![]() |
that,s why i use turtle wax on my fountain,for it,s hard shell.
|
Originally Posted by MILD THUNDER
(Post 4019509)
This thread is like watching turtles bang.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pyorz7iIwA
|
Originally Posted by mike tkach
(Post 4019513)
looks like mrs turtle was really enjoying it!:thankyouthankyou:
|
rumor has it icdedppl used to hunt turtle,s when he was a kid,when he got one he would turn it on its back and walk away!when reggie got wind of this he said,kid you will own baja,s cigs etc,but you will never own a fountain.
|
Originally Posted by HaxbySpeed
(Post 4019499)
Here's a dyno sheet I posted here a couple years ago, I can dig up some more examples for you later if you need. This particular sheet is on 89 octane with Imco manifolds, running the raw water pump and power steering pump, stock 502 mag bottom end, rmbuilder cam and valve train. With headers it made about 20hp more and 10 lbs/ft less
What induction was on this engine? Carb or efi? 502 Mag intake? Just curious. Thanks. Eddie |
Originally Posted by HaxbySpeed
(Post 4019499)
I don't know, I think correcting misinformation posted by wannabe engine builder / tuner's like you is definitely a help to anyone who doesn't take your bad advice.
I'll let you argue with yourself on that one.. Here's a dyno sheet I posted here a couple years ago, I can dig up some more examples for you later if you need. This particular sheet is on 89 octane with Imco manifolds, running the raw water pump and power steering pump, stock 502 mag bottom end, rmbuilder cam and valve train. With headers it made about 20hp more and 10 lbs/ft less your just a trouble maker posting negative comments on here..now go away....................... |
Sorry Mild Thunder for phucking up your trend due to the troll posting negative comments....
|
Originally Posted by ICDEDPPL
(Post 4019504)
Why must Mild Blunder always cause trouble with his threads!?!?!?
Turtles never get offended , they got thick skin, its like a shell! |
Originally Posted by mike tkach
(Post 4019467)
i guess i should say why i would have went with the 290 instead of the 265.i like the idea of a cnc intake&exhaust port as the repeatability with the cnc machines is exact.if the build was on a tighter budget,i would not hesitate to use the 265s.in my opinion the hp&torque figures would not be very different with either of these heads.i also believe the 290s will make more power if useing a cam with more lift&duration and will be run to a higher rpm.
MT, thanks for sharing the article. There is some excellent info on there that is good food for thought. I hate the fact that we can't discuss some of the technical parts of the article without things degenerating into people getting upset with each other. This has always been a good forum for info, but in the last few years it seems like it always leads to this - personal attacks on each other. I sure never intended for it to come to this. |
Originally Posted by FIXX
(Post 4019537)
Sorry Mild Thunder for phucking up your trend due to the troll posting negative comments....
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:01 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.