I have to agree on the style of posting in this thread. If its toned down I think that people would be more open to discussion.

Mark

 

+1

 

155 hp at the crank is possible...I can make 155 at the crank stock. All I have to is plug in the magical 60% drivetrain loss

 

If you want MCS power from your MC.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/MINI-...m330239724710&

 

Umm.. do you have an inside track on the BMC CDA? I can't find 'em online for less than $269, whereas the Apollo is $127 online. -> that's the price for the 'universal'. The 'Mini Cooper' specific one is more, but it's only for '07 & up. Mine's an '05..

 

I dunno.. that comes with an 'inner cooler'.. don't think I'm ready for that kind of technology.

 

You should try reading my posts, I never said that. Never.
The more people post their dyno sheet, the better.
It's obvious you know nothing about dyno testing and the different factors that can influence that result.

I have done a lot of dyno runs with my car (+25), along with some friends and their Coopers (close to 50 runs with other cars).
We HAVE ( = experience, something you don't have) tested several dyno's (Maha, Superflow, Cartec, Bosch) and several mods in several conditions.
And besides that, we have seen dyno testing with several other cars (people who we met at the dyno shops) as well.
On top of that, I know all the Mini clubs in Belgium and Holland and all those people share their experiences as well.
So, my opinion is based on experience, and guess what, most people who have done some dyno testing (the correct way) tend to agree.

It's people like you who believe everything they read on a website, or some people who have done dyno runs in unrealistic conditions who tend to not agree (not all of them, some people know that an open hood and/or other conditions can influence their result).

Your opinion is based on ... what exactly ?
Just curious.
What's your experience with dyno testing, software, intakes, exhausts, cams, ... ?

I have probably seen +50 tuned Coopers now and guess what, not one of them produced 135hp with software and a panel filter. Not even close to that.
Not one of them produced 140hp with software and a good (custom) CAI.
Etc.
This was also the opinion of most tuners here (some of them have tuned hundreds of Coopers now, so you could say they have quite some experience).

I say, let the people know that they probably aren't going to achieve those numbers with just those mods.
But according to you, you should let them think wrong ?
It's better to learn the hard way sometimes, then not to learn at all.
But again, knowledge seems to be something you don't care about.

Don't forget, you made the first "move" talking about "my rath".
Which was very funny by the way.
What you call rath, I call reality and experience.

So, like I said before, ignorance for the win.

First of all, I never called anyone a liar.
I always tried to give information about the factors that could have influenced their results.
Big difference.
Secondly, are you going to give me advice on how to deal with people ?
Talk about being arrogant.
Thanks, but no thanks.

Why should I tell people they did a good job when their result is obviously not correct ?
Wouldn't it be better to tell them what could have influenced their result so they can learn, instead of telling them they did a good job when obviously the result is not realistic.

Besides, I'm actually a nice guy.
I just don't like the BS some tuners are spreading around, giving people (like yourself) false hope.
If I have to be the bad guy, for bringing a dose of reality into this subject, so be it.

Back on topic.

 

I have a Dutch source who sells them on ebay.
Me and several others have bought them there at a good price.
If the Apollo is $127 online (that's a really low price, are you sure ?) then it certainly is an intake worth considering.

Thing is, we have tested the CDA, and a friend has tested the Viper (similar setup to the Apollo, but it does have a different filter) and the CDA got much better results.
The Apollo hasn't been available for long, so I'm sure that pretty soon we will do another dyno session to test it.

 

 

Der Abt - given you have continued berating members that don't agree with you this thread is being closed. Additional posting of this nature will result in a one week suspension of your posting access to the site. Beyond that your access to the site will be removed.

If you can tone down the rhetoric and have civil, open discussions with others we'll be in good shape going forward.

Mark

 

Since I've received messages from those involved and we seem to have the issues worked out I'm reopening this thread.

Thanks for everyone following up with me and working to keep the site civil

Mark

 

Just wondering how were your Mods that went on the Cooper?
I remember I wanted to post on this thread, I was gonna Be and Plea to you to make life simple and get a MCS with no sunroof (add lightness) 168bhp stock.

 

I have yet to see any test results for the RMW head.. which is what I'm waiting for. That and I blew my Midlands and that set me back a little on my modification budget. So far I've just been lightening it up - lost the spare tire & carrier, lost the run-flats & the 16" wheels for holies. I wanted to go lighter on the unsprung weight - looked into brakes but the lighter, 2-piece rotor are only available if you go bigger than stock which not only offsets any potential weight loss but requires new rims. I'd like to see aluminum calipers and 2-piece rotors in stock sizes, but that seems unlikely. I just yesterday put new rotors/pads on all around, OEM.