Responses regarding Pistal pistons

The Oily Bits S1 Specific Topics
1

This morning I have spoken to both Fred Hadley at Omega and Steve Smith at Vibration Free, both will be sending responses to Simon Erland’s postings for me to put here.

Fred Hadley was happy to tell me that he does not consider the skirt length on the Pistal pistons to be too long and concedes that they are both shorter and narrower than the skirts on the pistons that he makes for the K series. He also said that he believes that Simon Erland’s assertion that increased oil consumption would result from the Pistal piston’s skirt size to be incorrect.

He will be examining the ring problem on the Pistal piston as soon as it arrives and I will publish his findings.

Fred Hadley has been making excellent competition and racing pistons for 30+ years, I am very happy to accept what he has to say.

Dave

2

Here is the response from Fred Hadley regarding Simon’s inferences about my engine building.

Dear Dave,

I am sorry that my name has been used to discredit you. You have been a valued customer for many years and I have no knowledge of your engine building capabilities or in fact of any of my customers so I am not qualified to comment.

Your continued business with Omega must mean to me that you have very happy customers and that should be enough recommendation for anyone.

In short I have never commented on your ability to build engines and would never do so.

Regards,

Fred Hadley

Thanks to Fred for his candour.

His response on the Pistal ring problem will be posted as soon as it is available.

Dave

4

“and that is a much better way to do things than threatening everybody with lawsuits unless they tow your line.”

Simon,

Just a point to note: Have a closer look at DVAs post. It says you may find you’re on the receiving end of a law suit but NOT from him.

5

Simon,

If you actually read my posts you would understand exactly how it is possible for the ring to bind up without marking the liner.It is simply your inexperience with engines that has led you up this blind alley.

Whether or not you are sceptical is of absolutely no interest to me since I have seen the problem first hand, my postings were for the benefit of those people who might actually read them.

The skirt size issue is just another indication of your inexperience with engines in general, many engines actually have spray bars directed at the skirts and underside of the pistons to increase the oil being deposited on both the skirts and under the crowns. I’ll leave you to figure out why.

You say that you routinely machine the skirts of the Omega pistons, it is no more difficult for that to be done to the Pistal ones so I cannot fathom exactly what your original point is, if indeed there was one.

The fact is that you consistently refuse to concede that you may be wrong about anything even when the evidence is staring you in the face. This pattern of denial is characteristic of all my dealings with you both on this BBS and personally and on the 'phone.

I do not doubt that you have seen problems with Scholar blocks, but your elementary mistakes in units of measure and the conlusions you drew from these erroneous figures in comparison with the Rover OE liners were just plain wrong and damaging to the liveliehood of third parties. That sort of erroneous posting should not be allowed to continue. It also damages your credibility hugely.

It is of absolutely no interest to me whether you accept my measurements of the block I have here or not, the posting was not for your benefit. FWIW I have been measuring blocks and pistons since I was 15 years old, a time when you were either in nappies or not even born. I’m pretty sure that I have a good understanding of how to do it by now.

Whenever I dig into your posts and scratch the surface of your claims, it all falls apart like a pack of cards.When faced with just a gentle amount of probing or requests to substantiate your claims you drop into a sulk, start insulting people or regurgitating the same old stuff or disappear with a hackneyed ‘hypocrisy’ statement. It’s all rather tiresome, I have asked about a dozen questions and made repeated request for you to substantiate your claims all of which you have ignored, I can only assume that you have no answer, if this is the case then you should not be making the claims.

A true engineer does not comment by flailing around like a loose cannon and firing rubbish in every direction, but rather checks his facts and presents them in a pragmatic manner rather than interlacing them with conjecture, supposition and innacuracy, coupled with insults and over flamboyant language.

I have better things to do with my time than to scurry around pointing out the inconsistencies, errors and downright lies in your posts, and frankly I shouldn’t have to. If you posted in a responsible manner and avoided your penchant for trying to rubbish everybody then you would find yourself with allies instead of enemies and this BBS would become the pleasant place that it once was.

I do not understand what it is that makes you think it is OK to publish all this rubbish which is easily disproven, you should think before you type. Remember it is better to have someone inside the tent pssing out, rather than someone outside the tent pssing in.

I know how hard it must have been for you to concede that you did something wrong and it is to your credit that you have conceded that. I did try on one thread to lay down the framework of a reconciliation at least on a professional basis but it was ignored and derided. You should not be surprised at my reaction.

I have no intention of taking out a court action but it may well happen anyway at which point I might well have to be involved. You need to understand the difference between what you perceive as bullying and what I see as a natural response when faced with lies and potentially libelous statements, none of us live in a vacuum and casual readers of the threads involved could easily form the wrong impression based on the innacuracies in your posts. When this impacts on others business activities it is time to put a stop to it. Yoi should be aware that if any action were taken, this BBS and it’s administration is jointly liable for any damages and that is patently unjust. What I posted was intended to be a reality check for you before you waded in too deep.

As to third parties being bullied I have only responded to postings made by others and stated my case clearly and concisely, what is wrong with that?

It’s all got out of hand and despite clear advice and warnings you have very deliberately steered it in that direction, more fool you.

Someone we both know has told me that you think I hate you and you are very pleased about that. To be honest I am ambivalent towards the whole thing, I don’t need to work and I do so because I enjoy it immenseley, as soon as I don’t enjoy it I will stop.

One thing is for sure I have always tried to further the cause of the K series and will continue to do so, but I am not blind to it’s inherent problems.

I do have large reserves of patience and tolerance but even they are limited, I note you have apologised to the various third parties that you dragged in and have then inferred that they have said things to you in private but have denied it in public, that is scandalous.

I note you have not aplogised to me for the various sleights that you have put my way with innacuracies, misquoting and pretending that various third parties have scant regard for my work, allegations that have proved to be completely unfounded, nor for the downright lie about the frequency of my visits to Steve at Vibration Free which again was easily disproven.

I will post the response from Steve who you say is ‘Your pal and partner in all this’ later, suffice to say that his view is very different.

I have stopped phoning the individuals you mention because every one tells a completely different story to the one you are trying to project and it seems a pointless exercise to both cause them upset and to rub your nose in it further.

Once again can I ask politely (now for the 14th time), please stick to the facts that you know to be true and can substantiate and please stop using innacurate and incomplete information about my and others business activities to qualify your postings.

Let us draw a line under all this and move on.


Dave

6

Simon,

I have it on good authority that you have said that I have been threatening certain third parties with lawsuits in order to get them to pen retractions.

I seriously worry for your sanity, in every case the statements made were entirely voluntary, I have threatened nobody with any lawsuits, although I have made it clear that you are risking one. In every case they had already apologised to me that they had become involved before making the statements for me to post on here.

Are you saying once again that these ‘third parties’ have made remarks about me?

Their statements are entirely voluntary, clear and unequivocal. Persons of that standing I have absolute confidence in, as far as it is ever possible to believe anything which is typed, I believe their statements because they have absolutely nothing to gain or lose by making them.

Are you seriously suggesting that I would threaten a good friend, a business contact of many years standing who I deal with regularly and another business conctact who I also deal with regularly in that manner? It was embarrassing enough just having to raise the subject.

Both Steve Smith and Simon Thornley were incandescent (especially Steve) when I told them what you were up to, Fred Hadley was rather more pragmatic. Believe me I did not need to threaten anybody with anything, they were keen to set the record straight, in Steve’s case I suggested that he calm down before making any sort of response.

God help you Simon, you are spiralling out of control down the plughole at an increasing rate of knots…

Be very careful Simon, you are treading on thin ice.

I suppose that ultimately it is up to the readers to decide if they believe the clear and concise statements of 3 acknowledged professionals who have no vested interest or the statements of a man proven to have lied.

Dave

7

Here are Simon Erland’s comments WRT to the oil control ring problem on the Pistal pistons which he defends even after requesting and seeing a concise explanation and clear photographic evidence that his assumptions were wrong.

“No I am absolutely skeptical about the oil control ring issue, so is Fred Hadley at Omega - had that happened with the engine running the ring would have got badly damaged , ruined the liner and you’d have heard the engine complaining. Patently in your photo the rings are not damaged, so I think you’re being economical with the truth again.”

Here is my explanation

"On the issue of ring damage, the overall circumference of the ring reduces when this happens since the expander ring moves up and over itself in the vetical plane only, directly into space made by the lower ring moving down. The authority of the expander ring is then lost and the ring contracts away from the bore and hence makes very little contact with it.

This is what leads to the high oil consumption and is the reason why the ring and bore are not damaged."


Fred Hadley at Omega pistons has now examined the Pistal piston and I have just had a conversation with him regarding the ring problem.

He has confirmed quite concisely that the failure has happened exectly as I described and with the engine running. He also confirmed that there would be no damage to either the ring or the bore as a result. It is obvious to him that this would be a cause of astronomic oil cconsumption on the affected cylinders since the oil control ring loses it’s authority.

Furthermore he says he was not sceptical because he has seen the problem before and only needed to see the piston to confirm the mode of failure. He has not sent an email because he prefers not to comment in writing about other peoples products which is fair enough. He also mentioned that he would be very careful in his dealings with Simon in future.

He also confirmed to me (although it is strictly unnecessary) that his statement to me was entirely voluntary despite Simon’s grubby and untrue statements to spectators to the contrary.The content of these frankly barking mad statements can be posted here if the need arises.

I should point out that the ring problem is one that was discovered and fixed months ago, all pistons now supplied have the improved oil control ring as standard and this has cleared the problem 100%, Fred has yet to look at one of those because he inadvertantly threw away the ring I sent him in the wrappings, but he confirmed to me from my description that they would do the job.

Once again Simon you have shown your ignorance and inexperience in commenting about something that you simply do not understand despite my best efforts to educate you at your own request. To make outrageous comments based on this ignorance which question my integrity is simply intolerable.

Your absolute intransigence even in the face of the most compelling evidence shows just how unsuited you are to be making postings of this nature to a BBS where casual readers might be sucked into your little whirlpool of self deceit.

It’s time for you to concede on this one Simon and to apologise to me for suggesting that I was lying.

Dave

8

Dave

Regardless of what others say I think you have behaved admirably with reference to MrE postings and have showed remarkable self restraint in the face of blatant provocation.

Keep up the good work

9

Thank you Anthony…


Now purely about engines. As soon as I reclaim my torque plate which has been lent to someone who has disappeared on holiday I will be measuring the Scholar blocks I have here once again both with and without the torque plate.

For those who dont know, a torque plate is a large chunk of metal which simulates the ‘crush’ and clamping force that the head puts onto the liners and causes the block to move in the same way as the head would. This can alter the shape of the liners in the same way as bolting on the head.

The torque plate has holes which allow access to the bores/liners in order that they can be honed/machined or measured in the condition that they will be when the engine runs.

It is all very well having liners which are straight and parallel but the moment these are crushed by the head the situation changes. All Scholar blocks have inteference liners which are honed to size with the torque plate in place, this should ensure that they are at their most accurate when the head is bolted on.

I have spoken at length with Alan Wardropper at Scholar Engines about the information posted here and elsewhere and sent him copies of the statements for him to consider. It is only fair that he has a right to reply to the criticisms and to take any actions regarding the innacuracies in the reported dimensional instabilites in his products.

I will be reporting the results of my measurements as soon as they are available and, if I get time I will once again measure some of the Rover OE Goetze liners dimensionally both loose and under the influence of the torque plate, I will do the same for some AE liners that I have here.

I have invited Simon to return the AE liners he has for measurement many times but he has consistently ignored my requests preferring instead to continually raise them as an ‘issue’.

I will approach Mark Bowles to see if he is willing to forward the liners to me for professional measurement after all I consider it to be for the greater good and have already stated for the record that if they are found to be faulty I will be happy to compensate Mark.

To put peoples minds at rest WRT to measuring. I have used two companies to undertake measurement and small machining jobs for me in the past. We are spiled in this area of the country since we have a proliferation of companies who do work for ‘F1 Valley’. Both of these companies produce precision components for well known F1 and BTCC teams and I have the utmost confidence in their findings.

The accuracy and quality of their machining is second to none and their measuring equipment is of necessity extraordinarily accurate. I will not be identifying them here since the work they do is confidential and I do not wish them to be subjected to lengthy 'phonecalls from certain parties.

If these measurements indicate that there is a significant problem with any of the items mentoned then I will be very happy (as I have always stated) to take these discrepancies up with the various manufacturers involved. This I believe is the correct way to progress the problem. Rest assured that I will stick to the facts and give complete and accurate reflections of my findings.

Dave