Re: Newbie Questions
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote
> -jc wrote:
> >
> > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
>
> Is that the way you richen your two cycle?

Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
fuel + same air = richer.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote
> -jc wrote:
> >
> > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
>
> Is that the way you richen your two cycle?

Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
fuel + same air = richer.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote
> -jc wrote:
> >
> > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
>
> Is that the way you richen your two cycle?

Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
fuel + same air = richer.


--
- Jeff
- ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

We weren't talking aobut the jets, only the mixture of gas and oil. This
discussion was never about fuel going through the carburator. Perhaps "rich"
is the problem word here. You are using rich in terms of fuel/air mixture, I
am using rich solely to describe the gas/oil misture. Gas that has a 50:1
mixture with oil is less "rich" than gas that has a 25:1 mixture with oil,
where richness is a word to describe the oil content of the mixture.

The point being that the fuel mixture analogy of gas and oil is an inverse
analogy to what is needed to describe gear ratios.




"-jc" <SpamFree@DieSpammers.com> wrote in message
news:btfhge$eot$1@heap.juniper.net...
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
> > "-jc" wrote
> >
> > > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
> > >
> > That may be, but 50:1 has more gas than 25:1.
> >
> > Richness is measured from the perspective of the oil not the gas. Gas is
> > gas, but gas with oil is richer than gas without oil, therefore gas with
> > more oil should be richer than gas with less oil, and gas where 50 parts
> are
> > gas for each part of oil has less oil than gas where there is 25 parts
of
> > gas for each part of oil. 25:1 should be richer than 50:1 because there
is
> > more oil in it. 25:1 is the same as 50:2, and 50:2 has more oil than
50:1
> by
> > double the amount of oil.
>
> 50:1 has more gas, yes. The rest of your statement is incorrect.
>
> Less oil means more fuel will enter through the same sized jet. More fuel
> in the fuel/air ratio means a richer mixture will enter the combustion
> chamber. One will have to jet smaller to achieve the same performance
when
> going from 25:1 to 50:1. It may seem backwards but it's not.
>
> Oil does not figure into the combustion, only the fuel and air. More fuel
> for the same amount of air equals a richer mixture. The oil is for
> lubrication and cooling.
>
>

The topic was an analogy about gas/oil mixtures and how they might
correspond to gear ratios. I assumed througout the discussion that
appropriate changes in jetting would be done to make the ------- motor run.
The discussion started when somebody said that fuel/oil mixtures were
similar to gear ratios, the reality is that the analogy is an inverse
relationship. That is all.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

We weren't talking aobut the jets, only the mixture of gas and oil. This
discussion was never about fuel going through the carburator. Perhaps "rich"
is the problem word here. You are using rich in terms of fuel/air mixture, I
am using rich solely to describe the gas/oil misture. Gas that has a 50:1
mixture with oil is less "rich" than gas that has a 25:1 mixture with oil,
where richness is a word to describe the oil content of the mixture.

The point being that the fuel mixture analogy of gas and oil is an inverse
analogy to what is needed to describe gear ratios.




"-jc" <SpamFree@DieSpammers.com> wrote in message
news:btfhge$eot$1@heap.juniper.net...
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
> > "-jc" wrote
> >
> > > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
> > >
> > That may be, but 50:1 has more gas than 25:1.
> >
> > Richness is measured from the perspective of the oil not the gas. Gas is
> > gas, but gas with oil is richer than gas without oil, therefore gas with
> > more oil should be richer than gas with less oil, and gas where 50 parts
> are
> > gas for each part of oil has less oil than gas where there is 25 parts
of
> > gas for each part of oil. 25:1 should be richer than 50:1 because there
is
> > more oil in it. 25:1 is the same as 50:2, and 50:2 has more oil than
50:1
> by
> > double the amount of oil.
>
> 50:1 has more gas, yes. The rest of your statement is incorrect.
>
> Less oil means more fuel will enter through the same sized jet. More fuel
> in the fuel/air ratio means a richer mixture will enter the combustion
> chamber. One will have to jet smaller to achieve the same performance
when
> going from 25:1 to 50:1. It may seem backwards but it's not.
>
> Oil does not figure into the combustion, only the fuel and air. More fuel
> for the same amount of air equals a richer mixture. The oil is for
> lubrication and cooling.
>
>

The topic was an analogy about gas/oil mixtures and how they might
correspond to gear ratios. I assumed througout the discussion that
appropriate changes in jetting would be done to make the ------- motor run.
The discussion started when somebody said that fuel/oil mixtures were
similar to gear ratios, the reality is that the analogy is an inverse
relationship. That is all.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

We weren't talking aobut the jets, only the mixture of gas and oil. This
discussion was never about fuel going through the carburator. Perhaps "rich"
is the problem word here. You are using rich in terms of fuel/air mixture, I
am using rich solely to describe the gas/oil misture. Gas that has a 50:1
mixture with oil is less "rich" than gas that has a 25:1 mixture with oil,
where richness is a word to describe the oil content of the mixture.

The point being that the fuel mixture analogy of gas and oil is an inverse
analogy to what is needed to describe gear ratios.




"-jc" <SpamFree@DieSpammers.com> wrote in message
news:btfhge$eot$1@heap.juniper.net...
> "CRWLR" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote
> > "-jc" wrote
> >
> > > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
> > >
> > That may be, but 50:1 has more gas than 25:1.
> >
> > Richness is measured from the perspective of the oil not the gas. Gas is
> > gas, but gas with oil is richer than gas without oil, therefore gas with
> > more oil should be richer than gas with less oil, and gas where 50 parts
> are
> > gas for each part of oil has less oil than gas where there is 25 parts
of
> > gas for each part of oil. 25:1 should be richer than 50:1 because there
is
> > more oil in it. 25:1 is the same as 50:2, and 50:2 has more oil than
50:1
> by
> > double the amount of oil.
>
> 50:1 has more gas, yes. The rest of your statement is incorrect.
>
> Less oil means more fuel will enter through the same sized jet. More fuel
> in the fuel/air ratio means a richer mixture will enter the combustion
> chamber. One will have to jet smaller to achieve the same performance
when
> going from 25:1 to 50:1. It may seem backwards but it's not.
>
> Oil does not figure into the combustion, only the fuel and air. More fuel
> for the same amount of air equals a richer mixture. The oil is for
> lubrication and cooling.
>
>

The topic was an analogy about gas/oil mixtures and how they might
correspond to gear ratios. I assumed througout the discussion that
appropriate changes in jetting would be done to make the ------- motor run.
The discussion started when somebody said that fuel/oil mixtures were
similar to gear ratios, the reality is that the analogy is an inverse
relationship. That is all.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

So rather than jetting it, you just remove the lubrication.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

-jc wrote:
>
> Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
> concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
> the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
> fuel + same air = richer.
>
> --
> - Jeff
> - ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

So rather than jetting it, you just remove the lubrication.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

-jc wrote:
>
> Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
> concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
> the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
> fuel + same air = richer.
>
> --
> - Jeff
> - ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

So rather than jetting it, you just remove the lubrication.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

-jc wrote:
>
> Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
> concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
> the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
> fuel + same air = richer.
>
> --
> - Jeff
> - ........................ then again, what do I know.

Re: Newbie Questions
 

"-jc" <SpamFree@DieSpammers.com> wrote in message
news:btfhnd$fi8$1@heap.juniper.net...
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@cox.net> wrote
> > -jc wrote:
> > >
> > > And I only pointed out your misstatement. Regardless of the earlier
> > > discussion, 50:1 is richer than 25:1.
> >
> > Is that the way you richen your two cycle?
>
> Yes. Forget about the oil when considering the richness of mixture and
> concentrate on the fuel/air ratio. Oil is for lubrication and cooling of
> the internals. More oil = less fuel + same air = leaner. Less oil = more
> fuel + same air = richer.
>
>
Actually, forget about the air. We are talking about the ratio of oil to
gas, not the mixture of fuel and air.

There is more oil in a 25:1 mixture than there is in a 50:1 mixture. We
don't care what will run in a motor, we only care that the relationship of
ratios is understood. The relationship of 3.73:1 gears vs. 4.56:1 gears is
the inverse of a 25:1 oil/gas mixture vs. a 50:1 oil/gas mixture.

The higher numbers in the gear ratio means lower speed and more power, but
the lower numbers in the oil/gas mixture means more oil. The analogy was
first expressed as though the lower number meant less oil, but it means more
oil.