I still say that a vendor tht has done no scientific testing and can produce no number to support the theory that their product makes a difference should get challenged. That's just common sense.

And a company that produces a product and refuses to explain how it works at all (Or explains it in two different and incompatible ways (Plasma-booster)) should also get challenged. Even if 50,000 people have purchased and are satisfied with the product.

I mean, lots of people believe in ghosts. Should I sell a Ghost-Booster ignition performance enhancement device?
Sorry, I don't have any performance numbers, but I have satisfied customers.

It uses proven technology.

Some of the technology is used in the space shuttle engines (wire) and the latest queen mary-II engines uses identical technology (LEDs) so you KNOW it's a quality product.

So, keep asking for those numbers, both the blateltly pro-product and the blatently anti-product people.

 

maxmini,

You still don't seem to get it. I tend to not buy a product until credible evidence has been shown that it works as advertised, simple as that. It is not my responsibility to do any testing on any product (except for what my company makes, and I get paid for). However, I greatly enjoy testing stuff, even things that are not aftermarket parts (like the stock intercooler). Anyway, since you seem to have trouble with reading comprehension, I'll clarify the order that I used for sdahner's choices

Intake - I've tested one, it works. Search and you'll find plenty of data.

Guages - I've tested five, they work. Search and you'll find plenty of data.

V1 - I've tested it, it works. Search my police records and you'll find plenty of data ... or lack thereof:

-Andy
Team "Sponsored By Reality"

 

Andy,

I want to preface this by saying I wholeheartedly agree with your "show me the money" aka "guilty until proven innocent" stance on mods. As a consumer, it's wise and prudent and will save you money in the end. I've read many of your posts here and hold your opinion in high regard.

However, your accusation of lack of reading comprehension applies to you in this case. The thread author asked for opinions on what order you (the collective 'you' of NAM) would do those mods. Reading comprehension does not mean taking something literally word for word, it means understanding the meaning of what was written. It is plainly obvious that the author was asking for recommendations "What would you do because that will be what I base my choices on." You're basing your side of the argument on the premise that you didn't read it that way. Should we give you the benefit of the doubt that you lack that level of comprehension, or should we take what we know about you, that you're obviously an intelligent person, and see that you're simply using the literal meaning (not the actual meaning) to defend your stance because it's convenient?

You did not preface your post with any caveats such as "This is what I would do, but I'm not telling you what to do." The author was asking for recommendations and you provided recommendations. By proffering a NEVER list, without any commentary as to why, you are implicitly stating those items are worthless.

Your most recent post finally provides the reasoning behind the NEVER list, which, I think, is only fair considering the ramifications of making a NEVER list. People respect your opinions and if you say "Never get these, they're worthless" whether literally or figuratively, it's going to carry weight and it is a recommendation not just "what I would do" as you are trying to claim. Your opposition has a point that you don't have actual evidence to support your claim, however, your point that there's no actual (as opposed to emotional) evidence is also valid.

All that aside, I wouldn't waste my money on a Plasma Booster anyway. It's dubious at best, IMO, and, quite frankly, I'd rather spend that money on something I feel is a tangible benefit. That's emotional, and that's fine, but I'm acknowledging my reasoning for it, not just stating "The Plasma Booster is useless." And no, you didn't literally say that, but you sure meant it.

At least, that's how I comprehend it... :smile:

 

Just my $.02 here. While I sometimes think that Andy is a little too quick to jump to the negative (without numbers, he assumes something does not work while I tend to think maybe it does, maybe it doesn't), I can't fault his logic. For any statement, the BURDEN OF PROOF lies with whomever is asserting the positive (as someone already mentioned). Here is an example:

I claim that with the aid of my Superman pajamas, I can fly.

Andy disagrees, and asks me to 'show the numbers'. "Prove that you can fly," he says.

"Au contraire! Prove that I cannot fly!" I demand, thinking that his lack of proof somehow aids my argument.

Obviously, the burden of proof is on me. Granted, this is a silly argument but the point I think should be fairly clear. Randy / Peter - you guys seem nice and you also seem very enthusiastic about advancing aftermarket ideas for the Mini. However, if you're going to claim *any* part makes a measureable difference (key word being 'measureable') - its up to you to back it up; not for someone else to prove you wrong. As with the 350Z thread, perception of improvement is not always based in fact. I'm not saying you are wrong, just that its up to you to back it up or just ask people to 'take your word for it'.

Doug

 

CornOnTheCob,

You make some good points. I should have provided a brief snippet of explanation in my first post in this thread.

I hope that you and maxmini (and everyone else) sees the difference between:

A) A manufacturer providing data that backs up their performance claims

and

B) A skeptic providing data that disproves the manufacturer's performance claims

 

gravedgr,

How much are those Superman pajamas and where can I order them?

 

>>gravedgr,
>>
>>How much are those Superman pajamas and where can I order them?
>>
>>

 

Testing Maniacs theory on posting pics, thanks manic :smile: >>CornOnTheCob,
>>
>>You make some good points. I should have provided a brief snippet of explanation in my first post in this thread.
>>
>>I hope that you and maxmini (and everyone else) sees the difference between:
>>
>>A) A manufacturer providing data that backs up their performance claims
>>
>>and
>>
>>B) A skeptic providing data that disproves the manufacturer's performance claims

Now we are getting somewhwere :smile:


A) A manufacturer providing data that backs up their performance claims

As I am not a mfg. of any type of sway bar is still can offer some " data " of sorts. My car's front tires USED to rubb the plastic inner fender BEFORE i installed a front brace and now it doesnt. The car has a much more controlled turn in at speed and the ability to hold the turn has a much more direct feel as well. These facts are far from numeric I agree but whould you prefer numbers that only you can understand or something that the actual driver could relate to? Again I offer anyone a ride that wants one and that beats a slide rule any day.
BTW I am running a Forge Motorsports strut tower brace at present why do you ask?

>>B) A skeptic providing data that disproves the manufacturer's performance claims

You seem to be lacking the almighty DATA on this one ( strut tower brace ) or did your NEVER listing mean " never be without " LOL

Corn on the cob did a much better job of explaining the reason for this entire thread actually but it was a lot of fun taking the longway around :smile:





_________________
Hamman hm3 17/8 /,BfGoodricxh 215/40 kdw-2,M7 Plasma Booster ,M7 /Venom Nitrous syst,s,H-sport adj camber plates, BMP strut tower 'boost and oil pressure gauge pkg, Piper cross viper intake system, KW coil over shock,

 

maxmini,

You have just shown that you STILL do not understand the difference between:

A) A manufacturer providing data that backs up their performance claims

and

B) A skeptic providing data that disproves the manufacturer's performance claims

I'll try to explain it as slowly and clearly as necessary for you to grasp the difference. In case A, a manufacturer is making a claim. Basically saying "We have numbers". They should be able to show those numbers. It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to provide this data if asked.

In case B, an enthusiast asking "Show Me The Numbers". The manufacturer is claiming they have numbers. All the enthusiast is asking for is that data. It is not the responsibility of the enthusiast to provide contrary data (although it is fun to do so).

If you still can't understand the difference between A & B, I'm not sure how else to explain it to you.

BTW, I apologize for insinuating that you were defending a product from BMP, a company that sponsors you. Instead you are defending a product from Forge, a company that sponsors you.
_________________
SHOW ME THE NUMBERS!

...How Fast is Your MINI?...My Mods...

 

Aside ....

maxmini,

Could you please refrain from posting high resolution images side-by-side .

It makes reading this "back and forth" a pain!

Thanks

 

Miniac I will try to post pics as you request sorry about that one

Andy I didn't start this section of thread as Corn on the Cob also noticed you did with claiming that the strut tower brace was a NEVER BUY item. I was and still are curious as to why you came to that conclusion, show us your numbers :smile:
Tag your it.
Randy
Team M7

 

maxmini,

Re-read my previous post as many times as you need to. If you still do not understand it, ask someone else to explain it to you.

 

>>Miniac I will try to post pics as you request sorry about that one
>>
I think you should be able to edit your post and hit carriage return following the closing IMG tag for your first picture.

That should stack the pictures one on top of the other.

 

Thanks for the tip , i wil do that in the future, Randy

 

Maxmini, let me take a shot at explaining the A vs B difference.

I think you are reading B as "Andy is a skeptic, and he has to have numerical data before he claims that a product has no effect"

I don't believe Andy was making that statement.

There are two problems as I see it:

1) Manufacturers or the people they sponsor can make any performance claim they want.
2) Skeptics can make any performance claim they want.

Asking the manufacturer or the person they sponsor for a live demonstration of the product claim is the best way to demonstrate the validity of the claim. Since this is an Internet-World, we ask for some other evidence of the validity odf the claim. NUMBERS and physics explanations work well in this situation. We can't all fly all over the place to experience the results ourselves.

Asking the skeptic to prove the claim is false would be nice, but then the skeptic needs to purchase the device which is unlikely to happen.

I was lent a Plasma Booster, installed it, saw no measurable change in fuel economy, had no "seat-of-the-pants" changes, had no "smootheness" changes, and came to the conclusion that it has no effect. Some numbers (MPG) and some impressions (pants) Asking for me to prove that a device doesn't work and also asking me to purchase it is not reasonable.

So, clearly it's up to the manufacturer (or ...) to demonstrate in an internet-friendly way that their product actually meets the performance claims stated.

 

It was always my understanding that to dispute a claim, there must be some quantifiable data to dispute. How can one refute a statement that lacks any substance? The only numbers I have seen (and I searched google to find more info about this) were in a post that Andy presented to us here. Sure the guy wasn't pushing his car as hard as maybe Peter and Randy do, but 9 out of 10 people on NAM don't, which leads me to believe that a FSB is purely for show for most of the people who buy them. If that suits your fancy, then by all means get one...but until I see better track times or camber changes or deflection changes as a measure of a FSB, I'll save that money for a driving school.

Marty