Get rid of my stalker

[StudlyCamaro]

Originally posted by tWiStEdBird:
There's no way in hell I'd buy anything from a sponser that acts like that.

ive bought a few things from jim, he's a great guy (even if he thinks that the vane in the 3.4L heads should be removed), and ive seen 1DV6 give a bit too much of bad advice in the N2O section to think that he has much knowledge about these motors (mainly the 3.4L(THE 3.4L HAS NO MAF)(i dont care how much money you make or throw at it)

[1DangerousV6]

im in the nitrous section every day helping people..and i may be wrong..but i believe that is the only thing i've ever been corrected on in my time there..which is why it was recommended by other respected members that i be the second moderator there should one be needed..i believe i also told whoever it was that i have a 3.8 and no experience with juice on a 3.4..and that they might want to check with James or someone else too..not arguing with you..just saying..anyways..this has nothing to do with the topic anyway

[Jerriko]

This is were I am damned if I do and damned if I don't. If I don't say anything, the perspection is that you are right. If I say anything, then I'm a whining little b****. I have a question for you. Does the nozzle go before or after the MAF and how long did it take other members besides me to prove it to you?

You said StudlyCamaro's post has nothing to do with the topic but it has everything to do with the topic.

[1DangerousV6]

ok..i'll entertain you..even though this question SHOULD BE IN THE NITROUS SECTION..on a 3.8..if it is a wet kit..the fogger nozzle shoud be after the MAF and before the TB blade..the closer to the TB blade the better without hitting it..a dual nozzle setup would be ideal..one nozzle spraing on one side and over the TB blade..and the other spraying on the other side and under the TB blade..on a dry kit..the fan nozzle should be at least 6" before the MAF..on a 3.4..again check with others that run nitrous on them..idealy a wet setup should have one fogger nozzle on each side of the split intake..same with the fan nozzles of a dry kit although the fan nozzle could just be stuck into the rubber elbow..a MAF is not present on a 3.4..if you have any other questions relating to nitrous or need to know anything else..please ask them in the nitrous section..i dont remember you proving anything at all to me..other members most likely have..i have learned a lot from my time here..which is why id like to continue utilizing this board without being disturbed/harrassed by some stalker..i think that is a simple and fair request..and the only reason you say his post has anything to do with the topic is because you still say your reason for stalking/harrassing me is that you do not want new member being given bad advice..as i said before..bad advice..if given..can be corrected without harrassment and degradation..and no matter how much you say it..im not going to buy this as your reason..and i still dont think other members are either

[ May 04, 2005, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: 1DangerousV6 ]

[1DangerousV6]

Originally posted by Nicklz:


Jeriko your acting like an @@@.

If your concerned about your money....
Well I may not be buying DHP because of your remarks on this board, you've showed how immature you can be.

Originally posted by tWiStEdBird:
Jeriko is just acting like a child, and it does get quite annoying. There's no way in hell I'd buy anything from a sponser that acts like that.

thank you guys for understanding..im not trying to start a fight or bring anyone down or anything..as i've been saying throughout this thread..i just have one request..and i think it is very simple and very fair

[95fbirdkid]

you're both acting childish. damn guys, you cant stop, can you? just step back, take a breath, and leave it alone for a day. dayuuum.

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by 95fbirdkid:
you're both acting childish. damn guys, you cant stop, can you? just step back, take a breath, and leave it alone for a day. dayuuum.

You're completely right. There's no way I can get my point through to him, for whatever reason. I wish he would choose to remember that in the past when he was corrected, without 'harrassment', that he immediately jumped down people's throats and that's why I react the way I do. I guess since he deleted those threads I should forget about them since he has. I guess I am at a lose here. If he didn't want me to keep 'stalking' him, why would he continually egg me on? If he wants he to leave him alone, why does he still engage me in an argument?

[ May 04, 2005, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Jerriko ]

[1DangerousV6]

because..for the millionth time..i dont buy that and nobody else does either..i reply to this thread because it was to do something about it once and for all..to be the one willing to clean up the situation involving you and me on the board..and if nothing comes of it..then like i said..this thread will still stand

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by 1DangerousV6:
because..for the millionth time..i dont buy that and nobody else does either..i reply to this thread because it was to do something about it once and for all..to be the one willing to clean up the situation involving you and me on the board..and if nothing comes of it..then like i said..this thread will still stand

Thank you for proving my point.

[1DangerousV6]

YOU asked..im engaging in an argument to end stalking..my ANSWERING you is completely different then your STALKING me..and im not talking about just here..im talking about on the board..on the board i will ignore you..because you seem quite disturbed..but here there is a goal to achieve..i see you removed your poke at a fellow member from your sig..thats a good start..i would expect that from a sponsor and supporter of this board..you can try as much as you want to prove me wrong or whatever..or that this is a waste of time..but other member have agreed with me here..and when other members complain of your comments and stalking and ONLY posting to start an argument..as they HAVE done many times in the past..i will simply show them this thread..and that there WAS an attempt to do something about it

[ May 04, 2005, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: 1DangerousV6 ]

[shenanigans]

Originally posted by StudlyCamaro:
ive bought a few things from jim, he's a great guy (even if he thinks that the vane in the 3.4L heads should be removed)

He thinks the vain should be removed? I've read up in 60* engine build up books that you shouldn't remove the vain... and its just a genenral rule of thumb [img]smile.gif[/img] Sort of never made too much sense to me but was always said.

Crazy, did it work out for him?

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by shenanigans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StudlyCamaro:
ive bought a few things from jim, he's a great guy (even if he thinks that the vane in the 3.4L heads should be removed)

He thinks the vain should be removed? I've read up in 60* engine build up books that you shouldn't remove the vain... and its just a genenral rule of thumb [img]smile.gif[/img] Sort of never made too much sense to me but was always said.

Crazy, did it work out for him? </font>[/QUOTE]It worked quite well. Flow was increased by 41%. Another website, 60degreeV6.com (or something like that) originally gave me the idea. They have done that with many of there V6s. They have several of there cars in the 13s.

[ May 04, 2005, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Jerriko ]

[StudlyCamaro]

the chevy power service manual says

" Production V6/60 intake runners have a "vane" in the port floor. This vane produced a 17 percent increase in airflow over a conventional port design, and should be retained in competition prepared cast iron cylinder heads."

something tells me that they did some flow testing to get that number [img]tongue.gif[/img]

it does make sense that its there too, the walls of the port are really large in that area of the intake runner, so the vain is used to make the size of the port more like it is in the rest of the head going from a small port to a large port back to a small port will slow the incoming air going into the cylinder


did it work for him? his car ran.. hard to say if it would have been better if the vane's had still been there

(looks at post and realizes most people wont see it in here... oops)

[Jerriko]

Originally posted by StudlyCamaro:
the chevy power service manual says

" Production V6/60 intake runners have a "vane" in the port floor. This vane produced a 17 percent increase in airflow over a conventional port design, and should be retained in competition prepared cast iron cylinder heads."

something tells me that they did some flow testing to get that number [img]tongue.gif[/img]

it does make sense that its there too, the walls of the port are really large in that area of the intake runner, so the vain is used to make the size of the port more like it is in the rest of the head going from a small port to a large port back to a small port will slow the incoming air going into the cylinder


did it work for him? his car ran.. hard to say if it would have been better if the vane's had still been there

(looks at post and realizes most people wont see it in here... oops)

We flow tested the heads before and after the port work. The flow increased when the vanes were removed. Go over to 60degreeV6.com (geez, I hope thats the right address) and do a search on it.
The key to remember is the vane may be necessary if no other additional port work is done. Once the ports are cleaned up (especially by the valve seats) the vanes become a restriction.

[xX315Xx]

i honestly thought this thread was a joke before i got through reading it...