Piston pin offset "controversy"
I dont think anyone is bashing UT, I think it was said that there is no real verifiable gain, and since he repeatedly claims it works, they would like to see a back to back test to prove the theory. I'd like to see that also
Fair enough, but DC should be the ones to prove it. That's my point. Someone else here, already said they did it and DID see a gain which I'd chalk up to "freed up power" in the lower rpm band. I don't see how reducing firction, in any way shape of form isn't going to result in a "real" benefit. if we're nitpicking, why use loose bearings, why balance an engine, why use different sized pullies, etc. All anyone has to do is build an engine, dyno it, then chnage the pistons around in the SAME ENGINE with NO OTHER changes and dyno again. If there is ANY change as to where the power develops and/or how much, DC is right and UT is too. I'm willing to assume (yeah I know) he's maybe tried it at one point in his life and saw even a seat of the pants change, or he'd probably not parrot it. Maybe he would, but one thing is certain, this is and was DC's claim and they published docs for it. it's also in a few of the small block rebuilding for perf books. They all wrong too?
You and I have gone a few rounds before and I will say again, you have WAY more experience than I do, as do a LOT of people here, as does UT. As far as no one bashing UT, I would say the OP seemed to be looking for a reason to start a shitstorm, YET AGAIN, with UT in the middle. There's plenty of bashing and no one really has put together anything to discount anything he's said. The one thing everyone seems to NOT like is he does things differently and seems to be having fun. Oh the horror....
I'm not bitching AT you, just TO you and anyone else reading.
