PTS Flowbench Forum

65mustang393 wrote:Can't Harold shed some light on the SF bench calibration? He used to work there, correct?

I have all the documentation being emailed to me in the AM. It's all on his work computer.

Chad Speier wrote:Bruce, are your plates being supplied to Jamison and shipped with a Sanez bench?

I am not supplying them unless they special order something for a customer, I think my pricing was to high for them to buy to supply for every flowbench? I was not willing to drop my prices for a qty discount, really didn't think I needed to?

Much more than this I can not talk about on the public forum as I do value my customer's privacy.

I'm truly an orphan in the Flowbench community, don't think anyone likes me other than the forum members

Brucepts wrote:

Chad Speier wrote:Bruce, are your plates being supplied to Jamison and shipped with a Sanez bench?

I am not supplying them unless they special order something for a customer, I think my pricing was to high for them to buy to supply for every flowbench? I was not willing to drop my prices for a qty discount, really didn't think I needed to?

Much more than this I can not talk about on the public forum as I do value my customer's privacy.

I do know that every bench that is shipped is calibrated with the plate they send with it. It very well might be an Audie since their benches are equipped with that unit.

Reply back to my PM I sent earlier today and I'll send u a reply

Chad Speier wrote:Get the bench calibrated properly then you have fixture, clay radius vs a Brezenski, vs a proper 1"/.750 radius plate. Then you have valve openers, and blah blah blah. So at the end of the day it all equals out and I know when I put my plates on my bench, that part is correct. I can't find it in me to intentionally make the bench read low because it doesn't match a flawed system.

My bench doesn't read 3-4% high, the rest are 3-4% out of calibration.

I haven't even started on how the bench reads velocity yet!

It almost sounds like you're "hot rodding" the set up for the best numbers! For comparison, I do use the Brzezinski style inlet and valve opener. What differences have you seen?

65mustang393 wrote:

Chad Speier wrote:Get the bench calibrated properly then you have fixture, clay radius vs a Brezenski, vs a proper 1"/.750 radius plate. Then you have valve openers, and blah blah blah. So at the end of the day it all equals out and I know when I put my plates on my bench, that part is correct. I can't find it in me to intentionally make the bench read low because it doesn't match a flawed system.

My bench doesn't read 3-4% high, the rest are 3-4% out of calibration.

I haven't even started on how the bench reads velocity yet!

It almost sounds like you're "hot rodding" the set up for the best numbers! For comparison, I do use the Brzezinski style inlet and valve opener. What differences have you seen?

You know what if your serious about this you will do your own research.

I don't lie about the numbers and I certainly don't set my stuff up for best number, what a idiotic thing to say..

You know that your pitot tube will tell you if your numbers are low or high... That is if it has been calibrated as well.

Chad Speier wrote:

65mustang393 wrote:

Chad Speier wrote:Get the bench calibrated properly then you have fixture, clay radius vs a Brezenski, vs a proper 1"/.750 radius plate. Then you have valve openers, and blah blah blah. So at the end of the day it all equals out and I know when I put my plates on my bench, that part is correct. I can't find it in me to intentionally make the bench read low because it doesn't match a flawed system.

My bench doesn't read 3-4% high, the rest are 3-4% out of calibration.

I haven't even started on how the bench reads velocity yet!

It almost sounds like you're "hot rodding" the set up for the best numbers! For comparison, I do use the Brzezinski style inlet and valve opener. What differences have you seen?

You know what if your serious about this you will do your own research.

I don't lie about the numbers and I certainly don't set my stuff up for best number, what a idiotic thing to say..

You know that your pitot tube will tell you if your numbers are low or high... That is if it has been calibrated as well.

Chad, you want to call me an idiot? Fine, I'll call you a liar.

You don't like the data I post. Too bad. It's honest.

What amazes me is the discussion always gets around to "who makes the most airflow" in CFM. That seems to be the pissing point. It's like arguing about who has the biggest penis. If you can't get it hard what good is it if it is a foot long.

Why would a person want to put 400+ cfm heads on a 350 inch engine? Especially if it only turns 7500 rpm. This is why we need to be accurate so you can build cfm plus the correct velocity for what you are doing. This has been discussed here on the forum.

An 8" PVC pipe flow a ton of air and I did not have to port on it one iota. What have I accomplished? This is one reason I really respect Larry Meaux and his ability as he seems to know how to really make a head work for the application.

Brucepts wrote: look over and spy a copy of Drag Racing "something" in the magazine rack so I walk over and have me a look, on the cover they have an article listed about CNC porting heads so I find the page and have a look, hey one never knows might show a picture of a PTS Flowbench in there! Nope no picture of a PTS Flowbench but what do I see a SF1020! Now the picture is clearly taken to show the manufacturers logo prominently in the picture, the guy in the picture even looks like he is standing out of the way so it clearly shows SF1020.
Still wondering why Harold made no mention of my parts in his book as he clearly used my plates for some of the pictures and I know they are being used in other commercial places

I was the product manager for a auto parts manufacturer here in SLC for awhile. We bought the plans and prototype for an intake manifold Jim McFarland had designed. It was called a "Torklink" manifold. After we got it into production we did a big article for it to be published in a magazine. We had made friends with a guy from Carcraft magazine and it was the cover story in one issue. We got a call from the "boss" at Carcraft stating that we had never spent enough money in advertising to warrant an article like that. He demanding we up our advertising budget with them and when we did not he guaranteed we would not ever have another article about one of our products again. Bruce you hit it right on the head. Most magazines favor and promote whoever gives the most money.

WOW!

Allot going on since i left to go eat the bird and drink the bourbon......

Chad As i said we will move toward the Empirical calibration hopefully with some Certification for validation.

In the mean time please don't drink the punch they must give you when you buy one of there benches,
$2500 electronics and it is still wrong... and numbers like 3% and 6% are OK????? WTF


Bruce How the heck could you think about a Sub today..... I going to POP.

Rick