land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Internal Engine Block Painting

To: <drmayf@mayfco.com>
Subject: RE: Internal Engine Block Painting
From: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:18:46 -0500
Mayf;

Repeatibility is necessary if only a few samples are averaged; otherwise
it takes lots of tests (samples) to reduce the error-- simple statistics
as you alluded to.

What's the worst is Consumer Reports-- they buy ONE unit and then don't
even present any test data, only subjective terms such as Not Acceptable
or Good, etc.

Regards, Neil    Tucson, AZ


-----Original Message-----
From: drmayf [mailto:drmayf@mayfco.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:17 PM
To: Albaugh, Neil
Cc: Ed Weldon; land-speed@autox.team.net; Higginbotham Land Speed Racing
Subject: Re: Internal Engine Block Painting

I don't think even 8 to 9 hp are significant. On a 400 hp motor that is 
only 2 percent. Just about everything is less repeatable than that. 
Well, maybe in our business, but mechanical junk hooked to a dyno that 
depends on water valving to determine the hp. And of course at 5250 rpm 
that self same 8 hp would only be 8 ft lbs. If they could show that they

could do that repeatedly for a number of runs (95% confidence level) 
then I would agree. But a sample of 1? Nah. Hey thats the bad side, it 
could have been far better and they would not have noticed it.  I 
haven't reread the article since I got it but were the oil temps down 
and how about water temps? Cant tell in one run. Becaus eeach run is 
different from the other. Needs a normalizing set of data or functions.

But lets say that the hp was a true gain. What would be the total cost 
oof upgrading your motor to gain that 8 hp? The cost of prepping 
everything, the cost of applying, manhours involved, etc. If it was more

than 20 bucks per hp then it probably isn't worth it (at least to me0. I

know the NASCAR guys look for eerything they can find but they have the 
luxury of running a very long race at wide open speed and thus there is 
a total energy consideration for them, Better milage,  would also be a 
consideration..

IN any case it is very interesiting.

mayf, way off and far out in pahrump

Albaugh, Neil wrote:

>Mayf;
>
>I agree-- that's why those 1 or 2 horsepower "improvements" were not
>significant. The thermal barrier coatings gave about 8 or 9 BHP
>improvement, so that seems a bit out "of the noise."
>
>Regards, Neil    Tucson, AZ




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>