On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:18:08 GMT, Gunner calmly ranted:
I'm about 900 miles north of you just off I-5 in Grants Pass, OR. A mini mill like the HF/Griz/Taig/Sherline would probably suffice, but so would a small knee mill (which I could use as an occasional drill which would give me more depth than the HF 5-speed 8" junker does.
Excellent. I fit the weird part perfectly. ;)
So am I, but I haven't found a scrapped/free mill yet. If I were in IL, I might have that nearly-free Enco right now.
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:24:39 -0500, Gary Coffman vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
I am willing to stand corrected. I based my fuel consumption figures on last year's tests of the "average" 6 cyl cars. This year's (2004) appear to have lifted their game by an enormous amount, with the Falcon getting a tested 27mpg, where the older model was getting 20 mpg. AFAIK this is the best fuel consumption ever from this model of car.
So once again maybe they've been booted hard enough to lift their game.
A partial apology. Hope it helps.
***************************************************** Dogs are better than people.
People are better than dogs for only one purpose. And then it's only half of ofthe people. And _then_ most of them are only ordinary anyway. And then they have a headache.........
Improvements in electronic controls make it possible. In the new LS2 engine, GM was able to increase intake port flow at the cost of changing the injection angle because the newer electronic controls allowed them to compensate for what otherwise would have been in increase in idle emissions. They couldn't do that in the LS1 because the ECM for that engine wasn't fast enough.
They also are using a new quick light off catalyst that allows lower backpressure. That gained them 20 hp right there. But that also wouldn't have worked without the new faster ECM which now measures O2 in and O2 out as well as cat temperature. That allows it to more closely tailor the fuel maps for lower emissions.
6 liters is 366 cubic inches. The big difference with respect to the V8's torque is that first it has twice the torque of the 350, and second that the torque curve is very flat. That gives thrills right off idle. My
350Z was a 6 speed manual, the new Vette is a 4 speed auto. That does help MPG. The auto's computer always has it in the right gear for the load demand. I tended to wind out the gears in the manual more than necessary because it was no fun to drive it like granny.
No trailer, that's just what it gets pulling itself around. It is geared very low.
Base price for the 2005 Corvette is $1500 *lower* than the 2004 model. We got a fleet deal on the Durangos that beat the fleet price we got on the 1999 models. Allowing for inflation, my old
63 Corvette cost more than my new one too.
Turning up the pump is an old diesel trick. It *does* hurt fuel mileage, and *does* increase emissions. With the new common rail electronic injection diesels, it is possible to make it adaptive, so it only hurts mileage and emissions when you actually demand the extra power. That makes it practical on a daily driver.
It isn't as easy to do that sort of thing with a gasoline engine. It is already using all the fuel the air flow can support. You have to make air flow modifications to get more power.
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 22:03:12 -0500, Gary Coffman calmly ranted:
Yabbut you said "6.4L", sir. ;)
Torque is fun. My fondest memory of torque is the old Javelin I had. The Mark Donahue Special 390 had 375HP @ 420 ft/lbs of torque. I spun a manhole cover off and down a couple city blocks as my throttle stuck wide open showing off for a friend. By 3rd gear, I finally got my hand up to hit the key and stand it on its nose a foot before traffic. Torque IS thrilling. It wrapped up those leaf springs so much taht the rear end just about hit the ground. The gas tank hit when I spun the manhole cover off and I went down the extra couple inches. I though I'd torn a leaf apart at the time but it was riding OK right after that. My buddy called me that night to thank me for the sparking light show the manhole cover made. I wondered what that was as I was trying to get the beast to whoastop.
I've always driven autos like manuals for fun. I determine what speed the tranny upshifts manually. 2nd on Fords used to be set by a sprag clutch so it held on hills without the brakes as long as the engine was running. Pop it down into low for a quick getaway at the light or stop sign.
Yabbut new cars cost more than houses did when I started driving.
Right, power on demand. Very much worth the price.
Yes, both in and out for lots of power, but I'm not sure how much they claim for the boxes. Overriding the factory electronics settings (eliminating thoughts of higher emissions) on a temporary basis for performance is evidently both legal and workable.
-- Friends Don't Let Friends Eat Turkey and Drive --
PolyTech Forum 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.