. You are still wrong and getting becoming boring as well.
Prove it :-)
As I do with you but I have more than enough points now.
Yep, but it doesn't say it does it woutout input.
Wrong. If this were true, then an engine could not create anything either since its crankshaft is a lever.
Actually, it creates a torque
You really don't have a clue. Enough said, I'm done.
No Jerry, I just want to see Tbone twist in the wind. He provides an interesting diversion while I do boring paperwork. It takes very little to get a good laugh at what he tries to say, and what he seems to truly believe.
Jerry, its simply looking at the part of the situation that makes the most impact on an engine. Many people want to know how much got filtered out. Since its what gets in that is of interest to me, I prefer to look at the other side of the equation. K&N would have you believe that they are right up there with the best, and perhaps they are. But the truth is, they let more dirt in, and do little else. As I've said before, its pretty much the owners decision.
And as I've also said before, its a matter of amusing myself by watching Tbone spin his ass into a tizzy trying to show us how much he knows. In this case, while his basic idea might be one view, his math sucks ass.
Of course.
With regards to K&N, all dirt issues aside, most people forget all about volumetric efficiency with regard to an air filter's CFM rate. Does K&N outflow most paper filters? Hell yes. However, a standard WIX or Purolator paper filter specicific to a particular vehicle is capable of delivering more air than the engine can use assuming 100% volumetric efficiency. Since most gas engines operate nowhere near 100% VE (most are closer to 60-70%), the paper filters are capable of delivering more air than the engine can realistically use. So, in comes K&N with it's higher CFM ratings compared to paper and what do you have? Unuseable air. Sure it flows more CFM, but the engine physically can't use it assuming it's naturally aspirated.
Now, toss in that extra 1% of dirt (or 150%, or angular velocity, WTF were we talking about again??) oh yeah, uhhhhh...........hmmmmmmm.........
You speak the truth good sir!
Doc
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
A certain Mustang site would disagree with you. How accurate or recent their testing is unknown to me at this point.
Exactly.
Not sure, it changes so often with Tbone, its hard to figure he knows what hes talking about, let alone knowing what he is saying about that which he is talking.
As do you.
Wrong again, Braniac
from impeller, thru stator, to turbine, then repeat
you just can't help yourself, can you ?
hey, you're the one that said it 'produces torque'
just thought I'd give you a chance to tell us HOW...............
but your reply to another post proves you know jack shit about TC, no suprise
Hahahahahahahaha, you got it backwards, shit for brains. You claim to know about this stuff and even an admitted complete amateur (me) knows more than you do, how sad. You do know that the stator has a one way bearing, right. If the fluid went into the stator first, why would it need one and come to think of it why would the trans need the stator? Then come to think of it, how would it amplify low end torque if it received the fluid ahead of the turbine? It looks like you don't even know what the purpose of the stator is, some transmission expert. Were you the guy in the AAMCO commercial many year back with the garden hose that claimed to rebuild the same transmission
17 times?
Not when you make it this easy. Face it Gary, you blew it. Despite all your spinning and modified header changes, when it comes down to actual knowledge, you really don't know shit. Now lets see if Maxi is dumb enough to try and back you up on this.
One-way bearing? Bearing???
True, but not the only one to say that and neither you or Max have been able to prove otherwise. Max showed that he doesn't even know what a lever is or how it works with his linear force BS and you proved beyond all doubt that you don't know how a TC operates with your backwards fluid flow and no idea what the stator actually does so I can see how you simply don't understand how it can produce more torque.
Actually, I think that it is more in line with you wanting me to expalin how it works so that you can understand it.
Beekeep is right, it must really suck to be you. You accuse me of not knowing jack and then give completely wrong information on a subject that you claim to be an expert on so who is the real asshole? Come to think of it, Jerry has you pretty well pegged too, Shadetree. This was fun but it is getting old so I'm done here but I'm sure that we will start again...
LOL, yea, my spelling sucks As hard as it would be for anyone here to believe, I'm not perfect :-)
That about sums it up.
Who remembers or actually who really cares? Does anybody really use a K$N?
You both do.
Roy
transmission
It wasn't a spelling thing... I just don't see how "bearing" and "clutch" are synonymous...
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.