Trumpets and car exhaust pipes
nE0^
guys.
I like both trumpets and cars, and while reading about car exhaust systems,
naturally trumpet playing came into my mind.
In case anyone doesn't know, a car exhaust is not just a straight tube from
the engine to the rear. You will get one hell of a noisy car. The exhaust
first passes through a catalytic converter, then a resonater chamber and
finally, the muffler.
The resonater makes use of the exhaust gas's own kinetic & sound energy to
produce counter vibrations, which effectively cancels out each other in the
muffler. With proper tuning ( lotsa work here ), manufacturers can make 5
litre monster V12 engines purr softer than the average cat ( well, almost ).
Now back to trumpets. I think of the mouthpiece as the resonator, and the
rest of the instrument as the muffler. We produce disgusting sounding
vibrations with our lips, the space in the mouthpiece cup acts as a
resonator, the entire instrument then resonates according to the pitch we
are playing. Changing the length of the tubing changes the pitch center of
the instrument ie. The natural frequency of which the air volume vibrates.
Then, the mouthpiece material, tubing taper and bell itself act as a muffler
(more like a filter), cancelling out certain frequencies depending on
design. Different instrument designs give different final "exhaust tones"
from the trumpet.
Eg,
Lightweights(Schilkes) = F1 exhaust
Heavyweights(Monette)=Rolls Royce
Bass Trombone = Honda Ricer
Any comments?
Rick Busarow
> litre monster V12 engines purr softer than the average cat ( well,
almost ).
ummm... When idling.
Since you mentioned cats, I'll leave out classic cars. That said, the only
cars with 12-cylinder engines are various Lamborghinis, various Ferarris,
Aston Martins, probably some heavily modified Vipers and Lotuses, and then a
bunch of custom-made racers and toys for obscenely rich people. These cars
rev up very fast, and it's very easy to melt your tires. That's why you
either start your manual in second, or you pay extra so your automatic can
have that little button that lets you start in second. (BTW, why would
someone buy a sportscar/musclecar with an automatic transmission?)
Take the Diablo... The 6.0L has an extremely good intake system. It
creates a veritable vacuum around the entire front end. It's also so loud,
that no one can even tell what the engine sounds like, until it's running at
about 6k rpm, at which point it sounds like a jet engine. And it only gets
louder and higher until it redlines at 12k. (BTW, this car will do 90 mph
in first gear, although I wouldn't suggest it. I've seen it, and smelled
it.)
A 5.0L is more like an 8 or 10 cyl. Mustang Cobras, Jags, Trans Ams,
Vettes, Z8's... These cars are made to sound loud (and fast), so... Okay,
now I'm going to interject... All of these big engines, and they get killed
by 6-cylinders. Porsche 911 Turbos are turbocharged 3.6L inline 6-cyls with
415 hp at 6k rpm. They weigh half as much as all of those musclecars, get
twice the gas mileage, handle just as well to much better, accelerate
faster, and sound better. Absurdly, they also have more torque and
horsepower than all but the Ferraris and Lamborghinis.
Even more absurdly, I have a 1994 Mazda Mx-6 LS. It's a 2.5L V6 that
originally had 164 hp and a body of 2700 lbs. I've got headers in there
now, and I'm running at about 200 hp. With this car, I've beaten all kinds
of Mustangs and Eclipses and Corvettes and Firebirds and Dusters and
Camaros... I can't wait until I get a turbocharger and nitrous and a new
intake and a dropped suspension.
I'm not even going to list the attributes of the turbo DSM cars (Lasers,
Talons, and Eclipses, all 2.0L 4-cyls).
> Lightweights(Schilkes) = F1 exhaust
> Heavyweights(Monette)=Rolls Royce
> Bass Trombone = Honda Ricer
Honda what?
Lightweight = Porche Carrera, Geo Metro
Heavyweights = Mustang Cobra
Bass Trombone = Jaguar Vanden Plas Supercharged
Sorry for straying so far away from trumpets... You got me started talking
about my other area of interest.
Rick Busarow
RickB...@prodigy.net
Toshi Clark
"Rick Busarow" <RickB...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Since you mentioned cats, I'll leave out classic cars. That said, the only
> cars with 12-cylinder engines are various Lamborghinis, various Ferarris,
> Aston Martins, probably some heavily modified Vipers and Lotuses, and then a
> bunch of custom-made racers and toys for obscenely rich people.
Whoa. Vipers have 10 cylinders, whether modified or not. Lotuses have really
cramped engine bays (not going on personal experience here, as you might
imagine), and usually have 6 or lately V8 engines. And, as for the "purring V12
engines," you left out the prototypical "smooth-running V12" car: the Jaguar
XJ12. Which is not a performance car by any means, and is not a toy for
obscenely rich people, either, as it can be picked up used quite cheaply.
(Repairing the beast is supposed to be expensive, though.)
> Take the Diablo... [...] it only gets louder and higher until it redlines
> at 12k.
Try more like 8000 rpm, if that. The Honda S2000 has the highest redline out
there, from all I've read, and it is at 8500 rpm.
--
Toshi Clark
Rick Busarow
> Whoa. Vipers have 10 cylinders, whether modified or not.
I said heavily modified. You can drop a 12 in there, if you move stuff
around alot. I'm talking about Tim Taylor-like project hot-rods here.
Lotuses have really
> cramped engine bays (not going on personal experience here, as you might
> imagine), and usually have 6 or lately V8 engines.
Sorry, wasn't sure about the Lotuses.
And, as for the "purring V12
> engines," you left out the prototypical "smooth-running V12" car: the
Jaguar
> XJ12. Which is not a performance car by any means, and is not a toy for
> obscenely rich people, either, as it can be picked up used quite cheaply.
> (Repairing the beast is supposed to be expensive, though.)
I could also find a 1980s Porsche 9xx for anywhere from $15k to $5k. That
doesn't mean that it isn't a toy for rich people, as the things cost the
same as a cheap house new.
Jag sedans do purr nicely, until you rev them up.
> Try more like 8000 rpm, if that.
Umm.... They don't even max out their horsepower (550 in 2000) until 7100
rpm. My neighbor has a millionaire brother, who drives a 1999 VT Roadster.
I haven't gotten to sit in it (or drive it, but I will some day) yet, but he
tells me that it redlines at 12k rpm. Check your sources. Also, I'm
certain that they can do 90 in first gear. I watched one doing some drags
last summer, and he never shifted. He was so loud that I wouldn't doubt the
nearby airfield would have noticed the drop in rpm.
The Honda S2000 has the highest redline out
> there, from all I've read, and it is at 8500 rpm.
I believe the 2nd generation DSMs all redline at 8500. Either 8500 or 8300.
That's a very good engine, but I find it hard to believe that all of those
extremely pricy manufacturers haven't found a way to improve on that at all.
I am certain that 8500 isn't the record.
Rick Busarow
RickB...@prodigy.net
David C. Stephens
clearly demonstrates that shortcoming of our esteemed newsgroup.
He doesn't know shit about the number of cylinders in various cars, power-to
weight-ratios, engine placements, rev limits for spring actuated valves,
etc., etc.
I've not only smelled a Diablo, I driven one, and believe me, it's loud at
idle and at full tilt. That big ass engine is right behind your head.
There's no need for a CD player.
If Rick'd like to bring the title to his MX-6, or better yet any Porsche may
have access to, I'd be happy to run my daily-driver '89 Mustang against him
at any SCCA, Porsche Club or 'Vette Club autocross. He'll need good shoes,
because he'll be walking home. Not only will I beat him by several seconds
per lap, but odds are that 90% of the little old ladies in the club will
beat him. (They work at their driving and know what they're talking about).
Rick, it wouldn't be fair for me to take your car from you. I've been
driving competitively for 35 years and my 'stang ain't exactly stock. Just
don't think you can go spouting off around a group of trumpet players and
get away with any crapola you choose the spew. In any newsgroup on the
Usenet you're likely to run into someone that knows ten times as much as you
do about any given topic. So limit your posts to your knowledge base and
don't ever assume that the readers don't know when you're blowing smoke.
If you still think you know cars, you don't. ;-)
Dave
"Rick Busarow" <RickB...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:998iit$7khi$1...@newssvr06-en0.news.prodigy.com...
nE0^
exhaust is not designed to be quiet.
The diablo is a show off car, you can see and hear and feel one coming down
the road.
In contrast, a Bently can have a 6 litre V12 engine too, but is designed to
be quiet.
Since you like cars, you should know the term rice. Its when kids think that
adding Type-R, Vtec etc stickers, chinese characters, the words turbo, super
gigantic rear spoilers for FWD cars, lowering suspenstion etc will make
their honda Civic go as fast as a Toyota Supra.
Rick Busarow <RickB...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:998iit$7khi$1...@newssvr06-en0.news.prodigy.com...
nE0^
Btw, heavily modified Viper has 12 cylinders???
Who the hell adds cylinders to their cars? You tell me how. The only method
I know of is changing the entire engine block itself, which defeats the
purpose of getting it in the first place. Just go get a Dodge Hennessey
Venom 800TT and a truckload of Z rated rubber.
If thats not enough, get a Blitz tuned Skyline GTR, with 1030hp under the
hood, it will snap your neck if you have enough grip.
Oh yes, forced induction = more hp, but not much more torque. I kinda like
BMW's concept of non-forced induction engines. Take the Mclaren F1 engine
for example. Almost 700hp, and enough torque to beat a 1000+hp Skyline.
Go read up.
Rick Busarow <RickB...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:999fds$1v88$1...@newssvr05-en0.news.prodigy.com...
Rick Busarow
be at 8000 rpm. They're not geared THAT high. Can you imagine what
fifth/sixth (depending on what year) gear would be like? They'd go a lot
faster than the 210-something miles an hour that they boast.
Rick Busarow
that
> adding Type-R, Vtec etc stickers, chinese characters, the words turbo,
super
> gigantic rear spoilers for FWD cars, lowering suspenstion etc will make
> their honda Civic go as fast as a Toyota Supra.
The MX-6 LS and Probe GT were given some crappy parts, like the fuel
injection, intake, clutch, etc. so that the Mustang could maintain it's
status as Ford's top-end car. Basically, everything on the car except the
engine itself is mediocre at best. Therefore, I don't think of my changes
as modifications, but as repairs necessary to bring out the potential of the
engine. The only exceptions would be the turbo, the nitrous, and the
suspension (obviously). The turbo and nitrous are proven to add torque and
horsepower. And since my car is front wheel drive, the suspension will
improve not only my handling, but my pickup as well. When you start, your
car's weight shifts slightly towards the back end. This is fine for AWD and
RWD cars, but it severely hurts the grip of the front tires. As for
spoilers, I have the standard, pretty small spoiler that's on every MX-6,
and I think even that's too big. As for stickers... I took off my
dealership sticker, thinking it was tacky.
Rick Busarow
that I was wrong about the Lotuses, but that's it.
If you would have read my post thoroughly, you would have noticed that I
also said Diablos are extremely loud. Except, the sound you hear when
idling is almost all from fans and belts and stuff.
I've listened to tons of people talk mad smack to me about how they'd kill
my car, or how I'd need a friend to drive me home, or how I'd need a bus
pass. Most of them don't even have the car they're talking up. It belongs
to a cousin, or a friend, or a neighbor. And those that do, I've always
beaten. Thing is, all of these people talk to me with the knowledge that
I'm fully capable of living up to my end of it. You have the privilage of
hiding behind your computer. I live in Racine, Wisconsin. If you want to
race me, contact me and I'll give you my address. (Yes, I know this won't
happen)
Go to www.overboost.com and search for Probe GT. There should be six links
to a series of articles about second generation Probe GTs, which are the
same as my car. Read up.
And don't assume too much about the personalities of the people posting
here. I was rather offended by your post. This is supposed to be a
friendly forum, and I was being friendly. Be careful as to what inclination
you read into my words.
Rick Busarow
I have been. A lot. I'll explain exactly what I was thinking about the
Viper thing, since it's obviously confusing some people... Do you watch
Home Improvement? You know the various cars that Tim has had sitting in his
garage, gradually custom-making his dream car(s)? Perhaps I was applying
the name Viper too loosely. The car I pictured had a Viper body and seats
and stuff and that's about it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Forced induction... What else could make a 3.5L 6-cyl beat a 6.0L 12-cyl?
Motor Trend had a lot of fun about six months ago when they put the Turbo
911 against a bunch of 8-cyls, 10-cyls, and 12-cyls.
David C. Stephens
I'll run you at a sanctioned SCCA autocross event midway between Dallas and
cheese city Wisconsin. You drive your MX6 and I'll drive my Mustang. I don't
want or need your address. We'll be meeting half way. I'll even provide the
numbers for your car and you can borrow one of my helmets.
I know all about MX6s and Probes. They're fine cars.
You should be offended by my post. You continue to spout as if you know what
you're speaking of. It's obvious from your automobile posts that you're a
neophyte in that regard. You should keep your mouth shut until you get a
little more knowledge.
I'll be looking at the maps trying to find a decent halfway spot to have the
Mustang/Mazda showdown. BTW, I've owned five Mazdas in my past, mostly
rotaries.
Best regards,
Dave
"Rick Busarow" <RickB...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:99bfq6$78jq$1...@newssvr06-en0.news.prodigy.com...
Rick Busarow
"David C. Stephens" <dcs...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:%xfu6.202$7b.1...@nnrp2.sbc.net...
> Are you saying that you want to run for titles?
I have a feeling you'd back out, but sure.
> I'll run you at a sanctioned SCCA autocross event midway between Dallas
and
> cheese city Wisconsin.
I haven't seen a live cow in a few years. Racine is a city of about 150k
people, just south of Milwaukee. It would be more accurate to call it
Kringle City (we're famous for our kringle) or, failing that, Beer City.
You drive your MX6 and I'll drive my Mustang. I don't
> want or need your address. We'll be meeting half way. I'll even provide
the
> numbers for your car and you can borrow one of my helmets.
I've got nothing to prove to you and I have no interest in racing yet
another Mustang. I have a very busy schedule, so if you want to lose your
car to me, you've gotta come here.
> I know all about MX6s and Probes. They're fine cars.
All about em, eh? Tell me. Show me your expertise, please.
> You should be offended by my post. You continue to spout as if you know
what
> you're speaking of. It's obvious from your automobile posts that you're a
> neophyte in that regard. You should keep your mouth shut until you get a
> little more knowledge.
Just what makes this so obvious? Please, show me my faults, so that I can
correct them and become a pompous jackass like you.
>BTW, I've owned five Mazdas in my past, mostly
> rotaries.
RX-7's are not your typical Mazda. They hardly make you an expert. And
depending on the year, that car may not be impressive at all. The 1.9Ls
wouldn't be much of a match for your Mustang, much less my MX-6. BTW, what
model was your car originally? GT, LX 5.0L, or LX? I'm just curious,
because if you actually go through with this, and your car is a LX 5.0L,
then I can give your 02 sensors to a buddy of mine. I'm willing to bet
you've got a LX though, so I guess it doesn't matter...
S.Hager
Spencer Hager writes:
My money is on you David! I'm into cars pretty heavy even though it has been a
several years since I've built one myself - I am presently working on a
pro-street '66 Chevy II SS project car that has been taken down to the frame &
is now tube framed with a Ford 9" rear end w/links & a 400HP/300LB 383 Chevy
small block hooked up to a 6 speed manual etc. with my little brother. I can
smell BS a mile away when it comes to bench racers & you are no bench racer
that is for sure! Like you said the race will never happen but it has been fun
reading this thread.
Spencer
Greg Evans
avoid an ego-filled flame war? :-)
I think it's time for you two to take this to private email, and I suspect
others will agree with me. The original post had an interesting point, but
this showdown has nothing to do with trumpets.
Sorry for being a netcop, but *geez*, guys!
David C. Stephens
>
> "David C. Stephens" <dcs...@swbell.net> wrote in message
> news:%xfu6.202$7b.1...@nnrp2.sbc.net...
> > Are you saying that you want to run for titles?
>
> I have a feeling you'd back out, but sure.
>
> > I'll run you at a sanctioned SCCA autocross event midway between Dallas
> and
> > cheese city Wisconsin.
>
> I haven't seen a live cow in a few years. Racine is a city of about 150k
> people, just south of Milwaukee. It would be more accurate to call it
> Kringle City (we're famous for our kringle) or, failing that, Beer City.
>
> You drive your MX6 and I'll drive my Mustang. I don't
> > want or need your address. We'll be meeting half way. I'll even provide
> the
> > numbers for your car and you can borrow one of my helmets.
>
> I've got nothing to prove to you and I have no interest in racing yet
> another Mustang. I have a very busy schedule, so if you want to lose your
> car to me, you've gotta come here.
What's the matter, momma won't let you leave town?
>
> > I know all about MX6s and Probes. They're fine cars.
>
> All about em, eh? Tell me. Show me your expertise, please.
I know this model from racing against it. Saying they're fine cars is not
proclaiming myself an expert. I've observed that they're well balanced and
the GT has good power. A former SCCA national champion raced a GT around
here for a year, when the Probe GT first came out. He gave us all fits, he
always does.
>
> > You should be offended by my post. You continue to spout as if you know
> what
> > you're speaking of. It's obvious from your automobile posts that you're
a
> > neophyte in that regard. You should keep your mouth shut until you get a
> > little more knowledge.
>
> Just what makes this so obvious? Please, show me my faults, so that I can
> correct them and become a pompous jackass like you.
They're too numerous to list. Anytime you come into a room and start blowing
smoke, posing and talking jive, expect to have your bluff called. You were
disrespectful of everyone in the group with your falsetto attempts to show
'expertise'.
>
> >BTW, I've owned five Mazdas in my past, mostly
> > rotaries.
>
> RX-7's are not your typical Mazda. They hardly make you an expert. And
> depending on the year, that car may not be impressive at all. The 1.9Ls
> wouldn't be much of a match for your Mustang, much less my MX-6.
Once again, I never claimed expertise. Owning an RX-2, RX-3, RX-4, RX-7 and
a 626 merely demonstrates that I'm familiar with the line. I do know how a
rotary engine works and, unfortunately, I've seen the insides of one. The
fact that I raced two Mazdas regularly in sactioned events elevates my
knowledge level to knowing their relative performance characteristics
compared to other cars in their classes. Along with 911s, Mustangs and
Camaros, the RX7 is one of the most raced models of all time. Your claim
that any year of any RX model "may not be impressive at all", once again,
demonstrates your ignorance.
My wife didn't want to race her 1.9L 626. Still, in it's time, the 1979 626
was 'impressive' for its class.
BTW, what
> model was your car originally? GT, LX 5.0L, or LX? I'm just curious,
> because if you actually go through with this, and your car is a LX 5.0L,
> then I can give your 02 sensors to a buddy of mine. I'm willing to bet
> you've got a LX though, so I guess it doesn't matter...
5.0 LX originally and still is. Tell me, what's wrong with the 5.0 LX in
your 'humble' opinion? (It's got its faults, but I need an expert opinion).
Oh, your buddy's sensors would make my car illegal in the class I run, but
thanks for the offer. The headers and induction work more than offset the
inefficiencies of the stock ECM.
BTW, you obviously have a genuine interest in performance cars and driving.
I think that you'd likely enjoy an SCCA autocross event. Milwaukee is bound
to have an SCCA chapter. Go observe an event and ask about other clubs
holding similar events, then start racing. It doesn't have to be expensive
and it's not hard at all on the car, if you drive properly. The strain on
the drive-train is much lower than drag racing. Cars are divided by class
and there are usually Novice trophies for newbies.
I think it's great fun and you'll meet a bunch of like-minded enthusiasts.
Just don't go spouting off about 12 banger Vipers, 12k Diablos, six
cylinders 'killing' eight cylinders and other stuff that'll demonstrate your
ignorance. If you do, you'll be insulting people face-to-face. With a little
diligence and experience, one day you may actually know what you're talking
about.
Ciao,
Dave
Kirk Reeves
these "Toys" by trumpet playing. I read comic books and
came across a book called "Gunsmith Cats" where the hero
drive a '68 mustang cobra. I immediately decided that was
the car for me so ran out and see how much one would cost.
I got big time sticker shock!
Yet here you are bragging about cars I suspected you have to
be very comfortable to be able to afford. ANd the fact
there seems to be quite a few who are knowledgeable seem to
imply somebody made some money somewhere. so please clue me
in.
Steven J. Ross
A lg pizza can feed a family of four.
Best Wishes, Steve Ross
"Kirk Reeves" <workin...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:3ABA826A...@qwest.net...
Rick Busarow
in the world. After the headers, new exhaust, rims, tires, and air
freshener I've sunk about $10,000 into it. I've got a few thousand dollars
aimed at a turbocharger, suspension, clutch, nitrous, intake, and injection.
After that I'll have spent less money on my car than I would have on a Neon
or a Sunfire.
I paid for it with my job as a server at a five-star restaurant. In a seven
hour night I can make $600 to $700 in tips, assuming we're busy enough. I
do this three nights a week, and every Friday night my combo comes around 9
oclock (when it slows down a bit) and we play until close.
Rick Busarow
I'm a busy guy.
> I know this model from racing against it. Saying they're fine cars is not
> proclaiming myself an expert.
Saying that you "know all about" something does normally imply that you're
an expert.
> > Just what makes this so obvious? Please, show me my faults, so that I
can
> > correct them and become a pompous jackass like you.
>
> They're too numerous to list. Anytime you come into a room and start
blowing
> smoke, posing and talking jive, expect to have your bluff called.
I'm calling *your* bluff right now. Tell me my faults.
> > >BTW, I've owned five Mazdas in my past, mostly
> > > rotaries.
> >
> > RX-7's are not your typical Mazda. They hardly make you an expert. And
> > depending on the year, that car may not be impressive at all. The
1.9Ls
> > wouldn't be much of a match for your Mustang, much less my MX-6.
>
> Along with 911s, Mustangs and
> Camaros, the RX7 is one of the most raced models of all time. Your claim
> that any year of any RX model "may not be impressive at all", once again,
> demonstrates your ignorance.
1991, for example. Your choice of 160 hp or 200 hp in a car weighing 3,000
lbs. That's not exactly slow (the 200 hp) but there's almost nothing you
can do to improve them. My sister's fiance has one, and I've driven it
several times. The main thing that bugs me is that I feel they're geared
MUCH too high.
> BTW, what
> > model was your car originally? GT, LX 5.0L, or LX? I'm just curious,
> > because if you actually go through with this, and your car is a LX 5.0L,
> > then I can give your 02 sensors to a buddy of mine. I'm willing to bet
> > you've got a LX though, so I guess it doesn't matter...
>
> 5.0 LX originally and still is. Tell me, what's wrong with the 5.0 LX in
> your 'humble' opinion? (It's got its faults, but I need an expert
opinion).
I meant by "originally" is that you said you've modified it. I must not be
purely 5.0 LX, but whatever...
The ride height is too high. There's too much wind noise at high speeds.
The gear ratios are all wrong. The shifter is so long I felt like I was
driving a truck. The main thing is simply that they're Mustangs. I've got
a thing against just about every car tons of cylinders and hardly any
valves. Compared to what Porsche has managed to do with a little 3.5L
6-cyl, it just baffles me that anyone would unecessarily put all of that
mass into precious engine bay space. Also, I don't like convertibles.
> Oh, your buddy's sensors would make my car illegal in the class I run, but
> thanks for the offer. The headers and induction work more than offset the
> inefficiencies of the stock ECM.
Ummm... His sensors don't work. That's why he needs new ones.
> BTW, you obviously have a genuine interest in performance cars and
driving.
> I think that you'd likely enjoy an SCCA autocross event. Milwaukee is
bound
> to have an SCCA chapter. Go observe an event and ask about other clubs
> holding similar events, then start racing. It doesn't have to be expensive
> and it's not hard at all on the car, if you drive properly. The strain on
> the drive-train is much lower than drag racing. Cars are divided by class
> and there are usually Novice trophies for newbies.
I've been planning on looking into that once the weather improves.
Wisconsin weather sucks from early October through, well... late September.
Okay, well actually until the middle of April. It's hard to race on snow.
> I think it's great fun and you'll meet a bunch of like-minded enthusiasts.
> Just don't go spouting off about 12 banger Vipers, 12k Diablos, six
> cylinders 'killing' eight cylinders and other stuff that'll demonstrate
your
> ignorance. If you do, you'll be insulting people face-to-face. With a
little
> diligence and experience, one day you may actually know what you're
talking
> about.
Who's the one calling who not retentive? Re-read everything I've written.
David C. Stephens
Pirelli tires. All-in cost totaled around $2000.
My current 5.0 Mustang was $10,300 new in 1988. Over the years I've spent
another $4000 to $5000 on suspension, Auburn limited slip, exhaust, gearing
and such. Many of the guys and gals that I race against have similar budgets
for their cars. It's a matter of car selection and a little knowledge about
which ones are affordable and fun to drive.
Used Mustangs and Camaros are popular because they're readily available and
there's a very wide choice of after-market parts for performance
enhancement.
Old RX-7s are very inexpensive and commonly autocrossed. Several versions of
Hondas, Nissans and Mazdas are popular, with the racers using them both as
daily drivers and weekend racers.
Of course, you can spend cubic bucks on cars if you like. A number of
competitors trailer in "race only" street cars that are prepared to the inth
degree. I have a friend that regularly spent $20000+ per racing season on
his car.
There are quite a few auto and sports car clubs. The most widely available
is probably Sports Car Club of America, but there are also usually local
clubs in most good sized metro areas. Marques, like Corvette, BMW, Porsche
and others have clubs.
If you're into cars, then you'll probably enjoy one of these clubs on some
level. You don't have a lot of money to participate, but you can spend a lot
of money if you want.
Dave
"Kirk Reeves" <workin...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:3ABA826A...@qwest.net...
David C. Stephens
> > What's the matter, momma won't let you leave town?
>
> I'm a busy guy.
Cluck, cluck...
> > > Just what makes this so obvious? Please, show me my faults, so that I
> can
> > > correct them and become a pompous jackass like you.
> >
> > They're too numerous to list. Anytime you come into a room and start
> blowing
> > smoke, posing and talking jive, expect to have your bluff called.
>
> I'm calling *your* bluff right now. Tell me my faults.
A small sample will suffice. You spoke of V12 Vipers, 12K redlines on
Diablos, 10 cyl. Mustang Cobras, Jags, Trans Ams,
Vettes, Z8's... , Porsche Turbos that weigh half as much as muscle cars,
etc. All of those statements are wrong.
No bluff there, but I should probably seek forgiveness. It's not really up
to me to point out other's errors and at the very least I could spend a lot
more effort in making it less painful for the recipient. You riled me and I
tried to "put you in your place" and I shouldn't have. Please accept my
apology.
>
> > > >BTW, I've owned five Mazdas in my past, mostly
> > > > rotaries.
> > >
> > > RX-7's are not your typical Mazda. They hardly make you an expert.
And
> > > depending on the year, that car may not be impressive at all. The
> 1.9Ls
> > > wouldn't be much of a match for your Mustang, much less my MX-6.
> >
> > Along with 911s, Mustangs and
> > Camaros, the RX7 is one of the most raced models of all time. Your claim
> > that any year of any RX model "may not be impressive at all", once
again,
> > demonstrates your ignorance.
>
> 1991, for example. Your choice of 160 hp or 200 hp in a car weighing
3,000
> lbs. That's not exactly slow (the 200 hp) but there's almost nothing you
> can do to improve them. My sister's fiance has one, and I've driven it
> several times. The main thing that bugs me is that I feel they're geared
> MUCH too high.
You're right about the '91, by then, the original RX-7 was indeed getting
bloated with upolstry and extra weight. The gearing is easy to fix, but the
earlier and later cars were better, performance wise, than those early
nineties RX-7. Still, they came loaded with potential. They're very easy to
hotrod.
>
> > BTW, what
> > > model was your car originally? GT, LX 5.0L, or LX? I'm just curious,
> > > because if you actually go through with this, and your car is a LX
5.0L,
> > > then I can give your 02 sensors to a buddy of mine. I'm willing to
bet
> > > you've got a LX though, so I guess it doesn't matter...
> >
> > 5.0 LX originally and still is. Tell me, what's wrong with the 5.0 LX in
> > your 'humble' opinion? (It's got its faults, but I need an expert
> opinion).
>
> I meant by "originally" is that you said you've modified it. I must not
be
> purely 5.0 LX, but whatever...
>
> The ride height is too high. There's too much wind noise at high speeds.
> The gear ratios are all wrong. The shifter is so long I felt like I was
> driving a truck. The main thing is simply that they're Mustangs. I've
got
> a thing against just about every car tons of cylinders and hardly any
> valves. Compared to what Porsche has managed to do with a little 3.5L
> 6-cyl, it just baffles me that anyone would unecessarily put all of that
> mass into precious engine bay space. Also, I don't like convertibles.
Well, we must agree about ride height and gear ratios, because I've changed
both of those in my car. The wind noise at 150 in my Mustang is about the
same as a Porsche Carrera at the same speed, so you lost me there. Maybe
you're talking about a convertible Mustang. The shifter falls 'readily to
hand' in my car.
I used to like small engines, but I've gotten addicted to torque. The only
way to get torque without cubic inches is with a supercharger or a turbo. I
don't like what those devices do to head gaskets. Still, I'd love to have a
Porsche Turbo, but it's not fair to compare a $100,000+ car to a $10000 car
and diss the $10000 car because it doesn't have titanium parts and other
megabuck parts.
I never called you 'retentive'. Retentive people try to get their fact
right, not the opposite. Anyway, you'll probably enjoy autocrossing and
it'll be a good way to learn the limits of your car. (Every car has limits,
which you only really know when you've exceeded them. It's best to do that
in a safe, controlled environment with no trees, bridge abutments or other
motorists to hit.)
Ciao,
Dave
Rick Busarow
> to me to point out other's errors and at the very least I could spend a
lot
> more effort in making it less painful for the recipient. You riled me and
I
> tried to "put you in your place" and I shouldn't have. Please accept my
> apology.
> I'm a really forgiving guy. It's all good. Sorry for exaggerating some
stuff.
> You're right about the '91, by then, the original RX-7 was indeed getting
> bloated with upolstry and extra weight. The gearing is easy to fix, but
the
> earlier and later cars were better, performance wise, than those early
> nineties RX-7. Still, they came loaded with potential. They're very easy
to
> hotrod.
I know pretty much nothing about old cars, save a few lines. The only
RX-7's I know about are from the last two generations.
> Well, we must agree about ride height and gear ratios, because I've
changed
> both of those in my car. The wind noise at 150 in my Mustang is about the
> same as a Porsche Carrera at the same speed, so you lost me there. Maybe
> you're talking about a convertible Mustang. The shifter falls 'readily to
> hand' in my car.
For some reason, I was under the impression that all LXs were convertibles,
and that the hatchbacks (best insurance scam ever thought of, except for
possibly back seats) had some other little letter thing going on...
The shifter's at a nice height, but it's just too long. The distance you
have to move it is just too much. The day after I bought my car I put a
short-throw in there.
> I used to like small engines, but I've gotten addicted to torque. The only
> way to get torque without cubic inches is with a supercharger or a turbo.
I
> don't like what those devices do to head gaskets. Still, I'd love to have
a
> Porsche Turbo, but it's not fair to compare a $100,000+ car to a $10000
car
> and diss the $10000 car because it doesn't have titanium parts and other
> megabuck parts.
My friend's got a 2nd generation Eclipse GSX. That thing actually HURTS
when you floor it.
I wouldn't expect your car to compare to a 911. I was talking about new
Cobras and Firehawk Trans Ams and stuff like that. They're coming pretty
close price-wise, and a lot of their owners claim that they're in the same
league as the 911.
> I never called you 'retentive'. Retentive people try to get their fact
> right, not the opposite. Anyway, you'll probably enjoy autocrossing and
> it'll be a good way to learn the limits of your car. (Every car has
limits,
> which you only really know when you've exceeded them. It's best to do that
> in a safe, controlled environment with no trees, bridge abutments or other
> motorists to hit.)
I got an email from you saying that my retention level was low, or something
like that. I plan on autocrossing after I've got everything done to my car.
Kevin Maier
First and foremost, adding headers to your Mazda will not add 36hp, period! If
you get an additional 10% (and this assumes you un-corked the rest of the
exhaust), consider it a blessing as the Mazda motor is already near it's limit
on efficiency. Attempting to build that motor to 200bhp would not be cost
effective. As for beating all kinds of Mustangs, Vettes, etc., it's clear you're
the only one who was racing. Furthermore, adding either a turbo OR Nitrous on a
Mazda engine will quickly destroy it. Adding both and we'll see you listed in
the next updates for the Darwin awards. That said, you should stop breathing the
exhaust and you may regain your senses.
KM
Rick Busarow wrote:
snip..........
Rick Busarow
go to www.overboost.com and search for "probe gt". That's the same model
car. Read the six articles that this guy wrote about what he did to his
probe.
David C. Stephens
Interesting reading...
Overboost.com, LLC provides information for general information purposes
only.
CAR AND ENGINE MODIFICATIONS COULD CAUSE INJURY AND DEATH. USE THIS WEBSITE,
INCLUDING THE
MESSAGE BOARDS AND "SCOTT'S GARAGE," AT YOUR OWN RISK.
Rick Busarow
WEBSITE,
> INCLUDING THE
> MESSAGE BOARDS AND "SCOTT'S GARAGE," AT YOUR OWN RISK.
That can be said about everything you do to a car. It's just your typical
disclaimer.
Giles D.
way-off topic subject. Can you take it to another newsgroup???
nE0^ wrote:
> I'm been thinking about this, and would like to share my ideas with you
> guys.
>
> I like both trumpets and cars, and while reading about car exhaust systems,
> naturally trumpet playing came into my mind.
>
> In case anyone doesn't know, a car exhaust is not just a straight tube from
> the engine to the rear. You will get one hell of a noisy car. The exhaust
> first passes through a catalytic converter, then a resonater chamber and
> finally, the muffler.
>
> The resonater makes use of the exhaust gas's own kinetic & sound energy to
> produce counter vibrations, which effectively cancels out each other in the
> muffler. With proper tuning ( lotsa work here ), manufacturers can make 5
> litre monster V12 engines purr softer than the average cat ( well, almost ).
>
> Now back to trumpets. I think of the mouthpiece as the resonator, and the
> rest of the instrument as the muffler. We produce disgusting sounding
> vibrations with our lips, the space in the mouthpiece cup acts as a
> resonator, the entire instrument then resonates according to the pitch we
> are playing. Changing the length of the tubing changes the pitch center of
> the instrument ie. The natural frequency of which the air volume vibrates.
>
> Then, the mouthpiece material, tubing taper and bell itself act as a muffler
> (more like a filter), cancelling out certain frequencies depending on
> design. Different instrument designs give different final "exhaust tones"
> from the trumpet.
>
> Eg,
> Lightweights(Schilkes) = F1 exhaust
> Heavyweights(Monette)=Rolls Royce
> Bass Trombone = Honda Ricer
>
> Any comments?
--
Dr. Giles Dillingham
Chief Scientist
Brighton Technologies Group, Inc.
4125 Dane Avenue
Cincinnati, OH 45223
(513) 591-3100
http://www.brightontechnologies.com/
David C. Stephens
;-)
Dave
"Giles D." <gdill...@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:3ABB5B6F...@fuse.net...
BRIAN D MOON
Kevin Maier
difference? Probably depth-perception.
KM
Greg Evans
> > > I paid for it with my job as a server at a five-star restaurant. In a
> > > seven hour night I can make $600 to $700 in tips
> >
> > I always knew that waiters were overpaid.
>
> difference? Probably depth-perception.
That, and the danger of burning one's hands on hot dinnerware....
William Graham
THE DUBBA C PREMATURELY COULD CAUSE INJURY AND DEATH. -
USE THIS WEBSITE, INCLUDING THE MESSAGE BOARDS AND VARIOUS
METHODS AT YOUR OWN RISK.news:99fjkq$6qf4$1...@newssvr06-en0.news.prodigy.com...
Rick Busarow
> I never called you 'retentive'. Retentive people try to get their fact
> right, not the opposite. Anyway, you'll probably enjoy autocrossing and
> it'll be a good way to learn the limits of your car. (Every car has
limits,
> which you only really know when you've exceeded them. It's best to do that
> in a safe, controlled environment with no trees, bridge abutments or other
> motorists to hit.)
Today, I was walking out to my car for lunch and a guy I used to know comes
up in his 94 Integra GS-R Coupe. After talking a little bit of smack I
agreed to race him, and we drove across town to a construction site that had
been left for the winter. There's about a half-mile of wide, beautifully
paved road going to absolutely nowhere, and no one is ever around. We
dragged, and after a little over a quarter of a mile, when I was a couple of
car lengths ahead of him doing about 115 mph, a van suddenly turned onto the
street. I was fine, since I was on the right side, but Chris (the other
guy) had to slam on his brakes in order to get behind me. Well, he did it
too hard, and he locked up. There was a 300 foot trail of *solid* black
rubber left behind him, and enough smoke to make it impossible to see to the
other side of the road. His front tires were completely flattened, and I
could see innertube on the right one.
Luckily for him, he got his tires at Sears, which offers a life-time
warranty for $8.50. Otherwise, he would have been out of a few hundred
dollars.
So yeah, I think I'm gonna look into autocrossing for sure.
Rick Busarow
> dragged, and after a little over a quarter of a mile, when I was a couple
of
> car lengths ahead of him doing about 115 mph, a van suddenly turned onto
the
> street. I was fine, since I was on the right side, but Chris (the other
> guy) had to slam on his brakes in order to get behind me.
Okay, I broke my word, but only to ammend what I just wrote... I was
braking, and the distance between us was shrinking. That's why Chris had to
slam on his brakes.
Okay, NOW I'm done.
Kevin Maier
decades, or in your case, LONG before you were even born. Needless to say, you
wouldn't be able to see an innertube regardless. You are so clueless it's
absolutely astounding. I think YOU need to start reading your own ridiculous
posts just to realize how stupid (there... I said it, you're stupid) you
actually look. I can only hope your parents cancel your internet access, after
they take your keys away.
KM
Rick Busarow
> decades, or in your case, LONG before you were even born. Needless to say,
you
> wouldn't be able to see an innertube regardless.
Okay, nevermind. I will post more, since Kevin has suddenly lost the tact
he displayed when emailing me privately. I've never said I know a THING
about tires. I saw a layer of rubber different than what I saw on the rest
of the tire, and it was a good few 8ths of an inch past where the tread
stopped. I assumed that it was innertube. I guess not. Whatever. It
doesn't matter.
> I can only hope your parents cancel your internet access, after
> they take your keys away.
I've got my own place and my own prodigy account, thank you. And my car is
in my name, as I paid for it by myself.
Oh, and ignorance and stupidity are two completely different things.
Kevin Maier
You've been claiming to know plenty about cars during this long and somewhat
painful thread. Last I checked, tires are part of a car, go figure. Based on
your illustrious racing career, I figured you have gone through plenty of tires
so you should be somewhat familiar with them. I'll apologize for getting
frustrated and slaming you. I've got 3 teenagers living at home and you are
considerably more irritating than the 3 combined. As for ignorance and
stupidity, you're right.... they are different. In your case, ignorance is what
you don't know about tires and cars. Stupidity is your apparent lack of
willingness to learn about them.
As for having your own place, your own car and your own internet account,
that's great (really). Now, hopefully we can get back trumpets.... do you play?
Regards and apologies to the group, KM
Rick Busarow
> You've been claiming to know plenty about cars during this long and
somewhat
> painful thread. Last I checked, tires are part of a car, go figure. Based
on
> your illustrious racing career, I figured you have gone through plenty of
tires
> so you should be somewhat familiar with them.
I've always concentrated much more on what makes the car go than what it
goes on. I do know some things about sizes and sizes as opposed to weight
and treads, but I've never seen any need to learn about he insides of them.
I've got 3 teenagers living at home and you are
> considerably more irritating than the 3 combined.
Hmmm... It's not very difficult to understand why you would prefer your
kids over some punk kid over the internet who has the same interests as you
but opposing viewpoints. Not very long ago I had two adults living with me,
and you are considerably more irritating than both of them combined. Go
figure.
> Stupidity is your apparent lack of
> willingness to learn about them.
Actually, that would be called "arrogance." I know, it's hard to imagine
that a car buff/trumpet player would be arrogant, but... A good example of
stupidity would be your idea that I'm unwilling to learn, despite my obvious
second-hand *alleged* knowledge of various cars. That does demonstrate that
I read and talk to people about cars, so I must wish to learn.
> As for having your own place, your own car and your own internet account,
> that's great (really). Now, hopefully we can get back trumpets.... do you
play?
Yeah, I play. At the moment, I'm really heavily influenced by Miles and
Mike Plog (pretty different styles, so it's pretty interesting to listen to
me at times).
nE0^
the original thread?
moderators?
Giles D. <gdill...@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:3ABB5B6F...@fuse.net...
> Guys, This has gotten ridiculous. WAY too much bandwidth being spent on a
> way-off topic subject. Can you take it to another newsgroup???
>
David C. Stephens
Call the trumpet police!
Dave
"nE0^" <som...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:99qh1o$soc$1...@newsie.singa.pore.net...
William Graham
like about this list. - I can't selectively delete messages
from it. For some reason, the "delete" icon on my pallet is
replaced by one that says "stop", and the only thing I can
do is delete the whole list, which I have to do from time to
time. In my regular e-mail list, I can delete individual
messages, which is much more convenient for eliminating the
clutter of already read messages from the list.
David C. Stephens
Outlook Express I delete one at a time, all at once, or by thread. You can
also block based on the subject or the sender, among other filters.
Dave
"William Graham" <we...@home.com> wrote in message
news:ls8w6.632055$U46.19...@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com...
William Graham
just one message with rec.music.makers.trumpet. Now with my
regular inbox, it's no problem.
David C. Stephens <dcs...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:IKdw6.207$vb4.1...@nnrp2.sbc.net...
David C. Stephens
Edit, but you probably know that. Sorry for the confusion.
Dave
"William Graham" <we...@home.com> wrote in message
news:a5gw6.633210$U46.19...@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com...