| Message |
I didn't posit that "aftermarket = more flow," I simply said there are aftermarket offerings that allow more flow. And I say that is an assumption since there is no proof offered... anywhere, by any of the manufacturers and certainly not from you. My argument is that the primary force behind BOV marketing is the sound they produce. To prove this, there are plenty of sound bytes available for practically any BOV you can dream of, but little, if any, flow capability data is advertised. I believe this marketing emphasis could influence the design of many BOVs to not necessarily be a volumetric flow upgrade for the Z32. It would be extremely interesting to see flow tests performed on aftermarket BOVs and the stock valves they are destined to replace. I'm sure some poorly made offerings are more restrictive.Agreed, but I bet they sure will sound cool. Then you followed it up with your gem of an argument that "loud sounds = inefficient." Apparently you don't understand the principle of noise generated by a pressurized gas passing through a valve. Since your comprehension level is challenged here, let me explain: when a gas passes through a valve the velocity increases while the pressure decreases and a by product is noise. Velocity is proportional to the flow area and one might argue that the easiest way to maximize sound production is to decrease the flow area to increase the velocity which will negatively affect flow rate and hence, the measure of efficiency. Conversely, to increase the volumetric flow rate, the valve area will need to be increased which will decrease the velocity through the valve and the noise will diminish as well. Right, so you misread my point, then applied your incredibly intelligent theory that sound and efficiency operate in an inverse correlation. Did you really expect a serious response to that? It would have been nice, but I guess you got too amped up that someone could dare to be contrary to you... Get over yourself, you’re not that great. In this post you seem to think that BOVs and recirc valves are mutually exclusive. They are not, you can plumb a BOV to recirculate, as with the HKS, or anything else you'd like to fabricate a solution for. "fabricate a solution for"?… Speak on it son, you seem to have something else to say here. So, that's a moot point.As you pointed out above, the subject is flow, and not about whether they are plumbed to recirculate or not, so it seems you misread your own point and then went off on this tangent. By the way, any noise causing restriction will still be a restriction even if you can’t hear it due to recirculation plumbing. You final point was the length of time the (stock, I'm assuming) Your assumption is correct. recirc is open. That doesn't help a damn bit when the throttle plate closes and you've got an almost instantaneous pressure gradient that surges back into the compressor wheel.NOTHING happens instantaneously, especially when the movement of a gas is involved. Without sufficient volume, the pressure can't be vented quickly enough. Agreed, but is there any proof out there that shows a BOV performing better than a stock recirc? And by "better" I mean measurably reducing the pressure surge that the compressor wheel is exposed to.Now, you can either defend your positions with a bit of your own theory or go back to name-calling again.
|
 |
