ReconRat

haha, very good. Now if you have a stock 2.75 ratio, and want it to lay the torque down quicker, you'd go higher. Like 15F 44R for 2.93. So if you had a 17 front what sprocket on the back would do the same ratio? durrr, 17x2.93=49.81, or 50 teeth. But it's actually a 50/17=2.94. A tiny bit more away from stock. Somewhere I've got an Excel spreadsheet that shows me all these combinations of ratios. At least the ones I was interested in. Bonus question: if your stock speedometer reads 6% too low (or high), what sprockets would you use to correct it? Double bonus question, what change in tire circumference percentage would make the same change?

Yup, the Roadster, not the Cafe Racer. Your title made me think of the kid that brought home a pocket full of baby copperhead snakes. Worms, he called them. Poisonous at birth, but not easy to agitate into biting.

Argh.... SAEJ1349 explains the effects of humidity on the fuel air mix. It may or may not increase horsepower (or fuel efficiency). Moisture in the air, displaces the air, part of which is oxygen. Air density technically decreases at high humidity, resulting in less horsepower. The water itself can have other effects, which can increase the efficiency of combustion. Detonation is suppressed, so timing can change or boost can be increased at that moment. The fuel-air charge can be cooled prior to the combustion chamber. The reduction of oxygen can create a rich condition with the high humidity. edit: Also an interesting drop in temperature as heat is lost in turning water into steam. So basically results will vary depending on the engine, tune and setup. And the weather. Here is a calculator for your amusement: http://www.csgnetwork.com/relhumhpcalc.html Watch the horsepower go down as the humidity goes up.

Blood & Chrome Episode 5 & 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ytt0Fp3To

Heat warps rotors way too often. Anything that would cause an uneven distribution of heat, or a rapid quenching unevenly. The way it's torqued can also do it on a car, but not with a floating rotor, I'd think. When I read it was crimped, I thought it meant the fitting was re-crimped. There are obviously tools for that. Not very common to find anyone that knows how to use them. They get used on aircraft assemblies a lot. But buying them nice and new and "cut to length" is easier and preferred. I haven't seen a hose crimp clamp in years. It's pretty rough on the hose, so it would get replaced anyway.

Yeah, air density and % humidity will effect performance. And some odd factors like cold air is denser, or air low to the ground is denser, ram air is denser (need some speed for that), etc. edit: military piston engines in WW2 would inject mass quantities of water and/or ethanol, when the pilot got in a jam and wanted a brief increase in horsepower. Limited to being used twice, and then the engine had to be torn down and inspected. edit: An increase in supercharger boost was used when this was done.

Pulls the moisture right out of the air, and does it fairly quickly. Namib Desert beetle inspires self-filling water bottle So, if the technology were combined with an air intake system on a combustion engine, It could max out the humidity in the air charge. That would be a fuel savings, at least in the drier parts of the world. I wonder if it can do that fast enough.

I did not start this thread to have anything to do with Obama and Romney. Health care is coming regardless of who was elected. Drop the politics and grow the fuck up.

lol, most of those items have already happened. edit: and it didn't matter who was elected. This relates to implementing health care. And is Forbes really considered conservative? Not from some of the articles I've read there.

I also bought improved tires. Now expecting not to need them. I had a snow blower, right after a storm, and it didn't snow for years. Got rid of the snow blower, and it snowed again. It must be in the fine print that no one ever reads.

forbes.com says to expect: Health care premiums will go up. Some provisions will be repealed. Government spending will increase. State Medicaid costs will soar. State and Federal taxes will go up. Employer sponsored plans will shrink. Pay will go up, due to employer shifting payment from provider to employee.

Been there, done that. Next question. What effect will national health care have on Veteran's Administration benefits? As far as I can tell the current write-ups for the bill exempt veterans who are enrolled in VA benefits from having to participate. They will have to comply if they want to use care facilities outside of the VA. (There are plenty of exceptions to non-VA services which the VA will cover.) The decision will be through the IRS, who will control the penalty for not having bought health insurance per the national plan. The penalty is through the IRS and so is the collection of the penalty. Which will be deducted from the refund. If there is no refund, nothing can be collected. There might be a way around that. Once a certain limit is reached, assets could be confiscated. Currently VA does not cover dependents, and currently most insurers do not cover dependents without the principle policy holder being included.

wow, j-pop techno... whodathunk

Good point. But then it's endless wheelies. Somewhere in between is a comfort zone.

Yes what Desmo-Brian said. There are compelling reasons to use stock gearing. The factory is pretty close to a "do all" gearing ratio. If you're doing something different than average, by all means experiment with ratios. I've tried gearing up and down. I now avoid it. I did like one down front or 3 up in back for around town on a small bike, but many larger bikes don't need it at all. And so far "gearing up for freeway" isn't too attractive either. Just too bogged down when in traffic.

I hate to burst bubbles (no I don't), so nobody take this personal (somebody will). I read an analysis for the effects of cost on health care change. It didn't matter who won the election, changes are coming since the system needs changes. To pay for nationalized (or changed) health care: Federal income taxes paid under Romney would go up. federal income taxes under Obama would go up slightly more. Skip that part, it's too late now. We now need to survive the actual changes to the health care system itself. 1. We need to have coverage. There is some risk that heath care coverage could be lost or hard to find. A simple assumption is that there really hasn't been an increase in doctors to handle an increase in patients. The system will have to adjust to that. Not enough doctors are graduating. Too many general practitioners are fleeing for alternate types of medical practice. Not so much a problem in cities, but rural areas and small towns have seen this happen for a decade or more. One of the major complaints was the horrors of dealing with the bureaucracy of Medicare claims. (And new methods of federal claims risk the same or greater horrors.) 2. We need quality coverage, similar or better than what we had. There is risk there also as the system absorbs changes and adjusts. (And cheats, since there are probably a few loopholes to do so.) This is the most personal part, where actual or indirect costs to the people can add up fast. 3. I certainly expect some providers and hospitals and pharmaceutical manufactures to not play nice. We will have to survive that part also. This part becomes personal. People will have to find and deal with it. This is probably the easy part. People are very good at dealing with this and communicating their information. 4. Some states will handle this differently. This might be the interesting part. Some will be better, and some will be worse.

In large corporations the reasonable union vs non-unions are basically exactly the same for benefits. In situations where the employer thinks the union is unreasonable on a particular benefit, another benefit will generally suffer. By contract most often, it's accepted and agreed upon. No surprises. But yeah, there are a lot of variables, and sometimes crazy situations.

Good choice. Since accidents are common in intersections when people do things out of the ordinary. Turning would be good (and normal).

I shouldn't have said variable ratio. It's an uneven ratio because of the original number of teeth front/rear. Like mine is 16F and 44R, which is a 1:2.75 ratio. So there really isn't a perfect changing of the front sprocket up or down one or two teeth that could possibly result in an exact match. But something close could be found. So yes, on my sprockets if I wanted to go down one tooth in the front, then 3 teeth up in the back instead would be close. It would be slightly more "than one in the front", or basically 1.09 tooth in the front change. 10% more. Confusing enough? Actually, I'd rather go up 2 or 3 in the back and keep my stock front sprocket. The rubber dampener on mine does kill vibration. I've noticed the difference between the two bikes I have. And I will switch it back some day. Not all bikes will be that way though. Liter I-4, probably so.

Well, you can't see everything. But the oddness should have been a warning. And he apparently couldn't judge and handle the variables of some one missing his turn signal. Seriously, throw in a third variable and all hell could easily result.

It's a variable ratio depending on the front/rear number of teeth that you start with. (stock) Easiest way is with a calculator to crunch the numbers. Finding equivalent ratios. (Or a change in ratio.) http://www.sprocketcalculator.com/ http://www.gearingcommander.com/ http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/calcsprocketdiam.html edit: yeah, and it doesn't make torque, instead it applies torque more efficiently (or not). Similar result.

Did not know about Meijer, but these have low cost on certain meds: CVS Pharmacy Walmart Kroger Pharmacy Target Sams Club Finding this info at http://www.goodrx.com/ . I do not know if this is a reasonable website or not.

Also, it becomes difficult or impossible to calculate the required 80%-20% ratio between the medical costs and administrative costs that a health provider must prove to the government. It isn't under their control to an extent to be able to do that. Here's a possible look at what happens, since Massachusetts is so similar already. Interesting, because mine has already switched to free annual preventive care visits. And some other little changes I haven't paid much attention to. edit: So it sounds to me that an HSA is a winner for the employee if it can survive.

Basically an HSA is a type of HDHP (high deductable health plan). Those don't meet the actuary rules set to determine how a health provider operates. The simple problem is that the employee contribution is not counted, only part of the health provider contribution. Which causes false data to effect the rating of the health care provider. HSAs Losing Luster Under Obamacare googled: obamacare hsa limits

Back in the beginning of the first considerations of a national health plan it, HSAs were mentioned as something that wouldn't work out. I haven't heard anything at all since then. Which means nothing either way, but still unknown. Basically the cash is going into the individuals pocket, and not into the national collective. If it survives, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a penalty later on for having one. Time to do a little research, heh?