Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="n8skow" data-source="post: 7901272" data-attributes="member: 610656">Nothing in my argument has changed since post <a href="http:////forums/usertag.php?do=list&amp;amp;action=hash&amp;amp;hash=11" target="_blank">#11</a> ... whatever your&nbsp; implying I&#039;m trying to cover up isn&#039;t making any sense. We both agree&nbsp; it&#039;s not going to be a PERFECT match. I simply pointed out it was going&nbsp; to be REASONABLY close. What you are arguing is a philosophical&nbsp; discussion on what constitutes &#039;reasonable&#039;, which I&#039;m not going to get&nbsp; drawn into.As I explained - the bottom graph is an &#039;in-car&#039;&nbsp; reading (which affects the results).The &#039;out-of-car&#039; reading will be even&nbsp; closer to the WinISD plot.The&nbsp;&nbsp; 2hz off I was citing is at port tuning - your looking at the curve&nbsp; below tuning - and yes, it&#039;s a bit further off (the 4hz you&#039;ve pointed&nbsp; out). That&#039;s a pretty reasonable margin of error, wouldn&#039;t you say?&nbsp; (Again, 5 minutes vs. 3.5 hours... I&#039;ll still take option number 1.)You&nbsp; still haven&#039;t disclosed your method for box planning, or shared any&nbsp; notes from your numerous builds to show why this method is so unusable.In fact, didn&#039;t you duck out of this conversation 5 posts ago?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="n8skow, post: 7901272, member: 610656"] Nothing in my argument has changed since post [URL="http:////forums/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=11"]#11[/URL] ... whatever your implying I'm trying to cover up isn't making any sense. We both agree it's not going to be a PERFECT match. I simply pointed out it was going to be REASONABLY close. What you are arguing is a philosophical discussion on what constitutes 'reasonable', which I'm not going to get drawn into. As I explained - the bottom graph is an 'in-car' reading (which affects the results). The 'out-of-car' reading will be even closer to the WinISD plot. The 2hz off I was citing is at port tuning - your looking at the curve below tuning - and yes, it's a bit further off (the 4hz you've pointed out). That's a pretty reasonable margin of error, wouldn't you say? (Again, 5 minutes vs. 3.5 hours... I'll still take option number 1.) You still haven't disclosed your method for box planning, or shared any notes from your numerous builds to show why this method is so unusable. In fact, didn't you duck out of this conversation 5 posts ago? [/QUOTE]

Verification