MSD's ALS feature in Fast Ford
#161
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
I find it most interesting indeed that people in this topic agree wholeheartedly that our Launch Control product will bring a turbos boost threshold right down by retarding timing and bypassing air, yet they disagree that ALS will bring it down by retarding timing and bypassing air.
Quality "theories" chaps. Anyone want to join me in the real world for a beer this weekend?
Quality "theories" chaps. Anyone want to join me in the real world for a beer this weekend?
Obviously with launch control, you set it so that it is just within (or only just outside) the turbos threshold, so that as soon as you get on the throttle, there is enough energy to overcome the inertia of the turbo and keep it spinning as it switches off, I can totally see that.
However, are you saying that if LC was set at 1000 or 2000rpm, the energy would still be enough to keep the boost up, if the turbos threshold wasn't until 4000?
All the two (Tony) of you have done is poke fun at me without providing ANY evidence for the movement of the boost threshold .
There have been LOTS of really good questions raised and very few answers .
Tony has mentioned about the air injectors and then not bothered explaining any further - why not ? This post (despite the pisstakes), has probably been of great use in explaining terminology and the effects of ALS - it could go MUCH further with the HELP of the two hecklers from the muppet show .
It seems that there are lots of opportunities to make me look stupid (not difficult ), lots of opportunities to educate people as to the hows / whys etc - and I can't believe that you're not at LEAST taking the opportunity of an explanation to achieve the former.
Anyway, as soon as I get my car back on the road (this weekend), I shall be datalogging the effects of the ALS and boost threshold and post up the results. But given the fact that twin ALS valves has no discernable effect on a T4 (obviously 200rpm is difficult to detect without datalogging), I'm pretty sure what the results will be . However, I have no problem being proven wrong - but that will take evidence, not two pisstakers say "it just does alright" .
#162
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
I find it most interesting indeed that people in this topic agree wholeheartedly that our Launch Control product will bring a turbos boost threshold right down by retarding timing and bypassing air, yet they disagree that ALS will bring it down by retarding timing and bypassing air.
Quality "theories" chaps. Anyone want to join me in the real world for a beer this weekend?
Quality "theories" chaps. Anyone want to join me in the real world for a beer this weekend?
#164
Mike- These cars you bang on about, do you KNOW (aside from confidence in the tuner etc) they are set up to their maximum abilities?
My guess is no.
Suprising you suddently mention the T4 car with twin ALS valves when you said even yours was dangerously high EGTs etc with a single one, then suddenly, after 4 pages of being on the defensive, another one suddely appears you know of.
My guess is no.
Suprising you suddently mention the T4 car with twin ALS valves when you said even yours was dangerously high EGTs etc with a single one, then suddenly, after 4 pages of being on the defensive, another one suddely appears you know of.
#165
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stavros
Mike- These cars you bang on about, do you KNOW (aside from confidence in the tuner etc) they are set up to their maximum abilities?
My guess is no.
Suprising you suddently mention the T4 car with twin ALS valves when you said even yours was dangerously high EGTs etc with a single one, then suddenly, after 4 pages of being on the defensive, another one suddely appears you know of.
My guess is no.
Suprising you suddently mention the T4 car with twin ALS valves when you said even yours was dangerously high EGTs etc with a single one, then suddenly, after 4 pages of being on the defensive, another one suddely appears you know of.
#167
Resident Wrestling Legend
iTrader: (3)
i think mike is on about datalogging the resluts he'll get with the second valve now being fitted stav as opposed to him already having 2 valves fitted
perhaps he was in the proccess of having the secondary valve fitted just to bring the car up to better specs?
perhaps we'll read all about it in the mag in a few months time?
until then there's not a lot that can be "prooved" one way or the other, just one bloke saying this works on this car and another saying it works on his
it's akin to saying "i can put a 50" telly in my bathroom" knowing full well that the other persons only got a small shower cubicale
perhaps he was in the proccess of having the secondary valve fitted just to bring the car up to better specs?
perhaps we'll read all about it in the mag in a few months time?
until then there's not a lot that can be "prooved" one way or the other, just one bloke saying this works on this car and another saying it works on his
it's akin to saying "i can put a 50" telly in my bathroom" knowing full well that the other persons only got a small shower cubicale
#168
PassionFords Creator
iTrader: (12)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
All the two (Tony) of you have done is poke fun at me without providing ANY evidence for the movement of the boost threshold .
I have simply tried to keep my comments light and shall continue to do so.
#171
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
#174
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
All the two (Tony) of you have done is poke fun at me without providing ANY evidence for the movement of the boost threshold .
I have simply tried to keep my comments light and shall continue to do so.
Despite you not reading my PMs and replying about how you would like me to ammend the post, I did so off my own back to make it less confrontational (which as I explained in my pm was to provoke some discourse on the thread), as soon as I realised it had upset you.
I note you STILL haven't read these either . Obviously I must have upset you more than I thought .
#175
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
#176
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by T S M
Originally Posted by dojj
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by dojj
do air injectors have anything to do with this or is that another subject totaly?
thank you, come again please
i thought they were there to control the wastegate and keep it open/closed at certain points?
so doesn't that fall into the same sort of ball park?
if not i'll go and make another post somewhere
So I would say chip is wrong and dojj is right
Tony, if you read Dojj's post it was asking where air injectors come into a discussion on wether "LESS LAG" is a term that implies a change in boost threshold or not, I said they dont.
I wasnt saying they arent used in conjunction with ALS, I was merely saying they are relevant to the discussion we are having here.
We werent talking about the effect of badly implementing them, we were talking about correctly installed ALS and its effects on boost threshold, I know its harder to see what the topic is about since mike went and altered his original post to look less stupid and less argumentative so I hope that clears it up for you.
#177
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
So pointing out a mistake is now considered slagging off ?
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
#179
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
I altered the first line and two smilies ONLY .
Originally Posted by Before
Mike, you are a cunt, I want you to die, I hate you
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
Originally Posted by After
Mike, Ive got that money I owe you
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
There we go Mike, first line and two smilies only, can you spot the subtle difference in how people would interpret it now?
#180
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
I have simply tried to keep my comments light and shall continue to do so.
#181
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
I altered the first line and two smilies ONLY .
Originally Posted by Before
Mike, you are a cunt, I want you to die, I hate you
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
Originally Posted by After
Mike, Ive got that money I owe you
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
I will see you at the next event and you will get whats coming to you!
There we go Mike, first line and two smilies only, can you spot the subtle difference in how people would interpret it now?
Your examples (as would be expected from you ) are a bit different from:
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Just read this, and it would seem Stu has missed a crucial description out of describing lag, which I'm very surprised at .
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Just read this, and it would seem Stu has made a mistake in confusing lag and boost threshold .
#184
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Exeter
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
Having read the thread, frankly I remain convinced that Stu's article was spot on. But this is totally irrelevant. Your thread could be and has been interpreted as a challenge at the quality of the article written by Stu.
Hand on heart, with the benefit of hind sight, do you really think that this was the correct way to deal with it - so openly?
Fucking glad I dont work with you chap
JJ
#187
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by JjCoDeX75
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
Having read the thread, frankly I remain convinced that Stu's article was spot on. But this is totally irrelevant. Your thread could be and has been interpreted as a challenge at the quality of the article written by Stu.
Hand on heart, with the benefit of hind sight, do you really think that this was the correct way to deal with it - so openly?
Fucking glad I dont work with you chap
JJ
#189
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by JjCoDeX75
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
Having read the thread, frankly I remain convinced that Stu's article was spot on. But this is totally irrelevant. Your thread could be and has been interpreted as a challenge at the quality of the article written by Stu.
Hand on heart, with the benefit of hind sight, do you really think that this was the correct way to deal with it - so openly?
Fucking glad I dont work with you chap
JJ
#190
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 9,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Northants
You're exampple was incorrect, so have this back
So much back-peddling going on in this thread, that if you all rode Grifters, you'd have worn out your rear tyres by now
So much back-peddling going on in this thread, that if you all rode Grifters, you'd have worn out your rear tyres by now
#191
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are
This is not mentioned anywhere in your article .
Therefore anyone reading it will think that lag is the response of the turbo once you press the accelerator, as this is what you say it is.
#192
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Exeter
It was already in the public domain .
All above is merely my interpretation of course
#193
Team HOTHOT!
Mike
A much as I respect you for all you have done (and your colgate smile aswell), please, do us a favour and shut the fuck up for once
I for one enjoyed reading the article, even if I didn't fully understand it
A much as I respect you for all you have done (and your colgate smile aswell), please, do us a favour and shut the fuck up for once
I for one enjoyed reading the article, even if I didn't fully understand it
#195
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by JjCoDeX75
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Given the damaging effect this topic you started could potentially have had on me, my business and indeed the company we both work for, (Future) i think that is a bit rich coming from you!
TBH if I was Simon I would be bitterly dissapointed in Mike slagging off his mag as thanks for Simon giving him the chance to write for that same mag!
I expect technical fuckups from Mike, he has a great car but I put him firmly in the
"All the gear, no idea"
category for certain things, but I didnt expect unprofessionalism from him on that scale, I would genuinely have expected better from Mike based on what my opinion of him was prior to this thread!
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are - even you (see the air injector part of this post where you rediculed Dojj, but Tony handed a in your arse - depite the lack of detailed explanation on his part ).
Having read the thread, frankly I remain convinced that Stu's article was spot on. But this is totally irrelevant. Your thread could be and has been interpreted as a challenge at the quality of the article written by Stu.
Hand on heart, with the benefit of hind sight, do you really think that this was the correct way to deal with it - so openly?
Fucking glad I dont work with you chap
JJ
#196
Thread Starter
Caraholic
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by JjCoDeX75
It was already in the public domain .
All above is merely my interpretation of course
Sorry if this makes me unpopular .
#197
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Just because you don't EXPECT Stu to make a mistake, that doesn't mean he is incapable of them - we ALL are
This is not mentioned anywhere in your article .
Therefore anyone reading it will think that lag is the response of the turbo once you press the accelerator, as this is what you say it is.
So if in one of your articles, you say "my car handles well round the nurburgring" should you specify fruther that it "handles well round the nurburgring when I grab hold of the steering wheel with my hands, but NOT when you sit in the back of the car and prod it with a broom"
#198
*** Sierra RS Custard ***
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
You complaint, accompanied by your name (same one you use as a mag contributor) was already in the public domain where exactly?