-
[QUOTE][QUOTE=kingofthering;698349]This is turning into an advertisment for Revtec and his supporters.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Mate there is nothing wrong with some harmless fun, some pics, some commentary etc.
Yes, we are fans of the technology and its endless possibilities. Time will tell once the results are released by Revetec.
-
[QUOTE=santostripoli;698353]Time will tell once the results are released by Revetec.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I am still waiting for revetec to make information public regarding one particular claimed aspect of the engine that is still considered a physical impossibility...
-
[QUOTE]This is turning into an advertisment for Revtec and his supporters.[/QUOTE]
No it's not. I made that years ago and posted it for a bit of a laugh.
You forgot to mention it was an avertisement for the Muppets also.
-
[QUOTE][QUOTE=RVC Shareholder;698482]No it's not. I made that years ago and posted it for a bit of a laugh.
You forgot to mention it was an avertisement for the Muppets also.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
My apologies,I was a Muppets fan as a kid. I am sure Brad will find the whole thing funny.
-
Hmmm...I didn't like the photo mods. Especially beaker having more hair than me. I don't like being made to look unprofessional, but I can see the funny side of it. That's a very early picture. I think it was out of our first Prospectus? Anyway...
We have performed our first dyno test now and even though I cant say much about it until released on the NSXA and our website, what I can say is that I'm very happy with it and we have just about reached our proposed target figures for this project. The figures are higher right across the whole RPM range in power and torque than the engine in the marketplace we benchmarked against.
-
[QUOTE=hightower99;698417]Yeah I am still waiting for revetec to make information public regarding one particular claimed aspect of the engine that is still considered a physical impossibility...[/QUOTE]
What claim is that? Is it the torque claim, because we have proved this in previous engines and the current X4. Is it the fuel usage claim? Because we have tested this in an independent facility. Please post what you are talking about.
-
[QUOTE]I don't like being made to look unprofessional, but I can see the funny side of it.That's a very early picture. I think it was out of our first Prospectus? Anyway...[/QUOTE]
I was a little apprehensive about the unprofessional image. I'll remove it if you wish. I'm happy as long as it has put a smile of a few faces.
It's still one of my favourites photos.
Photo Mod?! I thought you actually had the Professor and Beaker on staff back then. :)
-
[QUOTE=revetec;699184]What claim is that? Is it the torque claim, because we have proved this in previous engines and the current X4. Is it the fuel usage claim? Because we have tested this in an independent facility. Please post what you are talking about.[/QUOTE]
No the fact that you claim to be able to burn more oxygen then you physically can with the amount of fuel you use.
I have no problem believing that you have an engine that runs at almost 30:1 A/F ratio that isn't hard to believe at all. What is hard to believe is that you claim to burn just as much oxygen then as when you are running closer to 14.7:1 without also saying that your engine is running horribly inefficent at the higher A/F ratios...
In effect you basically disprove the current stoichiometric ratio for petrol as inaccurate.
-
[QUOTE][QUOTE=hightower99;699367]No the fact that you claim to be able to burn more oxygen then you physically can with the amount of fuel you use.
I have no problem believing that you have an engine that runs at almost 30:1 A/F ratio that isn't hard to believe at all. What is hard to believe is that you claim to burn just as much oxygen then as when you are running closer to 14.7:1 without also saying that your engine is running horribly inefficent at the higher A/F ratios...
In effect you basically disprove the current stoichiometric ratio for petrol as inaccurate.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Hightower...
We are all waiting for the official test results to be released. Brad has indicated to you and others on a number of occassions that he will release the info on this forum when the timing is right.
It is not fare to criticise him on his technology when you know that he is not in a position to release details.
We should all show some understanding, fareness and professionalism regarding this matter.
Regards
Santos
-
[QUOTE=santostripoli;699712]Hightower...
We are all waiting for the official test results to be released. Brad has indicated to you and others on a number of occassions that he will release the info on this forum when the timing is right.
It is not fare to criticise him on his technology when you know that he is not in a position to release details.
We should all show some understanding, fareness and professionalism regarding this matter.
Regards
Santos[/QUOTE]
He asked a question I answered.
I am waiting for the information to be released, patiently I might add.
I was just stating what I am waiting for...
-
[QUOTE][QUOTE=hightower99;699808]He asked a question I answered.
I am waiting for the information to be released, patiently I might add.
I was just stating what I am waiting for...[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Now that you have clearly stated that you are waiting for this data we can all sit and wait for the data.
Remember, they dont have the R&D resources of GM or Toyota, so it will take time. Lets just sit back, relax and enjoy the show.
-
[QUOTE=santostripoli;699820]Now that you have clearly stated that you are waiting for this data we can all sit and wait for the data.
Remember, they dont have the R&D resources of GM or Toyota, so it will take time. Lets just sit back, relax and enjoy the show.[/QUOTE]
The thing that frustrates me is that this information is supposedly already known so I am actually only waiting for revetec to make certain information public.
-
We just have to arrange for the testing to be redone by a certified body before we release the figures. This takes a while to arrange and schedule in.
-
[QUOTE][QUOTE=revetec;700721]We just have to arrange for the testing to be redone by a certified body before we release the figures. This takes a while to arrange and schedule in.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Thanks for the clarification Brad, we look forward to the independent test results.
Cheers
Santos
-
Have to admit I'm interested in how you run a 30:1 air to fuel ratio too. I'm no expert but I know basic chemistry and it seems like you're saying you use more fuel than you have. If you only inject enough fuel to reduce 14.7 units of O2, how are you reducing 30?