Hello and thank you for your kind comments ! First of all I'm not worried about the cosmetics
cause that is all easily changed after a product is fully developed from a mechanical stand point.
Not looking to have a war with you, Dustin or anyone else for that matter, but having your fact's
in order isn't a bad idea either. However we are all guilty of bad assumptions here or there.
As to seeing hundred's of Dyno's your either very well traveled, or have had hundreds of engines
built and use a different dyno source each time ? Sorry just trying to understand?
Any way's more to the point at hand, How do you think Diesel engine's are dyno'd ?
Most diesel's are lucky to see 3,000 RPM's and my Cummin's Diesel make's peak torque at 1,800 RPM's.
( I have that right in the Cummin's Spec's for my year engine) How do you feel they came up with that number??
Diesel technology has come a long ways to and more and more of them are pushing the higher RPM's
but for the longest time majority of them are on the low side of the RPM scale and that obviously gives
them the longevity.
For what it's worth Earhart Engineering has done it's far share of Dyno work for Diesel engines as well.
Further more not looking to drag R-Tech into this, But if he has time maybe he would kindly confirm
we are for real and the Dyno pull's are taken this LOW.
One finale question, Earhart, Check300, myself, and R-Tech are all member's of OSO and
all of us work closely with Earhart Engineering. That being said I believe all would stand
be hind my comments. Are you willing to call all of us liars ?
I think R-Tech put it best with this quote:
These engine builders and the customers behind these projects are pioneers. Setbacks are to be
expected when testing any new application; this is the only path to success. But important milestones are being reached.
Sterling uses our single centrifugal race system on their Class 1 engines and they can qualify first and finish first.
Bottom line is we are looking to educate those with a mind that are willing to learn.