Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Julie H, Jul 15, 2017.
weird, i always imagine a horse facing out of the stable.
My little soft-top running flat out has done 105, top up, on level ground. With stock sized tires and no overdrive, that is 5600 rpms-a shade above the red line. At that point, a couple of things happen-the old tractor engine with siamesed intake and exhaust ports starts to run out of ability to "breath" and the weak old valve springs start to float.
Not too long ago, I did a mild refresh/upgrade with a rebuilt cylinder head that also raised the compression ratio and has larger intake valves. I'm still getting things "settled" so haven't done an extended interstate run. With new valve springs, being able to "breath" better, and having the combustion chambers actually completely seal I might get a few more MPH out of it.
Granted this is with twin SU carburetors and the factory "double Y" exhaust manifold-the most free breathing factory set-up. '72-74 US models with low compression engines lost some. Post-75 cars with a single Z-S carburetor on an absolutely terrible combined intake an exhaust manifold really lost a lot. Those cars are lucky to hit 90. The GTs are more aerodynamic and can usually squeeze out a few more mph, but then we didn't get GTs in the US after the 1974 1/2 M/Y. I looked at and nearly bought a 1974 1/2 GT about a year ago-there were 1200 and some odd of these imported, and they are the only GTs in the US with rubber bumpers(making them firmly in the "who cares?" category). Interestingly enough, just putting plastic shields over the headlights("Sebring covers") is supposed to be good for about the same.
Granted we're talking speeds where the things get downright scary. Mine is happy to cruise all day at 70-80. I'm hoping to install an overdrive transmission this fall that will at least knock down the interstate rpms.
There again, though, MGs aren't FAST cars-they're meant for twisty roads and not winning drag races. I did some work to increase my engine power(I'm not done yet) to get more low-end power for pulling out of curves. The MGA that I'm doing a frame-off restoration of will get a similar power plant. Fortunately, at 2000lbs, it doesn't take a huge amount of grunt to get these cars moving. The stock MGA gearing is also a bit more aggressive than the MGB to compensate for the fairly anemic 70hp engine from the factory-when all is said and done it might get an MGB rear axle for that reason.
Phil, seems like you had a very good experience. Way to spend the day!
To me, the first photo feels like, someone placed the truck next to John Gossage's pond that he photographed, but shows less ambience and more of the subject than Gossage did in his work. I followed the thread on aspect ratios. It's interesting how the square aspect reflects the shape of the dark truck frame within it, and works so well with the composition.
The second photo also shows a juxtaposition of nature vs man made mess, with more of the mess as if nature is pushed to a corner. I feel differently here compared to the first photo where the abandoned truck seemed more at home with nature. The intact car in the mid ground seems to be helplessly propped up on a pile of body parts, waiting for its fate. My impressions of course can change if I see the photos up close.
I should have thanked you, Phil, for posting these Evans photos, but I was too jealous.
Evans really got into debris/trash of all kinds in his later years. Dis-integration.
I suspect Walker Evan raised your baseline standard .
I am sorry for what happened with that family. Innocent people on both sides of the aisle suffered horribly. In my opinion, the photo doesn't document their real lives, but may be the aspiration of who they want to be, or rather how I wished their lives were.
That picture you posted is so eerily nostalgic. In India, most people store their bicycles just like that (including me). They all have that little shed under the stairs with a small space to store the bike. Its usually dark and you can scarcely notice the back reflectors of the bike staring at you. I like the stairs, how they are worn out from living in that house and using them ... for a long time.
I recently found this photo that I shot a few years back, while looking for images to post at the NW forum. Cars flocking together at a gas station at night. I thought they looked like thirsty animals gathered around a water hole. Just posting here, for I thought it could be relevant.
Supriyo, you blew it. You should have saved that one for the "Banana (symbols)" thread.
Yes, I agree that would have been wiser. But I saw Julie mentioned in the 'Strangers' thread, this was the end of the symbols series, so I thought I would take my chance now.
I searched high and low for any source that would claim 'peanut' or 'pea' as symbolic so I could have a 'Peanut (symbols)' thread or a 'Pea and Net' (symbols) thread ('net' has tons of symbolic sourcing), but no luck. Darn!
[p net ... get it? get it? ... << the emoticon I said was 'Supriyo's favorite' in another thread]
Oh yes, about that emoticon ... I almost forgot about it, but did like it though. I also found something that Julie might like, not an emoticon though. Here it is: http://advan.physiology.org/content/ajpadvan/33/4/257/F9.large.jpg
Supriyo, how about supporting this Philosophy forum. Start a thread:
I promise I will only post to your thread if I have something to say about the ideas in your thread.
I promise to make no personal attacks, no snarky cleverness, no clever wink-wink innuendo.
I will attack your ideas, if I don't agree with them. That's what threads are supposed to be for.
How about it? I dare you.
Supriyo, I may have to start a bad pun thread as I just realized I said "you blew it" in reference to bananas, lol.
Recently in another thread, there was talk of visual puns. Haven't given this much thought, but I wonder if a visual pun could be made without using a symbol. First thing that occurs to me is that it could but would, perhaps, require at least a sign.
Interestingly, I find a lot of photographic visual puns wanting, especially ones that use signs (a guy smoking next to a No Smoking sign, a heavy-set woman walking below a billboard with a slim, sexy model on it). I'd guess visual puns using symbols, on the whole, would be more challenging, though it would be too easy to fall into the banana-symbol cliche.
I will admit to having used emoticons once or twice, just to see how it would feel. Felt like I was using a crayon instead of a pen. That said, I do use typed characters to make symbols on occasion, but I think because I used to be a typesetter and have been playing around with letters and punctuation marks for most of my life, I get special dispensation.
I thought we were in a joking mood ... thats why you brought up the emoticon. In response, I made fun of you. I was never upset by your emoticon.
I did post an image that I thought was relevant. If you want, we can get back to topic right now.
I agree. They may be fun to look at for a while, but can get tiring due to lack of depth. Also, many visual puns that I see in photos are more like oxymorons.
Though not much of pun, this portfolio has some nice examples with signs.
Separate names with a comma.