Gaz6002 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Well yeah that's what everyone will obviously think and it's very interesting. However my point still stands. Where is the EVIDENCE that says it does or it doesn't work better than a normally fitted fmic? (Pictures/videos of readings/testing etc etc.) Because at the moment the next guy is just repeating the last. I'm not saying that it's down to everyone else to prove it's wrong but if you're going to say "it doesn't work" at least provide evidence, because he's saying it does work. So Its just your word against his It's not, it's physics. Read the thread. It's already been answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 It's not, it's physics. Read the thread. It's already been answered. That's all I wanted to know haha. If it's been answered and the answer proven and you say it has then I will believe you. I was just giving my opinion on how it looks and my thoughts. I only asked because on my phone I would of had to troll through 68 pages of posts and thought it easier to ask someone who actually kept up with the thread as it went along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 If someone said a banana was better at cutting through granite than a diamond blade, would you need proof? Or would common sense and a bit of explanation/understanding prevail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 If someone said a banana was better at cutting through granite than a diamond blade, would you need proof? Or would common sense and a bit of explanation/understanding prevail? No need to be a dick about it. You can't even compare that example. I have no real substantial knowledge of the physics of air flow around cars. It's like me asking you if someone said to you "lifting a weight 5x5 is better for strength than lifting a weight at 3x10" would you need proof or is common sense enough? Just because it's "common sense" for you doesn't mean It will be for someone else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 No need to be a dick about it. You can't even compare that example. I have no real substantial knowledge of the physics of air flow around cars. It's like me asking you if someone said to you "lifting a weight 5x5 is better for strength than lifting a weight at 3x10" would you need proof or is common sense enough? Just because it's "common sense" for you doesn't mean It will be for someone else... That was me being nice. Blow through a straw with your lips pressed against it, then blow through the same straw with your lips separated. Which is going to produce the better airflow through the straw? If you can answer that without a trial or a working model, then you can answer using common sense. If you can't.... then fair enough, your point stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 That was me being nice. Blow through a straw with your lips pressed against it, then blow through the same straw with your lips separated. Which is going to produce the better airflow through the straw? If you can answer that without a trial or a working model, then you can answer using common sense. If you can't.... then fair enough, your point stands. As I said before I don't care as to what the actual answer is. All I read was "its this because I know it is" followed by "no its not because I know it's not". I only asked if one or the other was proven because the original poster seemed adamant it worked very well if not better from his experience but provided no evidence to back it up... At no point did I say it worked better. I'd personally assume it wouldn't work better because of the reasons stated by you and others but I wasn't going to comment because I don't actually know about that subject in enough depth to have any credibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 As I said before I don't care as to what the actual answer is. All I read was "its this because I know it is" followed by "no its not because I know it's not". I only asked if one or the other was proven because the original poster seemed adamant it worked very well if not better from his experience but provided no evidence to back it up... A bit like banana's cutting granite then? There's an obvious correct party, and an obvious incorrect party. Proof is relative to the person seeking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 A bit like banana's cutting granite then? There's an obvious correct party, and an obvious incorrect party. Proof is relative to the person seeking it. How? I go back to my point of 3x10 being better for strength. Common sense for me. With obvious correct and incorrect parties. Buts how are you supposed to know if 5x5 or 3x10 is better when weightlifting, just because I say one thing and someone else says another? Would you rather not have evidence as to which is better for your goal? again, I don't care as to the answer, I just wondered if the OP's comment was proven or disproven by an experienced or professional credible source. You can't deny cold hard evidence of something that's happened/happening/will happen When I asked "has one or the other been proven" someone could have replied "yes, it's in the thread somewhere" and this pointless back and forth between me.and you would have been avoided. Although it's entertained me tonight haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markylee Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 That was me being nice. Blow through a straw with your lips pressed against it, then blow through the same straw with your lips separated. Which is going to produce the better airflow through the straw? If you can answer that without a trial or a working model, then you can answer using common sense. If you can't.... then fair enough, your point stands. Scott that reminded me of something, if you take a deep breath in and blow into a binliner with your mouth against it,,,,, it hardly inflates, but if you hold it about a foot away almost totally inflates you probably already know this , and I havnt got a clue how it relates to this thread, but a good trick anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Scott that reminded me of something, if you take a deep breath in and blow into a binliner with your mouth against it,,,,, it hardly inflates, but if you hold it about a foot away almost totally inflates you probably already know this , and I havnt got a clue how it relates to this thread, but a good trick anyway Hovis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 How? I go back to my point of 3x10 being better for strength. Common sense for me. With obvious correct and incorrect parties. Buts how are you supposed to know if 5x5 or 3x10 is better when weightlifting, just because I say one thing and someone else says another? Would you rather not have evidence as to which is better for your goal? again, I don't care as to the answer, I just wondered if the OP's comment was proven or disproven by an experienced or professional credible source. You can't deny cold hard evidence of something that's happened/happening/will happen With the weights, I can't be sure...... but that's only because you haven't put a case forwards as to why you have this conclusion. If you did put forward two cases (for and against) then it would give me the opportunity to use reasoning to work out what I thought was the most likely scenario. We need to come back to my straw comment though. Since common sense hasn't prevailed I'll give an explanation. When you seal your lips over the straw, the air is forced through the straw with no option for it to flow over or around it. When your lips aren't sealed around it, the air can flow through.... but it can also flow around. Therefore, the most effective way of passing air through the straw is to seal it. Now put the intercooler in the place of the straw. If it's outside the bumper, then the air can deflect and go around it at will. If it's inside the bumper then the funneling effect of the bumper sealed to the intercooler forces the air directly through it. Any air heading towards the surface area of the intercooler has no option but to go directly through it, there is no way to deflect over it, to the side of it, or below it, as the bumper is there.... sealing the intercooler and forcing the air through. I do not have proof of the above. I do not have testing, or R&D of the above. I have absolutely no straws in my house at this moment of time and my car is in around 100 bits in the garage. I can categorically state with no doubt in my mind that the above is true. There is no LOGICAL argument against the above, but people try regardless as they see "proof" as being a counter argument against deductive reasoning. Now. With regards to bananas and granite, that one's going to have to wait. I'm up to my neck in the stuff but I don't have any bananas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markylee Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Hovis. Had some people at the door today trying to sell me some brown bread, they just wouldn't go away.................................fecking hovis witnesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Had some people at the door today trying to sell me some brown bread, they just wouldn't go away.................................fecking hovis witnesses. I am nicking that one! Brilliant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 With the weights, I can't be sure...... but that's only because you haven't put a case forwards as to why you have this conclusion. If you did put forward two cases (for and against) then it would give me the opportunity to use reasoning to work out what I thought was the most likely scenario. We need to come back to my straw comment though. Since common sense hasn't prevailed I'll give an explanation. When you seal your lips over the straw, the air is forced through the straw with no option for it to flow over or around it. When your lips aren't sealed around it, the air can flow through.... but it can also flow around. Therefore, the most effective way of passing air through the straw is to seal it. Now put the intercooler in the place of the straw. If it's outside the bumper, then the air can deflect and go around it at will. If it's inside the bumper then the funneling effect of the bumper sealed to the intercooler forces the air directly through it. Any air heading towards the surface area of the intercooler has no option but to go directly through it, there is no way to deflect over it, to the side of it, or below it, as the bumper is there.... sealing the intercooler and forcing the air through. I do not have proof of the above. I do not have testing, or R&D of the above. I have absolutely no straws in my house at this moment of time and my car is in around 100 bits in the garage. I can categorically state with no doubt in my mind that the above is true. There is no LOGICAL argument against the above, but people try regardless as they see "proof" as being a counter argument against deductive reasoning. Now. With regards to bananas and granite, that one's going to have to wait. I'm up to my neck in the stuff but I don't have any bananas. I haven't even read most of that because you're clearly being patronising. I'm not sure what you're not getting but basically I don't care about the answer. "Was it proven?" - "no/yes". Not some crap about straws and bananas. Also I originally gave my opinion on its LOOKS and the attention it will get. Why would I care if it works or not? Didn't see the need to bring up its function but ah well. Bored now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Scott that reminded me of something, if you take a deep breath in and blow into a binliner with your mouth against it,,,,, it hardly inflates, but if you hold it about a foot away almost totally inflates you probably already know this , and I havnt got a clue how it relates to this thread, but a good trick anyway That's the skittle effect (I just named that myself). The difference is the size of the opening. If you hold it against your lips, the opening is the size of your mouth. If you kept the opening the same size and blew from a foot away, it probably wouldn't inflate at all. Holding the bag fully open and blowing from a foot+ away creates a domino/skittle effect. The front air molecule pushes the next 2 molecules, which pushes the next 3, etc, etc. By the time it gets to the bag, the blast of air has accumulated and expanded, the expanded flow fills the open bag. Good example of a chain reaction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 I haven't even read most of that because you're clearly being patronising. Prove it. I'm not sure what you're not getting but basically I don't care about the answer. I don't care about the mating call of a wombat, but I'd hardly question someone who clearly knows what said call sounds like because it has cute ears. "Was it proven?" - "no/yes". Not some crap about straws and bananas. Is it proven that god exists? Matter of opinion, hence why I said proof is relative. It still hasn't been proven that bananas can't cut granite, but I don't see a line of people queueing up to prove me wrong. Also I originally gave my opinion on its LOOKS and the attention it will get. Why would I care if it works or not? Didn't see the need to bring up its function but ah well. The same could be said for a turd on the windscreen but why even bring the efficiency into question if you don't care? Perhaps turds on the windscreen would make it more aerodynamic? The laws of aerodynamics say no, no..... but the misplaced non-logic of morons say yes, yes. Bored now It's about time. The forum got bored of this thread about 45.5 pages ago (note, I have no proof). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 I am nicking that one! Brilliant Are you drunk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Are you drunk? Fair to middling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Fair to middling I'm airing that way myself now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Prove it. I don't care about the mating call of a wombat, but I'd hardly question someone who clearly knows what said call sounds like because it has cute ears. Is it proven that god exists? Matter of opinion, hence why I said proof is relative. It still hasn't been proven that bananas can't cut granite, but I don't see a line of people queueing up to prove me wrong. The same could be said for a turd on the windscreen but why even bring the efficiency into question if you don't care? Perhaps turds on the windscreen would make it more aerodynamic? The laws of aerodynamics say no, no..... but the misplaced non-logic of morons say yes, yes. It's about time. The forum got bored of this thread about 45.5 pages ago (note, I have no proof). That's fair enough Scott but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 That's fair enough Scott but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? Probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 That's fair enough Scott but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? That is quite possibly the finest sentence ever typed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twisted Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markylee Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Scott , that is what you call a clever joke:tongue:, the urban dictionary says two of the words that are related to the word HOVIS are........JEHOVA,,,,,,,,,,and ,,, wait for it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and yes you guessed its,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WITNESS, ,,,,,,so no hes not drunk he just has a funny and clever sense of humor:p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 That is quite possibly the finest sentence ever typed. but is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts