Flowbench thought process?

[Brucepts]

Maybe it's just me . . . but as I travel through the internet world of various forums it seems to me that if you do not have a commercially produced flowbench you can't possibly think your flowbench it works as well?

Could it be those who appear that way, spent way more than they now realize they needed to and are trying to justifing it?

Again just maybe my perception and I'm just throwing this out there to spark a little discussion . . .

[Flash]

Yeah i have had this conversation with some.................most i don't bother with the discussion, other are such asshats, well we don't need them to find this forum any ways. and yet others that have heard of this forum, want to build one........just not high enough on there priority list yet.

[craigapd]

Its 50/50 for me, flowbenches in general arent THAT widespread here in the UK, so alot of people are impressed I have one at all, whilst others are of that exact opinion "well its homemade, its never going to be good as a SF" etc.

That said, the ones that have a niggle are always impressed with the speed/repeatability of testing with my set-up.

[1960FL]

I find this whole concept quite humorous, it is like saying the guy that can do integration by parts with paper and pencil is not quite at the same math level as the guy with the fancy HP Graphing calculator!

Personally I think the real issue is they spent allot of money on a tool that they have learned how to use but do not know how it works, thus they are at a disadvantage to the shop that built a bench and understands how it works.

In other words there just Scared !


Rick

Oh BTW i guess Smokey wasn't as good either? hahahahah

[coulterracn]

Oh BTW i guess Smokey wasn't as good either? hahahahah

Yep, and Dyno Don, Dick Landy, etc....

Chad Speier, Denis @ airflowdevelopment, and the list goes on.

[hdwgfx]

DITTO Rick and Flash.....

Hey what do those SF only guys say when they get beat by a DIY bencher or the DIY bencher holds records (which they have for many years) , it must have been a fluke or I guess it would go even faster if the guy had a SF bench .. there are followers and then there are leaders and then best, the innovators who dare to go where no man has gone before

IMHO of course ...

[86rocco]

There's probably no convincing the SF guys but IMHO, the test results from Bruce's pass around plates permanently killed the myth that high dollar commercial benches are necessary better than a well built DIY bench.

[coulterracn]

Yesterday Bruce mentioned the Pass around Plates on a thread on SpeedTalk, the guy's basically ignored him.

[DaveMcLain]

First off, I own a Superflow bench and I've had it for about 10 years. A friend of mine has a bench that he built himself using some equipment from Audie. He knows quite a bit about porting, certainly much more than me and he's used his bench to help him produce some very fine work and to learn a great deal. We've sent stuff back and forth and our results are virtually identical so either bench is as good as the other when it comes to repeatability and numbers.

He's struggled with the "it's not a Superflow or whatever" from several people who really should know better. The only reason THEIR results differ from his or mine are because of the way THEY use the flow bench, their techniques which are at times questionable, lack of calibration etc.

There was a time back in the early 1970's that the Superflow bench was a home built piece. I've been to Superflow and I've seen the very early one that they have sitting in their lobby. It's nothing special and certainly no more "polished" than many of the awesome home built benches posted on this forum.

What's the old saying? "The poor craftsman always blames his tools". This is so true....

[blaktopr]

Agree, agree, agree. "Asshats" are a good term for them. I couldn't read through the Speedtalk thread all the way, it made my head hurt. I couldn't believe how stubborn SF guys can be. The few who spoke up are the ones who understand how a bench works. And those are the people who have great results. So I came to a conclusion and I don't want to offend anyone but...

When a "head porter" (most but not all SF guys) needs to compare a head to check why the numbers are different across other benches, then maybe they need to learn a little more before continuing. See, if one can understand "how" a bench works (math, etc,) then that same person would understand the variances between head adaptors, radius, etc. If now you are smart enough to know that, then one will be smart enough to know that you are only comparing the porters hand and mind on a static measuring instrument.

So lets say Ray, Chad, and myself were to port a SBC head. Of course the numbers will vary a little because each of us will shape the port a little different. (I know you guys know this, I'm venting). We would know that is the reason for CFM differences, not because of a bench "type". Maybe I will post something over there.