Restrictor Tube Discussion

outlaw99 said:
U guys must like nascar... this is the gayest thread ever! Why dont you just go to protrusion and find a common map width and call it a day! this will never work. To say that someone will have to rent one of these things if they wanna pull at there local fair will never work... you think cotpc is killing the scene with our rules... look at this ****
Click to expand...


LOL, and sadly COTPC and BOB appear to be pretty close to having a similar 2.6 turbo class!
 
outlaw99 said:
U guys must like nascar... this is the gayest thread ever! Why dont you just go to protrusion and find a common map width and call it a day! this will never work. To say that someone will have to rent one of these things if they wanna pull at there local fair will never work... you think cotpc is killing the scene with our rules... look at this ****
Click to expand...

the proposal I made to my club was this: we adopt the restrictor idea, letting the guys who want to still go spend 4K on a custom turbo do so to pull at these national events that cater to the aftermarket. either way, we have accomplished our goal of eliminating the *****ing, making teching the trucks easier, and keeping the class level. There are other things to change once restricted to a set amount of air, it's not the end of the game by any means.

just my thoughts.....
 
nope, we have 2.5 WS and now the 3.0 Pro Stock. We are going to do this in order to get people to pull, because there are so many variations of twins and singles that dont meet our rules or national rules that want to pull. this is the easiest way to keep it fair and allow more people to pull without breaking the bank.
 
God damn, you are either a ****ing moron or you just argue to argue...

Take a 1" ID hose that's 10ft long with a source of air pressurized to 14.7psi behind it... now put a nozzle on the end of it and restrict it down to 1/4" ID. Whay happens? Velocity goes up, volume goes down.

If you think you can make the same power pulling through a 2.6" velocity stack as you can through a 5" pipe, then you're the first and not the second.

The goal here is to have equivalent rules and something that can easily be teched. Not to completely equalize the horesepower levels to within .5hp of eachother. It's designed to streamline and unify in order to make pulling events enjoyable and repeatable and not a huge cluster**** that never goes anywhere.

Sledpullers make it painfully obvious why the sport hasn't gone anywhere beyond the backwoods hick level in terms of sponsorship, purses, and public perception.

But maybe pissing and moaning like a bunch of women is so heavily engrained in the sport that you guys will never let go of that.

zstroken said:
When were you feeding water into the compressor?

Water is considered in compressible, hence the fallacy of your example.
Click to expand...
 
Forrest Nearing said:
God damn, you are either a ****ing moron or you just argue to argue...

Take a 1" ID hose that's 10ft long with a source of air pressurized to 14.7psi behind it... now put a nozzle on the end of it and restrict it down to 1/4" ID. Whay happens? Velocity goes up, volume goes down.

If you think you can make the same power pulling through a 2.6" velocity stack as you can through a 5" pipe, then you're the first and not the second.

The goal here is to have equivalent rules and something that can easily be teched. Not to completely equalize the horesepower levels to within .5hp of eachother. It's designed to streamline and unify in order to make pulling events enjoyable and repeatable and not a huge cluster**** that never goes anywhere.

Sledpullers make it painfully obvious why the sport hasn't gone anywhere beyond the backwoods hick level in terms of sponsorship, purses, and public perception.

But maybe pissing and moaning like a bunch of women is so heavily engrained in the sport that you guys will never let go of that.
Click to expand...


LMAO still don't get the compressible gas do ya? Hint mass flow rates. Using your logic you have just dissproved velocity stacks, and tapered runners

If your pressurizing the hose to 14.7 psi your actually at 29.4 PSI absolute.


How come they put scuba tanks under pressure, and you have to ascend slowly?
 
Last edited:
Forrest Nearing said:
God damn, you are either a ****ing moron or you just argue to argue...

Take a 1" ID hose that's 10ft long with a source of air pressurized to 14.7psi behind it... now put a nozzle on the end of it and restrict it down to 1/4" ID. Whay happens? Velocity goes up, volume goes down.

If you think you can make the same power pulling through a 2.6" velocity stack as you can through a 5" pipe, then you're the first and not the second.

The goal here is to have equivalent rules and something that can easily be teched. Not to completely equalize the horesepower levels to within .5hp of eachother. It's designed to streamline and unify in order to make pulling events enjoyable and repeatable and not a huge cluster**** that never goes anywhere.

Sledpullers make it painfully obvious why the sport hasn't gone anywhere beyond the backwoods hick level in terms of sponsorship, purses, and public perception.

But maybe pissing and moaning like a bunch of women is so heavily engrained in the sport that you guys will never let go of that.
Click to expand...

What class have you been pulling this year???
 
zstroken said:
LMAO still don't get the compressible gas do ya? Hint mass flow rates. Using your logic you have just dissproved velocity stacks, and tapered runners

If your pressurizing the hose to 14.7 psi your actually at 29.4 PSI absolute.


How come they put scuba tanks under pressure, and you have to ascend slowly?
Click to expand...

do you think you can flow the same mass through a 5" pipe as a 2.6" orifice? I use the 14.7psi example as I was trying to illustrate pressure on one side, taking the vacuum of the turbocharger out of the equation as you seem to be unable to wrap your head around the fact that it's going to limit mass flow.
 
Forrest Nearing said:
do you think you can flow the same mass through a 5" pipe as a 2.6" orifice? I use the 14.7psi example as I was trying to illustrate pressure on one side, taking the vacuum of the turbocharger out of the equation as you seem to be unable to wrap your head around the fact that it's going to limit mass flow.
Click to expand...


No I do not think you can, but your crude example of taking about a water hose was so wrong it wasn't even funny.
 
Forrest Nearing said:
I don't sled pull... I don't enjoy hanging out with dumb**** rednecks
Click to expand...

Just wondered.... You seem to have somethin to say in every debated topic.

One of the main reasons I just read on here and dont post ***** is all the people who post even if they dont have a clue.
 
zstroken said:
No I do not think you can, but your crude example of taking about a water hose was so wrong it wasn't even funny.
Click to expand...

crude examples are used to help people visualize something they don't seem to understand.

I still can't figure you out. I guess you argue just to argue... which goes back to pissing and moaning like a bunch of women being part of sled pulling.

by all means, keep the rules that require a volume of books just to describe the turbocharger inducer rules and an engineering degree and 3hrs of labor to tech each turbocharger... that'll keep sled pulling right where it is... backwoods...

hey, when are you going to increase your turbine wheel to housing gap to .125"?
 
BigYellowIron said:
Just wondered.... You seem to have somethin to say in every debated topic.

One of the main reasons I just read on here and dont post ***** is all the people who post even if they dont have a clue.
Click to expand...

you won't see me getting into debates about clutches, tires, traction bars, hitches, hanging weight, etc. because I don't know anything about it...

an engine is an engine... a turbocharger is a turbocharger... I've been around both of those things for decades
 
Forrest Nearing said:
you won't see me getting into debates about clutches, tires, traction bars, hitches, hanging weight, etc. because I don't know anything about it...

an engine is an engine... a turbocharger is a turbocharger... I've been around both of those things for decades
Click to expand...


LOL Ok.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top