JohnCh

They look like the earlier version of the Intatrim Odyssey. Current model is very similarly shaped, but the slots for the harnesses are handled differently. -John

I just received a cease and desist order from his attorneys, so it looks like the deCrocification tool was a use-once piece of software. SENC, you have a PM incoming. -John

Kind of. It has a native de-Crocification tool that removes sarcasm, non PC comments, and obvious HR violations from his posts. As a test, we ran the initial version of what he wrote above through the tool which converted it to what you now see. I will admit, the original version was more amusing (and even mentioned you by name), but...well, progress. -John

Selfishly, I would like to see us using more modern software, with fewer bugs that leave me screaming at the computer "why the f&*# did that happen? why??" and that has a better interface for how people like to use the forum; easily upload photos to posts whether from an image hosting service or from your device, simple youtube uploads, a mobile interface that accommodates the much smaller screen size, far more intuitive galleries (how many of you even know we have galleries now?), places to host and manage articles, etc. It's not perfect, and some people will have a knee-jerk reaction that they don't like it simply because it's different, but I think this is a case, where different creates a significantly better user experience. I'll put together some simple user guides before launch to speed up the learning process and ease the transition. The new software even has a native support ticket system. Having an issue posting something or paying for club membership? Simply open a ticket in that relevant area and you immediately go into a queue where your issue is addressed. No more trying to figure out who to email or PM, or taking a tangent in an existing thread to express your understandable frustration with no clue if I've actually seen it. This will also provide analytics to highlight any problem areas we can address through feature changes, or how-to articles. It's a modern forum for old school car owners. BTW If anyone here uses the WSCC or OZClubbies forum, you are familiar with the Invision Platform. Prior to making the decision on which way to go, we did significant research on the major players and felt this option gives us the best package for the future. We hope to work through the migration timeline over the next couple of weeks and will give plenty of notice before the switch occurs. -John

I haven't come across that issue before in my research. Is it possible the lean running is due to the engine ingesting hot air, rather than injector location? Thanks, John

Another option is to use Torx or Torx Plus head fasteners. They take more torque and repetitive fastening without rounding than hex or Phillips head alternatives. -John

Thanks, I hadn't considered the increase mass for that 4" column of air and how that could impact pulse tuning. Without doing the math (any volunteers?) it doesn't seem like it would alter the effective length of the runner a significant amount. By any chance have you played around with this on a dyno and have any numbers you could share? Thanks, John

A 1000+ drive mile home in spotty weather is proof those 8 years were well spent! As others have said great first post and great first drive. -John

After consuming several hours of Croc's video consulting time earlier this year, I eventually opted for the DJI. I didn't need the overlays of the Garmin (that's a very cool feature for track videos), preferred the DJI's less bulky setup for an external microphone, and liked the second screen on the front of the camera to help positioning from the driver's seat. No regrets. -John

Thanks repsna. CarlB, somehow I missed your earlier reply. I didn't want to muddy this conversation from the outset by bringing up that option, but it is something I'm considering and was the impetus for my initial post. If people with real world experience had said they found a benefit at the top end from moving the injector to the TB, but there was a noticeable change to the drivability around town, then I was planning to go the dual injector route. Yes, it would be overkill for my setup, but sometimes I like overkill. Also, there is a chance I may have a new engine loom made, so I this could be done as part of that process. Thanks, John

Some bugs? SOME?? I wish that was the case. :jester: Yes, a picture would be great. Also considering posting an introduction in the So, tell us a little about yourselves thread. -John

Thanks. From what I've read, the effect from mounting in the TB is most pronounced over 7000rpm. Not sure if that's accurate, but my engine does rev to 8000+, so if true, there may be benefit for my installation. Did you notice any degradation to idle, low rpm running, or throttle response when the injectors were mounted in the TB? Thanks, John

Sorry Christopher, we've had some very random issues where the backend software doesn't properly apply the user group rules. We are working on a fix. -John

Croc, does this mean the ease and willingness to pay on a claim by Hagerty may vary by the state where the policy is issued, or does Hagerty control those decisions regardless of the state issued insurance company behind a specific policy? Thanks, John

Thanks Repsna, did you run the injectors in either the Roller Barrel or ITB before settling on the head mount? Thanks, John

Because the last few posts have gone off topic, I'm removing them so we can focus on this beautiful 420S that's for sale. Thanks, John

Thanks Snig. Micromike, please see PM I just sent. Thanks, John

Beautiful car! What is the spec of the Duratec? BTW looks like the link provided by Imgur was missing the file extension, so adding that and embedding the photo here. -John

Trailer for the episode has been released. The poor Caterham -John

Thanks for the link, it's a shame he was comparing TB mounts to shower mounts rather than in head, but that one portion of the video showing the fuel spraying down the intake from the shower mount really highlighted the potential improvement at low rpm if the injector is in the head and hitting the hot valve. Jenvey claims that mounting in the TB below the butterfly is the best compromise for a modified engine. If this was a simple switch, I'd just try it. Slightly off topic, but if you are like me and interested in velocity stack length and design, definitely check out this guy's other videos. Very interesting stuff. Thanks, John

I'm curious if anyone with ITBs has experimented with injector placement? V1 of my Duratec utilized stock internals and cams. At the time, the recommendation was to leave the injectors in the stock factory location in the head. Apparently the fuel spraying on the back of the hot valves promotes lower emissions and better idle/low speed drivability. V3 of the engine has far more aggressive cams with an 8000+ rpm redline. I'm wondering if moving the injectors out to the ports in the ITBs is a better compromise with the current internals? From what I've read, at higher rpm, the extra distance gives the air and fuel more time to atomize, creating a better mixture that burns better, and hence, develops more power. As seen in the photo below, the difference between the two location is about 4 inches. The benefits of each location make sense to me, but it's the quantity of difference I'd like to better understand. If it's another 4-5hp at the top end with marginal difference to the low end, then I might give it a try, but if it's 1-2 hp and idle becomes noticeably less happy in traffic, then there's no point. The change will require removing the plugs in the ITBs (I have a feeling that will be a PITA), buying new plugs for the head, a new fuel rail, and doing a little replumbing, so not a quick, simple update. Thanks, John

My information must have been incorrect, I heard a different number about a year ago. Regardless, having seen the quality of Brue's work firsthand, it is as you note, a reasonable fee. I don't think we are going to change each others mind. Clearly there were two people who really wanted that car, but I remain surprised by the final price of $63k with buyer's fee. -John

Price what Bruce Beachman charges to build a car. I think you'll find it's surprisingly reasonable. Even the factory only charges 2395 GBP (~ $3170) for that option. -John

Fair point, but that was a significant premium. As Croc notes, the new price for a 420R SV is less. As a data point, Beachman Racing recently had a 420R SV listed on their site as ready to ship for under $49k. There are always people willing to overpay for immediate gratification or for a very specific color, but it's rare these kind of outlier prices reset the market. -John

Congratulations! Glad to see we wore you down -John