articfriends

iTrader: (1)

Blue,I'm not claiming to have invented twin rail fuel injection,I just took the modifications to the 502 mpi merc manifold pkg to the next level and made more hp from it then I have ever seen claimed anywhere. As far as how much hp some N/A 565 made or "1000 hp carbed big blocks",thats pretty irrelevant unless it can idle thru a No-wake zone without loading up, not blow a drive apart at idle when you drop it in gear and last for a few hundred HOURS not 1/4 mile PASSES,we are discussing marine engines that will run in a stern drive boat, not CAR engines or DRAG motors. Your very entertaining,when you write your book I'll buy it,it should be good reading,Smitty

Blue242

The 1000 HP motor I spoke about was a boat motor. Idles perfectly fine at 800-900 rpm, and lives in a 21 ft Eliminator. The motors don't care what they are in.. If you build them properly, and for the application intended, you can avoid breaking drives... Drives are an entirely different issue, as the basic Bravo is a cheap attempt at a HP drive at the best... It was never designed for it..

As far as writing a book for you guys to read, no bother.. You would not understnd the math, nor the reading. A few paragraphs of this is more than proof enough that participating here is becoming more of a waste of time on my part.

Why 3 engines for a cheap boat... Well, toom many of you are just way too small minded to figure it out even if it's spelled out in front of you.. Doesn't surprise me after the load of crappy, egoistic, mental midget snickering..

Actually my fault for even asking, and further expecting a bunch of mental neutrinos for factual input and to contribute in a healthy discussion forum..

I will be of no surprise if you don't understand what I just wrote.. I wouldn't expect you to..

Thanks,

R

ZXXX Donzi

Wow, that is a pretty hostile response.

You seemed to want us to question you in the beginning. You are proposing some cutting edge stuff that has never been done by some pretty well respected engine builders. It is natural for a number of us to be skeptical.

I actually want you to prove everybody wrong in this case.

As far as the math. I spend a good bit of my time validating interest risk management simulation systems for banks. Lots of non-linear math but I am no mechanical engineer so I might not get it

Blue242

Donzi,

The above is directed at those who dished out the stuff at me in the first place. I always welcome questions and am willing to participate in any discussion that is civilized, and from which everyone can learn. I have consistently stated this, and have asked questions of all in the same manner. It is to learn from all that participate. However, if someone throws mud in my face, I will certainly take exception. Fair is fair.

No hostility intended to anyone who is not initiating it in the first place towards me.

The negtivity will also not prevent me from carrying out my little experiment in my old boat with the few engines I have in my garage. I'm way past childhood, my ego is not involved other than to push me to finish building the engines, and my skin is way too thick..

I can understand that you and others are well capable of understanding the math involved. No pun intended. I'm also not a mechanical engineer, and most of this stuff is not that difficult..

I spend a bit of my time keeping some of those pubilcly traded companies that subscribe to your risk management theories out of the path of the SEC et al if things go to a level where they should not have gone...

Anyway, no differential calculus or quantum calculations involved, and that's my point. It is pretty simple, but some people here seem to just like throwing mud for whatever reason.. People way more educated than I have done a lot of research that indicates that there are improvements to be had in many of these marine engines.


Thanks,

R

ZXXX Donzi

I hear you.

For the record, my risk management theories are backed up with experience. That is where I come into play. Although I do deal with the theory, I also back up my assumptions with real experience. Kind of like tuning a motor on a dyno. It is a good start but then you have to adjust for the real world. A number of my competitors have done thousands of simulations and know how a model will react. I have done that and also managed risk on a multibillion dollar balance sheet. You can run hedge calcs and figure basis risk all day long but until you see it in real life it is just not the same. I know that there is no perfect hedge but also know that you can combine quantitative analysis and real experience to reduce risk.

I can talk for hours about hedging convexity with delta but in the end the real world prevails. That is fact, not theory.

I think that is what some of these guys are trying to say. We can talk about optimizing ratios all day long but until it is put into use it is no good. A marine environment is a tough place to do that. Some things that are good theory don't always work out. Some of these guys have spent a bunch of time both on the dyno and in a boat. Some of them have defied theory themselves. Heck Smitty here has generated hp numbers that nobody thought were possible with a merc MPI platform.

I don't think that any of these guys want to see you fail. I do think that they have brought a few good points to the table. For instance, Mr Whipple knows some pretty good stuff. He lives in both the auto and marine world. I hear that he has spent countless hours on the dyno and in the field. He has spent a bunch of money on R&D figuring out how to make his blowers behave in a turn key fashion. If is was as easy as doing some calcs, adding a O2 sensor and running a closed loop system he would be doing it. One of his points and a point that Smitty made as well is how you are going to keep the O2 sensors alive. Other than that the Sweeds do it in the artic, I have still not heard an answer to that one. I guess that it is theoretically possible with the right dry stack exhaust and a moisture trap. Dang that would be loud. Then you have the whole saving money by using a small blower but at the same time building 3 engines. That seems to be tough to swallow. I have personally seen how tough it is to tune a regular MEFI system with a large procharger. I have no clue why someone would want to do it with a small centrifugal huffer. Heck, if I was trying to be that exotic with a fuel injection system I would probably at least start out with a Whipple blower so I could have a more linear air flow to tune. These guys are right, one wrong move and you will melt pistons.

I hope you don't take what I have just said to be offensive. It was not meant to be.

JasonSmith

Blue242 lives in his Mother's basement.
Dude, you are as full of sh!t as the day is long. At least you could make your line of crap more entertaining for us small minded folks.
I work in the garbage business & have seen a some seroius stuff in my day. Your ideas belong in the piles I work on.
No need to (correction) respond to me, I'm just a garbage man so.........

kennyo

Your a garbage man, I"M a mental neutrino!

ZXXX Donzi

I actually work in the adult film business.

As a critic!!!!

kennyo

Cool! I'm a female fluffer myself!

articfriends

iTrader: (1)

Kennyo,now that you been neutered have you been able to focus on getting that boat finished,how is it running,Smitty