What just happened?
First off, I didn't revive the thread, you did after someone posted a post about the old thread. You referenced an old post of mine from 2011 in which I complemented your reputation. I don't know you and wasn't bad mouthing you in any way shape of form.
In the post today, I didn't attack you or your data. I mentioned that we have seen different numbers on a small Cb200 head and wondered why the data you mention was lower. Could be the answer is that they were actually measured at a different pressure, or perhaps smaller ports flow better at low lifts. I don't know, so I asked. I make zero claims for knowing much about CB750 flow numbers and did not make any reference to them. I referenced a Cb200 head that according to the numbers seem to flow more at very low lift and I was curious.
It may not have read that way at your end and that's a problem with short messages. Sometimes they can be misconstrued.
I'm, not making any claims on behalf of others, and even less for myself. I hear good things from others about your work but instead of a reasonable answer, we go off at a tangent. I agree that face to face we would have a very different discussion and I'd enjoy that opportunity.
The funniest thing about the CB750 you mentioned is I have been working on pipe and port simulations for a completely different bike out of South OZ that seems to be a major competitor of your client. I'm not doing the work on that one, just running his numbers and some different scenarios. I had no idea you were involved in that project. If the scuttlebutt is right, your man may have more HP than mine - Stephen seems to think so.
First off, I didn't revive the thread, you did after someone posted a post about the old thread. You referenced an old post of mine from 2011 in which I complemented your reputation. I don't know you and wasn't bad mouthing you in any way shape of form.
In the post today, I didn't attack you or your data. I mentioned that we have seen different numbers on a small Cb200 head and wondered why the data you mention was lower. Could be the answer is that they were actually measured at a different pressure, or perhaps smaller ports flow better at low lifts. I don't know, so I asked. I make zero claims for knowing much about CB750 flow numbers and did not make any reference to them. I referenced a Cb200 head that according to the numbers seem to flow more at very low lift and I was curious.
It may not have read that way at your end and that's a problem with short messages. Sometimes they can be misconstrued.
I'm, not making any claims on behalf of others, and even less for myself. I hear good things from others about your work but instead of a reasonable answer, we go off at a tangent. I agree that face to face we would have a very different discussion and I'd enjoy that opportunity.
The funniest thing about the CB750 you mentioned is I have been working on pipe and port simulations for a completely different bike out of South OZ that seems to be a major competitor of your client. I'm not doing the work on that one, just running his numbers and some different scenarios. I had no idea you were involved in that project. If the scuttlebutt is right, your man may have more HP than mine - Stephen seems to think so.
