The UCI is totally inconsistent.

Closed Thread Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

03-16-24, 07:36 AM

#201

dedhed

SE Wis

Join Date: Apr 2005

Location: Milwaukee, WI

Posts: 10,516

Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)

Tagged: 0 Thread(s)

Quoted: 2747 Post(s)

Likes: 1,510

Liked 3,401 Times in 2,058 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent

Yes cars really went down hill when they came out with front wheel drive. Having the front wheels hold up most of the weight, steer, brake, and drive the car forward is not really very bright. Then they put in 4 cylinder engines that really belong on ag equipment.

Most cars in the 20's were 4 cylinders

03-16-24, 07:39 AM

#202

dedhed

SE Wis

Join Date: Apr 2005

Location: Milwaukee, WI

Posts: 10,516

Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)

Tagged: 0 Thread(s)

Quoted: 2747 Post(s)

Likes: 1,510

Liked 3,401 Times in 2,058 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by phughes

Though I won't condone a personal attack, I will say that is not how freedom of speech works. In fact, this is not really a public forum, it is owned by an entity, and as such they have rules. Meaning, you really cannot say anything you want to say. If it truly were a public forum, and the rules of freedom of speech applied, then a personal attack would also have to be permitted.

Anyway, back to the matter at hand. I think you are bored, and opened the thread because you wanted to start an argument here. It is what you do. Nothing you have written makes any sense in the real world of racing, in any type of racing.

More accurately (in the USA) free speech isn't so much about where you do it, but who is restricting it.

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

03-16-24, 07:40 AM

#203

big john

Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2005

Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County

Posts: 25,299

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)

Tagged: 0 Thread(s)

Quoted: 8285 Post(s)

Likes: 8,927

Liked 9,055 Times in 4,481 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by rydabent

Also FWD has ruined engines. Starting in 1950 or so we had modern short stroke, big bore engines that didnt waste power moving the piston so fast. Now they have to cram engines in sideways, and they have gone back to the long stroke engines to make engines shorter. The worst thing about small bore long stroke engines is they dont have the much room for big valves in the head,

Sadly todays young guys will never know how much fun it was to drive a car like my 1969 300 horse 350 Chevelle, with a turbo hydro. It shifted at 56 and 96!!!

A couple things you have backward. Around 1950 engines were undersquare, that is stroke greater than bore. In 1955 Chevy introduced the oversquare V8.

Oversquare (short stroke, big bore) engines tend to rev higher and therefore move the piston faster. These engines tend to wear the rings and cylinders faster.

Maybe today's gearheads won't get to drive a 300 horsepower Chevelle but they can buy a Mustang, Camaro, or Charger with more than double the power, better mileage, and more comfort and safety features.

And if you think 300HP is a lot, Honda makes a 2 liter 4 cylinder with 300HP and 28 mpg. The bore and stroke are almost equal, if that means anything.

As far as "cramming the engine in sideways" , it works. I listed some of the advantages of this design earlier. This is done with V8 engines as well as 4 and 6 cylinders. This set-up is ideal for most people, most of the time.