I knew there where people that woulden't agree when I posted it, but I have the experiance and mechanical knowlege to back up what I stated as fact.
I have been working with mechanical devices of every kind since I was old enough to use a screwdriver. I've been working with engines and learning about them since grade school.
Additionaly, I trained with a Honda certified mechanic.
Other people base what they state as facts on how they think it works, without actualy knowing how it does, or all the variables and forces involved. I base my facts on tried and tested experiance.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
That is correct, with the throttle closed the vacuum "pulls" on the piston faces, slowing the engine.
I was going to call them jake brakes, but I figgured I'd call them by what they do for simplicity. There are areas in canada where the use of them is restricted, but on open highways where there are a lower number of houses near by, they are permitted. I hear them alot when I travel up to my trailer, but other than that I never hear them in the city.
I was going to call them jake brakes, but I figgured I'd call them by what they do for simplicity. There are areas in canada where the use of them is restricted, but on open highways where there are a lower number of houses near by, they are permitted. I hear them alot when I travel up to my trailer, but other than that I never hear them in the city.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
I played GT5 prologue for about ten minuts and gave it up. I just couldent get into the feel of the cars, the tyres just didn't seem to react right to my inputs.
If GT5's full release has the exact same tyre model I won't bother playing it. LFS may be incomplete, but it's miles ahead of any console game in terms of drivability.
If GT5's full release has the exact same tyre model I won't bother playing it. LFS may be incomplete, but it's miles ahead of any console game in terms of drivability.
That is why I started learning to drive at the age of 12. My first lessons where in a Ford E150 super extended van.
At this point (20 years old), even though I don't have my license I can drive just about any vehicle I want, and do it well.
Engine braking: How it really works
If you own or drive a manual transmission equiped vehicle on a regular basis you use engine braking more than you realize. But alot of people don't know how or why engine braking occures.
I'm writing this article to explain how engine braking works and to explain away alot of the misconceptions surrounding this phenomenon.
Common misconceptions consist of the following:
-Air in the crank case causing resistance
-Friction in the engine causing resistance
-Compression
I will start by stating how an engine actualy intakes air, because that is an important part of how engine braking actualy works.
An engine idles because the intake is restricted so that the vacuum is just enough to keep the engine at a fixed speed but not enough to stop the engine completely. An engine is in a sense an air scavenger, it will take in as much air as the intake system will allow.
If you completely removed the throttle butterfly, or even just opened it completely with the engine unloaded, it would accelerate untill it could not take in any more air provided there is sufficient fuel. Unfortunately this is always far faster than the engine was designed for and it will probably rev itself apart in a short time.
This is actualy how restrictor plates work as well, they restrict the extra overhead that the intake system would normaly allow. This means that as the engine hits higher speeds it actualy starts to run out of air and this causes a reduction in power. Normaly it is not enough to cut into the redline of the engine, but in extreme use it can.
Now on to the misconceptions.
-Air in the crank case causing resistance
Air in the crank moves freely around above the oil in the pan and is unrestricted, there is usualy a vacuum line hooked up to the crank case vent to prevent air and gasses from building up.
The air mass causes very little resistance because as one piston moves down there is always another moving up. So the air in the crank never gets compressed, only pushed around. An engine can always overcome the effort needed to move this air mass, even with the throttle closed.
-Friction in the engine causing resistance
Friction does have a very small part in lowering engine speed with the throttle off, but it is no where near enough to cause the heavy braking effect seen in the lower gears on some vehicles. If it where that intense the engine would simply stop rotating completely.
-Compression
This is probably the most common misconception, and people also use the wrong term in conjunction with it. Compression acts as a spring, if it isn't released it will return most of the energy it takes to complete. Not to mention that in multiple cylinder engines it is almost always paired with a power stroke.
Compression braking is only seen in diesel engines, and it works only because of special equipment added to that engine. More on this after I explain how engine braking on gasoline burning engines works.
Now onto how it actualy works.
Engine braking happens when an engine is reved up to a higher than idle speed and then the throttle is closed, since the engine is essentialy an air scavenger it will still try to take in enough air to maintain it's current speed. Because the throttle is closed it will generate a vacuum in the intake system and even in the cylinders.
The engine is now generating an opposite force, instead of applying torque in the forward direction it is resisting the rotation of the transmission, it is trying to slow down because the vacuum in the intake and cylinders is acting on the pistons with much greater force.
The vacuum will increase or decrease as engine speed climbs or falls, if you rev it higher and release the throttle it will generate more braking force than at lower RPMs, additionaly, because of the force multiplying of the gears in the transmission you will experiance more engine braking in lower gears.
This is also largely effected by the shape of the cylinders, for instance:
You have two engines, both are 1 litre with four cylinders. The first one has a short stroke, but a large bore. The second has a long stroke and a narrower bore. Both still have the same displacement but are of different shapes. Intake and exhaust are identical.
Provided the transmission ratios are the same, the short stroke engine will always experiance more engine braking in any given gear than the long stroke engine. This is because the surface area the vacuum can act on is larger in the short stroke engine because the pistons have a larger surface area.
How diesels achive engine braking is a bit more complicated.
A diesel engine has no butterfly valve in the throttle body, they accelerate or slow down by increasing or decreasing the amount of fuel injected into the cylinders. There is no vacuum to slow the engine down when the throttle is released, it slows simply because combustion is insufficient to maintain speed without the fuel from an open throttle.
Compression in a diesel works exactly the same as in a gasoline engine, it returns most of the energy it takes when it springs back. However, because there is no vacuum there is nothing preventing the engine from accelerating on a down hill section of road even when the throttle is closed.
This was and sometimes still is a problem for trucks, so several special devices where invented to prevent the problem.
Most work on the same principal but go by different names, I will simply call them compression release brakes.
A compression release brake does exactly that, it releases the compression before it has a chance to return the energy back to the vehicle. You've probably heard it before, a machine gun like sound from a transport slowing down. Even with mufflers installed a compression brake is very loud. Loud enough that I have wittnessed drivers using them as horns to scare slow drivers infront of them.
Another device used less commonly on diesels is an exhaust restrictor, it essentialy increases the pressure in the exhaust system puting resistance on the exhaust stroke and thus reducing the speed of the vehicle.
I hope this clears up some of the mystery surrounding engine braking, and I may revise and add to this if I find I missed anything. Also, feel free to ask questions. I realy want to squash the myths surrounding this because I hear them on a regular basis.
I'm writing this article to explain how engine braking works and to explain away alot of the misconceptions surrounding this phenomenon.
Common misconceptions consist of the following:
-Air in the crank case causing resistance
-Friction in the engine causing resistance
-Compression
I will start by stating how an engine actualy intakes air, because that is an important part of how engine braking actualy works.
An engine idles because the intake is restricted so that the vacuum is just enough to keep the engine at a fixed speed but not enough to stop the engine completely. An engine is in a sense an air scavenger, it will take in as much air as the intake system will allow.
If you completely removed the throttle butterfly, or even just opened it completely with the engine unloaded, it would accelerate untill it could not take in any more air provided there is sufficient fuel. Unfortunately this is always far faster than the engine was designed for and it will probably rev itself apart in a short time.
This is actualy how restrictor plates work as well, they restrict the extra overhead that the intake system would normaly allow. This means that as the engine hits higher speeds it actualy starts to run out of air and this causes a reduction in power. Normaly it is not enough to cut into the redline of the engine, but in extreme use it can.
Now on to the misconceptions.
-Air in the crank case causing resistance
Air in the crank moves freely around above the oil in the pan and is unrestricted, there is usualy a vacuum line hooked up to the crank case vent to prevent air and gasses from building up.
The air mass causes very little resistance because as one piston moves down there is always another moving up. So the air in the crank never gets compressed, only pushed around. An engine can always overcome the effort needed to move this air mass, even with the throttle closed.
-Friction in the engine causing resistance
Friction does have a very small part in lowering engine speed with the throttle off, but it is no where near enough to cause the heavy braking effect seen in the lower gears on some vehicles. If it where that intense the engine would simply stop rotating completely.
-Compression
This is probably the most common misconception, and people also use the wrong term in conjunction with it. Compression acts as a spring, if it isn't released it will return most of the energy it takes to complete. Not to mention that in multiple cylinder engines it is almost always paired with a power stroke.
Compression braking is only seen in diesel engines, and it works only because of special equipment added to that engine. More on this after I explain how engine braking on gasoline burning engines works.
Now onto how it actualy works.
Engine braking happens when an engine is reved up to a higher than idle speed and then the throttle is closed, since the engine is essentialy an air scavenger it will still try to take in enough air to maintain it's current speed. Because the throttle is closed it will generate a vacuum in the intake system and even in the cylinders.
The engine is now generating an opposite force, instead of applying torque in the forward direction it is resisting the rotation of the transmission, it is trying to slow down because the vacuum in the intake and cylinders is acting on the pistons with much greater force.
The vacuum will increase or decrease as engine speed climbs or falls, if you rev it higher and release the throttle it will generate more braking force than at lower RPMs, additionaly, because of the force multiplying of the gears in the transmission you will experiance more engine braking in lower gears.
This is also largely effected by the shape of the cylinders, for instance:
You have two engines, both are 1 litre with four cylinders. The first one has a short stroke, but a large bore. The second has a long stroke and a narrower bore. Both still have the same displacement but are of different shapes. Intake and exhaust are identical.
Provided the transmission ratios are the same, the short stroke engine will always experiance more engine braking in any given gear than the long stroke engine. This is because the surface area the vacuum can act on is larger in the short stroke engine because the pistons have a larger surface area.
How diesels achive engine braking is a bit more complicated.
A diesel engine has no butterfly valve in the throttle body, they accelerate or slow down by increasing or decreasing the amount of fuel injected into the cylinders. There is no vacuum to slow the engine down when the throttle is released, it slows simply because combustion is insufficient to maintain speed without the fuel from an open throttle.
Compression in a diesel works exactly the same as in a gasoline engine, it returns most of the energy it takes when it springs back. However, because there is no vacuum there is nothing preventing the engine from accelerating on a down hill section of road even when the throttle is closed.
This was and sometimes still is a problem for trucks, so several special devices where invented to prevent the problem.
Most work on the same principal but go by different names, I will simply call them compression release brakes.
A compression release brake does exactly that, it releases the compression before it has a chance to return the energy back to the vehicle. You've probably heard it before, a machine gun like sound from a transport slowing down. Even with mufflers installed a compression brake is very loud. Loud enough that I have wittnessed drivers using them as horns to scare slow drivers infront of them.
Another device used less commonly on diesels is an exhaust restrictor, it essentialy increases the pressure in the exhaust system puting resistance on the exhaust stroke and thus reducing the speed of the vehicle.
I hope this clears up some of the mystery surrounding engine braking, and I may revise and add to this if I find I missed anything. Also, feel free to ask questions. I realy want to squash the myths surrounding this because I hear them on a regular basis.
Last edited by DragonCommando, .
You are less likely to damage the crank then you are anything else in the engine. The crank shaft has to endure intense forces for its entire expected life, it is usualy built strong enough to withstand anything you can throw at it.
The main bearings may overheat, but it's likely the valves will crash into the pistons before that happens. At which point everything from the lifters to even maybe the timing chain or belt will need to be replaced. Not to mention it could shatter the piston face, I've seen that a fue times.
If you are engine braking it should use the same amount of fuel as it would at the same RPM. so if you are engine braking or cruising at 3k RPM, it should use the same amount of fuel.
That is assuming the fuel system is static and just adds fuel as it needs to, if the computer is programed to, it may actualy lower or cut fuel, but I've never thaught of testing it.
Engine braking won't damage or wear the crank shaft any more than normal use unless you let the revs go past redline.
Putting the car in neutral on a downhill is not an advisable practice and is frowned appon by most professional driving instructors. If a driving instructor ever tells you to do it, that instructor is not a professional, and I personaly would call the test off right then and there.
Putting the car in neutral delays the option of accelerating away from trouble. If you ever need to accelerate out of a situation on a down hill you'd have to take the time to put the car back in gear and then accelerate away.
Shutting the engine off is even less advisable since it adds an additional step before you can accelerate.
I have witnessed people getting rear ended by an out of control object, car or other, because they put the car in neutral and didn't have the time to put it back in gear and pull away before the object hit them. It sounds unlikely, but it has happened.
As for a carbureted bike cutting fuel, it isn't realy, but it is reducing it.
Most bikes use a slide barrel carburetor, they have a tappered variable main jet fixed to center of the slide barrel, as you open and close the throttle, the jet changes size increasing or decreasing fuel.
If the engine is running fast and you lower the throttle the engine gets less fuel than it needs for optimum combustion and will sometimes sound as if it isn't combusting at all.
Putting the car in neutral on a downhill is not an advisable practice and is frowned appon by most professional driving instructors. If a driving instructor ever tells you to do it, that instructor is not a professional, and I personaly would call the test off right then and there.
Putting the car in neutral delays the option of accelerating away from trouble. If you ever need to accelerate out of a situation on a down hill you'd have to take the time to put the car back in gear and then accelerate away.
Shutting the engine off is even less advisable since it adds an additional step before you can accelerate.
I have witnessed people getting rear ended by an out of control object, car or other, because they put the car in neutral and didn't have the time to put it back in gear and pull away before the object hit them. It sounds unlikely, but it has happened.
As for a carbureted bike cutting fuel, it isn't realy, but it is reducing it.
Most bikes use a slide barrel carburetor, they have a tappered variable main jet fixed to center of the slide barrel, as you open and close the throttle, the jet changes size increasing or decreasing fuel.
If the engine is running fast and you lower the throttle the engine gets less fuel than it needs for optimum combustion and will sometimes sound as if it isn't combusting at all.
I was wondering when someone would use this song in a LFS video. I considered it myself a fue times, but I don't have the programs needed to make videos.
Definately glad it was someone with alot of talent that used it, that video was awsome.
Definately glad it was someone with alot of talent that used it, that video was awsome.
As long as it is 75+ efficiency and has at least 30 amps on the 12v rail(s) a 500-600w PSU should be good.
I got a 500w PSU made by thermaltake, it is rated at an efficiency of 80% and my system runs nice and smooth even with my three hard drives and power hungry CPU and graphics card.
I got a 500w PSU made by thermaltake, it is rated at an efficiency of 80% and my system runs nice and smooth even with my three hard drives and power hungry CPU and graphics card.
LOL, that 4x4 game looks like they put all the budget into graphics and botched the gameplay/physics because they had no money left.
Now this is a real racing game, oldschool but awsome.
http://pc.ign.com/objects/015/015318.html
I remember playing that alot, just because it was funny. The physics wheren't realistic, but they didn't suck either. It was good fun.
Now this is a real racing game, oldschool but awsome.
http://pc.ign.com/objects/015/015318.html
I remember playing that alot, just because it was funny. The physics wheren't realistic, but they didn't suck either. It was good fun.
thermal pad + soldering makes me go. 
The thermal pad should never need to be soldered to anything, the IC is soldered to the board though, and those connections can and should be tested on a pin bed specificaly designed for the board before the wheel is even ready for assembly.
If the soldering is suspected to be failing the whole production run should be considered potentialy faulty and a notice to all waranty owners should be issued. Additionaly, any known faulty wheels that are returned should be replaced with ones that are known to not have this issue.
And people wondered why I originaly said Fanatec wheels arn't as good as they seem. I'd rather have my driving force GT than any of the wheels made by Fanatec. They have the porsche branding, and work on the 360, but thats as far as the apeal goes for me.
The thermal pad should never need to be soldered to anything, the IC is soldered to the board though, and those connections can and should be tested on a pin bed specificaly designed for the board before the wheel is even ready for assembly.
If the soldering is suspected to be failing the whole production run should be considered potentialy faulty and a notice to all waranty owners should be issued. Additionaly, any known faulty wheels that are returned should be replaced with ones that are known to not have this issue.
And people wondered why I originaly said Fanatec wheels arn't as good as they seem. I'd rather have my driving force GT than any of the wheels made by Fanatec. They have the porsche branding, and work on the 360, but thats as far as the apeal goes for me.
If you don't have FFB then you'd have to re spring the wheel, which can be hard or easy depending on the wheel and will void the waranty if you still have one.
If you have an FFB wheel then just increase the force in the game, if it is maxed out and the wheel is still weak the wheel is most likely failing and pushing it harder won't help.
If you have an FFB wheel then just increase the force in the game, if it is maxed out and the wheel is still weak the wheel is most likely failing and pushing it harder won't help.
There are so many factors that can effect a benchmark or the actual real world performance that the benchmarks arn't ever going to be reliable.
nine times out of ten one card is going to be good for one thing and another is going to be good for something else.
It's always a trade off. If you can look at the specs and consider what you are going to use it for, knowing that ATI and Nvidia count things differently, you can factor that in and figure out which one is actualy better for your task.
I've looked at alot of graphics cards that boast big numbers and passed them up for cards with lower numbers, but they are better, simply because they are geared for what I do.
Like you said, the numbers mean very little when they arn't measured on the same scale. But benchmark numbers mean nothing if you arn't using the exact same computer system they are.
Basicaly I'm saying, if the benchmark somehow covers exactly what you are going to be using it for, then fine, it might be accurate. But if the benchmark doesn't cover what you are going to use it for there is no way it will be of any use to you.
nine times out of ten one card is going to be good for one thing and another is going to be good for something else.
It's always a trade off. If you can look at the specs and consider what you are going to use it for, knowing that ATI and Nvidia count things differently, you can factor that in and figure out which one is actualy better for your task.
I've looked at alot of graphics cards that boast big numbers and passed them up for cards with lower numbers, but they are better, simply because they are geared for what I do.
Like you said, the numbers mean very little when they arn't measured on the same scale. But benchmark numbers mean nothing if you arn't using the exact same computer system they are.
Basicaly I'm saying, if the benchmark somehow covers exactly what you are going to be using it for, then fine, it might be accurate. But if the benchmark doesn't cover what you are going to use it for there is no way it will be of any use to you.
If something like that happend to me, I'd tear the whole computer apart and rebuild it making sure all connections are tight and secure and no wires are damaged.
I would suggest doing that now, to make sure you have no ground faults.
By tear it apart I mean lie the case on its side, remove all power connections, remove IDE and SATA cables, hang all of the wire looms for power out the side or top of the case since it is on it's side.
Check all cables for damage and check the braided shields, if you have them, for damage. If everything looks good, begin to put it back together carefully and find ways to manage all the cables so thay don't rest against anything sharp.
If you have any home made power connections for things like fans or lights, I would consider using heat shrink or electrical tape to cover them.
If you suspect there is a grounding problem I would not run the computer if I where you.
I would suggest doing that now, to make sure you have no ground faults.
By tear it apart I mean lie the case on its side, remove all power connections, remove IDE and SATA cables, hang all of the wire looms for power out the side or top of the case since it is on it's side.
Check all cables for damage and check the braided shields, if you have them, for damage. If everything looks good, begin to put it back together carefully and find ways to manage all the cables so thay don't rest against anything sharp.
If you have any home made power connections for things like fans or lights, I would consider using heat shrink or electrical tape to cover them.
If you suspect there is a grounding problem I would not run the computer if I where you.
Sometimes there is a HUGE discrepancy.
Benchmarks are bull most of the time, I never look at them. I look at the characteristics of the hardware.
I've seen where a graphics card that is benchmarked as being much better is beaten by the card it was marked against.
For instance, my realy old Number nine savage3 8mb agp was marked against an nvidia card with 16mb on agp (can't remember what nvidia card though). It said I would get 10fps more at 800x600 resolutions with the nvidia card, where as I actualy got 20fps more in all situations with the savage3.
Unfortunately Number Nine tech shut down, they could have been a real contender with the cards they made.
Since then, I don't even look at benchmarks let alone take what they say as fact.
That show isn't completely scripted, I know that for a fact.
There are people who have lost their license after being on that show, or their insurance goes way up. It's supported by the OPP and RCMP.
Alot of the tests they do on that show are pretty good, and should probably be standard for getting your license, others are silly and are there just to show how stupid some people realy can be.
And if you think someone can't be that bad and shake the wheel like that, I have seen alot worse than that.
There are people who have lost their license after being on that show, or their insurance goes way up. It's supported by the OPP and RCMP.
Alot of the tests they do on that show are pretty good, and should probably be standard for getting your license, others are silly and are there just to show how stupid some people realy can be.
And if you think someone can't be that bad and shake the wheel like that, I have seen alot worse than that.
Personaly, my absolute favorite racing movie to date was made in 1966, Grand Prix has to be the best down to earth racing movie ever.
The scenes inbetween races are also realy well done, they arn't just a bunch of bull they put in to call it a movie. It has an amazing story, and some amazing racing footage. It's a legendary movie from a legendary era of racing.
The only thing that would have made it better is if they had been able to use the footage from the nurburgring, but that race footage was set aside for another movie that, sadly, never got finnished.
The scenes inbetween races are also realy well done, they arn't just a bunch of bull they put in to call it a movie. It has an amazing story, and some amazing racing footage. It's a legendary movie from a legendary era of racing.
The only thing that would have made it better is if they had been able to use the footage from the nurburgring, but that race footage was set aside for another movie that, sadly, never got finnished.
LOL, I love that show, because every one of those people HAS a license and shoulden't, it brings a very big problem to light.
People still arn't understanding what I'm getting at when I say everyone should have to learn manual. Its subconsious training, you have to be more aware because driving a manual isn't as easy as pressing the gas and turning the wheel. Theres a lot more to pay attention to when you are learning.
If you learn to drive a manual first, and are actualy good at it, then you will have the mindest and skill to drive any vehicle you want. I never said all people who drive manuals are better drivers, only the ones who drive manuals well are the ones who benefit from it.
It's about training multi-tasking and higher awareness in new drivers, it has nothing to do with people who have been driving for years already. Most of the people who have been driving for years already are set in their ways, good or bad.
For the most part it's having the extra overhead so that when things do get intense it never drops below the refresh rate. Although that should only be the case with V-sync off, with it on it should remain at refresh all the time. However, the card should still be able to run at high FPS with V-sync off, if it can't there is no way it will hold v-sync frame rates under load.
I think the only reason I can run things at such high settings is because both my monitors are limmited to 1280x1024, the CRT's max is the same as the native of my TFT.
I've played crysis on this computer once, and that was the demo running on an HD2600 pro.
Oddly enough it ran at all high settings decently well, not great but decent. No AA or AF though, and at 1024x768 on my old CRT.
With my current setup I think I could get it on high at native, but not ultra high, and probably very little if any AA and AF.
Crysis has great graphics though, I don't understand how Age of Conan can be asking for more than what you've got considering the graphics it generates. It must be a real resource hog.
I've played crysis on this computer once, and that was the demo running on an HD2600 pro.
Oddly enough it ran at all high settings decently well, not great but decent. No AA or AF though, and at 1024x768 on my old CRT.
With my current setup I think I could get it on high at native, but not ultra high, and probably very little if any AA and AF.
Crysis has great graphics though, I don't understand how Age of Conan can be asking for more than what you've got considering the graphics it generates. It must be a real resource hog.
What screen resolution do you want to run at?
I run everything on High plus 8x MSAA and 16x AF at 1280x1024 (native of monitor) in Team Fortress 2 on my Sapphire HD3850 512mb gddr3 AGP, and everything the same in bioshock and every other game I play. Hell even Insurgency doesn't lag, and it has some seriously large open spaces.
I never go below 30fps, usualy sits around 35-50 in heavy action scenes.
I'm running a 3.2ghz P4 prescott HT on an 800mhz FSB and 2GB of DDR @ 400mhz.
I run everything on High plus 8x MSAA and 16x AF at 1280x1024 (native of monitor) in Team Fortress 2 on my Sapphire HD3850 512mb gddr3 AGP, and everything the same in bioshock and every other game I play. Hell even Insurgency doesn't lag, and it has some seriously large open spaces.
I never go below 30fps, usualy sits around 35-50 in heavy action scenes.
I'm running a 3.2ghz P4 prescott HT on an 800mhz FSB and 2GB of DDR @ 400mhz.
That would be paradise for me, just spending hours building the car from the ground up.
I did that with a bike once, but its not as time consuming, not enough parts.
That right there is how computers get fried, $100 for both? more like $60 for a good case and at least $80 for a seperate PSU. I payed $80 for my Xblade case and $100 on a 500w power supply.
NEVER use the PSU that comes with the case, its always going to be absolute garbage. Instead buy a good case without a PSU and buy a seperate unit.
PSUs are extremely important and many people overlook them. If you get a shit one it will be cheap now, but later it could cost you many times it's own price, like when it nukes everything in your system when it dies.
I was just waiting for this to happen, I knew it was comming a long time ago.
GM has been the worst out of the big north american auto makers, too many mestakes in R&D, quality control, and branch company management.
As nice as my family's 6.5L turbo diesel Express 3500 is, its a lemon, nothing but problems since it rolled off the assembly line. The only reason we still have it is because the alternative would be an overpriced used Ford Econoline 350 turbo diesel.
Why overpriced? because everyone knows that the econoline 350 is miles ahead of the Express 3500 in terms of quality and reliability.
Before we got the Chevy we had nothing but ford trucks, first an Econoline 150 cube van, and then a 150 super extended. both of them ran until they where so beat up they wheren't even road legal anymore.
We only bought the chevy because the super extended 150 got side swiped by a driver that fell asleep, and the insurance woulden't pay for the body work to make the truck road legal again.
The chevy eats fuel pump controlers, and has problems with axle seals and the vacuum pump.
GM has been the worst out of the big north american auto makers, too many mestakes in R&D, quality control, and branch company management.
As nice as my family's 6.5L turbo diesel Express 3500 is, its a lemon, nothing but problems since it rolled off the assembly line. The only reason we still have it is because the alternative would be an overpriced used Ford Econoline 350 turbo diesel.
Why overpriced? because everyone knows that the econoline 350 is miles ahead of the Express 3500 in terms of quality and reliability.
Before we got the Chevy we had nothing but ford trucks, first an Econoline 150 cube van, and then a 150 super extended. both of them ran until they where so beat up they wheren't even road legal anymore.
We only bought the chevy because the super extended 150 got side swiped by a driver that fell asleep, and the insurance woulden't pay for the body work to make the truck road legal again.
The chevy eats fuel pump controlers, and has problems with axle seals and the vacuum pump.
Arctic cooling are probably the best fans I have seen, scythe are a close second and I've never heard of the last two.
If you want proper cooling you need to have an exhaust at the back, an intake at the front and an intake at the side.
Pulling air out the side of the case will just lower the airflow out of the back and might actualy have a negative impact on cooling anywhere it doesn't directly pull air from. You are better off having the two fans at the back suck out, that would be PSU fan and rear exhaust. Then have the fan at the side and at the front push air in.
If you want proper cooling you need to have an exhaust at the back, an intake at the front and an intake at the side.
Pulling air out the side of the case will just lower the airflow out of the back and might actualy have a negative impact on cooling anywhere it doesn't directly pull air from. You are better off having the two fans at the back suck out, that would be PSU fan and rear exhaust. Then have the fan at the side and at the front push air in.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG