:aliaZ wrote:"the "Voice of the Forum" with your massive 858 hit count. I've been a contributing member for over 10 years, none of which has been spent lurking."
:God I hate repeating myself, the length of time spent on some forum is not germane to the information posted. Incorrect. People will more readily accept information from a member with established post history. The Technical Forum is supposed to be reserved for technical posts. Technical posts may also be refuted in the Technical Forum. Otherwise, potentially false information may be accepted as true. Again, you may want to brush up on those reading comprehension skills... An ad hominem attack... :AliaZ wrote:"Your mentioning that you spoke with a JWT engineer was an obvious attempt to bolster your credibility, which has clearly backfired. Some of us know people at JWT." :I only spoke of the source of the information, NOT to "bolster" my credibility, but only to share the information that was given to me, for the benefit of this "community". "Backfired?" as you stated, the only thing that has "backfired" is your insistance upon revealing a 3rd parties personal information. My insistence that you reveal your source at JWT has backfired? Really? It seems you don't want anyone contacting your "source" at JWT to fact check what you are saying. Why is that? :You may want to check your underwear, that's where shitty ideas come from. Grow up :aliaZ wrote:"Rather than just answer the question, you have attacked my credibility, education, and intelligence. What does that say about you?" :As I presented the information (as observations I might add), you go off into the attack mode, seems whenever someone presents a comment or information that differs from your own beliefs. (I've read your post history) Incorrect. I asked a simple question, and rather than answer it you go into attack mode. :Clearly, IF you had completed the necessary calculations, you would have come to a like conclusion, it's obvious that you have absolutely no clue about the information presented, and re-presented to you and this forum. Actually, I do have a clue. But the theoretical calculations that you speak of aren't what I asked for. Who did you speak with at JWT again? :What's worse in my opinion, is that you are so close-minded, you cannot accept information contrary to your uninformed beliefs. Incorrect. I can accept information that is contrary to my very informed beliefs...with adequate proof. :aliaZ wrote:"Unlike some people on this forum, I don't blindly accept as truth whatever is posted, particularly from those who have no history here."
:
:GOD I hate repeating myself, yet again, the length of time spent posting or on any internet site or forum is not germane to the subject matter at hand. Incorrect :As I stated in my previous post(s), when one combines the required calculations, studying a sectioned head, and asking the right questions to the right (informed) people, conducting your own un-biased testing, combined with over 29 years of experience, the answers and solutions become quite obvious. And yet you won't answer a simple question... :It becomes quite clear when reading this series of posts, that you have not presented one bit of substantial evidence or any valid counterpoint. Its also quite clear that you have never done any of the required calculations to properly port any set of cylinder heads. Despite all of your calculations, the last set of heads (with over-sized valves) that I had flow tested outperformed your stock valved head. How did that happen? You say this is impossible... But in the end, this is just a tangent to the original question that you refuse to answer... :We in the business have a name for persons such as yourself:
:We label them as Hacks! Heh...I challenge you to find anyone credible who thinks I'm a hack.
:Again, this side of the TT.net forum is supposed to be for the presentation of Technical data and ideas. I suggest that you go back and refresh your memory of the posting rules on this side of the forum to begin with.
I'm well aware of the rules, junior :Secondly, (as in my previous post), in your case, you need to spend more time reading, rather than impulsively hitting the respond key and making an idiot out of yourself. So you're proposing that I spend more time reading, but don't question any of it? Only an idiot would do such a thing... :I'll close this thread by saying, your time is probably better spent reading, learning and perfecting your trade or art, (beyond any shadow of a doubt, porting cylinder heads is an art), rather than being a muse to the internet public for 10 years. If you really want to close this thread, simply fill in the blank: The person I talked to at JWT was _______. My persistence is annoying, isn't it?
 |
