Friendly Late Night Debate About Transfer Ports.........

[warts]

If you are receiving "info" behind the scenes, perhaps then it should have been dealt with by PM's?

[Stokie]

the thing is, which many of you on the open forum may not appreciate is that as admin/moderator...we do get such a lot of things going on behind the scenes...and are sometimes subjected to all sorts of comments/advice/warnings etc etc from all sorts of folk and in Darrells case we have in fact been inundated in that respect and as admin etc, so we simply would not be doing our job if we ignored these things...hence our initial concerns about Darrell...and so raising awkward questions etc about the fact of his ban off the FS1e forum.

In my opinion, as a moderator, admin, whatever, who's getting all these warnings you should have shown more respect and discretion and raised your FS1E forum question directly to Darrell away from the public forum. I didn't see anyone else posting publicly about their 'concerns' about Darrell - clearly they're spineless s**t stirrers.
Again, in my opinion, you've made yourself look a c**t by your style of questioning and the forum has been damaged as a result.

[rocho68]

the thing is, which many of you on the open forum may not appreciate is that as admin/moderator...we do get such a lot of things going on behind the scenes...and are sometimes subjected to all sorts of comments/advice/warnings etc etc from all sorts of folk and in Darrells case we have in fact been inundated in that respect and as admin etc, so we simply would not be doing our job if we ignored these things...hence our initial concerns about Darrell...and so raising awkward questions etc about the fact of his ban off the FS1e forum.

In my opinion, as a moderator, admin, whatever, who's getting all these warnings you should have shown more respect and discretion and raised your FS1E forum question directly to Darrell away from the public forum. I didn't see anyone else posting publicly about their 'concerns' about Darrell - clearly they're spineless s**t stirrers.
Again, in my opinion, you've made yourself look a c**t by your style of questioning and the forum has been damaged as a result.

Stokie has summed it up for me ,in future please use pms to air concerns in private , the damage is done and people have been hurt ,let us all learn from this and for god sake lets hope darryl accepts the apoligies and decides to enlightens us with his undoubted talent ,from the support towards him its obvious that his ideas are certainly pushing the boundrys of the scooter tuning world !

[lifes a drag]

well seid Sean ,,,, think were above all that bitching,

lets keep this forum the best scooter forum there is

[Chris CSPE]

Let me get this right,
Are you saying that you had been inundated with these messages from people off this forum?
Or from the fizzy forum?
I've been on the FIzzy forum for a few years and the contribution that Darrell made on there was vast.He'd tested every kit for the fizzy and put all the results on there together with back to back exhaust tests of every pipe available for them. All this info took years to gather and was done in his own time and at his own expense.
The Fizzy forum had ties to a certain "tuner" just like this one has, and it's been no great shock to see his name at the bottom of the page over the last 4 nights but has not contributed to any discussion I know of.
Does this style of vetting procedure apply to everyone Sean or just the selected few (one)
But it's great it was done on behalf of all the forum members and that you had there best intentions at heart.LOL

[coaster]

Ok guys, mistakes have been made, things have been said and explanations and appologies given. CAN WE PLEASE get back to what started out as a VERT interesting thread about transfers.

I'll give the ball another kick ...In all the discussion about transfer port size I see no mention made of any relationship with crankcase volume/compression, is that a factor in calculating the size? :fb:

[Diablo]

I think your right Col. I think though for the benifit of all involved and interested perhaps a line should be drawn under this thread and a new one started thats doesn't veer off topic.
Does that sound agreeable to everyone?

[coaster]

I think your right Col. I think though for the benifit of all involved and interested perhaps a line should be drawn under this thread and a new one started thats doesn't veer off topic.
Does that sound agreeable to everyone?

Gets my vote Al although that would mean loosing site of the original debate about the function of the transfers which to my uneducated mind was very thought provoking (I think that was DT's intention) . I personally can't see the problem in the thread being tidied up and the off topic stuff removed (including this one), it was a storm in a tea cup, we've read it now lets forget it and move on.

colin

[Darrell Taylor]

i agree al. but not to closing the thread off and cleaning it up ,the dyno graphs section has been cleaned up and that graph al put up of the TS1 and the good little write up has gone,joes dyno test of it and ride out review has gone both relevent topics of interest which had no reason to go(can they be recovered?)

just kept on topic from now on
ill start.

was briefly covered here Coaster

the volume of charge held in the transfer duct is less important than the duct shape,
the combined volumes of the duct and case could have positive or negative effects if the volume calculated is too big for your engine design or too small

if you have a 58 stroke 107 rod then bigger transfer ducts would create larger overall crankcase volume and prove useful
but on a 62 stroke 116 rod /large packer the volume may already have been achieved so may not prove useful

i believe on the above example that bigger feeds for the purpose of increased case volume applys and not for othe reasons that its believed that porting/enlarging a duct entry provides a performance benefit by creating an improved venturi

having read the other debate about case volumes and crankcase compression i can see it has already been discussed and good points are raised,only to say that we can drop the compression part of the statement as it only does so for a short period of which its modern useful role is for engine starting.Modern engines have it covered and are within range so changes to case volume have little effect but old engines or/and engines that have grown in cubic capacity will need bringing into range
if a skinny pipe is used it wont matter as much but the fatter the pipe the requirement for correct case volume becomes greater

[coaster]

Thanks Darell, I'm only at the begining of understanding 2 stroke tuning (only read Bell's and Websters books) and done a little port fettling so this is all helping. If I understand it correctly (appolgies if it's already been mentioned) increasing the transfers would increase the crankcase volume to some extent?

colin