| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Where is your shop John?
sissy "John Durbin" wrote in message ... probably wouldn't last much longer than a heartbeat, from what I hear JD making a mental note to give Texass a w-i-i-i-d-e berth in the future... sancho wrote: Lizard. I mean love in the heterosexual "you're not getting my beer" kind of way, of course. i'd do durbin in a heartbeat... -- sancho and by 'a heartbeat' i mean 'his ass' |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Amp Challenge Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing??Help>>>>>>>>>>>
that challenge CANNOT BE WON!
Try reading the "war and peace" sized book of rules to the testing.... He is allowed to EQ and PROCESS any amp in the test so that it meets his stringent rules, there is NO WAY to win after HE MAKES the amps sound like he wants them to sound.... Read the rules....!! Now (IMO) the amp challenge started as a good demonstration! Typicly if amps arent overdriven or if two amps are playing the same music its pretty hard to tell them apart, in fact its damn near impossible.... But there are so many amps out there and there are some that might be different, so the amp challenge and its good intentions has bloated into a nasty bunch ao bull**** with Richard Clark at the reins.... And you think Richard Clark would pay the $10000 if someone did win???? Hell no, he is just a big blow hard! I had a little arguement with him once and he told me his proof was in one of his tech papers and I had to buy the tech paper to get his side of the story.... He told me if I didnt believe the test paper after I bought it he would refund me back the price DOUBLE!!! I bought it and now the ****er wont even answer my emails...!!! That was only $5 or $10 ... And you think he would give someone $10000.00 ... ha ha ha No WAY! he is a scumbag! Scott Gardner wrote: Speaking of Richard Clark, has anyone won his "Amplifer Challenge" yet? Or is that ten grand still sitting in his bank account? I can't find any website that's tracking the challenge, but it's been several years, so we should have heard about a winner, or at least heard about how many people have unsuccessfully attempted it. Scott Gardner On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 23:41:23 -0500, thelizman thelizman1221.yahoo@com wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
Jd,
Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
Amp Challenge Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 16:56:46 GMT, Eddie Runner
wrote: that challenge CANNOT BE WON! Try reading the "war and peace" sized book of rules to the testing.... He is allowed to EQ and PROCESS any amp in the test so that it meets his stringent rules, there is NO WAY to win after HE MAKES the amps sound like he wants them to sound.... Read the rules....!! Actually, I have read them, and they're not as bad as you make them sound. As a matter of fact, if I had been the one to write them, they'd probably be twice as long. And the rules don't say anything about Clark being able to EQ and process the amps any way he sees fit. The only equalizing or processing that would be introduced would be when one amp has some kind of a boost or filter that can't be disabled. I'm still curious about why we haven't heard of a winner, or at least heard how many people have tried. Scott Gardner Here are the rules, for those interested: THE $10,000 AMPLIFIER CHALLENGE RULES {April 21, 2000} By Richard Clark There is no question that all amps are not the same. It is very easy to measure large differences in the performance of amplifiers. This is true in nearly every known specification, including power, noise, distortion, etc. My experience has led me to believe that even though these differences can be easily measured, hearing those differences may not be so easy. Given the relatively small magnitude of performance differences, there is a giant step between amplifier performance and our ability to hear performance differences. It is claimed by designers, manufacturers and especially salespersons that differences in amplifiers are clearly audible. Reasons include "obvious" advantages of one type of circuit topology over another. For example, it is claimed that certain designs have a smoother midrange response whereas other amplifiers exhibit tighter bass. Tube fanatics claim that tube amplifiers have that "warm" sound we all need in our systems. Such descriptive terms are certainly subject to personal interpretation. It is not my intention to determine if one particular amplifier is better than another amplifier. Differences in the quality of the discrete components and constructions are more appropriate for settling the issue of "good - better - best." The sole purpose of my amplifier challenge is to determine if the differences in amplifiers are audible. What differences are Audible? I believe the perceived differences in amplifiers are all due to various factors that can be explained with basic physics and elementary psyco-acoustics. For instance, if two amplifiers are not carefully matched in volume, and one amp is slightly louder than the other, then it would be a simple matter to detect such a difference. In such an example it is important to understand that it is not the circuit topology, quality of the component, design excellence, or superb marketing and packaging that caused the noticeable difference - it was an error in the test setup! It is my present belief that as long as a modern amplifier is operated within its linear range (below overload), the differences between amps are inaudible to the human ear. Comparing Amps The idea here is for a test subject to scientifically demonstrate his/her ability to hear differences in amplifiers. It is our job to carefully match the amps so that we are comparing "apples to apples" instead of "oranges to frogs." This means that we sure wouldn't want to compare one amplifier that had + 12 dB of high frequency boost against another amplifier that was adjusted for + 12 dB of bass boost. Such a test would be easy to pass - even on identical amplifiers with consecutive serial numbers. For our comparison test, we aren't concerned with which amplifier sounds best to the test subject. We only require that the listener be able to identify each amplifier when it is powering the speakers. Since many folks seem to believe that amplifiers have some kind of distinctive sonic character, this test should be easy to pass. Right? After all, we're talking about comparing those harsh sounding, high distortion, squeaky "widget As" to those warm sounding, smooth, bass hog "widget Bs." Now pay particular attention to the following sections. Since we're looking for differences in amplifiers, and we already know that those differences are probably going to be very, very small, it is important that the parameters under our control be carefully adjusted so as to be equal as possible. This means that we must be cognizant of differences we might unknowingly introduce between amp A and amp B. They must be adjusted as identical as possible. We already mentioned the importance of volume. The same goes for the L and R balance. It sure would be easy to choose an amplifier that exhibited left side bias over a balanced amp. Right? Well, in order to keep this amplifier comparison test fair, there are a few other parameters that must be considered. I'll list them all in the following section. Amplifier Comparison Test Conditions 1. Amplifier gain controls - of both channels - are matched to within +- .05 dB. 2. Speaker wires on both amps are properly wired with respect to polarity. (+ and -) 3. That neither amp has signal phase inversion. If so correction will be made in #2 above. 4. That neither amp is loaded beyond its rated impedance. 5. That all amplifiers with signal processors have those circuits bypassed. This includes bass boost circuits, filters, etc. If frequency tailoring circuits cannot be completely bypassed an equalizer will be inserted in the signal path of one (only one and the listener can decide which) of the amps to compensate for the difference. Compensation will also be made for input and output loading that affects frequency response. Since we are only listening for differences in the sonic signature of circuit topology, the addition of an EQ in one signal path only should make the test even easier. 6. That neither amp exhibits excessive noise (including RFI). 7. That each amp can be properly driven by the test setup. Not normally a problem but it is theoretically a problem. 8. That the L and R channels are not reversed in one amp. 9. That neither amp has excessive physical noise or other indicators that can be observed by the listener. 10. That neither amp has DC OFFSET that causes audible pops when its output is switched. 11. That the channel separation of all amps in the test is at least 30 dB from 20Hz to 20kHz. In addition to these requirements the test will be conducted according to the following rules. Amplifier Test Comparison Rules 1. To make things easy we would prefer to use high quality home type loudspeakers for the test. If our speakers are not acceptable, the listener can provide any commercially available speaker system as long as it uses dynamic drivers. The actual measured impedance cannot exceed the rated load impedance of the amplifiers tested. If, however, the tester would like to perform the test in a car, we will use a car, however, it will have to be provided by the test subject. For practicality we will have to limit the number of amplifier channels to four or less. 2. Amplifiers will be powered from the same power supply at a nominal 14 volts DC. (any voltage is OK as long as it is the same for both amps) 3. The test can be conducted at any volume desired; however, the amps will not be allowed to clip. In other words, listening volume can not exceed the power capacity of the smallest amp of the pair being tested. (power capacity will be defined as clipping or 2%THD 20Hz to 10kHz, whichever is less) 4. No test signals can be used - only commercially available music. 5. The listener can compare two amps at a time for as long as desired. For practical reasons we would like to keep this at least no more than a few hours. A test session will consist of 12 A/B sequences. Passing the test will require a positive identification of each amp for all 12 sequences. Remember, guessing will get you about 6 out of 12. If the differences are so great, and a subject can really hear the difference, then he/she should be able to do so for all 12 sequences. 6. To win the $10,000.00, the listener must pass two complete sessions of 12 comparisons. Passing the test means 24 correct responses.* The amp of choice can be compared to the same or a different amp in each session - challengers choice. We have many amplifiers in our demo inventory such as, but not limited to, Alpine, Rockford, Kicker, Phoenix Gold, Precision Power, MTX, Adcom, Kenwood, Pioneer, Sony, etc. You can pick any of them or bring your own. 7. All amps must be brand name, standard production, linear voltage amplifiers. This does not exclude high current amps. Amps can not be modified and must meet factory specs. They must be "car audio amplifiers designed to be powered from a car's electrical system." 8. Failure of an amp (this includes thermal shutdown) during the test will require that the test be repeated after repair or replacement or cooling of the amp. This means that the entire test session will have to be repeated. 9. The amps will not be overloaded during the session from either a voltage or current requirement. 10. To save time the listener will have to pass a quick 8 trial session to qualify for the extended 2 session test for the money prize. Any 2 amps can be used for this test. Passing this qualifying test will require at least 6 out of 8 correct answers. 11. The amplifier power up and/or power down sequence will not be acceptable for comparison. (The turn on/off noises of some amplifiers would give it away.) 12. Although anyone is welcome to take the test, only subjects employed in the car audio industry or Car Sound subscribers are eligible for the $10,000.00 prize. 13. Cost to take the test is $100.00. $300.00 for people representing companies. Payable in advance, scheduled appointments only. Done correctly the test takes several hours and I don't have the time if you aren't serious. * Twelve correct responses in a row is certainly a lot of correct listening but $10,000 is also a lot of money for a few hours of easy listening. The way people describe the differences is that they are like night and day. I would certainly not have any trouble choosing between an apple and an orange 12 times in a row. When compared fairly I believe the differences in amps are much too small to audibly detect and certainly too small to pay large sums of extra money for. If I am wrong someone should be able to carefully take this test and win my money. Even if I am right, if enough people take the test eventually someone will take my money due to random chance. This is the reason for the large sample requirement. If you feel that you can easily pass this test but 12 sequences will give you "listening fatigue" I am willing to modify the requirements. Since the way it is being offered is a challenge and only my money is at risk I am willing to let a confident challenger "put his money where his ears are". If we are willing to make this a bet instead of a challenge, I am willing to drop 1 sequence for every thousand dollars put up by the challenger against my money. This would mean: ____My___________ _ _Your________Trails Required to win__ $10,000 to $0 = 12 Tries $9,000 to $1,000 = 11 Tries $8,000 to $2,000 = 10 Tries $7,000 to $3,000 = 9 Tries $6,000 to $4,000 = 8 Tries $5,000 to $5,000 = 7 Tries $4,000 to $6,000 = 6 Tries I will not do the test with less than 6 trails. It would be statistically meaningless and reduce the challenge to mere gambling. |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
you're awful sparky lately - not getting enough of the good stuff lately?
JD sancho wrote: sissy "John Durbin" wrote in message ... probably wouldn't last much longer than a heartbeat, from what I hear JD making a mental note to give Texass a w-i-i-i-d-e berth in the future... sancho wrote: Lizard. I mean love in the heterosexual "you're not getting my beer" kind of way, of course. i'd do durbin in a heartbeat... -- sancho and by 'a heartbeat' i mean 'his ass' |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing wrong with his test methodology, Eddie - which I would
think you'd appreciate, you being such a big fan recently of actual in-car tests vs. theory and what-not. If you notice, I very carefully sidestepped the "who came first" part and simply pointed out that he was one that hyped big caps early on ... in other words, he's predisposed to recommend them (if used correctly) but his charging system stability testing with the big MTX amps in-car with stock electrical was done without a cap, I believe. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Jd, Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
you're awful sparky lately - not getting enough of the good stuff lately?
JD could you be a bit more specific? -- sancho |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
Was I knocking his testing methodology in that post??
I dont think so. He has claimed many times that most systems dont need a cap. I agree with him there He has also claimed to be the first to use big caps in competitions. He is a liar on that point Or just ignorant of the fact that Wayne Harris and Hugh Sullivan both had them in the 84 finals about 6 or 7 years before he bought the Buick and started competing... Your right he did help bring (Jewelry) caps into the limelight (or should I say market) Before RC was makeing money on CAPS that folks dont need, the big caps were sort of an underground thing known only by a few installers.. The PRE JEWELRY CAP guys did higher voltage caps and we wired them directly to the amps power supply rails! (this is where the amp stores the voltage before it makes music with it you know that JD, im explaining it for anyone else that might be reading) instead of just hooking the lower voltage cap to the 12 volt input line where moron can do it and RC can make a buck selling caps that are purdy... I dont question RCs test methods, I only question his motives ... Everytime I look into his motives I see lies because he want to make money.... Like his cable bull**** Eddie John Durbin wrote: There's nothing wrong with his test methodology, Eddie - which I would think you'd appreciate, you being such a big fan recently of actual in-car tests vs. theory and what-not. If you notice, I very carefully sidestepped the "who came first" part and simply pointed out that he was one that hyped big caps early on ... in other words, he's predisposed to recommend them (if used correctly) but his charging system stability testing with the big MTX amps in-car with stock electrical was done without a cap, I believe. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Jd, Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
not if it's likely to result in you inviting yourself to my ass again...
JD sancho wrote: you're awful sparky lately - not getting enough of the good stuff lately? JD could you be a bit more specific? -- sancho |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
I know you guys got history... and issues. But, doesn't stop me from
pointing at the test in question as being of interest. Better than a lot of the theoretical stuff that gets spouted in here. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Was I knocking his testing methodology in that post?? I dont think so. He has claimed many times that most systems dont need a cap. I agree with him there He has also claimed to be the first to use big caps in competitions. He is a liar on that point Or just ignorant of the fact that Wayne Harris and Hugh Sullivan both had them in the 84 finals about 6 or 7 years before he bought the Buick and started competing... Your right he did help bring (Jewelry) caps into the limelight (or should I say market) Before RC was makeing money on CAPS that folks dont need, the big caps were sort of an underground thing known only by a few installers.. The PRE JEWELRY CAP guys did higher voltage caps and we wired them directly to the amps power supply rails! (this is where the amp stores the voltage before it makes music with it you know that JD, im explaining it for anyone else that might be reading) instead of just hooking the lower voltage cap to the 12 volt input line where moron can do it and RC can make a buck selling caps that are purdy... I dont question RCs test methods, I only question his motives ... Everytime I look into his motives I see lies because he want to make money.... Like his cable bull**** Eddie John Durbin wrote: There's nothing wrong with his test methodology, Eddie - which I would think you'd appreciate, you being such a big fan recently of actual in-car tests vs. theory and what-not. If you notice, I very carefully sidestepped the "who came first" part and simply pointed out that he was one that hyped big caps early on ... in other words, he's predisposed to recommend them (if used correctly) but his charging system stability testing with the big MTX amps in-car with stock electrical was done without a cap, I believe. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Jd, Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
"John Durbin" wrote in message ... not if it's likely to result in you inviting yourself to my ass again... what is not likely to result in that? -- sancho short godamned list |
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
so he *IS* sucking your dick!
John Durbin wrote: I know you guys got history... and issues. But, doesn't stop me from pointing at the test in question as being of interest. Better than a lot of the theoretical stuff that gets spouted in here. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Was I knocking his testing methodology in that post?? I dont think so. He has claimed many times that most systems dont need a cap. I agree with him there He has also claimed to be the first to use big caps in competitions. He is a liar on that point Or just ignorant of the fact that Wayne Harris and Hugh Sullivan both had them in the 84 finals about 6 or 7 years before he bought the Buick and started competing... Your right he did help bring (Jewelry) caps into the limelight (or should I say market) Before RC was makeing money on CAPS that folks dont need, the big caps were sort of an underground thing known only by a few installers.. The PRE JEWELRY CAP guys did higher voltage caps and we wired them directly to the amps power supply rails! (this is where the amp stores the voltage before it makes music with it you know that JD, im explaining it for anyone else that might be reading) instead of just hooking the lower voltage cap to the 12 volt input line where moron can do it and RC can make a buck selling caps that are purdy... I dont question RCs test methods, I only question his motives ... Everytime I look into his motives I see lies because he want to make money.... Like his cable bull**** Eddie John Durbin wrote: There's nothing wrong with his test methodology, Eddie - which I would think you'd appreciate, you being such a big fan recently of actual in-car tests vs. theory and what-not. If you notice, I very carefully sidestepped the "who came first" part and simply pointed out that he was one that hyped big caps early on ... in other words, he's predisposed to recommend them (if used correctly) but his charging system stability testing with the big MTX amps in-car with stock electrical was done without a cap, I believe. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Jd, Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm -- Lizard |
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
damn dude, you need to get some and I mean now!
JD and that warn't an invite sancho wrote: "John Durbin" wrote in message . .. not if it's likely to result in you inviting yourself to my ass again... what is not likely to result in that? -- sancho short godamned list |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>>
like I said, you got issues...
JD Eddie's closet is big enough to hold a unimog Eddie Runner wrote: so he *IS* sucking your dick! John Durbin wrote: I know you guys got history... and issues. But, doesn't stop me from pointing at the test in question as being of interest. Better than a lot of the theoretical stuff that gets spouted in here. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Was I knocking his testing methodology in that post?? I dont think so. He has claimed many times that most systems dont need a cap. I agree with him there He has also claimed to be the first to use big caps in competitions. He is a liar on that point Or just ignorant of the fact that Wayne Harris and Hugh Sullivan both had them in the 84 finals about 6 or 7 years before he bought the Buick and started competing... Your right he did help bring (Jewelry) caps into the limelight (or should I say market) Before RC was makeing money on CAPS that folks dont need, the big caps were sort of an underground thing known only by a few installers.. The PRE JEWELRY CAP guys did higher voltage caps and we wired them directly to the amps power supply rails! (this is where the amp stores the voltage before it makes music with it you know that JD, im explaining it for anyone else that might be reading) instead of just hooking the lower voltage cap to the 12 volt input line where moron can do it and RC can make a buck selling caps that are purdy... I dont question RCs test methods, I only question his motives ... Everytime I look into his motives I see lies because he want to make money.... Like his cable bull**** Eddie John Durbin wrote: There's nothing wrong with his test methodology, Eddie - which I would think you'd appreciate, you being such a big fan recently of actual in-car tests vs. theory and what-not. If you notice, I very carefully sidestepped the "who came first" part and simply pointed out that he was one that hyped big caps early on ... in other words, he's predisposed to recommend them (if used correctly) but his charging system stability testing with the big MTX amps in-car with stock electrical was done without a cap, I believe. JD Eddie Runner wrote: Jd, Richard Clark is the same one that claimed HE INVENTED the big caps in the first place!! ha ha ha he is such a liar! They were being used in cometition cars 6 or 7 years before Richard ever even competed!! Is he suckin your pecker now or what??? John Durbin wrote: yeah, yeah, yeah... but the guy is dead on the money on a lot of stuff, like the debunking of the effectiveness of high ESR super caps, this particular study I was referring to, some other good work that he's published. The AS2000 labs do some very solid product evaluation, too. JD thelizman wrote: John Durbin wrote: Rich Clark wrote a very good piece on this subject a few yeas ago, keeping in mind this is a guy that helped start the capacitor hype... Richard Clark started a lot of hype. Clark and his coat-tail riding wannabees (lovingly referred to as "clarkies") are hype-machine extraordinaires. I think my favorite bit of hype was...http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm http://www.teamrocs.com/crap/rcpunked.htm-- Lizard |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
"John Durbin" wrote in message ... damn dude, you need to get some and I mean now! JD and that warn't an invite some what, then? -- sancho confused |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
sad, very sad... there was a time when el Sancho needed no explanations
in the realm of tang. JD sancho wrote: "John Durbin" wrote in message ... damn dude, you need to get some and I mean now! JD and that warn't an invite some what, then? -- sancho confused |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where is your shop John?
Don Johnson??
FHLH... obscure references... "sancho" tR-003.at.ev1.dot.net wrote in message ... Lizard. I mean love in the heterosexual "you're not getting my beer" kind of way, of course. i'd do durbin in a heartbeat... -- sancho and by 'a heartbeat' i mean 'his ass' |
Linear Mode
