johnta1 wrote:That is why I posted it here?
The infantile antics there usually derail topics all the time.
I figured here there would be more intelligent people.
(I also didn't mention any names or link until you wanted it)
Context is everything, the way you started this thread triggered red flags. If you had been upfront from the start I'd be thinking very differently now.
johnta1 wrote:This is what I do not understand?
increasing the test orifice size I was able to pull a higher depression cross the cylinder head with same WORK applied by my vacuum Motors.
Why would anyone buy the bigger (more) vacuum motors if it wasn't necessary?
More vacuum gives more opportunity to test at a variety of different vacuum levels. Engines don't always run at 28" H2O so exclusively testing at 1 level doesn't show the full picture. That however, to me, is beside the point. Why? by the quote you just gave he didn't buy bigger or more vacuum motors. What he says he did was change the test orifice size and obtained a higher depression with the same level of work from the motors.
johnta1 wrote:Or even use different plates?
(for more accuracy?)
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
To change the amount of vacuum and/or flow.
Why don't you ask John Marcella? If you keep your tone neutral, and don't irk people, on the other forum you may actually get a civil answer.
Every job is a self portrait of the person who does it.
Autograph your work with excellence.