JustRandy

23 minutes ago, Mech said:

I don't think the regulators are as bad as Randy seems to think.

Maybe because you haven't seen all the threads about bad regulators over the last decade. 

A quick search:

https://www.suzukiatvforums.com/threads/1991-quad-king-250-runs-well-when-headlight-are-on.8878/

https://atvconnection.com/forums/suzuki/378708-motor-sputters-like-out-gas-then-you-turn-lights-runs-fine.html

Me answering same question from 10 years ago: https://atvconnection.com/forums/suzuki/347075-250-suzki-will-not-run-without-lights.html

Of all the atvs I've ever had, I've only had to change 2 regulators and both were these 4x4s.

The evidence is overwhelming.

Thanks but not much credit to me since that is a very common problem.  There should be a sticky about it because every 250 and 300 4x4 suzuki will get the problem eventually.  Look how much trouble could have been avoided.

Congrats on a nice sounding machine!  Try to keep it cool and change the oil often so it doesn't start smoking.  I'd put a fan on it.  Suzuki used to offer one.

https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/oem-schematic/2

Usually the epoxy on the back is cracked or burned.  Here are two examples:

The one in the bag is the one from Ricks.  They said it is for a Triumph and can handle 50 amps.

Yep the problem would get worse as revs increase.  The way to check is to see if voltage rises beyond 14.4v with rpms.  Once voltage exceeds roughly 16-18 then the CDI stops working correctly.  A quick fix is to turn the lights on which reduces the voltage.  There are threads all over the net complaining that the engine only runs with lights on.  It's such a common problem that I recommend every owner of these 4x4s swap the regulator first thing.

1 hour ago, BenderIsGreat said:

Thanks Randy.  The CDI I had already ordered arrived, and it seemed to help, and then didn't....where is the voltage regulator on these bikes?

It's on the front to the right of the steering stem bearing (would be passenger side if it's a car).  It's hard to get to with the plastic in the way so I cut the plastic and either used zip ties to put the "door" back on or else left it off.   It don't look too bad, whatever I did.  I'm pretty sure your regulator is bad because they all are.

Ricks is the way to go.  https://ricksmotorsportelectrics.com/   Call them and tell them you want something that can handle lots of amps.

I've never seen a bad CDI, but problems when hot do indicate electrical issues.  Check the regulator.  All those quads have bad ones or will eventually.  Just pop it off and look at the back.  Another way to test it is to turn the lights on and see if it runs better.  Put a big electrical load on it to lower the voltage.  The problem is the voltage runs up to 16-18 volts and causes the CDI not to function.  Turning the lights on reduces the voltage and restores CDI functionality.

If it is the regulator, don't buy another stock one.  Contact Ricks Electronics and order something bigger.

That engine doesn't care about compression leaks because the stroke is longer than the bore.  The only symptom it would produce is hard starting when cold.

I have the kingquad 300 and have put the 250 CDI on because it has a higher rev limit.

On 8/13/2022 at 2:15 PM, BenderIsGreat said:

First, I've heard that the factory mixture setting on the carb for this bike is 2 full turns out.  Can people confirm?  I've also heard that it's a fuel mix valve, not air, so screw in to lean, out to richen?  Is that correct?

No clue about the turns, but any carb with the screw towards the front of the carb has a fuel screw (turn out to richen) and any carb with the screw at the tail has an air screw (turn in to richen).

On 8/13/2022 at 2:15 PM, BenderIsGreat said:

And for the valve clearances, I've heard two different specs, one is intake 0.004" and exhaust 0.006", and that other I heard from a youtuber who claimed this bike had 'very tight' valve clearances, said 0.002" intake, and 0.004" exhaust.

0.002" intake, and 0.004" exhaust is correct.  Those are averages.  I always set the intake to .001 which is the smallest perceptible movement.  Like Mech, I don't use feelers.

If you find that your intake valve has no clearance at all then it means the valve is wearing and you will have to regrind the seat and purchase a new valve, preferably one made in Japan.  If the engine is nearly impossible to start when cold, then it almost certainly needs a new intake valve.

40 minutes ago, Mech said:

In some philosophies they say there are three types of men, the enlightened ones, the ignorant, and those that are willfully ignorant. Of the three, only the willfully ignorant can't be helped.

Calling me names because you disagree with a service manual is of no help to anyone, least of all yourself.

You should have just said, "Oh, my bad.  I made an easily understandable mistake."

But you can't say that because you've already touted being an expert on carbs with 50 years under your belt.  How could anyone like that ever admit being wrong?

I'd prefer someone who knew a little less but could admit being wrong to someone who is sure he knows it all because the one who knows how to be wrong will be right eventually while the one who knows it all will be stuck forever clinging to a fallacy for fear of looking dumb.

That is the basic reason why science advances funeral by funeral.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_principle

The only sure impediment to truth is the conviction you already have it.

When the engine is not running the well will be filled with fuel as you say, but so long as the air jet (#12 in pic) is passing air then the well will be filled with air.  I suppose the question is at what point the air jet begins to pass air and I'm not sure how we could determine that with any certainty.

The way they worded that suggests that if there is any fuel in the well, it is so quickly evacuated and replaced with air that it's irrelevant.  If it were designed to hold fuel, I think they would have specified that.

13 hours ago, Mech said:

You are lucky that I'm a patient man Randy... but I do have my limits.

Just saying....

Not sure what that's supposed to mean.  You tell me to download a manual, then you suggest the manual is wrong... and because you disagree with the manual you threaten to give me the cold shoulder?

13 hours ago, Mech said:

Try it, do your own experiments, swap the emulsion tube on your bike, see what effect it has..

Obviously I did that or I wouldn't be in possession of both tubes.  I did every conceivable experiment, including plugging the air jet, removing the air jet, swapping with other air jets.  Unfortunately that was over a decade ago and I've forgotten many of the results.  Seems like there was no way to get the bleed type to work properly.

I also have a variety of slides.  I've even filled the cavity of the bottom of slides with JB weld and have ground the cutouts of slides with rotary tools in my experiments.  I left no stone unturned.

When I say there is no way to get that carb to work, I mean practically any combination of slide, needles, needle jets, air jets, main jets that Mikuni offers will not work.  There is something fundamentally wrong with the design of that carb.

Is Mikuni also welcome to their opinions?  They also believe the little holes are to mix in air, not extra fuel.

The primary needle jet is a straight tube drawing up the fuel while the air comes up through a separate opening around the tube.  The air and fuel are not mixed together in the tube.  I guess it's good enough for 2-strokes.

But with the bleed type the air bubbles into the fuel as it's drawn up the tube.

You're right that it's important for those little holes to be unplugged, but to prevent the carb being too rich, not too lean.

I guess we both learned something lol.  I'll pay more attention to cleaning those holes in the future.

On 8/10/2022 at 5:01 PM, Mech said:

And.. carbies are not junk..  Just the wrong one for the job.

My opinion is it's junk, designed before CAD existed, and instead of tossed out of production they just relegated it to 2-stroke engines.  Some carbs have design flaws and the existence of those flaws makes them junk because the flaws are not able to be remedied or compensated for without starting over with a new chunk of aluminum and new design.

On 8/10/2022 at 5:01 PM, Mech said:

See if anyone(any one qualified) suggests snapping the throttle open as a test.. on the type of carby you have.. If you want to snap the carby open, which is not a good driving technique, then get a pumped carby..

Over the years I've seen many tutorials recommend snapping the throttle as a test that supersedes blindly lowering the idle speed and readjusting the mixture screw.  All that matters is the performance and as I said before the only reason for a pilot circuit is to generate a strong vacuum to facilitate starting.  So other than that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with idling with the slide a little higher.

I don't care much about qualifications; only results.  If the tutorial produces the results, then they're qualified.

On 8/10/2022 at 5:01 PM, Mech said:

And you see those small holes stacked up on one tube.. that indicates it needs/gets a lot of enrichment as it comes onto the needle, which means it's running lean somewhere else.. slide probably.

I believe those little holes draw in the air from an air jet.  #12 in the pic.

40 minutes ago, Mech said:

Not all two-stroke engines have those holes.

That jogged my memory.  The tube is how I know it's a 2-stroke carb.  I remember swapping that too with no luck.

I thought I posted these pics earlier:

 

The 230s and 250s carbs are the same but look how different the 250s needle is.

It says "Super Tuning Manual" by Mikuni.  https://www.mikuni.com/pdf/vmmanual.pdf

I've read that it's a 2-stroke carb which explains all my trouble.  I fiddled with it for years on various engines and never could get it tuned right on any 4-stroke engine.  In the end I figured there must be a fundamental flaw with its design which makes it better suited for 2-strokes.  To me it's essentially junk and that's the advice I'd give anyone thinking about trying one.  If you're looking for a good puzzle, they only cost about $100.  A guy I met on an atv forum sent me one for free 15 years ago which is how I got involved with it.  It turned out to be a very expensive gift, but I learned a lot about carbs.

Getting that manual is pretty much what I did.  The pics I posted are from the VM mikuni manual.

Practically everyone back in the day was putting TM28 flatslides on their 230 quadsports, but as far as I know no one got it tuned perfectly.  A common question was what pilot jet everyone else was using because no pilot jet ever seemed to work.

A buddy had a 350 warrior that he put a 32mm roudslide on and it was a constant nightmare that went on for weeks.  He'd buy a few needles and we'd tinker all day trying to figure out which needles in the catalog we should try next, then he'd go order them and wait.  That went on and on seems like forever.  We never got it perfect, but good enough to ride.

My 300 king quad had a restrictive small carb for torque, but I installed a sport cam and ported the head and high comp piston so I needed a bigger carb.  I settled on a 30mm mikuni from some dirt bike on ebay.  It runs great except for a lean spot just above idle that I can't make go away.  If I richen the lean spot then the idle is too rich.  And I already have an extra washer under the needle to raise it more so I can't richen the upper throttle opening anymore without sanding needles or buying a bunch of random needles which I don't want to do.  So I just live with the lean spot which gets better as it warms up.

I also have a 300 Lakota with a 32mm roundslide that I'm sure also has that problem because the 32mm mikuni is junk that won't work right on anything.

Basically, in my experience, anything that isn't stock is going to have the problem.  At the factory they have the tools and machinery to get carbs tuned perfectly, but I don't.  I've tried installing an O2 sensor on the header but it didn't help.

Those experiences taught me a lot about carbs but I don't want to do it again lol

10 minutes ago, Mech said:

wear on the needle that could be seen with the naked eye.

I actually have pics of worn needles.  I'll see if I can find them tomorrow.  The vibration wears the jet-needle and needle-jet, so the needle gets smaller and the jet gets bigger over time.  You might be able to compensate by leaning the pilot mixture or lowering the needle.

Well I do want advice and help because most carbs I encounter that need tuning ultimately have that problem.  I have 3 atvs now with that problem.  The easiest thing I know to do is turn the idle speed back up and readjust the mixture until the stumble goes away.  Other than that I'd have to spend hours, days, weeks as I always have struggling to get it tuned.  I've ground slide cutouts with rotary tools and have sanded needles in addition to drilling jets trying to get aftermarket carbs to work on modded engines.  It was fun the first few times as a learning experience but now it's just too much work, so if you know an easier way I'd appreciate it.

Ok, oracle of engines, answer the question: if the carb is tuned per your instructions and the result is a stumble when the throttle is stabbed, how would you solve it?

How do you know what carb manufacturers think?

Turn the mixture screw until rpms are at a maximum then turn the idle speed screw down to reduce rpms then turn the mixture screw until rpms are a maximum then turn the idle speed screw down and at the end of that process the engine idles great but you stab the throttle and the engine dies.  Now what?

Option 1: Tear the carb apart and spend lots of money on jets, needles, slides and spend hours and days and weeks struggling to tune it like Mech says you should.

Option 2: Turn the idle speed screw back up and turn the mixture screw until the rpms are where you want them and verify the engine doesn't die when the throttle is stabbed.  Done.  Easy.

Which is the good idea?

Here is a graphical representation.

When the slide is closed, a vacuum is easily generated which draws fuel and air mixture up through the pilot opening (3 in the pic).  If the turns on the mixture screw are correct then the engine will idle fine.

When the slide is opened just a hair, suddenly air rushes in and the vacuum drops.  That's where problems start, and in this picture they remedied that with a bypass outlet (4 in the pic) which draws fuel directly through the pilot jet to help make the transition from closed slide (high vacuum) to open slide (low vacuum).

On larger carbs the problem is remedied with an accelerator pump that squirts fuel into the venturi.

That transition from high to low vacuum is the most difficult part of a carb to tune and my idea is to eliminate it altogether by never closing the slide and relying totally on the pilot circuit.  The only downside is it's difficult to generate enough vacuum to draw fuel up the needle jet to start the engine with a pull cord or kicker if the slide is still open.  The upside is there is no transition to worry about and the throttle response will always be crisp.

If you have a stock bike and stock carb, great!  You can easily set things by the book and not worry about any of this.

If not, then you're certainly welcome go through this tuning nightmare all you want.

2 hours ago, Mech said:

you've already told me you come here because you  enjoy arguing.. Which is why I've refrained for so long from responding.

I complimented you on a good idea and offered an alternative way of doing things which for some reason caused you to get bent out of shape.

All you had to say was "Thanks!" and "Good idea!".

11 hours ago, Mech said:

The way you do it Randy, you have both holes discharging fuel at idle, and because of that, you have the idle mixture screw wound in more than it should be. It gives the right mixture at idle, but when the butterfly opens there is a shortage of fuel.. it's being restricted by the idle screw.

If we take a carb that is tuned properly to run from just off idle to WOT then there will never be a shortage of fuel at any opening above idle.  Then if we tune the pilot circuit such that the carb idles with the slide open a bit then there will still never be a point where there is a shortage of fuel.  The only issue with tuning it like that is: because the slide is open a hair the engine needs to develop more vacuum to draw gas out of the needle jet which makes it harder to start manually, but it's not an issue with electric start.  The advantage is the tuning procedure is easier because the pilot circuit is less relevant and the throttle response is crisp with no stumbles.

Your way requires everything in the carb be absolutely perfect (slide cutout, pilot jet, air jet) in order to have seamless transition from idle to off-idle, and that's often not the case, especially with aftermarket carbs or switching carbs to different engines or tuning stock carbs after modifying engines.

There are a range of slide cutouts available and you can't just pick one and make it work.  There are a range of jet needles and needle jets and pilot jets and air jets.  It's a puzzle with at least 5 variables to tune to make work right just to transition from idle to off-idle.  So to avoid that nightmare I just tune it with the slide open a bit then there is no transition to worry about.

The downside is it's hard to use a pull cord or kick starter to generate the vacuum necessary to draw fuel out of the needle jet with the slide open a hair.  If not for the issue of starting, a pilot circuit wouldn't be necessary at all.

10 hours ago, olddude said:

I found a long time ago that for every expert that has this view or that there is 10 more out there that tell a different story. I guess it just depends on which ever one of these experts you want to believe. 

Normally I'd agree that appealing to authority is a bad way to argue, but there are a couple caveats in this case.  First, you asked why people believe these things and I said it's because all the greatest experts also believe it.  So I was answering your question.  Second, there really are no economists that disagree, certainly not nobel prize winning economists.  Guys like Peter Schiff are not economists, although they play one on tv.  So it's like some guy with an interest in physics arguing with Einstein... or maybe a street brawler picking a fight with Tyson.  Who would you put your money on?  But you're right that what experts think doesn't establish truth.

10 hours ago, olddude said:

Oh and from what I heard the stock market crash in 1929 is what led to the depression which probably means the last couple years of the twenties were not all that roaring.

It was October 1929, so they were partying all the way up to the end of the decade.  The depression didn't start in earnest until sometime in 1930.  I think I heard Henry Ford made $5 million that year, then he closed his factory to retool for the Model A.  Meanwhile everyone else was standing in soup lines or heading for another country to find work.

10 hours ago, olddude said:

FDR's new deal was supposed to end it and put the country back into prosperity but depending on who you want to believe all that massive spending and money printing draged the depression on for a good ten years.

People argue both ways, but the truth is there were good parts and bad parts to the new deal.  Price controls were the bad parts, but putting people to work building dams and parks was the good part.  It was a big experiment and he really didn't know what would work for sure.  Plus the Supreme Court got involved and FDR threatened to expand the court if they didn't see it his way (which he had power to do since he had congress and the people on his side).  But many parts of the new deal got struck down by the court, so what remained was a hodge podge that wasn't exactly what he intended.  Plus he had to about-face when he needed industry to make stuff for the war because he had to supply Churchill and he knew it was only a matter of time before the US entered the war too.  So instead of taking money from the robber barons like he had planned, he had to give them money to produce war equipment... the exact opposite of what he wanted to do.

11 hours ago, olddude said:

The war effort not government spending is what led to the end of the depression

The war effort IS government spending.  The war just gave excuse to spend even more.

11 hours ago, olddude said:

It was US companies that were charged with the task of making stuff which required American workers to do the work.

But the gov paid to build their factories and paid for the stuff the factories produced.  There is a series on youtube called War Factories that is pretty interesting.  The difference was that German factories had skilled craftsmen who took forever to produce anything whereas the US factories were assemble lines that took advantage of unskilled labor without sacrificing quality.  Germany couldn't match the production of the US.  And German factories had a lot of bureaucracy because Hitler wanted to micro-manage everything whereas FDR just cut checks and let those who knew what they were doing make the decisions.  Hitler called it jewish capitalism but in the end he started to copy it but still managed to screw it up because he put buffoons in charge... kinda like Trump did.

11 hours ago, olddude said:

I didn't fit in well there with most because I was a go getter. The way I looked at it if I had to be there 8 hours a day I might as well do my job. Most of the people did not like the idea of people actually doing the work because it might catch on and it made them look bad.

That's the way I am.  Breaks are boring so I'd rather just keep working.  Unions force people to take breaks and tell them to slow down.  Sometimes they play cards all day.  Unions just result in slow production, poor quality, and expensive end product which is why I usually avoid anything made in the USA.

11 hours ago, olddude said:

He told me that 12 of the people on that list have not even reported to work for the past 3 years. The higer ups figured it was better to just let them stay home rather that have them around the warehouse for fear of them getting run over by a folk truck while they were sleeping in one of the corners around the warehouse. I said just how can that be can't you fire them? He said your kidding, right? You are forgetting your working for uncle sam what do you expect?

LOL that's funny!  But that's my point of paying people to stay out of the way.  Many people are good for nothing so either shoot em or pay em to stay out of the way.

The bad part about you losing your job was Reagan actually increased gov spending.  You must not have been working in the defense industry.

Ok so back to the depression.  Watch 2 minutes of this video.  It should be cued up to the right spot.  Americans were actually fleeing to communism and communist movements were gaining traction in the US because Hoover refused to do anything except beg charities to do something.  It's funny that the USSR was perceived to be the land of opportunity at that time.  That's how bad Hoover was.

 

And Germany's problem was the war reparations that were demanded to be paid in gold which caused the value of the Mark to plummet.  I mean, if you know Germany is forced to buy gold at any price, you would jack up the price so much that the Mark was essentially worthless.  That's what caused Germany's problems.  Of course, the depression didn't help.  Hitler promised to fix all that and he did.... with government spending rebuilding the military and building the autobahn.  Fast forward the video to 41:40 to see.  Unemployment went to zero.

So we have USSR, Germany, and FDR in the US.  Government spending is the only thing that worked.

So the gov either has to tax people or print money in order to spend.  Either way is the same thing because printing money devalues your money so it's the same as taking it from you.  It's better to just raise taxes because then the rich can be targeted while the middle class and poor are left alone.

Imagine we had gold as money and there is a fixed amount of it.  Now, when someone gets richer, where is their gold coming from?  Answer= everyone else because there is no other place for it to come from.  It's stated at the beginning that there is a fixed amount of gold so if one person accumulates more gold then it must mean the gold is coming from other people who are getting poorer as the rich get richer.  Now imagine we print money instead of the gold.  How does that change the picture?  It doesn't because printing money to make the rich richer only devalues the money of everyone else, so it's the same thing again: as the rich get richer, everyone else gets poorer.

How do we fix that?  That only way is to take the money from the rich and give it back to everyone else.  If we don't then eventually everyone else will run out of money.  And that is the technical definition of a depression (ie lack of money).  Therefore lack of sufficient taxation necessarily leads to a depression.  You can call taxation theft, but there is no way to avoid it.  Money can be printed instead of taxation, but that only comes with other perils.  The only way to keep an economy functioning well for any length of time (ie 50 years) is sufficient taxation.  When taxes are lowered, we started to see catastrophic blowups like 2000, 2008, and 2020 came just in time to blame what was going to happen anyway on covid.

15 hours ago, olddude said:

I don't know why I do this.

Because it's fun!  What better way for a couple farts to kill time?  

13 hours ago, olddude said:

I often wonder how people could get to the point that they really believe some of the stuff you think is so right.

Because all the economic greats agree with them.

Milton Friedman advocated welfare via a negative income tax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman#Governmental_involvement_in_the_economy

Irving Fisher "opposed laissez faire and pleaded for an equitable distribution of income."
http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/economists/irving-fisher-1867-1947-economist/21019

Kenneth Arrow wrote "A cautious case for socialism".
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1426269747ACautiousCaseforSocialism.pdf

Hayek: Why I am Not a Conservative
https://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/excerpt/2011/hayek_constitution.html

Even Einstein supported socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Socialism%3F

13 hours ago, olddude said:

I'll argue the point about how wonderful things were for 50 years was not the result of all that money the gubment stole from the rich.

At least you acknowledge the astronomical taxation had no deleterious effect.  We're making progress!

13 hours ago, olddude said:

It was because in the late 20's the country and most of the world went into a depression like never seen before.

It was the 30s.  The roaring 20s were good times.  Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were big business capitalists who blew up the economy and ushered in FDR to clean up the mess.

13 hours ago, olddude said:

The new deal with it's massive gubment spending kept something going for almost ten years that it was supposed to fix in 100 days.

Parts of the new deal were bad ideas and some of it wasn't allowed by the courts, but for the most part it helped which is why FDR won 4 terms.  If private industry wouldn't provide jobs then the gov would, which is pretty much what is happening today.

Richard Ojeda said "Where I come from, when you graduate high school, there's only three choices—dig coal, sell dope, or join the Army. And I chose the military". He served 25 years in the United States Army, starting as an enlisted soldier before going through officer training and rising to the rank of major.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Ojeda

If you can't find a job, the gov will give you one.  If you can't do that, then peddling dope and going to prison is an option.  The drug war is really just a way to get rid of people who won't work.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

The depression led to WW2 which led to more spending for the defence department.

No it was the treaty of Versailles forcing Germany to pay reparations for WWI.  By the time the great depression kicked in, people were fleeing the US to find work in Germany and the USSR because Hoover refused to involve the government.  It was the only time in history that more people were leaving the US than coming.

And it was Pearl Harbor that led to the involvement of the US in the war, which FDR knew about and may have even caused because Churchill was begging him for help.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

The war effort put people to work which led to the great prosperity

So you realize government jobs led to prosperity?  Whether it's the war or the new deal, both are gov jobs.

Gov jobs are just welfare that you have to do some work for.  Therefore you agree that welfare = prosperity.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

Where does the gubment get it's money?

It gets money from taxes and printing money.  But the gov doesn't have any money regardless how much they take because anything they take or print is paid out immediately to the poor and middle class who work for them.  The gov is in the business of taking from the rich and giving to the poor which is why when taxes are high there is so much prosperity.  Deficit spending too.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

Big business doesn't give a rat's azz what the gubment's tax rate is because all they do is raise their prices to cover their cost.

Price is a function of supply and demand, not costs.  Costs have zero to do with prices.

If you sell widgets and your costs go up, you can't raise your prices or you will sell less widgets and have less revenue.  Less revenue + higher costs = less profit.  The only thing you can do is try to streamline production or cut salaries or lay off workers.  Prices are set by the market and the market doesn't care about costs.

If a company COULD raise prices, they SHOULD do it anyway without having rising costs as an excuse.  Prices should always be the absolute max they can possibly be in order to maximize profit for shareholders.  Since price is always the max, then it can't be raised if costs go up.  The only time prices can go up is if demand is sufficient to accommodate the increase.

So if taxes are raised then the company has to eat it because they can't get it from the consumer unless the consumer suddenly has more money.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

Let's talk about the unions.

We agree about unions and min wage.  I really don't like unions.  I'd prefer UBI from the gov then we wouldn't need unions since workers could just quit without starving if working conditions are so bad.  We also wouldn't need min wage laws.  Gov could be reduced quite a bit if we had UBI.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

You call it renting yourself to the man I call it an opertunity to better myself.

Do you call prostitution an opportunity?  Renting yourself to someone is non-sexual prostitution.  I mean, you gotta do what you gotta do, but why advocate for it?  Why celebrate such a demeaning deal?

You show up at an employer and say "Here is my body, what can I do with it to make YOU money?"  Because making money for the employer is what it's all about otherwise they wouldn't hire anyone.  When I employed people each worker was a money machine making me $50/hr and I paid them $10/hr out of it.  $10 was good money back then and they were glad to get it until they found out how much I was making, then suddenly it wasn't anything they would have agreed if they had known in the first place.

That brings up another point because if the worker and employer don't agree on how to divide the spoils then it's not a free and fair transaction, but a theft of their labor.  Since labor was stolen, then taxation is justified to rectify the theft by returning the stolen property to its rightful owners.

Republicans from Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt were against wage slavery.  Taft was the first republican to abandon ship because TR called him fat, so he created the US Chamber of Commerce to give big business more representation in government.  Because TR called him fat.

Here's a short video about wage slavery 

 

14 hours ago, olddude said:

There is no reason in this country that anyone who is willing to work for it can't get as far as they want to go.

Too many people work 2 jobs and are not getting anywhere.  And a lot of people have disabilities that preclude their working.  Some are just screwed up in the head, which is a disability.

Obviously hard work by itself is not enough because millions of people work hard and are not rich.  A lot of luck is also required.

14 hours ago, olddude said:

I'll agree some of these businesses around today are totally out of control and need to be taken down a notch. The problem with that is all of them are in bed with the politicians that make the laws that are supposed to protect us.

We agree.  Here is a video you might like.  It's called "Freedom of Choice: How the Government Controls What You Consume."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5qamYpmODA

Basically, corporations lobby government to make laws to hurt their competition.

Government is supposed to be by the people and for the people, not by corporations and for corporations.  The concept of government by itself is not bad, what's bad is who controls it.

15 hours ago, olddude said:

You complain about rich people why do you keep voting for the same bunch that are beating you up each day.

I don't get much of a choice who to vote for and pretty much everyone I vote for loses.  My dad said the only one he ever voted FOR was Goldwater, and everyone else he voted against the other guy.  That's how it is with me too... there is hardly anyone I really like, I usually vote against the worst one.  I didn't vote Trump because I like him, but to try to stop Biden.  But see?  Everyone I vote for loses (even though he really didn't lose).

15 hours ago, olddude said:

Some of the people in congress are some of the richest people in the country and there is just something wrong with that.

I would say that's capitalism.  If you don't like something, then simply give your politician a bigger bribe to do what you want.  Whoever has the most capital gets their way.  That's how this game is played.  How else should things be decided?  We all compete to make our money then use our money to shape our world.  How else would we know who to put in charge?  I'm not against capitalism; I just want a bit of help for the poor is all.  And the rich want that too.  The problem is the poor don't want it.

Why did Mitch McConnell fight Trump sending the $2000 checks?  Was he being a jerk?  No, he's faithfully representing the people of KY.  They did not want the money for the reason I already said: because they are scared someone else might get it too.  Why else turn down free money?

If you worked hard for what you have then you wouldn't want lazy people getting stuff too because it devalues everything you worked for.  If everyone gets free money then how is the hard worker different from the lazy?

15 hours ago, olddude said:

Nothing will ever change as long as the same bunch is guarding the hen house.

The problem is people worship the rich.  They think the rich are smarter because they are rich.  Nothing will change until that changes.

The democrats are the coddled elites, professionals, professors, affluent.  Those are the ones calling for censorship.  They don't live in the real world; they live in gated communities shielded from reality.

I didn't say Hillary would be great.  I said covid, censorship, and internet sales taxes would not have happened had she won in 2016.  That certainly would have been better than what we have now.  I'm  sure there would have been some drawbacks other than the distaste of knowing another Clinton is in the white house.  Some were saying we could have had war with Russia if Hillary had won, but that's a moot point since we're at war with Russia now.

We both agree democrats are evil incarnate.... and Trump was always a democrat until he ran for office.  He filled the white house with swamp just like Biden and Obama.  He put a Goldman guy in charge of the treasury, Rothschild over commerce, oil lobbyist over the interior, pharma lobbyist over health, coal lobbyist over epa, and a confederate over veterans affairs.  He had the very criminals in charge of the cops just the same as Obama and Biden.

Plus he appointed that war-mongering Bolton, that Kebler Elf Jeff Sessions, he kowtowed to Fauci, and he still celebrates his vaccines even though his fans boo him.  He's a backstabbing con man.

35 minutes ago, olddude said:

No contry on earth will ever be successful and prosperous by taxing the rich

The USA was prosperous for 50 years by taxing the rich.  We already went over that.  One man could support a whole family on one income.

There were even less suicides and homicides when taxes were high.  As soon as taxes went back down, suicides went back up.  The correlation is perfect!

When the rich get richer, where does their money come from?  Either their money is created or it comes from someone else.  There is no 3rd possibility.  If the money is created, then it devalues the money everyone else has, so either way their money still comes from everyone else.  There is no way of avoiding that mathematical fact.

Therefore if we allow the rich to get richer and richer then it necessarily means everyone else gets poorer and poorer.  So either we tax them and redistribute the money or society is going to break down.  Capitalism always runs out of other people's money which is why it needs bailed out constantly by the government.  We can't even make it a decade without firing up QE again.  The market is crashing right now and QE is still going, for crying out loud.

44 minutes ago, olddude said:

Oh and just who are the rich anyway? What is the difinition of a rich guy?

People with more money than they know what to do with.  People who could have their taxes doubled and never know it.

48 minutes ago, olddude said:

Rather that beat up on the rich you should celebrate the people that go out and better themselves and become successful

Why celebrate them?  There is no way to make a billion by the fruit of your own labor.  The only way is to steal someone else's labor or have the gov print money for you, which is a silent theft.  Therefore simply being rich is evidence of a crime.  Gates, Musk, Bezos, etc didn't get rich selling their products, but by owning stock and having the fed print money for them.  And Gates stole software from Xerox and IBM.  He didn't invent anything.  Musk got handouts from the gov for climate change.  Bezos eliminated 1000s of jobs and killed the malls.  Amazon didn't make a dime in profit for 16 years, yet Bezos was a billionaire nonetheless.  How do you get to be a billionaire by running a company that never made a profit?  Odd huh.

55 minutes ago, olddude said:

why we are the greatest country on the planet.

It's not the greatest country.

 

56 minutes ago, olddude said:

Just tell me how someone sitting on their sofa collecting a check from the government is good for the country.

Because if they sit on the couch then they are not forced to do a job they don't want to do which only results in screwing the job up which causes me problems.  I'd rather pay people to stay out of the way.

We could streamline the tax code and destroy the tax preparation industry.  Fire all the tax accountants and attorneys and send them checks to stay out of the way.  The pentagon is the largest employer.  Fire them all.  We're giving them tax money anyway, may as well have them sit on the couch rather than making war.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

Life is not supposed to be fair

Correct, life is not fair, which is why the rich must pay while others collect.  It's not fair, but necessary.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

for one group to take what others have worked for just to make it even

No, not to make it even.  From 1932 to 1982 there were plenty of rich people even though taxes were 70-90%.  That's 50 years, man.  I remember Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous on tv.  Fred Trump was rich through all that time.  No one was equal.  You were there, so you should know.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

No country in existance today has ever become great and properous while governing by the socialist dream. It's not possible, there are just not enough rich people in any country to pull that one off. 

And yet we did it for 50 years.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

When you start handing out money by the truck load it's not good for anybody not even the people with those open hands. 

Did you tell Milton Friedman that?  You know the genius economist advocated a negative income tax, right?

Funny how all the most notable economists advocate handing out money.  What is it that uneducated people can see that economic geniuses cannot see?

When we cover peoples' basis expenses then they are not forced to work to survive so they can bargain for better wages as we have seen in response to the covid handouts.  Wages are through the roof!  Keeping people in a situation where they have to rent themselves to others to survive is immoral.  Evil really.  Work should be voluntary.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

My dad to struggled along too. He raised 5 kids that never missed a meal we always had shoes and close on our backs.

Why do you advocate for that kind of life?  Does hardship make a better person?  Refusing assistance is just pride, and not much good comes of pride, they say.

All my friends were poor growing up and they are all still poor now, except one who managed to break out.  Rags to riches is the exception and not the norm.  Most of them turned to drugs, booze.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

Taking money away from one person to give to someone else is just wrong. The cops call that robery.

Cops return stolen property all the time.  They take from the thief and give back to the owner.  That's more or less what taxes do.

10 minutes ago, olddude said:

Just what is poor anyway?

It's whatever we define it to be.  I generally define it as not being able to provide for basic stuff without going into debt.  There are people who are comfortable, there are those who have great excess, then there are the poor who struggle all the time.

I know a woman who worked so much she had a heart attack at work.  Then she worked more and needed foot surgery from all the standing.  Working is costing her more money then if she didn't work at all.  But she's poor and has bills so she has to work. 

It's a myth that the poor do not work.  My mom worked 2 jobs to raise me.  Her mistake in life was planning to be a stay-at-home mom so she didn't go to college. so she couldn't make much above min wage.  The state could have helped a little, but it was more important that the rich keep their gross overcompensation, like that lawyer who works for Twitter making $17 million a year as if she's worth it.  https://nypost.com/2022/04/29/twitters-chief-censor-making-17m-per-year-could-be-fired/  So it's more important that people getting $17 million to censor conservatives get to keep their money than to help single mothers and their kids... because taxation is theft.  Something is wrong with that picture.  I had to do without as a child so millionaires could become billionaires then proceed to usher in the great reset and the cultural perversion.

The Reaganites empowered the beast that now seeks to destroy them and their heritage and their religion and scrub them from history books and knock down their statues.  Conservatives gave them the power to do those things with the tax cuts and deregulation over the last 40 years.

38 minutes ago, olddude said:

They wouldn't take a lick at a snake if it was about to bite him them. Yet when the guy with the weed comes to call they are quick to pull out wad of cash that would choke a mule.

I know people like that too and there is no helping them.  They are just too lazy to try.  The only thing we can do is change the system that is making people like that.  They probably had a rough childhood because they were poor.  So the solution is to get rid of poverty and rebuild families so we stop making future criminals.

43 minutes ago, olddude said:

Yeah there was a time when a man could feed and provide for his family.  But, that was when a loaf of bread was 15 cents a quart of milk was a quarter and a gallon of gas was 14 cent.

But min wage was 75 cents.  You have to look at how long someone had to work to buy a loaf of bread.  Before this recent bout of inflation bread was actually cheaper in terms of hours-worked than it was when it was 15 cents.  Most things are actually cheaper today in terms of hours-worked than back then because of increased manufacturing efficiency, but the things that are not cheaper are housing, education, healthcare which are things the rich bid up in price.  Raise taxes on the rich and the stuff they buy will come down in price which helps the poor.

56 minutes ago, olddude said:

People then lived within their means,

Only because they couldn't get the credit to live outside their means, or they would have.  Interest rates were high and it was hard to get a loan back then.

But when wages were reduced as part of Reagan's supply side economics the shortfall had to be made up with debt, so lending standards were relaxed and interest rates came down.

Wages stagnated and debt exploded right after Reaganism.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

I know a few that made more money sitting at home than they were making at work.

I've heard of that but no clue how they pull it off.  It took mom forever to get on disability and she still struggles.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

A lot of people now days don't have the same work ethic they once had mainly because of the fast and free money the government hands out.

I blame unions.  Workers get punished for working too hard.

It's hard to blame the gov because Japan has more welfare than the US but Japan also has the best work ethic.

1 hour ago, olddude said:

Also thank god that, that crooked beast lost that election. and yeah, there probably most likely that there would be no china flu if she had because before it's over that stuff has democrit finger prints all over it.

I don't like her either but life would have been easier if she had won.  I think covid came from a US lab and was dropped in China to make it look like it came from China to disrupt Trump's election chances and use mailin voting to rig the election.  If Hillary had won, covid would never have existed and we also wouldn't have all this censorship.  Under Obama no one cared who said what online, but once Trump was in office it suddenly became important to censor.  Also if Hillary had won we wouldn't have sales tax on internet purchases because she wouldn't have appointed Gorsuch to scotus who broke the tie to give us a forever tax that can never be repealed.  And sales taxes are taxes on the poor.  Most of the stuff I buy went up 10% thanks to Trump.  Meanwhile he gives the rich a massive tax cut and cajoled the fed to do more QE at the top of a stock market bubble.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

there is always going to be rich and there is always going to be poor people.

Yep poor can't exist without rich and rich can't exist without poor since each is relative to the other, but we can move up the bar where the poor are not as poor as they used to be.  The poor today often still have smartphones and nice cars, but their lives are still one long emergency that never ends.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

The left uses the so called poor as another tool in their tool box to use to rack up votes.

Every politician does what it takes to rack up votes.  It's their job.  You think politicians should do the opposite of what people want?

For instance the gov of my state suspended gas taxes and is refunding tax money right before the election... and I'm going to vote for him because of it.  Is he buying my vote or doing his job?

2 hours ago, olddude said:

Anybody that thinks the lft really gives a crap about poor people needs to take a real hard look at their thinking process.

Democrats stole the election from Bernie twice and are the main impediment to medicare for all, so yeah any progressive supporting democrats are pretty stupid.

Republicans advocate republicanism, progressives advocate progressivism, but democrats exist to stop progressives and normalize what republicans do.  Dems are the greatest evil.  They pretend to help the poor while stabbing them in the back to help the rich.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

Id bet there are more rich democrits than there are rich repubs.

Definitely.  Democrats are the party of the rich.  Hollywood, banking, academia.... anywhere you find money you will find democrats.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

No country will settle it's poor people problem by taxing the so called rich.

We did it before.  For 50 years taxes were 70-90% and those were the best years this country ever saw.  One wage-earner could support a whole family with no debt and earn interest on savings.  Since taxes have been cut the country has gone to hell.  Parents both work and have no time to raise their kids, people are drowning in debt, we have a drug problem and prisons are packed more than any other country.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

There just ain't enough of them.

There are more millionaires than there are bitcoins.

Who do you think is driving house prices out of the reach of the middle class?  Too many people have more money than they know what to do with, so they plow it in stocks, houses, cars, NFTs and cartoon real estate.

2 hours ago, olddude said:

Just because the right would rather see people actually get out and work rather than send them a check every month while they lay around on the sofa watching ophrey all day.

By "work" you mean rent yourself to some rich guy.  There is a difference in selling a product that you make and selling/renting yourself.

And most of the work done in the world is not even necessary.  The whole tax preparation industry is needless.  The pentagon is the largest employer.  And most of the food service industry is because people are forced to work all the time leaving no time to cook for themselves.  It wouldn't bother me if Starbucks ceased to exist; I can make my own coffee.

"Why I Fired 12 Floors Of People" - Carl Icahn  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdbxYZfBsxk

No one could tell him what all those people did or why they were employed, so he fired all of them.  Skyscrapers are mainly just containers of useless jobs.

 

Fuller was the World President of Mensa from 1974 to 1983. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller

The real reason conservatives don't want the gov sending them money is they don't want other people to get the money.  It's human nature.

Here's proof:

 

Kids would rather have less prizes for themselves if it means other kids get even less.  That doesn't go away when we grow up.

So we struggle to find sense in economic nonsense to justify our innate proclivities, but the majority of notable economists are liberal: Arrow, Hicks, Keynes, Tobin, Marx, Stigliz, and even conservative darling Milton Friedman advocated welfare via a negative income tax and was in favor of drug legalization, which makes him more liberal than most conservatives.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman#Governmental_involvement_in_the_economy

Irving Fisher "opposed laissez faire and pleaded for an equitable distribution of income."
http://www.economicsdiscussion.net/economists/irving-fisher-1867-1947-economist/21019

Kenneth Arrow wrote "A cautious case for socialism".
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1426269747ACautiousCaseforSocialism.pdf

Hayek: Why I am Not a Conservative
https://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/excerpt/2011/hayek_constitution.html

Even Einstein supported socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Socialism%3F

3 hours ago, olddude said:

Trump would still be president if it wasn't for that china flu.

We wouldn't have the china flu if Trump hadn't been elected.  None of this would have happened if Hillary had won.

On 2/1/2022 at 4:36 PM, Mech said:

I made this tool to do it.

That is genius, I gotta say.  Thanks for sharing!

On 2/1/2022 at 4:36 PM, Mech said:

The adjustment should be done warm, and it's supposed to be the highest revs you can get with the least throttle opening, then you wind the mixture screw in until the revs just start to drop.

Often the problem is when I tune it like you say, then I get a stumble just off closed throttle indicating the needle and slide cutout interactions aren't able to compensate quickly enough.  So I like to tune it such that it idles a little more on the needle/slide circuit rather than fully closing the slide and adjusting the pilot/airbleed circuit, that way there is no big change to compensate for.  The downside is it may be harder to start the engine manually because the more the slide is open the more vacuum must be generated to draw enough fuel through the needle-jet to mix properly with the air which means the piston has to move pretty fast, but with electric start it's no big deal.