Now I'm so disappointed ... :nonod: I've been hosin N2O for decades .. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by powerabout
When all along , I could-a been runnin 2 N molecules to 5 Ox molecules ... :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_pentoxide
Printable View
Now I'm so disappointed ... :nonod: I've been hosin N2O for decades .. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by powerabout
When all along , I could-a been runnin 2 N molecules to 5 Ox molecules ... :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_pentoxide
Great example .. Killed the Boss 302 and 429 .. one year only 1971Quote:
Originally Posted by FMP
I applaud Ford .. OK we killed the big block .. (sic) Give us permission to build a small block. Last ditch effort to hold onto yesterday. The rest of the world knows it as the 351 Cleveland .
How bout them 1972 Rustangs .. ???? :p
The Mustang 2 Cobra Edition !!!
Buick picked up where Olds left off in the early 60s Turbo 8 with the Turbo 231 V6 in the 75+ pace cars then production T Type to GN , X . All clean machine s.
Diesel .... He11 yea brother .. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Whaaaaat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwugr3i2apo&t=897s
FuMPy ... Mustang 2 .. Olds and Buick ... LMAO Bottom of the barrel :rolleyes:
You really should have gotten out more .. HotRod and Car Craft wasn't the real world. You sink lower and lower in having any genuine practical experience .... :nonod:
Buick Turbos out of the box without remapping did 13.85 et on crap gt4 tires.
Since you're talking about programming, not a bad run for a 3800 lb V6.
But you enjoy yourself Chaz
14 second car ... Ohhh Ahhhh .. Yawnnnnn
Chaz, I don't think your statement about outboards not adding emission equipment is valid. The EPA doesn't mandate HOW you have to meet emissions, only that a certain level has to be met. It is up to the manufacture to figure out how to meet them. All of the manufactures went down a route of not adding the equipment such as air pumps, cats, etc. The Japs went to 4-stroke technology (Yamaha dabbled in the direct injection as well), and the domestic manufactures put their faith in direct injected 2-strokes, such as FICHT, Etec, and Optimax. Keep in mind the outboard emissions are not as strict as the automobile.
Since forever ago, there have been NO EMISSIONS STANDARDS for outboards.Quote:
Originally Posted by InjectorService
From 2hp kickers to 300hp V-6's and V-8's . None have come with any emission equipment .. just like private aircraft.
What they might have done in the last 5 to 10 years , I couldn't tell you. They make absolutely nothing today that peak's my interest .
They pushed the Opti-pop's on people , I can't say why .. it would only be a guess. I would rather not guess , I'm more of a black or white type .. the greys are what pass along bogus information ..
Four strokes , everybody (many on this site too) swore at them . Now that it's the only thing they can sell .. they swear by them .
I have a feeling that in 5 to 10 years .. they'll be at the Crossroads , lookin for Robert Johnson to help em write a new blues album ... :smiletest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_Road_Blues
Yes , thank you for making my point ... :thumbsup:Quote:
Keep in mind the outboard emissions are not as strict as the automobile.
I can drive my truck which has the smog garb to Ft.Pierce and back on about 4 to 5 gallons of gas . :smiletest:
I can go there in my boat and back on roughly 20 gallons ......... from each tank .:eek:
Yeaaaa , I'll say they are not as strict , as in NONE AT ALL .. :cheers: <--(maple seyrupp)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz
ah no, since 2000 there has been.
Are you confusing the idea that as you cant see any add on device on an outboard therefore its not meeting an emission standard?
the 1,2,3 star ratings are for styling and not emissions? lol
Come clean, you have been out on a long fishing trip since 2000?
There are standards. There confusing at best. Since boats abs motors are separate unlike autos they can't force efficiency/ mileage on them. Which would have forced them to address the inferior, outdated , mile wide lower units there still breaking every day. Instead there based on some sort of formula based on exhaust gases and cubic inches over the whole model range 2 stroke is somehow penalized in this formula, it may not be a direct penalty, could be that half the cubic inches make the same hp in a 2 stroke so it crashes the emissions formula.
This is why the shift to big displacement low compression 4joke engines.
When you stop and think about it it's sad how self defeating the whole **** show is.
A DI 2 stroke half the displacement, 2/3 the weight 1/1000 the moving parts makes the same power and pushes smaller boats with slimmer lower units. The push for "green" has brought bigger heavier boats needed to float bigger less efficient engines.
Well I haven't lived in the world of paper pushing lefttard tree huggers. But now I see how good a job they have done .... Ppppffftttttttt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LrUBFWS2GE
But dont worry , couple years ... they'll knock the guides out of the new boy wonder motors .. and they'll catch up quick ... :p
https://youtu.be/Eb9QImgZbpc?t=177
Where did you get the story its based on capacity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Whaaaaat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz
would it peak your interest if they would make a small turbo charged four cylinder with a 58mm stroke power peak in between 8000 and 9000 rpm on a 12 inch mid! :cheers:
i for one really don,t understand the new APX engine
on a 15 inch mid this would be great for cats not for F1 tunnel boats
for that you would need a
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=oid6JrLpkxg&feature=emb_logo
another 4 stroke that sounds great on paper but we know for a boat it will need 10 gears....Quote:
Originally Posted by PanRonnie
you must be right!Quote:
Originally Posted by powerabout
to get an 120 kilogram carbon fibre tunnel boat around a track you need torque not horsepower :thumbsup: