rhetorical question. but one that doesn't apply. dyno pic isn't a ****ty camera, it's a staged shot.
cmon shek, you missed my point. my point is that all those dudes are experts. but they dont even mention the elephant that someone posted into the room. look at the cosworth dyno vid. that's the color it should be for a properly running engine, it's a bit too dull and i'd say running on alchohol. but something is clearly non-representative of what the pic was taken of, and nobody said a fukkin thing about it. cause theyr'e NOT experts.
so Tom, 2kF EGT huh? k, how long did that engine last? you can get crazy EGTs if you just retard your ignition and/or advance your exh cam timing. i did give the option it's in the process of blowing up. real high EGTs burn valves and don't make good power and it doesnt' take that long cause they have to transport that gas. he's also switching to 85% ethanol which has even lower EGTs. which is regardless. i was calling out the 321SStards. they piss me off pretty much everywhere. and 321 does crack, WILL crack. just has more longevity. an amount that's unnecessary and doesn't justify any extra costs. like yeah, i know this plastic 30c bic pen works, BUT IT COULD BE MADE OUT OF CARBON FIBER to reduce the flex and weight, and the inks could be nano-filtered the ball tip could be nano machined to have a golfball higher ink transfer coefficient and less friction, the fukkin thing COULD be made to a standard that is unsupported by it's use. as a reasonable human, i dont want a $50k pen, i'll go step it up and buy a $1 uniball that feels and writes better. a 200$ parker uses a replacable 5$ writing cartridge, so you can even make an expensive pen analogy if you want. done. that 3x and successive 5x cost increase practicality translates pretty poorly to thousands and thousands of dollars on something that isn't that consequential. on the cost benefit curve of toms car, 321 is a dud of the highest order.