Talk:Cylinder head porting
Deletion: The article vaguely covers subjects better described by other articles on the Bernoulli Effect, Volumetric_efficiency, Manifold_(automotive), etc articles, and is poorly written. No significant rewrites or additions have been made since June 2008, and it is not written in an encyclopedic tone.
It describes them BADLY, and it IS covered in other articles! The writing is below subpar, and it doesn't cite ANYTHING besides anecdotes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosetap.Brocade (talk • contribs) 07:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. This article or section seems not to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.
This article or section does not cite its references or sources. You can help Wikipedia by introducing appropriate citations
Whats all this????--=Motorhead 10:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Don't worry about it. Someone didn't like your writing style; you have to admit it's more "prescriptive" than "descriptive". I'm fine with it and unless the person who tagged it has more specific issues, I support you removing that tag. As for the lack of references, that is a point well taken. Any good books on this topic you can add to a references section? Samw 01:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
This information was gleaned from many sources bit by bit. Thats why its important that someone wanting to know it can get it all in one bite here, similar to reading spark plugs. Besides, I haven't written a book to refer to yet! I can list books but to pick out the information sentance by sentance?
I write the way I teach, using carefully thought out analogies when needed. prescriptive? hmmm I dunno. Just trying to decribe a hard subject which has been preceded by tons of misinformation. I cant see a better way.--=Motorhead 10:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- I reworded the intro slightly. I think that's what the editor meant when it was flagged for "cleanup". See also for a sample of some recent copyediting. Like I said, I'm fine with it as it is so by all means remove the cleanup tag.
- As for references, I guess you'll have to write the book and quote yourself! Samw 00:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Actually I think he objected to that whole paragraph. I put it in last because I recall the problems I had understanding the true phenomenon back when. I know its tone is not strictly encyclopedic but I couldn’t leave the article without it because I know where the problems in understanding it all lie. I write for the person who does not know with the goal of having him know it in the end. It would have saved me a whole lot of time and effort to have this article when I started out. Elsewhere he could search and search and never find this information out there.
I don’t mind the reference thing. It’s irksome that most articles don’t have any but I am being asked for them! I could put some general references but the real meat comes from assembling bits of many such sources with a heavy dose of actual (unpublished) research. For every reference I’d have to qualify which parts are good and which parts are outright wrong.
For instance Honda did a paper on high-speed four stroke engines that became and still is a foundation block of the whole science. In that paper there is a discussion at the end where Prof. Blair disagrees with Honda engineer’s contentions and that little nugget is the most important part of the whole paper. (Time has borne out Prof. Blair’s Ideas) --=Motorhead 03:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- I kind of like "thick, sticky, elastic, gooey and heavy" and will let someone else remove it! :-) As for references, that is a requirement for Featured articles. I suspect it was tagged because this is an expert subject without any references. By all means cite just the last paragraph of that paper. Anyways, we're spending far too much effort on random comment by an anonymous user! Remove the tags as you see fit. Samw 03:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
I think this section needs to be revised: "Interestingly, this head received extensive flow bench development by Ford at design time but because of engine height restrictions, the use of cast iron and lack of knowledge at the time, this was the best that could be manufactured. Today, manufacturers are able to do much better although they still cannot approach the quality of hand porting." To begin with, today all serious race heads are CNC machined rather than hand ported as you can't by match the accuracy of a CNC machine by hand, and CNC porting is today also found in some production engines as the accuracy is better than te raw casting. Secondly, it's generally not the lack of knowledge that is the reason for ports being shaped as they are, but rather dimensional restrictions and manufacturing limits as was mentioned and other factors like the effect on cycle-to-cycle variations, maximum rate of pressure rise, fuel consumption, emissions and so on. How to dimension a port for a good flow has been known for quite some time, so has the knowledge that desirable flow motion can reduce the port coefficient. JEdlund 22:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
All the cnc stuff in in there if you read further down. You do have to show a bad port in order to explain the subject and that ford mold is what I happened to have on hand. As far as the lack of knowledge goes that was exactly the case for that engine. Manufacturers have always led from behind and likely always will. Its in the racing community that the cutting edge is found, only later does the technology appear in factory built engines. Most often the factories farm out advanced work like this to small companies who actually do the real work.--=Motorhead (talk) 14:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessaryily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
- Triggered by
\bcomoj\.com\bon the global blacklist
- Triggered by
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
There is an issue with the opening paragraph. It opens with this statement: "Cylinder head porting refers to the process of modifying the intake and exhaust ports of an internal combustion engine to improve the quality and quantity of the air flow." and closes with this "More than any other single factor, the porting process is responsible for the high power output of modern engines." The problem: most modern engines, i.e. in new motor cars and motorcyles would not be ported,i.e not modified. So their high power output is not due to porting or being modified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 10:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)