"Low performance turd lawnmower engine". Good one. You should be on with Joe Rogan.
I'm not sure who he is but I think he's involved with sports or something but I've been calling them low performance little turds... for a long time.
Let me also say that everything I say or post in one of these forums unless it's obvious it's simply my opinion or my preference which I will usually clearly state that.. but everything else, if I say it you can take it to the bank as being absolutely 100% fact!
I don't know why I have to bother to tell people this but it seems humans today especially on social media and online have the default stance I'm not trusting anything anyone says.
I don't get that but I guess we should be clear or more clear when we tell people things like maybe try this or something to let them know we're not telling them that this is specifically going to work that's why we said maybe.
But back to turdmobiles.
A current, latest and greatest high-tech Briggs & Stratton lawn mower engine of let's say the 24 horsepower variety is about 597 cc's. Let's forget for a moment that you could also find a 597cc or approximate engine that had anywhere from 20 to probably 26 horsepower but let's just sweep them into the carpet for now as we can let people argue and blame that on different carburetors later.
So this 2023 model engine is almost 600 cc's it has maybe 24 horsepower on a good day, and some test lab at low altitude and very dense thick moist air but also maybe with a small leaf trimmer with a trickle of gasoline being blown into its air filter housing.
But I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and say it's got 24 horsepower.
A 1987 let's say Kawasaki 600 ninja sport bike also had a 600cc engine, about 598 or so but in some situations they were only barely x48 and they rounded up and still called them to the next hundred.
But anyways, these engines had a minimum of around 85 horsepower!
Shocking and exhilarating!
Sure, they had four cylinders but that's not the point - they were still a 600cc engine but they WERE NOT low performance turds.
They were high performance.... Some of the highest performance.
Now what really surprises me cuz I thought these motorcycle engines had high compression ratios but apparently they're just about as bad as the lawn mowers had like 7:1. This is surprising and slightly disappointing.
Back then, even with the cheapest pump gas eight and a half or at least eight and three quarter if not 9 or 9 and 1/4 to 1 would have been just fine but on a high performance motorcycle why not tell people they have to run premium fuel in there with a minimum octane of 89 or 91?.
But llama wrenches have very little compression ratio also. I often joke that it's about 7:1 but it may be worse than that.
If you've ever slowly watched the intake valve open and the Piston go down two bottom dead center and sit there waiting for it to close so it can actually compress the air that's in the cylinder...and you sit there waiting, and waiting, and waiting as the Piston comes back up as you rotate the flywheel etc and then only when the Piston gets to like 3/4 of the way up or something on its last little legs the valve actually closes!
It's depressing!
I know there's that pesky little thing that if the valves operated like I want them to you wouldn't be able to pull the rope as it would yank it out of your hand and break your fingers or wrist but that's not the point!!
Low performance little turds!!!
Got to go. I'm on a roll today pissing people off.