I and my efforts were being trashed and mirepresented by two individuals particulrly - Scuffham and Scouse.
That is not true Simon. All we asked was that you come with examples of engines that achieved the reliabilty and power levels you were claiming. So far you have been unable to do this. It may well be that the engines you are working on now can meet your claims. And if they do then that will be a great credit to you.
But when you started all this over a year ago you were talking as if the engines were fact at the time.
Tell you what Simon, why don’t we go to a track somewhere and let Walshy loose for a day in Uldis’s car revving it to 9500rpm like you said. �100 says it would go bang.
YOU ARE ON!!!
Or with Marks engine or Bernie’s or Steve’s or Johnny Walkers or Steve Pearse’s, or Normans, or Stuart’s…
Simon
better still lets do it with a 2.0L K to 8500rpm too because that has a higher piston speed at 85 than a F1 engine
Sounds interesting to me. What does Uldis think of having his engine revved to 9500rpm all day long? From memory he was only revving it to about 7500 when I was in it.
better still lets do it with a 2.0L K to 8500rpm too because that has a higher piston speed at 85 than a F1 engine
Sorry, but I don’t see why having such a high piston speed is such a good thing. From my point of view surely it shows a poorer design than an engine that can produce the same performance with lower piston speed. Am I missing something?
better still lets do it with a 2.0L K to 8500rpm too because that has a higher piston speed at 85 than a F1 engine
Sorry, but I don’t see why having such a high piston speed is such a good thing. From my point of view surely it shows a poorer design than an engine that can produce the same performance with lower piston speed. Am I missing something?
Errr no, it’s the K series that’s missing something. Sufficient bore size to reach 2 litres without having to have such a long stroke. High piston speed is never a good thing.
As I say, let see this reliable 9500rpm happen. You can waffle on about bearing loadings all day long but it isn’t quite that simple is it. What about when the car the engine sits in, with its firm engine mounts, is loaded up in a fast corner with oil surge and chassis flex taking its tolls on its slim and flexible block. Do you thing 9500rpm is sensible then? A properly balanced engine is important but it�s not a wonder cure. Remember all these people who disagree with you speak from experience. Steve balanced my E-type engines years ago, really went to town on them and we didn�t change the max rpm we used as it didn�t allow us to. Sure they felt a bit smoother but it didn�t stop the failures and its no different on the K-series. In fact we had some fairly similar issues and balancing wasn�t the cure.
Having been in Uldis�s car I can tell you that it wasn�t being strangled by the CAT, its quite apparent when an engine is being effected in that way. It wasn�t silky smooth either and nor did it rev/idle like a Honda or have the power of an Audi. It was definitely better than a VHPD and that�s credit to you but nobody can perform miracles.
Can you also please, please for once answer some of the questions that have been asked over and over. Like what qualifies you to speak with such authority? What engineering background do you have and what racing experience do you have under your belt? Surely you must have had lots of success if your concepts are so sound? And where are the cars you have built engines for so far, the ones that are �beating all comers�, can we see some results please? If you are not willing to answer any of these questions then could you please let us know why?
Can you also please, please for once answer some of the questions that have been asked over and over. Like what qualifies you to speak with such authority? What engineering background do you have and what racing experience do you have under your belt? Surely you must have had lots of success if your concepts are so sound? And where are the cars you have built engines for so far, the ones that are �beating all comers�, can we see some results please? If you are not willing to answer any of these questions then could you please let us know why?
Randy
at this stage in the game ain’t this all a bit irrelevant? Simon seems quite keen to get some stuff finished and tested for us all to see, why can’t you find it within yourself to cut some slack on these old arguments?
BTW, Simon - thanks for the post above with the calculations… but where does the constant 0.01 come from ? assuming your formula is correct I found it very interesting
You have no idea how many engines I may or may not have produced over the last 5 years, nor where they were balanced nor the tolerances that they were balanced to. So may I politely request that you don’t make up the data to suit your ends or support your postings.
I don’t want to be embroiled in another argument or fan any flames, but incorrect data like that is misleading.
Nobody would argue that correct balancing is important in an engine, but without empirical supporting data about your ‘competitors’ engines generalisations of the kind you make in your post are just unsubstantiated rhetoric.
You can’t really post up calculations like that especially when there are large mulitplications involved based on a sample of one.
For what it’s worth, my old engine needed the Omega pistons and rover rods matching and the clutch plate balacing. By pure luck everything else was balanced, i.e. flywheel, crank etc (just ask Steve Smith). Engine was super smooth to 8700. If you did the calculations based on my ‘lucky’ components rather than Uldis’s ‘unlucky’ parts it’d give very different numbers.
As usual you only have half the facts or less and if you presume to know more about what I have done than I do then you are indeed a fool. Once again I will ask you politely not to use incorrect information about my business activities to support your postings.
Steve is not the only balancer in town and in a large number of cases my customers arrange for their components to be balanced prior to coming to see me, it is much more convenient for me, some with Steve, many elsewhere.
The best thing to do when you dont know all the facts is to stay silent rather than opine.
And are you so seriously deluded that you believe that no-one knew anything about balancing before you graced the world with your article?
Please do not lecture me about whether I understand your utterings or not… I have already made it clear that I have no issue with what you write. What I do have issue with is your continued use of supposition, incomplete information and hearsay to support your point of view, much of this is presented as proven fact. If you could stick to what you know and not what you assume/presume then perhaps people’s tolerance of your postings would be higher. I do not anger easily, nor am I Simon Scuffham, but there is a limit.
You make mention of the information that you have made available to me for so long, perhaps your memory is selective Simon, but it was you who came to me for help and advice (which was freely given) all those years ago and now it seems that I am a target; a familiar pattern I’d suggest. Now your favourite activity seems to be to rubbish the work of all others, many of whom you have used in the past, in the real world this just makes you a pariah and risks you a bloody nose. ISTR that you were using QED to build your engines at that time, now they are high on your hit list, how times have changed.
Woe betide you should any of your engines develop a problem following all of your invective.
Dave
P.S. Dave is probably someone else too if you’re going to be picky. Dave_Andrews is my identifier here.
For pities sake man get a grip, you really are turning into the worst kind of windbag. Incidentally you are hardly in a position to point out deficiencies in my spelling given the howlers that you perpetrate here.
As you have already mentioned in your earlier posts , I do take engine sets to Steve and I also recommend him to owners of all the engines that I build so spare me the mealy-mouthed evangelism, I’ve heard it all before. It just so happens that a lot of people for whom I build engines have their own preferences and minds of their own. FFS, just thought I add that, oooh AND SOME CAPITALS
I don’t post to seek patronisation either, but merely to put right what I see as innacuracies and assumptions which are incorrect.
QED can scoff all they like about porosity, if they have not seen any then that makes them ignorant of it, I have seen plenty of porous heads, as has my local machine shop who specialise in K series but that is another issue.
Now like I asked before please do not use innaccurate information about my business activities to support your postings.