Where's the product bulletin?

 

Well pardon the he%% out of me. It was Harddrivin quoting PSI as opposed to the water guage static pressure losses in the test he quoted.

 

who gives a flying fuck?

 

BZZZZZZ, wrong.

V is volume for a GIVEN MASS dumbass, not velocity.

You claim to have taken fluids but don't know applications in Boyle's Law?

Jeez man.

 

It's VELOCITY

Pressure 1 * Velocity 1 = Pressure 2 * Velocity 2

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pber.html

 

Nothin' like jumping in with such a profound statement. Maybe someone about to drop $40 on a KN filter.

 

NO

Pressure 1 * VOLUME 1 = Pressure 2 * Volume 2
for a given mass

This is the Combined Gas Law not Bernoulli's Equation.

 

Can you read?

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pber.html

 

THIS IS THE BERNOULLI EQUATION DUMBASS!!!



READ THE FRIGGIN LINK YOU POSTED. THIS IS THE FORUMULA.

You priginally posted the combined gas law.



Man are you lame.

 

40 bucks!? hahahaha...c'mon. this entire thread is b.s. who really cares about which one allows more air or dust particles in? give it a damn rest. 3.5 pages of bickering back and forth like school children

 

I've said BERNOULI ~ 3 times...

P1 V1 = P2 V2

 

No one asked you to read it. If you don't like, click on something else, bozo.

 

That's the Combined Gas Law



Your ignorance is ASOUNDING!

 

Your ignorane is pathetic! You are quoting one law and using the varibles of another!!!!!!

 

P1V1 = P2V2

where V = fluid velocity

 

Let's go over this again.




Combinded gas law




Bernoulli's Equation



Combinded gas law




Bernoulli's Equation



Combinded gas law




Bernoulli's Equation



Holy crap!

 

That is not Bernouli's equation, bozo. It doesn't matter what you said. You are looking at Bernouli's equation on the site you posted and you are now telling us it is different. Instead of collecting links to make yourself look more impressive to complete strangers you will never meet, why don't you actually read some the stuff in your extensive library of links???

 

Are you telling me that:

Pressure 1 + Velocity 1 does NOT equal Pressure 2 * Velocity 2?

 

Combined gas law.

V is VOLUME
P is PRESSURE


V is NOT velocity.

 

YES OR NO?

Are you telling me that:

Pressure 1 + Velocity 1 does NOT equal Pressure 2 * Velocity 2?

 

That is what he is telling you.

 

He's wrong.

And I'll prove it.

 

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. Pressure and velocity are not a linear relationship. Velocity has an exponential component.

 

I can't wait...

F=ma

e=m x c x c

Do I seem smarter now?????

 

NO.

Look at Bernoulli's principle. Velocity is squared. They are not linear relationships.

But like you even understand the difference between linear and non-linear relationsships.

 

This is gonna be great. I can't wait for this "new" math.

 

This is his problem. He reads sh!t but doesn't understand it and gets extremely confused. He simply doesn't understand the concepts so it doesn't know when these article writers are full of crap.

He's confusing the Combined Gas Law with Bernoulli's Equation, yet he claims to have taken a year of fluids.

The classes in fluids he took were at the local bar...then he came right home to start posting.

I would actually respect him a bit if he would just admit he f-ed up and confused the formulas. Fluids is hard, the math forumlas are difficult to keep straight and the logic counterintuitive. I got mostly A's with little effort in college, and I had a hard time in fluids. Sh!t just doesn't work in fluids like you think they would.

But I'm guessing he will continue taking his screwed up logic and incorrect statements and defending them to the bitter end.

 

Let's find out...

Harddrivin,

Which bullet has more foot-lbs. of energy?

9mm, 115 grain bullet traveling 1500 feet per second or...

.45 cal., 230 grain bullet traveling 950 feet per second?

 

Torque would require a focal point like holding the subject by the neck and shooting him in the nuts.

 

We're all waiting for your new math 1LE?

Or are you ready to just admit you screwed up?

Look, I bag on ya quite a bit, but it's because of crap like this. You should STICK to what you know. If you have an article, post it. But if you don't understand it, don't bother trying to defend it. Articles aren't gospel, especially in Hot Rod.

I encourage you to drop the mags, get off the forums, buy a helmet and go to your local drag strip and put that 1LE to work. You'll meet new people and learn REAL sh!t...speed secrets you will NEVER find in any magazine.

Join the sport instead of just reading about it. With the 1LE, you're 90% there.

 

I'm a big advocate of high velocity ammo.

http://mysite.elixirlabs.com/index.p...2665&page=1609

 

Not me, I'm into spreading out the force. High velocity ammo goes through the perp, and through the 3 or 4 things behind him.

IMHO, high velocity ammo is more dangerous to people other than the perp.

Also if you use say a wad cutter, the higher velocity keeps the shape of the bullet better. A deforming bullet (bigger dia) is what gives you your stopping power not the velocity.

But I'm referring strickly to home defense situations, not police work.

 

Hello?????


Harddrivin????


Anyone home????

 

Either he's surrendered, or we're in full one hellofa cut n paste If he would just admit that he screwed up...I'm willing to explain the principles to him. But we have to get past the "defense" mechanism he builds up.

There is so much he can learn for more experienced people on the forum, not just about the TL, but other stuff. There are drag racers like me on here, I'm sure guys (and gals) going way faster than I am here, guys with blowers, guys who autocross, mechanics, engineers, everything.

But you have to have an open mind and be willing to learn from someone.

 

Ah, grasshopper, you must follow your own advice and stick to subjects you know. CorBon advocates high-velocity HOLLOW POINT ammo that transfers all the energy into the target without over penetration. No wadcutters or ball ammo allowed. Can I quote the Marshall study or is that not scientific enough for you????

One more test, which penetrates more gyp board, 9mm handgun round fired from a H and K MP5 or .223 rifle round fired from an AR-15?

The answer is the high-velocity .223 penetrates less gyp board than the 9mm but goes right through a bullet proof vest.

 

But hollow point's offer lower PSI for a given velocity, isn't that what counteracts the high velocity?

What's gyp board and do you have good links for this stuff?

I figured the .223 goes though because of the tiny surface area of the .223 translates to way more PSI than 9mm allowing it to go through.

 

You were OUTRIGHT WRONG about aluminum heads...and you never admitted it, despite the fact that I posted ~ half a dozen links to the contrary.

I'll find what I'm looking for and when I do I'll post it.

 

BZZZZZ.

I had you on ignore until today. Otherwise I would have continued explaining why aluminum heads can build way more power.

While iron heads keep heat, they keep it during non-combustion cycles, increasing detonation.

You can run higher compression with aluminum heads thus building more power than is lost through aluminum heads not keeping the heat.

I never said that for a given engine, you take off iron heads, and put on aluminum that you will build more horsepower. I said aluminum allows you to build more power because you can run more compression.

Take the LT1 for example. The reason they can run 10:1 was because they went to reverse flow cooling, keeping combustion temps down during non-ignition times. Controlling detonation.

If you put iron heads on that LT1, it would detonate, you would not be able to run 10:1 with iron heads on that motor on pump gas. You would have to lower the compression (and reduce the time advance), and the loss of compression is more "lost" power than you would gain by holding in the heat.

If you have say a 9:1 motor with iron and there is no detonation, the iron headed motor should make more power than an identical aluminum head because of the trapped heat.

 

Firstly, P1 + V1 cannot be equal to P2 * V2, even from a simple units comparison.

Secondly, even correcting the typo does not make it correct. Bernoulli's is as posted by Skeedatl. Even someone with a very rudimentary course in fluid mechanics should know this. Please read a book in basic fluid mechanics first.

 

But that's your problem 1LE. You just post links without understanding the WHY behind what you're taking from others.

You lack a FUNDAMENTAL understanding of the crap you're trying to defend.

Instead of FIGHTING everyone, how about LISTENING for change. Get your OWN understanding instead of posting irrelevant links that you don't understand.

For God sake drop the magazines and go to the track. Talk to racers so you can ask questions when you don't understand something.