35 since the 1st if I subtract the 3 troll bots.
Kat
Stop picking on our Russian brothers. Slimeballs need love too.
35 since the 1st if I subtract the 3 troll bots.
Kat
Stop picking on our Russian brothers. Slimeballs need love too.
35 since the 1st if I subtract the 3 troll bots.
What exactly is a. "Troll Bot?"
I read that thread and found it interesting that Cole is using some very clever wording about his stroker kit, sounding like it's actually better than stock.
When you stroke an engine by offset grinding the rod journals, you must remove metal from the crank at the same rate you want the stroke to increase.
So if your journal is 2.5" in diameter, and you want to add 0.300" stroke to it, you have the grind the journals down .300". That's 30% LESS rod journal material as well as 13% less bearing area. If my math is right.
Exactly how much stronger does that make it? None. It makes it far weaker. Even if that's not the area the cranks are breaking at, reducing the rod journals makes the crankshaft flex more. 30% more.
Not the road I'd go down to solve breakage problems, or even use on an engine with breakage issues.
Whether the SoCal stroker is the cat's meow or not, trusting someone's opinion on it who thinks cutting that much off the journals is a clever solution is silly.
Yeah, love the cute messages and the WARNING!! YOU WILL GO TO PRISON OR THE GAS CHAMBER IF YOU READ THIS WEBSITE crap.
IIRC, CompetitionDiesel.com says:
Welcome back! We've missed you. Please take a minute and post something.
THE STAFF HAS BANNED YOU FOREVER. GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE!
You can be back on in a few minutes...........
It's easy..........:rofl:
The cranks that I have had offset ground were built up first, then offset ground to give them the extra stroke so we still used the original journal size and factory bearings, Then some used regular and some used custom rods. If that's the case and they are doing this, is it still going to be weaker than stock? Still have the same amount of material on the crank just moved a little bit, so it could be re balanced and ready to go? I've never seen it done like you were describing, that just seems like kind of a silly way to do it to me, unless I'm picturing it wrong.
doubt it as i have been banned from there for a looong time now! lol
:rofl: I got that one there, defenatly another site that has double standards!
I went and looked...that is in fact NOT the message you got when you were banned.:hello:
If "double standards" means banning someone who repeatedly attacks a Moderator untill said Mod gets fed up and hits the button....then so be it.
I would have done the same thing. I have better things to do than fight with a member who doesn't wat to be there anyway.
I went and looked...that is in fact NOT the message you got when you were banned.:hello:
....
We didn't lose much Pat...he only had 14 posts and most of those were defending you. LOL:hug:
Most your members don't have 14 posts.
We have no plans to change it at this time.
Most banned members find their way back through other usernames anyway.....right Pat ? :rofl:
We're just a bunch of unedumacated hillbilly's...we can barely find the keys to type anyway. 14 sounds about right....most of our guys are too busy winning races to worry about posting.