tooter's manifold adventure...

[cali yaris]

they all went down the same well worn path by following exactly the same basic cookie cutter pattern.

Yes - because it works and makes power. Additional power was our non-negotiable goal in order to market the product, and we were very careful to do the math first on runner length.
The math tells you what to do.

Your goal is simply to "find out", and you are on your second round (or more) of that process. It's fun to follow!

[tooter]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

Yes - because it works and makes power.

Of course, Garm. It's not Golden Eagle's aim to explore or to innovate, but to make their product by utilizing a preexisting design.

That's the difference between what's on TV... and what else is on TV.

(by the way, you still haven't produced that 7 hp dyno graph )

[cali yaris]

It's not Golden Eagle's aim to explore or to innovate, but to make their product by utilizing a preexisting design.

Correct. My design. From drawings produced by collaborating with an engineer. I have the files, which predate my "competitor's" claims by well over a year.

[tooter]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

Correct. My design. From drawings produced by collaborating with an engineer. I have the files, which predate my "competitor's" claims by well over a year.

What went on with dates and competitors is something else entirely. That is only between you and others, and has absolutely nothing to do with me. I was only referring to the basic similarity of the Golden Eagle, Weapon R, and Richard Holdener manifolds because they all follow the same accepted well-travelled parameters of intake manifold design.

I'm more interested in what else is outside of those parameters.

[cali yaris]

^ We all are -- and like I said, it's fun to watch you experiment. So far, you're proving that the "same accepted well-travelled patterns" are such for a reason; they get measurable results.

(The WeaponR did not by the way, as far as I've been able to tell).

Maybe ET will show us something new.

[tooter]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

So far, you're proving that the "same accepted well-travelled patterns" are such for a reason; they get measurable results.

Since you mentioned measurable results, what happened to that 7hp dyno graph, Garm?

[cali yaris]

^ I explained that. Clearly. Remember? The fact that you keep bringing it up is telling, in my opinion.

A peak of 7hp is not as impressive (and shouldn't be) than a dyno pull that shows a smaller peak, but useful power gains through a larger range.

The Weapon R manifold, as tested on an xB, lost power. Using the phrase "cookie cutter" is an unfair and specious comparison to a product that got a different (and much better) result, in an attempt to lump them together. One clearly was just made to fit the motor, and the other was created from calculations and performance design considerations. The results speak for themselves.

Maybe we can just leave it there, so we can get back to watching your experiments, which I think are cool -- it is your thread, after all.

[tooter]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

^ I explained that. Clearly. Remember?

Yes. This is what you said:

We did several pulls, this one showed the best distribution of power gains, but not the greatest power gains.

Then I said why not post the chart showing everyone that 7hp gain, and then you said that you wouldn't do it.

It's totally understandable why Golden Eagle would want their product to be presented to the public in the very best light possible. Every marketer does exactly that. So it's perfectly natural not to want to disclose anything that could adversely affect that favorable image. It's clear that other graph might do just that, because if it did not, it would have been posted long ago. So it is obviously in your own best interest (and Golden Eagle's too) to freely choose not to post the graph even if it means leaving a hp claim undocumented.

Everyone weighs in their own balance choices that are of a similar nature as this one... and it is these choices which make life interesting.

[cali yaris]

1. We only kept one dyno chart, the best one in my judgement. I stand by it, and the customer feedback has been excellent in terms of noticeable power gains and ease of installation.

If you don't believe that we got 7hp on one pull, that is significant, tooter; most people that know or buy from me by now trust me to tell the truth. Do you?

2. Golden Eagle is a fabricator. They didn't design, nor do they "market" the product. They had nothing to do with our design or testing, nor do they have a copy of the dyno results. We do that. I am the co-designer, and my company markets the product.

[jetblast]

Alright you two stop kicking sand. :) Garm you get the Tonka dumptruck, and Tooter you get the Tonka bulldozer. Now play nice in the sandbox! Please. Thanks to both of you for your time and efforts, and risks. I think I speak for many in that we all greatly appreciate the cool stuff you guys do. This community is blessed to have you guys around.

Thank You Both!!!!!!!!!

[tooter]

Originally Posted by cali yaris

1. We only kept one dyno chart

That's odd. All of my pulls are stored at the dyno shop. I picked the best ones just like you did and posted the results down to the hundredth of a hp. There is no need for me to claim anything as I'd never impose upon others to give me their trust.

the best one in my judgement. I stand by it

There is no need to stand by what everyone sees for themselves because what is self evident stands on its own merit.

and the customer feedback has been excellent in terms of noticeable power gains...

Of course. You posted a good chart of a good product.

If you don't believe that we got 7hp on one pull, that is significant, tooter; most people that know or buy from me by now trust me to tell the truth. Do you?

I honestly haven't had enough personal interactions with you to know one way or the other. So it's understandable why you're offended at even being questioned. I am hoping that you won't go down that well trodden road of "How dare you accuse me of not being honest." just because of an open question.

My point is that no one ever needs to trust anything I say. Because I believe that no one is entitled to the trust of others, I never expect anyone to trust me. So instead of becoming offended I welcome the opportunity to earn the trust of others.

Golden Eagle is a fabricator. They didn't design, nor do they "market" the product.

Origin Design is my fabricator and I'm the designer, so my name is on my product.

They had nothing to do with our design or testing, nor do they have a copy of the dyno results. We do that. I am the co-designer, and my company markets the product.

Their name is on the product.

If the folks here believe that I'm being unreasonable, this will offer you the opportunity to look good in comparison because I don't mind appearing to be the "bad guy".

[Bluevitz-rs]

[cali yaris]

But... but... I want the bulldozer.

[cali yaris]

I honestly haven't had enough personal interactions with you to know one way or the other.

Thank you for confirming that I have not yet earned your trust, tooter. I hope to change that. You've earned mine.

Golden Eagle gave us the choice of what name to put on the product. It was my decision to put their name on it, as their name is more recognizable. It doesn't mean they designed or tested the product -- which they didn't.

Seems to me it's time to get back to YOUR project in this thread so we can follow along.

[Golddeenoh]

here Garm now play nice.

[cali yaris]

^ Sweet. tooter, you can even have this one...

[tooter]

Thanks, Garm... I use this.

[cali yaris]

And then this...?