***** Guitar Project Jigs, Tools & Techniques Online Resources Archives OLF Video Page Library of plans MP3 Library Inlay Class
Offical Luthiers Forum





And our community proudly sponsored by:

RC Tonewoods | Stewart MacDonald | LuthiersForum
TasmanianTonewoods | OLF | OLF MERCH
Luthier Suppliers | Pacific Coast Woods | ELEVATE
OLF X | Tasmanian Acoustic Tonewood | Luthiers Forum Store!
Luthiers Forum | OLF Facebook | AVAIL SPACE
OLF | Alaska Specialty Woods | A.Hix Tonewood
Duke of Pearl | Birkonium CNC | Space




Official Luthiers Forum!

Owned and operated by Lance Kragenbrink
It is currently Mon Aug 11, 2025 5:11 am


Board index » Luthiers Forum Rooms » Guitar Building Forum

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Forum rules


Be nice, no cussin and enjoy!




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 19 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
sprouseod
 Post subject: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:23 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:35 am
Posts: 348
Location: Spartanburg SC
First name: Richard
Last Name: Sprouse
City: Spartanburg
State: SC
Zip/Postal Code: 29302
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I am really new to all this. If underrated it correctly, the 2.4 signal is for the video feed back to the uniy. The 5.8 is for the acual phantom, w or w/o video
Is this correct or am i I missing something?
Is this correct?


Richard
Top
 Profile  
 
Barry Daniels
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 4:55 pm 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:02 am
Posts: 3272
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
First name: Barry
Last Name: Daniels
Are you talking about the flux capacitor?
Top
 Profile  
 
Stuart Gort
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:39 pm 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 3:34 pm
Posts: 2047
First name: Stuart
Last Name: Gort
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
I believe that boy is going to be checking some video forum and then cursing the moderators for censoring him.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic
Top
 Profile  
 
Flippo
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 8:57 pm 
Offline
Mahogany
Mahogany

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:27 pm
Posts: 90
Location: Atlanta, GA
no, no , NO sprouseod. You have it confused with the video inverted feed back loop. The signal for the video feed back to the uniy is 1.9 and the acual phantom is 3.8. Nuf said...

_________________
**************
Tony Flippo
Top
 Profile  
 
Eric Reid
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:22 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:59 am
Posts: 678
First name: Eric
Last Name: Reid
City: Ben Lomond
State: CA
Zip/Postal Code: 95005
Country: USA
Status: Professional
Flippo wrote:
no, no , NO sprouseod. You have it confused with the video inverted feed back loop. The signal for the video feed back to the uniy is 1.9 and the acual phantom is 3.8. Nuf said...


No, in English units, the acual uniy is 2' 54". The phantom is a function of the variability of random primes.http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/do_the_math/2013/05/yitang_zhang_twin_primes_conjecture_a_huge_discovery_about_prime_numbers.html
Top
 Profile  
 
doncaparker
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:20 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:52 pm
Posts: 3186
First name: Don
Last Name: Parker
City: Charleston
State: West Virginia
Zip/Postal Code: 25314
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I thought the shadow knows what evil lurks in hearts of men.

Anyway, it's 1.21 gigawatts.
Top
 Profile  
 
Haans
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 7:42 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood

Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:34 am
Posts: 3081
42


These users thanked the author Haans for the post: Bryan Bear (Thu Sep 18, 2014 9:10 pm)
Top
 Profile  
 
RustySP
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 8:25 am 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:00 am
Posts: 363
First name: Rusty
I don't know what this is all about, am I correct or am I missing something?
Time for a goat picture.
Top
 Profile  
 
Pmaj7
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 8:36 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:50 pm
Posts: 2260
Location: Seattle WA
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
Keneth, what's the frequency?

_________________
Pat
Top
 Profile  
 
meddlingfool
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 9:10 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:15 pm
Posts: 7549
First name: Ed
Last Name: Bond
City: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Focus: Build
Status: Professional
Eddie's in the space time continuum.
Top
 Profile  
 
dzsmith
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 5:48 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:35 pm
Posts: 2660
First name: D
Last Name: S
State: TX
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I would just plug it in and see what happens.
Wear safety glasses of course, and shield important body parts.

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah
Top
 Profile  
 
cphanna
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:12 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:08 pm
Posts: 1958
Location: Missouri
First name: Patrick
Last Name: Hanna
State: Missouri
Country: USA
...and don't forget to energize the cross-gonculating modulator....
Top
 Profile  
 
doncaparker
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:31 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:52 pm
Posts: 3186
First name: Don
Last Name: Parker
City: Charleston
State: West Virginia
Zip/Postal Code: 25314
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
. . . or you might transmogrify the midichlorian ratio to its inverse . . . requiring a mythryllispanner wrench to correct . . . and those are a real bear to get these days (unless you know somebody).
Top
 Profile  
 
cphanna
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:41 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:08 pm
Posts: 1958
Location: Missouri
First name: Patrick
Last Name: Hanna
State: Missouri
Country: USA
doncaparker wrote:
. . . or you might transmogrify the midichlorian ratio to its inverse . . . requiring a mythryllispanner wrench to correct . . . and those are a real bear to get these days (unless you know somebody).

...wish I had said that...
Top
 Profile  
 
Alex Kleon
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:46 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:32 pm
Posts: 3470
First name: Alex
Last Name: Kleon
City: Whitby
State: Ontario
Zip/Postal Code: L1N8X2
Country: Canada
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Well, the 2.4 if its supercharged, otherwise, I'd go with the 5.8 dbl 4 barrel.

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker
Top
 Profile  
 
dzsmith
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:33 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 8:35 pm
Posts: 2660
First name: D
Last Name: S
State: TX
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Alex Kleon wrote:
Well, the 2.4 if its supercharged, otherwise, I'd go with the 5.8 dbl 4 barrel.

Alex

My '95 Roadmaster had a 5.8 L supercharged. it weighed 4500 pounds, but could still give you whiplash when you gunned it. Sorry to stray off topic.

_________________
wah
Wah-wah-wah-wah
Wah
Top
 Profile  
 
Wes Paul
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:34 pm 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 199
First name: Wes
Last Name: Young
City: NEWFIELD
State: NY
Zip/Postal Code: 14867
Country: United States
Focus: Build
Status: Professional
I would say 2.4, less is more.
Top
 Profile  
 
Bryan Bear
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:59 pm 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:12 pm
Posts: 3308
First name: Bryan
Last Name: Bear
City: St. Louis
State: Mo
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Alex, there is no replacement for displacement. . .

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.
Top
 Profile  
 
Alex Kleon
 Post subject: Re: 2.4 vs 5.8
PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:09 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:32 pm
Posts: 3470
First name: Alex
Last Name: Kleon
City: Whitby
State: Ontario
Zip/Postal Code: L1N8X2
Country: Canada
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
dzsmith wrote:
Alex Kleon wrote:
Well, the 2.4 if its supercharged, otherwise, I'd go with the 5.8 dbl 4 barrel.

Alex

My '95 Roadmaster had a 5.8 L supercharged. it weighed 4500 pounds, but could still give you whiplash when you gunned it. Sorry to stray off topic.


Topic? What topic? I'm totally lost, but it was cocktail hour a while ago! :D

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 19 posts ] 

Board index » Luthiers Forum Rooms » Guitar Building Forum

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Colin North and 37 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
phpBB customization services by 2by2host.com