Drivetrain Cylinder Head Modification
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,253
Likes: 0
From: NY NY
for what it is worth, I agree, there is something interfering with my car's ability to put it out. I keep trying to zero in, but I haven't focused on the porblem yet.
As far as comparative dyno runs, my car baselined at 147, with the Evo, Rogue intake and stock exhaust. (This was with firmware prior to 3.1) Then we tried, all on the same day, stabilizing temps between runs and repeating the baseline at the end to verify credibility: Rogue exhaust, Helix exhaust, Supertrapp. The Rogue had about 3-4hp increase.
The next dyno day, a month later, re-ran and got very similar results, within 2 hp, same car setup, but with the stock chip.
The next dyno day, 162 hp, now it had the header and the pulley, stock chip, set to ver 3.1. Same day, Andy got 163, pulley and stock otherwise.
Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust.
I tend to think Andy's results are a measure of uninhibited performance due to the mods he put on and they reflect numbers close to those measured by others, validating the Helix dyno results (also we were able t measure repeatable and consitent results at Helix).
My car picked up 9hp from the cam, throttle body and chip. It should have picked up as much increase as Randy picked up, unless as we suspect, there is a sock in one of my intakes or my cat is plugged up. My next test is going to be a pressure drop measure across the cat.
As far as comparative dyno runs, my car baselined at 147, with the Evo, Rogue intake and stock exhaust. (This was with firmware prior to 3.1) Then we tried, all on the same day, stabilizing temps between runs and repeating the baseline at the end to verify credibility: Rogue exhaust, Helix exhaust, Supertrapp. The Rogue had about 3-4hp increase.
The next dyno day, a month later, re-ran and got very similar results, within 2 hp, same car setup, but with the stock chip.
The next dyno day, 162 hp, now it had the header and the pulley, stock chip, set to ver 3.1. Same day, Andy got 163, pulley and stock otherwise.
Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust.
I tend to think Andy's results are a measure of uninhibited performance due to the mods he put on and they reflect numbers close to those measured by others, validating the Helix dyno results (also we were able t measure repeatable and consitent results at Helix).
My car picked up 9hp from the cam, throttle body and chip. It should have picked up as much increase as Randy picked up, unless as we suspect, there is a sock in one of my intakes or my cat is plugged up. My next test is going to be a pressure drop measure across the cat.
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>for what it is worth, I agree, there is something interfering with my car's ability to put it out. I keep trying to zero in, but I haven't focused on the porblem yet.
>>
>>As far as comparative dyno runs, my car baselined at 147, with the Evo, Rogue intake and stock exhaust. (This was with firmware prior to 3.1) Then we tried, all on the same day, stabilizing temps between runs and repeating the baseline at the end to verify credibility: Rogue exhaust, Helix exhaust, Supertrapp. The Rogue had about 3-4hp increase.
>>
>>The next dyno day, a month later, re-ran and got very similar results, within 2 hp, same car setup, but with the stock chip.
>>
>>The next dyno day, 162 hp, now it had the header and the pulley, stock chip, set to ver 3.1. Same day, Andy got 163, pulley and stock otherwise.
Hey boss you didnt answer my question:
What exhaust?
What Header?
What CAM?
How Big throttle body?
Bet ya a Beer the exhaust is a baffle design and it wont let your back pressure out.
>>Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust.
>>
>>I tend to think Andy's results are a measure of uninhibited performance due to the mods he put on and they reflect numbers close to those measured by others, validating the Helix dyno results (also we were able t measure repeatable and consitent results at Helix).
>>
>>My car picked up 9hp from the cam, throttle body and chip. It should have picked up as much increase as Randy picked up, unless as we suspect, there is a sock in one of my intakes or my cat is plugged up. My next test is going to be a pressure drop measure across the cat.
>>
>>As far as comparative dyno runs, my car baselined at 147, with the Evo, Rogue intake and stock exhaust. (This was with firmware prior to 3.1) Then we tried, all on the same day, stabilizing temps between runs and repeating the baseline at the end to verify credibility: Rogue exhaust, Helix exhaust, Supertrapp. The Rogue had about 3-4hp increase.
>>
>>The next dyno day, a month later, re-ran and got very similar results, within 2 hp, same car setup, but with the stock chip.
>>
>>The next dyno day, 162 hp, now it had the header and the pulley, stock chip, set to ver 3.1. Same day, Andy got 163, pulley and stock otherwise.
Hey boss you didnt answer my question:
What exhaust?
What Header?
What CAM?
How Big throttle body?
Bet ya a Beer the exhaust is a baffle design and it wont let your back pressure out.
>>Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust.
>>
>>I tend to think Andy's results are a measure of uninhibited performance due to the mods he put on and they reflect numbers close to those measured by others, validating the Helix dyno results (also we were able t measure repeatable and consitent results at Helix).
>>
>>My car picked up 9hp from the cam, throttle body and chip. It should have picked up as much increase as Randy picked up, unless as we suspect, there is a sock in one of my intakes or my cat is plugged up. My next test is going to be a pressure drop measure across the cat.
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 6
From: Lansdale, PA
MCSHP,
What was your peak hp @ rpm, peak tq @ rpm at the wheels, both before and after the mods that you claim gave you "13.3 whp" and "26.0 whp"? You shouldn't need to use Microsoft's assets in order to read they dyno sheets that you allegedly have, from your own alleged testing.
What was your peak hp @ rpm, peak tq @ rpm at the wheels, both before and after the mods that you claim gave you "13.3 whp" and "26.0 whp"? You shouldn't need to use Microsoft's assets in order to read they dyno sheets that you allegedly have, from your own alleged testing.
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>I started this thread because I had a chance to examine a stock MCS cylinder head. I found it interesting that the modified cylinder head advertised by Madness looked almost identical, with the same finish to the combustion chamber.
>>
>>I don't have anything against any tuner, unless they post erroneous, ficticious, or unsupported data ... or if their washboys/lackeys do the same.
>>
>>What was your peak hp @ rpm, peak tq @ rpm at the wheels, both before and after the mods that you claim gave you "13.3 whp" and "26.0 whp"? You shouldn't need to use Microsoft's assets in order to read they dyno sheets that you allegedly have, from your own alleged testing.
So you are saying that my results were fake? Are you also saying that Randy's results are fake as well? He got the same numbers by the way. So did about a handful of other folks along with Rentech.
Why should I go to the trouble of posting my results when there are so many others to choose from?? They are all pretty close! By the way if you were deaf, dumb, blind or any combination of the three, before I told everyone I was not going to test anymore because I would have to debate with people like you. Thats really the main reason I have not posted any of my results.
Again you saw a stock head and are comparing it to a friggin picture. Wow you are amazing Andy! We all need to hand it to you because examination of a picture can tell you so much especially when someone has the level of knowledge as you do on heads. I disagree with you saying that you don’t have anything against Madness, if you go back through this forum you will find that you have NEVER been anything but negative toward ANY of their products. You are always on the negative side, unless it’s a Helix product. Here is an example: https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9200
You have no problem believing these numbers posted by Randy UNTIL you find out that it’s an EVOTECH ECU. Now you’re here bashing the same product due to one guy that has problems with his setup that more than likely is not even ECU related.
Madness has NEVER posted erroneous, fictitious, or unsupported data. There are more results on this ECU than any other ECU on these forums. So this is a totally false statment made by you! Again Fueled by your hatred.
Here is another example of some good results with dyno charts:
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9773
Same results also as Silver S posted to my site via Rentech.
That’s three with the same results and I am sure if I dig I can find more.
It’s a done conversation; you don’t have a leg to stand on. The results are there and proven by many folks.
You can talk crap about this head until the cows come home but if you don’t flow test it or dyno test it you have nothing valuable to give the Mini Community.
Now if you want to be productive you should try and help JLM figure out what his real issue with his car is.
I really feel sorry for you because you cant seem to get over this.
>>
>>I don't have anything against any tuner, unless they post erroneous, ficticious, or unsupported data ... or if their washboys/lackeys do the same.
>>
>>What was your peak hp @ rpm, peak tq @ rpm at the wheels, both before and after the mods that you claim gave you "13.3 whp" and "26.0 whp"? You shouldn't need to use Microsoft's assets in order to read they dyno sheets that you allegedly have, from your own alleged testing.
So you are saying that my results were fake? Are you also saying that Randy's results are fake as well? He got the same numbers by the way. So did about a handful of other folks along with Rentech.
Why should I go to the trouble of posting my results when there are so many others to choose from?? They are all pretty close! By the way if you were deaf, dumb, blind or any combination of the three, before I told everyone I was not going to test anymore because I would have to debate with people like you. Thats really the main reason I have not posted any of my results.
Again you saw a stock head and are comparing it to a friggin picture. Wow you are amazing Andy! We all need to hand it to you because examination of a picture can tell you so much especially when someone has the level of knowledge as you do on heads. I disagree with you saying that you don’t have anything against Madness, if you go back through this forum you will find that you have NEVER been anything but negative toward ANY of their products. You are always on the negative side, unless it’s a Helix product. Here is an example: https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9200
You have no problem believing these numbers posted by Randy UNTIL you find out that it’s an EVOTECH ECU. Now you’re here bashing the same product due to one guy that has problems with his setup that more than likely is not even ECU related.
Madness has NEVER posted erroneous, fictitious, or unsupported data. There are more results on this ECU than any other ECU on these forums. So this is a totally false statment made by you! Again Fueled by your hatred.
Here is another example of some good results with dyno charts:
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9773
Same results also as Silver S posted to my site via Rentech.
That’s three with the same results and I am sure if I dig I can find more.
It’s a done conversation; you don’t have a leg to stand on. The results are there and proven by many folks.
You can talk crap about this head until the cows come home but if you don’t flow test it or dyno test it you have nothing valuable to give the Mini Community.
Now if you want to be productive you should try and help JLM figure out what his real issue with his car is.
I really feel sorry for you because you cant seem to get over this.
6th Gear
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,649
Likes: 0
From: 14605
... none of you guys have taken your estrogen replacement recently, have you ?
Do we really need three pages of bickering again ? ... just take 'em to the track and see what you can do head-to-head, so-to-speak ...
Do we really need three pages of bickering again ? ... just take 'em to the track and see what you can do head-to-head, so-to-speak ...
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>They are absorption mufflers. I dont drink beer tho.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Cheese
>>
And those mufflers absorption or baffle design or whatever have been rumored to cause flow problems on modified Mini's beyond Stage I.
Stage I: intake, exhaust
Stage II: Stage I plus anything else.
The stages are just an example so don’t go crazy.
_________________
MCSHP
Check out our Quest For HP
http://www.mcshp.org
>>
>>
>>--
>>Cheese
>>
And those mufflers absorption or baffle design or whatever have been rumored to cause flow problems on modified Mini's beyond Stage I.
Stage I: intake, exhaust
Stage II: Stage I plus anything else.
The stages are just an example so don’t go crazy.
_________________
MCSHP
Check out our Quest For HP
http://www.mcshp.org
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>> ... none of you guys have taken your estrogen replacement recently, have you ?
>>Do we really need three pages of bickering again ? ... just take 'em to the track and see what you can do head-to-head, so-to-speak ...
Sorry there 8Ball,
Apparently Andy can’t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn’t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
I just think he wants to be difficult.
>>Do we really need three pages of bickering again ? ... just take 'em to the track and see what you can do head-to-head, so-to-speak ...
Sorry there 8Ball,
Apparently Andy can’t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn’t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
I just think he wants to be difficult.
3rd Gear
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
From: Piscataway NJ
>>Sorry there 8Ball,
>>
>>Apparently Andy can&#8217;t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn&#8217;t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
>>
>>I just think he wants to be difficult.
>>
>>
>>
>>
You can't seem to let things go either...and you keep saying look at this and that, well just post your damn dyno and end it all. You're public library has a scanner if you're afraid to use Microsofts property. And since you have some time off you shouldn't have a problem getting down there. Oh and is there something wrong with someone critiqueing a product? Last time I checked if someone just accepted everything they were handed then they'd probably get a giant pile of **** that didn't actually make any more power then their original stock parts. Only with people's suggestions do companies further improve their products.
Mike
>>
>>Apparently Andy can&#8217;t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn&#8217;t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
>>
>>I just think he wants to be difficult.
>>
>>
>>
>>
You can't seem to let things go either...and you keep saying look at this and that, well just post your damn dyno and end it all. You're public library has a scanner if you're afraid to use Microsofts property. And since you have some time off you shouldn't have a problem getting down there. Oh and is there something wrong with someone critiqueing a product? Last time I checked if someone just accepted everything they were handed then they'd probably get a giant pile of **** that didn't actually make any more power then their original stock parts. Only with people's suggestions do companies further improve their products.
Mike
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>>>Sorry there 8Ball,
>>>>
>>>>Apparently Andy can&#8217;t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn&#8217;t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
>>>>
>>>>I just think he wants to be difficult.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>You can't seem to let things go either...and you keep saying look at this and that, well just post your damn dyno and end it all. You're public library has a scanner if you're afraid to use Microsofts property. And since you have some time off you shouldn't have a problem getting down there. Oh and is there something wrong with someone critiqueing a product? Last time I checked if someone just accepted everything they were handed then they'd probably get a giant pile of **** that didn't actually make any more power then their original stock parts. Only with people's suggestions do companies further improve their products.
>>Mike
Mike,
Criticism on a product is totally acceptable but for how long? We have been talking about this since January. Its been proven, we already had the debate. Why does anyone need to see my sheets when there are so many others? You doubt the others?
>>>>
>>>>Apparently Andy can&#8217;t get over the results. It just keeps coming back again and again. What doesn&#8217;t add up is again there is more data on this ECU than any other and he still has issues.
>>>>
>>>>I just think he wants to be difficult.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>You can't seem to let things go either...and you keep saying look at this and that, well just post your damn dyno and end it all. You're public library has a scanner if you're afraid to use Microsofts property. And since you have some time off you shouldn't have a problem getting down there. Oh and is there something wrong with someone critiqueing a product? Last time I checked if someone just accepted everything they were handed then they'd probably get a giant pile of **** that didn't actually make any more power then their original stock parts. Only with people's suggestions do companies further improve their products.
>>Mike
Mike,
Criticism on a product is totally acceptable but for how long? We have been talking about this since January. Its been proven, we already had the debate. Why does anyone need to see my sheets when there are so many others? You doubt the others?
6th Gear
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
From: Dunedin, FL, USA
I'll leave my MINI's head alone until I blow a gasket or have some other reason to go through the pain of pulling the head. I can't believe how ugly the port surfaces of the stock head look though. The result of penny pinchers in the corporate HQ.
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 6
From: Lansdale, PA
I infer from your rantings that you don't have any data to post. Thanks for clarifying that.
Did you actually take the time to read what I posted in the threads you linked?
I have no problem with MNI-Madness, MINI-Mania, MINI-Insanity, MINI-Schizophrenia, MINI-Dyslexia, etc. I actually complimented the product and results in both the threads you linked:
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9200
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9773
What I have a hard time believing is that you got the exact same results as claimed by MINI-Madness/Evotech/Renntech/etc. Exactly the same. For two different levels of modifications. Yet, you have shown zero evidence to supoort this. I am sure that you have some free time in between complaints about the weight of the ALTA intercooler diverter. Why don't you actually post your results? Is it because you don't have any?
BTW, your Evo chip "results" are based on a car without a pulley. Isn't their file tuned differently for pulley cars and non-pulley cars? Why are you comparing apples to oranges?
Did you actually take the time to read what I posted in the threads you linked?
I have no problem with MNI-Madness, MINI-Mania, MINI-Insanity, MINI-Schizophrenia, MINI-Dyslexia, etc. I actually complimented the product and results in both the threads you linked:
Wow! Very impressoive gains. I'm interested to hear the details as well as the explanation for the high rpm downstep. It looks like even more hp would be possible without that step.
Sleepless,
Great posts and graphs!
Great posts and graphs!
What I have a hard time believing is that you got the exact same results as claimed by MINI-Madness/Evotech/Renntech/etc. Exactly the same. For two different levels of modifications. Yet, you have shown zero evidence to supoort this. I am sure that you have some free time in between complaints about the weight of the ALTA intercooler diverter. Why don't you actually post your results? Is it because you don't have any?
BTW, your Evo chip "results" are based on a car without a pulley. Isn't their file tuned differently for pulley cars and non-pulley cars? Why are you comparing apples to oranges?
6th Gear
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,816
Likes: 2
From: New Jersey
>>>>They are absorption mufflers. I dont drink beer tho.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Cheese
>>>>
>>
>>And those mufflers absorption or baffle design or whatever have been rumored to cause flow problems on modified Mini's beyond Stage I.
>>
>>Stage I: intake, exhaust
>>Stage II: Stage I plus anything else.
>>
>>The stages are just an example so don’t go crazy.
>>_________________
>>MCSHP
>>
>>Check out our Quest For HP
>>
>>http://www.mcshp.org
What are you talking about? Absorption mufflers are straight thru designs which muffle sound via perforation covered in some sort of sound insulating material. Baffled mufflers reflect sound back on itself, cancelling it out.
The only thing baffling here is your pseudo intelligence and misinformation. Please reread your posts for validity before subjecting the rest of the mini community to it. We do not have room or time for "or whatever" s
--
Cheese
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Cheese
>>>>
>>
>>And those mufflers absorption or baffle design or whatever have been rumored to cause flow problems on modified Mini's beyond Stage I.
>>
>>Stage I: intake, exhaust
>>Stage II: Stage I plus anything else.
>>
>>The stages are just an example so don’t go crazy.
>>_________________
>>MCSHP
>>
>>Check out our Quest For HP
>>
>>http://www.mcshp.org
What are you talking about? Absorption mufflers are straight thru designs which muffle sound via perforation covered in some sort of sound insulating material. Baffled mufflers reflect sound back on itself, cancelling it out.
The only thing baffling here is your pseudo intelligence and misinformation. Please reread your posts for validity before subjecting the rest of the mini community to it. We do not have room or time for "or whatever" s
--
Cheese
2nd Gear
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, OH
Ah, it's so refreshing when everyone gets along isn't it?
Really, the closeup pictures are interesting and the remarkably poor performance of JLM's mods is also very curious but the rest of this banter is becoming pretty dry. If someone has data they want to post, great. If not, that's fine too, it doesn't really matter either way since, as is apparent from JLM's experience, "actual mileage may vary". All this is antectotal and hardly scientific.
Perhaps I should start this thread over again and a moderator can rename this thread the "Two headers are better than one - The Final Deathmatch" thread.
</soap box>
Jim
PS: I know this sounded preachy and will be roundly ignored. So at the bell I want to see a good clean fight
(ding)
Really, the closeup pictures are interesting and the remarkably poor performance of JLM's mods is also very curious but the rest of this banter is becoming pretty dry. If someone has data they want to post, great. If not, that's fine too, it doesn't really matter either way since, as is apparent from JLM's experience, "actual mileage may vary". All this is antectotal and hardly scientific.
Perhaps I should start this thread over again and a moderator can rename this thread the "Two headers are better than one - The Final Deathmatch" thread.
</soap box>
Jim
PS: I know this sounded preachy and will be roundly ignored. So at the bell I want to see a good clean fight
(ding)
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
From: Santa Clara, CA
On a different train of thought, what would all of this head modification do to engine longevity?
I can imagine that better exhaust flow (through the header/exhaust system as well as polishing the head) would actually improve longevity. But I was worried about the effects of having too much HP/litre and removing too much material.
Any thoughts?
I can imagine that better exhaust flow (through the header/exhaust system as well as polishing the head) would actually improve longevity. But I was worried about the effects of having too much HP/litre and removing too much material.
Any thoughts?
6th Gear
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,649
Likes: 0
From: 14605
>>On a different train of thought, what would all of this head modification do to engine longevity?
>>
>>
some things like cc-ing the head can help to make it run smoother by equalizing the combustion pressures in each cylindar - that would be a good thing ...
>>
>>
some things like cc-ing the head can help to make it run smoother by equalizing the combustion pressures in each cylindar - that would be a good thing ...
4th Gear
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
From: Santa Clara, CA
>>some things like cc-ing the head can help to make it run smoother by equalizing the combustion pressures in each cylindar - that would be a good thing ...
sorry but what does "cc-ing" mean? Thanks
sorry but what does "cc-ing" mean? Thanks
6th Gear
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,816
Likes: 2
From: New Jersey
Is CCing the head really helpful in an engine thats not symmetric? I think there are some issues with getting even distribution to all cylinders (thru the intake manifold) in a supercharged 4 cylinder application. I dont have any experience with 4 cylinder manifold design though, so maybe you know better than me!? I guess, at worst, it wouldnt hurt. :smile:
--
Cheese
--
Cheese
6th Gear
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,649
Likes: 0
From: 14605
"cc-ing" is just making sure that all four combustion chambers are the same size, or that their displacement is the same number of cc's. It is all part of 'blue-printing' an engine - not always making upgrades but re-assembling to tighter tolerances than those that come from the factory; these also include making sure that the con-rods all weight the same and stuff like that as you balance the motor ...
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,253
Likes: 0
From: NY NY
cheese: I just started examining the engine components and noticed that the intake manifold cross section decreases from the intake side toward the last cylinder to even out individual port velocities; a good thing.
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>I infer from your rantings that you don't have any data to post. Thanks for clarifying that.
>>
>>Did you actually take the time to read what I posted in the threads you linked?
>>
>>I have no problem with MNI-Madness, MINI-Mania, MINI-Insanity, MINI-Schizophrenia, MINI-Dyslexia, etc. I actually complimented the product and results in both the threads you linked:
>>
>>
>>
>>https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9200
>>
>>
>>
>>https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9773
>>
>>What I have a hard time believing is that you got the exact same results as claimed by MINI-Madness/Evotech/Renntech/etc. Exactly the same. For two different levels of modifications. Yet, you have shown zero evidence to supoort this. I am sure that you have some free time in between complaints about the weight of the ALTA intercooler diverter. Why don't you actually post your results? Is it because you don't have any?
>>
>>BTW, your Evo chip "results" are based on a car without a pulley. Isn't their file tuned differently for pulley cars and non-pulley cars? Why are you comparing apples to oranges?
Andy,
This is getting old. I will get your file just please shut up. Apparently the other folk’s results are not good enough for you.
Yes this was pre-pulley so things now would be different as they have made a few more revisions but I think it’s the same file now for both. I could be wrong though. Currently I do not have the ECU as the dealer upgraded my ECU at my request, I was having some hesitation issues but it looks like the stock base maps have had issues and have not been addressed by Mini yet. I have seen a few other threads about this on mini2. I need to get this re flashed but waiting on Mini to fix the base map. Anyone else seen this problem?
In reference to the ECU thread I pointed out earlier. The only reason you were nice was you had no idea it was the EVOTECH ECU. That was the thread that Randy started. You debated the results in many other posts just because it was the EVOTECH ECU.
Then when sleepless thread came along it seemed that you warmed up a bit, now you are back to discounting the whole thing based on JLM’s issues but none of you that were present for the Helix dyno day have any idea what the true problem is.
If I had started that thread with sheets that Randy did you would have been all over that with problems and negative commitments. JLM is having issues and I don’t hear you complaining to Randy who sells the ECU nor to EVOTECH. BTW JLM I still have not seen a list of exactly what you are running??? I am sure everyone is curious why you are having issues not just me.
Cheese,
Thanks for the nice comments; I never said I was an exhaust expert. I was just stating the facts passed down to me from the guys who found the baffle design to be a problem. Sorry I was not up on the terms and lingo.
I appreciate you jumping in and correcting me though. It’s also good to know that you like to back up your buddies. Nothing wrong with that and I am not being facetious. In the future I will try to be more factual with you since you just don’t have time to explain things to folks who don’t know everything.
In general I am sorry I just can’t please you guys. We are not posting false data nor giving bad information. I just don’t understand why you guys choose to direct your energy in this way.
It’s too bad that threads like this get started and for my part on that I am sorry. I will try my best to get those charts for you tomorrow.
>>
>>Did you actually take the time to read what I posted in the threads you linked?
>>
>>I have no problem with MNI-Madness, MINI-Mania, MINI-Insanity, MINI-Schizophrenia, MINI-Dyslexia, etc. I actually complimented the product and results in both the threads you linked:
>>
>>
Wow! Very impressoive gains. I'm interested to hear the details as well as the explanation for the high rpm downstep. It looks like even more hp would be possible without that step.
>>https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9200
>>
>>
Sleepless,
>>
>>Great posts and graphs!
>>
>>Great posts and graphs!
>>https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...amp;topic=9773
>>
>>What I have a hard time believing is that you got the exact same results as claimed by MINI-Madness/Evotech/Renntech/etc. Exactly the same. For two different levels of modifications. Yet, you have shown zero evidence to supoort this. I am sure that you have some free time in between complaints about the weight of the ALTA intercooler diverter. Why don't you actually post your results? Is it because you don't have any?
>>
>>BTW, your Evo chip "results" are based on a car without a pulley. Isn't their file tuned differently for pulley cars and non-pulley cars? Why are you comparing apples to oranges?
Andy,
This is getting old. I will get your file just please shut up. Apparently the other folk’s results are not good enough for you.
Yes this was pre-pulley so things now would be different as they have made a few more revisions but I think it’s the same file now for both. I could be wrong though. Currently I do not have the ECU as the dealer upgraded my ECU at my request, I was having some hesitation issues but it looks like the stock base maps have had issues and have not been addressed by Mini yet. I have seen a few other threads about this on mini2. I need to get this re flashed but waiting on Mini to fix the base map. Anyone else seen this problem?
In reference to the ECU thread I pointed out earlier. The only reason you were nice was you had no idea it was the EVOTECH ECU. That was the thread that Randy started. You debated the results in many other posts just because it was the EVOTECH ECU.
Then when sleepless thread came along it seemed that you warmed up a bit, now you are back to discounting the whole thing based on JLM’s issues but none of you that were present for the Helix dyno day have any idea what the true problem is.
If I had started that thread with sheets that Randy did you would have been all over that with problems and negative commitments. JLM is having issues and I don’t hear you complaining to Randy who sells the ECU nor to EVOTECH. BTW JLM I still have not seen a list of exactly what you are running??? I am sure everyone is curious why you are having issues not just me.
Cheese,
Thanks for the nice comments; I never said I was an exhaust expert. I was just stating the facts passed down to me from the guys who found the baffle design to be a problem. Sorry I was not up on the terms and lingo.
I appreciate you jumping in and correcting me though. It’s also good to know that you like to back up your buddies. Nothing wrong with that and I am not being facetious. In the future I will try to be more factual with you since you just don’t have time to explain things to folks who don’t know everything.
In general I am sorry I just can’t please you guys. We are not posting false data nor giving bad information. I just don’t understand why you guys choose to direct your energy in this way.
It’s too bad that threads like this get started and for my part on that I am sorry. I will try my best to get those charts for you tomorrow.
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,253
Likes: 0
From: NY NY
" but none of you that were present for the Helix dyno day have any idea what the true problem is."
I would say we have quite a few ideas, we just don't know which one is correct yet. We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust. We have not eliminated the cat, O2 sensor, fuel regulator, cylinder head etc. port mismatches, a basic engine mis-assembly (like cam timing).
This had been posted above,("Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust."
but to id components, my car has the Rogue intake, BMP cam, P&D pulley, P&D 61mm throttle body,Supersprint header, Evo chip, Rogue exhaust (about to be changed to custom dual side outlet Supersprint)
I would say we have quite a few ideas, we just don't know which one is correct yet. We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust. We have not eliminated the cat, O2 sensor, fuel regulator, cylinder head etc. port mismatches, a basic engine mis-assembly (like cam timing).
This had been posted above,("Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust."
but to id components, my car has the Rogue intake, BMP cam, P&D pulley, P&D 61mm throttle body,Supersprint header, Evo chip, Rogue exhaust (about to be changed to custom dual side outlet Supersprint)
2nd Gear
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
>>" but none of you that were present for the Helix dyno day have any idea what the true problem is."
>>
>>I would say we have quite a few ideas, we just don't know which one is correct yet. We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust. We have not eliminated the cat, O2 sensor, fuel regulator, cylinder head etc. port mismatches, a basic engine mis-assembly (like cam timing).
>>
>>This had been posted above,("Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust." but to id components, my car has the Rogue intake, BMP cam, P&D pulley, P&D 61mm throttle body,Supersprint header, Evo chip, Rogue exhaust (about to be changed to custom dual side outlet Supersprint)
>>
>>
Thanks JLM, I was looking for the specific brands on each component in the previous post. Thanks for posting it here. What I dont understand and maybe you can explain it to me is:
Above you imply that the EVOTECH ECU is not working correctly.
Then in this latest thread you say "We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust"
I was wondering how you eliminated those three things from the problem list. Also for the record I am not trying to start anything. I am just wondering how you wrote those off as good and why you thought it was bad in the first place.
Also its not really fair of you guys to call out bad parts on forums before you really know. I am sure that EVOTECH doesnt appreciate it. Again not trying to start anything.
>>
>>I would say we have quite a few ideas, we just don't know which one is correct yet. We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust. We have not eliminated the cat, O2 sensor, fuel regulator, cylinder head etc. port mismatches, a basic engine mis-assembly (like cam timing).
>>
>>This had been posted above,("Next dyno day, 171, with header, pulley, cam, throttle body, intake and exhaust and Evo new version. andy puled 172, pulley, intake and exhaust."
but to id components, my car has the Rogue intake, BMP cam, P&D pulley, P&D 61mm throttle body,Supersprint header, Evo chip, Rogue exhaust (about to be changed to custom dual side outlet Supersprint)>>
>>
Thanks JLM, I was looking for the specific brands on each component in the previous post. Thanks for posting it here. What I dont understand and maybe you can explain it to me is:
If the Evo was really working as advertised, I would expect to have seen at least 180hp..Randy has reported almost 190 witht he same mods, no cam
Then in this latest thread you say "We have eliminated the ECU, trottle body and cat back exhaust"
I was wondering how you eliminated those three things from the problem list. Also for the record I am not trying to start anything. I am just wondering how you wrote those off as good and why you thought it was bad in the first place.
Also its not really fair of you guys to call out bad parts on forums before you really know. I am sure that EVOTECH doesnt appreciate it. Again not trying to start anything.
Temporarily Banned
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,382
Likes: 2
From: Denver
Holy crap! You guys are brutal (not referring to either side in particular).
The head work is probably only worth 10 horsepower at most. With the cam, maybe 15. What I think most folks realize is that as you go for more and more horsepower, it gets higher priced for less gain. A good example of this are the "first stage" mods that give pretty good bang for the buck - exhaust, intake, pulley. You start going more than that, and it starts costing more for less - the header, the throttle body, the ECU, the head, the cam. After that, it gets really expensive for very little gain. The reason some of this is really moot anyway, is because by the time you go for all of this, you are well above the safe limits on the gearbox and driveshafts (something I'm actually working on right now since MINIBeast was able to blow one of his up).
I think the reasonable place to stop is 230 hp without having to address other areas - and then you have to take it easy with the hole shots.
Back to the head, most of the gain comes from the porting in the intake and exhaust path, as well as some slight angle changes (8Balls illustrations were excellent), so you don't see the big differences on the combustion chamber side picture.
The cam is very nice, 252 intake/260 exhaust, billet (not a regrind) and made by Schrick - one of the best manufacturers bar none. The problem with it is that it runs $599!
As far as jlm's car - I think he is on to the right track. There is a restriction with his car somewhere that is keeping the potential of all of the mods he has done from being realized. Once he "pops that cork", the horsepower will probably jump, and whatever that last mod was will take all the credit - 30 horspoer from the new header!
The head work is probably only worth 10 horsepower at most. With the cam, maybe 15. What I think most folks realize is that as you go for more and more horsepower, it gets higher priced for less gain. A good example of this are the "first stage" mods that give pretty good bang for the buck - exhaust, intake, pulley. You start going more than that, and it starts costing more for less - the header, the throttle body, the ECU, the head, the cam. After that, it gets really expensive for very little gain. The reason some of this is really moot anyway, is because by the time you go for all of this, you are well above the safe limits on the gearbox and driveshafts (something I'm actually working on right now since MINIBeast was able to blow one of his up).
I think the reasonable place to stop is 230 hp without having to address other areas - and then you have to take it easy with the hole shots.
Back to the head, most of the gain comes from the porting in the intake and exhaust path, as well as some slight angle changes (8Balls illustrations were excellent), so you don't see the big differences on the combustion chamber side picture.
The cam is very nice, 252 intake/260 exhaust, billet (not a regrind) and made by Schrick - one of the best manufacturers bar none. The problem with it is that it runs $599!
As far as jlm's car - I think he is on to the right track. There is a restriction with his car somewhere that is keeping the potential of all of the mods he has done from being realized. Once he "pops that cork", the horsepower will probably jump, and whatever that last mod was will take all the credit - 30 horspoer from the new header!