In reply to frenchyd :
I don't know if you're stupid or delusional. There is absolutely nothing there saying GM copied Jaguar when they designed the Atlas. So from now on I'll just going to consider anything you say to be a lie unless proven otherwise. Tell us again how your dad is an astronaut.
In reply to Stampie :
I think calling someone both stupid and a liar falls deeply outside of the "Don't be a dick" guideline.
frenchyd said:Stampie said:In reply to frenchyd :
Look what arrived in the mail today! My very own copy of Saving Jaguar by John Egan.
I will admit that I did not read the entire book as it is boring as hell. I read Chapter 1 then skipped to Chapter 8 and read to the end of the book other than Chapters 15 and 16. Chapter 9 is titled Dilemma and discusses the AJ6 engine and the first time GM approached Jaguar about buying them out. Unfortuately the two are never even mentioned together on the same page. That leads us to Chapter 17 titled The Ford takeover. On page 209 he talks about them approaching GM to save themselves from Ford (understandable) and GM proposing a joint venture. Finally we get GM and an engine mentioned together:
The General Motors idea was that the XJ80 would use a floorpan, engine and some other components from GM ...
So the theory that GM so loved the AJ6 engine to have copied it makes no sense what so ever if GM was going to use their own engine in the joint venture.
And for the final nail the coffin, after I finished reading what I did, I discovered the damn book has an Index. Surprisingly the word Atlas is not listed in the index at all. General Motors is listed multiple times and I looked up all of them to make sure the AJ6 and GM weren't mentioned together. They were not.
Frenchy this is now the second reference you have given to support your lies. Both have been proven to not say what you claim at all. Are you going to come clean and admit that you made up your "facts"?
Stampie.
You are the absolute master of misdirection. You quote one part of the paragraph out of context and say it proves GM's intent.
Read further and earlier that was an initial proposal for a future 50/50 joint venture.
Read further and you will see that such a proposal was being seriously considered. And Jaguar even had meetings with Opel of Germany . The beginnings of such a project.
There are liability laws that must be adhered to. Responsible leaders like John Egan So you will never find out for example exact details of what transpired in board rooms and meetings. Even if proven true the cost of attorneys, time from executives, negative publicity, make it a fools error and John Egan was no fool.
Yes a certain degree of imagination is required to connect the dots. It's logical dot connecting though. Then read page 213.
Even you will admit that Ford and GM are competitors. GM did not like losing to Ford in Acquiring Jaguar. So what exactly are the details of GM coping Jaguars AJ6/AJ16 engine? I doubt even Roger Smith knew.
But The Atlas project began right after the Ford purchase. The similarities of the Atlas and the Jaguar engine are purely a coincidence? Sure you can claim that. Others studying the matter wouldn't agree with your conclusion and arrive at their own.
Just consider these facts.
The last time GM designed an in line six.
The last time they designed a 4 valve over head cam engine. ( Cosworth Vega was purchased from Cosworth).
The timing of the whole affair.
You mean 80/20 venture lol.
But no, you're completely using your imagination to come to that conclusion about the Atlas. There is no evidence anywhere outside of what you claim to be true. You can now stop saying that GM copied Jag for their Atlas engines. Since you cannot prove it, nor can anyone (including yourself) find any actual evidence or even hint to it.
And your picture of that page further proves nothing.
A lot of people already knew GM was interested in Jaguar. But that doesn't = your claims. So, from this point forward please stop spreading misinformation until you have proof.
You are discrediting yourself on this forum because of your casual sense of making E36 M3 up and making unfounded claims. You're hurting everyone interest in XJS's and Jag V12's. Why? Because when we read your post we have to consider that you might making some things up. We all enjoy those v12. But your efforts to make us think its superior and cheaper than almost anything else ontop of your untrustworthy embellishments and clear 'tales from the imagination of a 74 yr old man' makes me very indifferent to anything related to Jaguar, Jag v12's, and XJS.
BLUF: You had us in the first half.
If GM wanted Jag, they would have only wanted the name.
Just as Ford did. Then they made Jags off of Ford chassis. (and bought Volvo to have Volvo do their chassis, and the Ford era S60s look a lot like long wheelbase Focuses underneath, so much for that!)
Just as Fiat would only have wanted Chrysler for the Jeep name. None of the Fiat era Jeeps have Jeep engines, and the newer ones are Fiat chassis with Fiat engines.
Stampie.
You are different than I am. I grew up reading nearly everything. I'm a voracious reader.
Your generation looks to Google and index's to find the answers you're looking for.
That's OK, it's what works for you.
I'd rather have the whole story.
But here's the difference. If you had read the whole book you would have found a thousand things, legitimate things, to embarrass me regarding Jaguar. And you would be right.
Instead of reading to learn you scrolled to try to embarrass me. Put me down. Prove me wrong.
That's pretty petty. To be honest I'm not worth your time. Certainly you spent more to buy the book than I would ever spend to prove someone wrong. Then you had to quote something out of context to make your point. Tssk Tssk. I guess that's the difference in what each of us value.
But, if you had read the whole book and took to heart the lessons in it. You would have a much deeper and richer appreciation of Jaguar. Not just as a car brand. But how hard work , sacrifice and diligence has its rewards.
yupididit said:frenchyd said:Stampie said:In reply to frenchyd :
Look what arrived in the mail today! My very own copy of Saving Jaguar by John Egan.
I will admit that I did not read the entire book as it is boring as hell. I read Chapter 1 then skipped to Chapter 8 and read to the end of the book other than Chapters 15 and 16. Chapter 9 is titled Dilemma and discusses the AJ6 engine and the first time GM approached Jaguar about buying them out. Unfortuately the two are never even mentioned together on the same page. That leads us to Chapter 17 titled The Ford takeover. On page 209 he talks about them approaching GM to save themselves from Ford (understandable) and GM proposing a joint venture. Finally we get GM and an engine mentioned together:
The General Motors idea was that the XJ80 would use a floorpan, engine and some other components from GM ...
So the theory that GM so loved the AJ6 engine to have copied it makes no sense what so ever if GM was going to use their own engine in the joint venture.
And for the final nail the coffin, after I finished reading what I did, I discovered the damn book has an Index. Surprisingly the word Atlas is not listed in the index at all. General Motors is listed multiple times and I looked up all of them to make sure the AJ6 and GM weren't mentioned together. They were not.
Frenchy this is now the second reference you have given to support your lies. Both have been proven to not say what you claim at all. Are you going to come clean and admit that you made up your "facts"?
Stampie.
You are the absolute master of misdirection. You quote one part of the paragraph out of context and say it proves GM's intent.
Read further and earlier that was an initial proposal for a future 50/50 joint venture.
Read further and you will see that such a proposal was being seriously considered. And Jaguar even had meetings with Opel of Germany . The beginnings of such a project.
There are liability laws that must be adhered to. Responsible leaders like John Egan So you will never find out for example exact details of what transpired in board rooms and meetings. Even if proven true the cost of attorneys, time from executives, negative publicity, make it a fools error and John Egan was no fool.
Yes a certain degree of imagination is required to connect the dots. It's logical dot connecting though. Then read page 213.
Even you will admit that Ford and GM are competitors. GM did not like losing to Ford in Acquiring Jaguar. So what exactly are the details of GM coping Jaguars AJ6/AJ16 engine? I doubt even Roger Smith knew.
But The Atlas project began right after the Ford purchase. The similarities of the Atlas and the Jaguar engine are purely a coincidence? Sure you can claim that. Others studying the matter wouldn't agree with your conclusion and arrive at their own.
Just consider these facts.
The last time GM designed an in line six.
The last time they designed a 4 valve over head cam engine. ( Cosworth Vega was purchased from Cosworth).
The timing of the whole affair.You mean 80/20 venture lol.
But no, you're completely using your imagination to come to that conclusion about the Atlas. There is no evidence anywhere outside of what you claim to be true. You can now stop saying that GM copied Jag for their Atlas engines. Since you cannot prove it, nor can anyone (including yourself) find any actual evidence or even hint to it.
And your picture of that page further proves nothing.
A lot of people already knew GM was interested in Jaguar. But that doesn't = your claims. So, from this point forward please stop spreading misinformation until you have proof.
You are discrediting yourself on this forum because of your casual sense of making E36 M3 up and making unfounded claims. You're hurting everyone interest in XJS's and Jag V12's. Why? Because when we read your post we have to consider that you might making some things up. We all enjoy those v12. But your efforts to make us think its superior and cheaper than almost anything else ontop of your untrustworthy embellishments and clear 'tales from the imagination of a 74 yr old man' makes me very indifferent to anything related to Jaguar, Jag v12's, and XJS.
BLUF: You had us in the first half.
Jaguars are not superior to everything. I've never made that claim. If that's what you get please take the time to carefully read What I said.
First I'm a racer. I've never said anything otherwise. Not a guy who buys and resells things to make a profit. I strip out stuff most people want. All I want is a cheap and good source of race car.
Take your bias away, look at things from my point. Is the V12 engine itself made from great materials? Is it well built? Is the suspension geometry good for racing? How expensive are the cars themselves sitting in dusty unrunning condition?
Since you took Stampie's word for it and haven't read page 213. Or anything else in that book You don't know if GM built the Atlas based on Jaguars AJ6.
Either read the book or don't read these postings.
In reply to frenchyd :
Did you not just show us page 213 in your post above? Which I read...
Pete. (l33t FS) said:If GM wanted Jag, they would have only wanted the name.
Just as Ford did. Then they made Jags off of Ford chassis. (and bought Volvo to have Volvo do their chassis, and the Ford era S60s look a lot like long wheelbase Focuses underneath, so much for that!)
Just as Fiat would only have wanted Chrysler for the Jeep name. None of the Fiat era Jeeps have Jeep engines, and the newer ones are Fiat chassis with Fiat engines.
Pete. Jaguar the company wasn't worth 500 million pounds. Let alone 2.5 Billion.
What made Ford willing to spend 2.5 Billion. Was the sizzle. ( don't sell the meat sell the sizzle). Old salesman quote used by John Egan to Ford Motor company.
Ford spent that money and billions more to repair Jaguar's facilities and systems. To add that sizzle to the Ford Brand.
By using those Ford motors and suspension on a tatted up body with Jaguar styling features. Ford forgot why they went after Jaguar in the first place and lost the sizzle. They even tried to buy it back by getting a Formula 1 team but failed even that.
Then the business cycle turned down and Ford was forced to sell Jaguar to survive.
yupididit said:In reply to frenchyd :
Did you not just show us page 213 in your post above? Which I read...
I guess I have to read that for you. " The joint venture (50/50) plus perhaps a 20% rights issue to GM".
It then goes on to why they went back to Ford. Yes you would have had to read the earlier part to catch the 50/50. Would you like me to take a picture of that?
In reply to frenchyd :
Take a picture to prove your years of claiming the Atlas is a copy of Jag.
In reply to frenchyd :
I'm a believer in telling the truth. When someone isn't telling the truth aka lies I'm going to stand up for the truth. I did learn some things about Jaguar good and bad. The worse part is someone had turned me off to Jaguars so much I'll never appreciate them.
In reply to Stampie :
Prove your contention! That GM designed the Atlas without looking at the Jaguar AJ6/AJ16
In reply to frenchyd :
I don't have to. I'm not making unwarranted claims. Prove to me that Jaguar didn't copy everything in everyone of their cars from GM. GM made cars with inline 6s and V12s way before Jaguar even existed.
What? Now we have to prove the starting date?
Well, go ahead. Prove your assertion.
SV reX said:In reply to Stampie :
I think calling someone both stupid and a liar falls deeply outside of the "Don't be a dick" guideline.
Pretty sure that only applies to the Challenge?
That being said, having come from the rules thread, I want to post something. Bolded/highlighted emphasis is mine.
You will refrain from politics, religion, or droning on long after the rest of the party has walked away from a conversation. Not because these topics are delicious forbidden fruit that you can't have because the world has nambified and now sucks, but because it's rude, and rarely brings a conversation to a good end. Besides, although you can't see it, you look like a shiny happy person standing there in the middle of the room spouting and arguing with yourself. And shiny happy people are not fun.
Pretty sure that frenchy, again, repeating the lie that the Atlas is originally of Jaguar descent falls under that section.
In reply to frenchyd :
You've been hanging out with the elementary school kids too long. You're starting to argue like they do.
In reply to Stampie :
There is none so blind as those who will not see.
In reply to frenchyd :
We finally agree on something.
I think this has run its course.
The original question which nobody has answered so far remains. What is the formula to increase power higher in the RPM range?
Increase flow by X% per 1000 rpm? Increase timing by Y?
How much does an Indy car flow? A Grand Prix car? NASCAR? Heck a S2000 Honda?
The answer is more air. Pretty sure we got that in the first few posts. The rest is how to make it live given exactly how that air is handed to the engine among other constraints.
In reply to frenchyd :
So let me get this straight... we have 4 pages on this thread if you making wild claims, ignoring answers and calling people stupid and liars, you have many other threads ignoring all information presented, you've argued about rules for an event you've never attended, likely will never and then want to complain that you're not getting the answer to your question? Is that correct?
In reply to bobzilla :
No matter how far off the subject I will usually answer. It's only polite.
Do yourself a favor. Go back and read the answers. Has anyone given me a straight simple formula or rule of thumb?
I didn't make wise cracks or off the question remarks did I?
Edit; I went back and read all the posts. You know what I found out.? You were the first to give an off the question response. With your put a LS in it remark. Followed by Stampie.
I really don't mind. But then you have to take responsibility for your posts. As Does Stampie
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) said:The answer is more air. Pretty sure we got that in the first few posts. The rest is how to make it live given exactly how that air is handed to the engine among other constraints.
Thanks for giving me a straight answer. I'm concerned not about reliability or other issues. I want to understand the simple rules that govern engines.
The question is if I want to go to some higher rpm and generate more power how much "air" flow is required to achieve that?
IF; if a given engine makes peak power at 5,000 rpm to go to 10,000 RPM what percentage of flow (Air) is required to achieve that?
Maybe I can ask the question another way? If a normally aspirated engine makes peak power at 6000 RPM how much bigger does the flow need to be to make peak power at 9000 RPM?
For example. The Honda S2000 makes peak power at 9000 rpm. Is there another 4 cylinder 2 liter Honda engine that makes peak power at 6000 rpm? If so what are the flow and valve lift differences?
Now I'm not hung up on any engine or RPM. I just want to know for example if a 20% flow increase will achieve how much rev increase for peak power? 30% 50% ?
I'll assume that air/flow doesn't matter if the increase is achieved with lift or size.
You'll need to log in to post.
