".makes the engine run smoother.blah blah blah...no-one has actually ever done it...oh except maybe Stan Meyer...."

YET!!!


you do have a point, a very good point, BUT.....

If say all of man kinds nutters where to just give up on it, because some people say it's not possible, it won't work, be happy with the situation you find yourself in, don't fight the system you will loose, etc etc etc..... all the things these oil overlords are saying. Do you think the airplane would have been in existence today, or even the car for that matter... I can but only imagine the ridicule Daimler had to endure with his invention...

nobody said it was going to be easy, I was not expecting to get it working from the getgo. The fact that Meyer actually got it to work, just proves the point.... the fact that he got killed for it, was because his invention was still kept secret and that is his doing.... not advisable with these kind of things....

I for one would rather try my best to get out from underneath these oil overlords thumbs, than to sit around waiting for my gov, or anyone else for that matter,
to get me out.......



oh by the way it is impossible to do a qtr mile in less than 10 seconds... realy it is, don't even bother trying, Iv'e seen many people try and fail misserable, myself included.... I've seen people get killed trying.....

and yet, we still keep trying.

well, I'm still an infant in the world of hydrogen, so far, as best I can tell, not worse . I am however still way down on the amount of gas I can and should produce per minute, for the real benifits to be seen.

I have however noticed, even with the small amount of gas I do manage, the engine runs a lot smoother.. and it's almost as if the lower grade fuels actually works better. even under boost conditions where they could not be used without HHO, so just that is allready a saving in cost.... almost 15c\l in price diffs from 93oct to 95oct here....

don't for one moment think a 500+Ftlb dead flat torque line from 0RPM's all the way through 6000RPM's is boaring.... turbolag, that is boaring...


HHO is the near future of internal combustion.
I am actually one of those backyard tinkerers...




Notice that fruit-jar in the righthand corner, behind the Strut, with the little blue tube and wires going into it....


I'm even screwing around with some fuel reforming consepts...

jasas...... (772 ft. lbs.)

suddenly, I don't care for old oil engines so much no more...

as to the Question, hopefully short, very short..

I would also go for the 8.3 head...

hell NO!!!! post away!

That flappy paddle contraption, whould it be possible to use that kind of setup with a normal oldschool cable shift gearbox. ?

I will not ever let any machanic, licenced or otherwise, touch any part of any car I own, ever... as long as they can belong to an union that can have them do half-assed work with no concequienses to there actions, forget it....


and yes, I'm in the trade too... scary

care to share the name of this place...

Nice!!! yes...

The reasoning behind the difference in the pot-sizes is to prevent the leading edge of the pad, getting eaten away faster than the trailing edge, looked at it from the direction of rotation of the rotor.

To do this they made the leading pots small and then going bigger towards the back...
http://www.apracing.com/drawings/cp4340_1cd.pdf

so to conclude, it is possible to mount a stock trailing caliper in front of the axle by moving it over to the opposing wheel, and still have the bleed outlet at the top. The important part is not whether it's in front or behind the axle, it's the direction of rotation.... and always the smallest piston should see the rotor first.