Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TR\]\s+2\"\s+SU\'s\s+vs\s+Triple\s+1\/34\"\?\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TR\]\s+2\"\s+SU\'s\s+vs\s+Triple\s+1\/34\"\?\?\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. re:[TR] 2" SU's vs Triple 1/34"?? (score: 1): Author: "Anthony Rhodes" <spamiam@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 23:57:04 -0400; as a potential replacement? And conversely, did any who opted >for the 2" SU's compare them to the triples? go. Interesting question. All else being equal, more choke area is better IF YOU NEED IT.; /html/triumphs/2006-08/msg00204.html (10,305 bytes)
2. Re: [TR] 2" SU's vs Triple 1/34"?? (score: 1): Author: Dave1massey@cs.com; Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 08:13:56 EDT; One big hole in this theory is the presumption that air flow through the carbs is constant. At WOT it is not. Air only flows when a cylinder is on its intake stroke. Since a carburettor in a twin set; /html/triumphs/2006-08/msg00206.html (9,442 bytes)
3. Re: [TR] 2" SU's vs Triple 1/34"?? (score: 1): Author: spamiam@comcast.net; Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:44:35 +0000; You make a good point about the flow being cyclical rather than constant. I suppose the carbs need to be sized to accomodate the peak air flow rather than the average. Of course, the dampers on the; /html/triumphs/2006-08/msg00208.html (9,791 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]