HP, 60 mph, level ground (2025 Update)

The little 241 Red Ram Hemi with overdrive was a joy. 2000 RPM at something like 70MPH, shift out of overdrive and pass an SS350 Nova at about 3000 with no drama at all. - in a '53 station wagon.

You illustrate the nature of optimization -- a concept beyond Kidding's reading level.. With pyooters, it's a pretty straightforward thing to evaluate a maximum fuel efficiency point *real-time*.. Some cars have a real-time "mpg meter" of sorts -- the new Fit does -- but they really don't make it easy for a driver to tell exactly where or how he should be operating for max. effic.

Well, unbeknownst to KiddingHisSelf, there is no real need to tweak the scanguage to that degree, siince what is most useful to most people are the RELATIVE readings. You'd only need to calibrate against some standard if you needed to dick-wave YOUR mpg's against another car's/brand mpg's. Which, apparently Kidding compulsively needs to do, so tweak away!!! Arf Arf Clap Clap....

AND, that multi-car comparison would presume that everyone has an accurately calibrated 'guage, which is highly unlikely. So once again, Kidding dick-waves in an empty room, but still hears the applause in his head. Arf Arf Arf Clap Clap Clap......

One possible useful application of an accurately calibrated scanguage would be to use it as a screening tool for buying a new car. But, how realistic or practical is that, given the mpg visissytudes of new cars, and the difficulty of accurately calibrating the 'guage to EACH car. Or to even find standard conditions for sed testing.

But this all over Kidding's head anyway..... it's mostly an observation for other people who might get a scanguage, to spare them from wasting time with Kidding's sundry pathologies and idiocy.

The scanguage is much more of an *educational/behavioral* tool. It better demonstrates trends/patterns, than absolute info. Altho it does display a bunch of engine parameters, as well, but that's not really mpg-relevant.

Put a cap on my '66 F-100. That had 352 with a quad. Got a cap that sat exactly at the cab roof line, because I wanted it "aerodynamic." Gas was 35 cents a gallon, so I never checked if it made a difference. Just made it into a good camper.

Oh?? How so? Be as coherent as you can.....

Wow.... Shall we call you Galileo?? Or Kidding's ButtBuddy?

? Heh.

I was tempted to get a Honda VFR1200F last winter - local dealer had it reduced to $13K.

"Existential Angst" fired this volley in news:518c31f4$0$20210$ snipped-for-privacy@cv.net:

Moron.

I'll let your little dick fester in your mouth now. You won't get any more replies no matter what you post. So suffer, asshole. I know you live to get a rise out of people, since you can't do anything else; but you won't.

'Bye, little girl!

Lloyd

My favorite passing is dropping down to 2nd gear on the F4i, and letting in the clutch hard so the front wheel comes up about a foot or so off the ground. And no, I do not want to grow up. :)

Yes, it was the Borg Warner Automatic overdrive. Press the button on the gearshift and mat it!!!

It made a nice "split shift" too - basically gave you a 5 speed. couldn'r use 1st od and 2nd direct if I remember correctly - you picked one or the other as 1stOD was just a tad higher than 2nd direct.

The ones I've driven were all Studebakers - the switch was integrated with the throttle linkage, which had a heavy spring integrated into it so you could push the gas pedal past WOT to engage the kickdown. Don't ever have to take your hands off the steering wheel unless you really mean business and want to grab 2nd (and in a Stude at highway speed that's pretty pointless, even the wildest factory engines work best shifted at 5K - 5500 or so.) Even easier! Some owners would wire a kickdown switch on the dash so you could kick down before WOT. Problem (for me) is that most used the T86 transmission and I don't really expect that - or the OD unit that was used with them - to hold up to the torque of an Avanti engine, and as I said, I have been looking off and on for years for a T-85/OD but they all have the wrong input shaft, are really expensive, or both.

I did manage to do a mostly factory looking conversion to a T-10 wide ratio 4-speed though, so I got that going for me.

nate

How about the Kaw ZN1300? a friend has about half a dozen in various states or repair. He's in his eighties now.

Not really my thing - I would prefer a bike that you can remove the luggage and take to a track day.

Not when you own a 60 Dodge Matador.....

No, you idiot. If you don't adust the offset, then the miles to empty readings are useless.

All you do is check the actual gallons to fillup vs what the scangauge predicted, and tweak until they consistently match up. You tweak the offset on the same screen as the fillup reset, so it couldn't be easier.

Another of your straw men, oh empty headed one.

Whoyakidding? You're only making this crap up because I rightly called you a crackpot.

No it wouldn't. That's what the EPA mileage estimates are for.

LOL Now you're taking down your own straw man.

Ah, so now you're serving the public good by saving people from investing in what is widely accepted as a very useful tool... mostly because you don't have $150, and because you don't want to know what that tool would tell you about your crackpot hp ideas.

Horseshit. It displays a lot of dead accurate info, reads and resets TCs, and is highly customizable.

So what? Those parameter readouts are excellent for troubleshooting.

They're heavy. The FJR is no lightweight, but it's not bad for a big sport tourer. The Triumph is light and I have no fear of chains, but it's hard to imagine going back to British. Didn't like the concept of the swaying saddlebags but I need to see them in person. The BMW RT looks good on paper, but I swore off BMW a long time ago. The VFR is really slick but too sporty for this old man. Plus the high pipe looks to preclude anything but the stock tiny bags.

I like how he was replying to himself. Very funny, and a frequent habit of the deranged like Bonkers, who is EA becomes more like each day.

Again, you miss the point. You only need this for absolute readings -- the few practical purposes to absolute readings -- besides dickwaving -- were outlined below, and you didn't understand those.

When you can stop jerking yourself off in a mirror, go find the error, and post back.

Arf Arf Clap Clap: Kidding the Seal mugging for fish again, from the status quo -- or swinging from the dick of the status quo -- again. Dude, I just gave you one possible app of calibration. If you throw THAT out, then you are *really* just jerking yourself off.

Well, you couldn't, so I figgered I do it for you..... LOL Still, one could assume that

1. initial mpg's of a new car will be in some constant proportion to broken-in mpg's;
2. Iffin yer not driving on a distinct grade or into a wind, you could proly get a serviceable result.
3. Still not easy for the avg person. Plus, the same model scanguage does not work on all cars -- or didn't.

I have a scanguage. I stated that the scanguage was useful, much more useful than the absolute calibration you are so obsessed with. Whatever you don't understand is crackpot. You really need to get your reading on grade level.

Lots of s*it do that. Its "mpg feedback", which I have explained at length and which you obviously don't understand, is most useful. But then, you aren't really into education. Didn't do well in school, eh?

Didn't say they weren't. But you can get s*it for that from Autozone for $19.95. Oh, but that's right, you prefer to pay double.... sextuple???

In a previous post, I outlined about 4 experiments you can do with the scanguage. again???

- While your vehicle maybe smaller than a vette that does mean that it CdA is less. CdA is a function of both frontal area and CD.

- Since Aero Dynamic HP loss is not a straight line you will not get very good results from interpolation. If you double that speed to 130 MPH you will see around 100 HP.

- What happens when you try and past someone at 65 MPH going into a 30 MPH head wind?

Stan

Existential Angst wrote: