> My point was that I don't consider it wise to recommend to 700+ people who
have
> mostly stock engines to feel safe about revving over 6000 rpms just
because they
> might have upgraded to aluminum roller rockers - thats all.
I could not agree any more Shane...
> I don't think the majority would like to "test strength" or "tempt
strength" on
> their brand new, highly respected, Daks. As far as 8500 rpm on a 318 or
360 -
> yeah right - how common is that? I see 360s (LA motor in an A or E-body)
> running low 12s all day long that never have to go over 4800 rpms.
That's what folks like me are for....some guys build for low, some for
high....
> 340s are not even vaguely related to this conversation - so I thought.
And 360
> not a big cube torque motor? On what planet? Guess thats not why they
are the
> gasoline engine of choice for a 5000+lb truck that might do some light
towing
> huh?
Strange, those same engineers put the V-6 in that same truck.....and I don't
seem to recall
too many built 360's putting out more than 450 lbs of torque naturally
aspirated....I am sure you've seen many
though......you really want to talk torque?..... then let's discuss
Buick's......
>Although the factory springs aren't worth a crap.
They worked fine for me and never complained once, even the tranny gave out
before them....
I am sorry you don't trust them, it's a good thing they don't have
feelings.......
> Nobody said anything about MAKING air. Go back and re-read the entire
post and
> try to put it into perspective.
I am sensing some ruffled feathers here..........I believe I said something
about MAKING air
after reading your regained torque statement......
>When
> you start at a low altitude and expect ANY kind of driveability (much less
> performance) at higher altitudes - you flat out wont get it UNLESS you
turn the
> ignition off and back on so the computer can compensate. If you still
think I'm
> trying to MAKE air - you are confused. Try it - you'd be surprised at the
> difference. Try to think of just enrichment modes like stabbing the
throttle
> and how that relates to how much EXTRA fuel the computer will deliver
under both
> conditions - if it doesn't KNOW about the difference in ambient pressure -
HOW
> do you expect it to react? Sluggish by both theory and experimentation.
Well, I don't have to try it living at sea level anymore, but when I did
travel from sea level to
5500 feet, your theory did not do me any good, period. It made me angry that
I couldn't afford a
blower at the time. Besides, I really don't think I am confused because you
simply stated:
(((( This is why if you start the vehicle at a low altitude
and climb to a much higher hill/mountain the vehicle will feel sluggish up
there. If you pull over and turn the engine (and keyswitch) off and back on
(resetting this calibration) you will regain the lost torque)))))
You will not regain the lost torque, as anyone above 3500 feet will tell
you, due to the less dense air. Your MAP
will adjust the spark and timing curve while driving, there is no need to
turn off the ignition, teach the MAP
your new elevation/pressure, it does this during closed loop. It will
advance to a set number while driving up the mountain
and write it to the tables, you turn it off to snap pictures of the cascade
below, then back on, and it goes right back to that last number. So, you
will not regain the lost torque. So that is not ""why if you start the
vehicle at a low altitude
and climb to a much higher hill/mountain the vehicle will feel sluggish up
there."" It's is because the little magnum can't
make air for itself and regain it's lost torque. After racing in Albq
Shane.......I only could wish you were right....V-8's that run 16's to 17's
are for chevy's and ford's, not for our Dakota's.....
Most Humble Respects'
Kuk
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:50:37 EDT