it seems that way...


and there are reasons for it

 

im thinking the same thing. im interested in some numbers before i drop $300 on an intake system which for all i know performs with the Alta $250 system

 

If this product doesn't have numbers yet (considering it was just released yesterday) then why are you researching the product then downgrading it. A business is very difficult to run and very busy, and when your working on multiple products and all of the sudden are givin' the opportunity to work with Cosworth on a performance cylinder head and port-n-polished supercharger, you try to get numbers out. As Rick-A listed all of the aftermarket CAI's (which I'm sure most of you have bought one of those) have boasts but no independent dyno results, yet you cracked open your wallet for them.

 

I never bought a CAI..... about the only thing I didnt


its disappointing they are still editing my posts....sigh***

 

M7 being held to a higher standard? Here on NAM, M7 avails themselves more so than many other tuners/vendors. With that there is more opportunity for some folks to inquire, publicly, about such requests. Other manufacturers who don't frequent the boards probably get their share of questions also, privately, via email or phone though...

As said earlier by Rick and myself, the provision of performance data is not the norm for the many mods available to us (and there seems to be good reason for that). The request and even demand for M7 to be different in that regard is evident...

I think the real question revolves around what some find to be the gospel - numbers of some type. If M7 releases a dyno plot revealing let's say 11 hp for the AGS, is that going make someone feel better, or should it be higher? Or if 11 is fine in one's cost/benefit analysis, the next bone of contention might be bhp vs whp. I'm a whp fan myself, but you get the idea...

And after such back-and-forth, if the number is finally found to be solid or acceptable (whatever that might mean to someone), the bigger question is... compared to what??? I would think compared to competing products on the market... Well, if another intake claims 12 hp and it's 20 bucks less, it's a no-brainer for some. And for others, that wouldn't be nearly enough to base any decision. I am one of those, and find it very foolish...

If Peter provides an AGS dyno plot, in whp, of an otherwise stock MCS, how does that compare to a different stock MCS with a different induction system on a different dyno machine, in a different location, different operator, and with different supporting equipment and procedures? One can't accurately ascertain the performance difference of the intakes in such a scenario, as there are too many un-controlled and confounding variables. Throw intent (to mislead) into the equation, and what we have is just an absolute mess for which someone wants to base decision? And it would be an asinine one at that...

I'm no engineer, nor are my degrees in any scientific field, but I did take some hard-science classes (minor), and if one thing stuck, it was the absolute significance of proper experimentation. There is no way to draw meaningful conclusions from results that are inherently flawed by poor technique. And worse yet are those folks who choose to make decisions based upon such. They think they are making an informed rational choice because there are numbers, something objective. If anything, that is the smoke and mirrors here!

As I said above, any comparison of results that is not done in a controlled environment to pinpoint the impact of a mod is subject to way too many variables. Many vendors/tuners will not provide performance data due to such ramifications, as well as others. I'm sure that is at least one of the reasons why we don't see so many objective claims...

Yet, even with all of the shallowness that can surface with such numbers, there is a demand for M7 to provide something. To appease those who are unwilling or unable to understand the above quasi-diatribe, he will, unlike many other vendors/tuners. On top of this, a further expectation for him to provide data (dynos, flow #'s, etc.) on competing products, when those companies don't do so is just unrealistic, and unprofessional. I can't imagine M7 wanting to even entertain that idea...

I would love to have a 3rd party (un-interested) perform such analysis for us. Numbers would mean something then! I'm not holding my breath on that happening anytime soon though... As far as numbers are concerned, I make use of them in my own little world - what I can control: my MCS, my data-logging tool, my stretch of testing roads, my choice of environmental conditions, and soon "my" dyno and a specific operator. I wouldn't want to change any of those ingredients, then compare results, and draw conclusions. It would be foolish. And I find it absurd that some would want even more polluted information, and assert that it's needed to help base a decision...

Since 3rd party controlled evals are not be expected, it's important then to ask what makes for numbers? The characteristics or attributes of the product are what make it a winner. There are several well-recognized and popularly accepted positives for which I mention in my previous post. The M7 AGS, by design, from the SC upward, addresses those criteria more comprehensively than anything out there. And minus the desired 3rd party testing, this is seemingly the best way to discern a product's worthiness. And if numbers are provided for an item, then behind that is the person or the company touting such claims. As shared above, getting to know that vendor/tuner is paramount. I have invested much time in conversing with Peter of M7 and Randy Webb. Knowing their respective philosophies and approaches, and building trust is essential in my doing business with anyone...

As far as Peter copying the HAI to make the AGS, I very much disagree. I had been involved in conversations with Peter well before the 05/2004 public release of the HAI, and he was already working on modifications to the stock runner, and contemplating how to design a new piece to replace it. A few months later, he had a prototype that he was testing over last summer. And make no mistake about it, I'm an HAI fan! I not only posted very early on in that thread, I also tried to entice Andy to pursue those gut-feelings expressed in previous threads. I remain a fan of the ingenuity, HAI, AGS, and all others who attempt to think without blinders on...

With regard to filter size, I've read here on NAM, and elsewhere that the vast majority of filters only draw air from a relatively small portion of the surface area (think tennis ball in diameter, for example). This is often simply the path of least resistance... If our filters are allowed to get dirty enough, we usually can see where that entrance point is located. If the filter is not cleaned for a while, then the path of least resistance is bound to change as the "desired" spot gets excessively clogged; and a new portion of the filter media sees use. Being that much smaller motorcycle air filters can supply sufficient air for 200 hp engines, the surface area is most likely not an issue for us...

Wow, at the computer way too long for a beautiful Sunday!

 

M7,

Any chance you have an update on CARB certification?

Thanks!

 

hey all. i've been lurking for awhile, and resisting the urge to post, as i couldn't decide between a MINI or a WRX. have decided the MINI is the way to go and have been trying to gleen all i could before the '06's come out so i know what to order. it seems people are getting tweeked because M7, meaning to or not, is getting what most companies strive for and never get. free publicity. a few posts and a couple pix makes for quite a buzz. apparently a major piece of the kit will be a proper adapter, i.e. not choked down between the TB and the IC. does anyone else offer something like this ? sounds like the necessary next step in the upgrade path.[font=Arial] [/font]
as far as the filter goes:

Originally Posted by andy@ross-tech.com
you can check out http://www.knfilters.com/facts.htm and get a formula for engine size vs filter area. i came up with a filter area of 32.78 in^2 minimum for a 1.6L(97.6cid) @ 7000rpm. that puts the AGS filter at over 2.5 times the minimum. should be good enough.

i don't see any of this as being a knock off of something else, get a grip. it's all just an evolution from the first guy who was tired of looking at some horses rump all day. there is not ONE manufacurer that is not in some way building on what was done before. anyone ever cut the airhorn off the top of a Holly to improve the flow? people been doing that for 50 years. it's all the same. get the air flow as straight and smooth as possible.

whether the AGS kit ends up working as promised or not, somebody is going to be doing a home built version soon. just to see if they can. and that is the cool thing about wrenching on your own car.

as far as what to put in the big empty created by removing the stock air filter, how 'bout one of these http://www.jegs.com/cgi-bin/ncommerc...91&prmenbr=361 . might need some modding for fuel injection pressure, but no car is ever truly finished.

 

tony,
your rambling M7 apology can't be left unanswered. it has so many points to address, it will take more than 1 post.

for one, you claim that it would be unprofessional and unrealistic for M7 to test competing products and post a comparison to his product. well, then M7 shouldn't make claims like this from post #11:
"and it does (gain) more air then any other system."
how do you logically make this claim unless you test?

second, high hp gains claimed by other inlet manufactureres HAVE been challenged numerous times on NAM and on MINI2.

third, regarding the HAI "knockoff:" the original pictures of the M7 system had an elbow UPSTREAM of the TB. i pm'd jlm about this (or posted) questioning the benefit of "straightening" out the TB path, then just adding back in another 90 bend upstream. you may recall that there was a "major" redesign / simplification of the AGS; it now looks like an HAI upstream of the TB. (and some of the pictures were edited out of the earlier posts TODAY by M7. that's ok if one doesn't want to confuse customers, but the original pictures didn't look like the current HAI setup.)

fourth, one of the problems here is that the vast majority of buyers (and posters) are like you in that they don't have a professional engineering or science background; for those of us who do, the bogus vendor claims, by ANY vendor, are especially irritating. there ARE valid, objective, scientifically based engineering tests that can be performed on ANY of these products to prove or disprove the vendor claims. and there are also bogus tests that can be performed. just because the latter happen, don't give up on trying to get the former. since andy has shown a valid method of measuring the pressure drops across the whole inlet path, why not subject an inlet in question to this method?

fifth, the reason it may appear tha M7 is getting a hard time here has something to do with questionable claims (and the words they use*) made by them about some other products, the plasma booster, the rear splitter, and the strut bars, for example, about which they made claims that couldn't be backed up by numbers. (* for instance, earlier in this thread they said the filter was "huge." compared to what? a stock filter is ~60 in^2. theirs is actually in between a stock filter and the HAI.) this continuing "hype" is what is generating a deserved response from people who know better.

 

If M7 (or any vendor) supplies a dyno chart it will immediately be questioned and criticized.

- it came from the vendor
- dispute about the dyno it was on
- complaints that it reads BHP or WHP
- questions about the tuning or lack of tuning that was done
- questions about the control comparison
etc.

For the most part, anything vendor-provided SHOULD be considered suspect. In my experience, trustworthy numbers and objective opinions don't become available until after the vendor quits talking, and after the vendor's fans quit talking. At some point, neutral parties will give their reviews, feedback and numbers and we can go from there. Obviously there is some demand for this product, but the patient won't even consider buying for another couple of months.

I mean, we're talking about a product with multiple advertising threads - an incomplete section on the vendor's website, and not a single vendor-provided picture anywhere. I will gladly sit back and allow others to be the early adopters. I've done my own share of testing in the past, but now I'm more than happy to learn from the money spent by others.

My suggestion is to quit pushing these vendors for information. Expect them to provide it, and if they don't, take your money elsewhere.

 

"I think the real question revolves around what some find to be the gospel - numbers of some type. If M7 releases a dyno plot revealing let's say 11 hp for the AGS, is that going make someone feel better, or should it be higher? Or if 11 is fine in one's cost/benefit analysis, the next bone of contention might be bhp vs whp. I'm a whp fan myself, but you get the idea..."


Tony -- but M7 has been making superority claims without providing ANY backup data on the AGS. If he gives specific data, then people of course can then make up their minds if it is worth spending the $ for the performance gains, like any other product out there. It's the fact that M7 is making pretty strong claims with no backup -- even months later -- that people on the board are hammering him. Bottom line, if a vendor makes a claim of superiority versus established competitors, he just better have the data to back it up or he's gonna get hammered.

 

Thank you Tony for your eternal wisdom...

The Air Resource Board papers has been filed and we will be able to deliver
a final production unit on the 22nd to ARB, feel confident that we will follow thru on our promise to receive certification (California cert).

As Tony said numbers (HP) will be generated by many sources very shortly
and you numbers people can make your decision on that.

Meanwhile multiple cars are running with semi to final beta units on the streets of Los Angeles and Hawaii, the response/ feedback has
has been more then positive. Considering that all the drivers previously
demanded the best CAI available on the market, and would never change
back after running our system.

As I have said before, nothing ships out from M7 if the product is in Beta
or possibly worse. That is the reason for a lengthy (close to 9 months)
period of testing and belleive me a staggering budget.

Flyboy.... (Team..... one of 4 now only 3)

peter
Team M7

 

it seems like at least we need is follow through on this M7 statement:

"Regarding the flow capabilities we will have tons of data to share, that will
include all the competing systems on the markets (HAI included)."

or this one:
"As for Hp and flow numbers we will have all the numbers as soon as everyone get's back from the holidays."

 

After writing those words, I spoke to my friend Tony, who recommended me
"Not" to follow thru on that promise. And the reason is of course the
unavoidable flame fest that would ensue not only from The usual suspects but the bad blood that would erupt between other manufactures
and M7.

peter
Team M7

 

How convenient it is for you to not follow through on this promise. You seem to have a history of doing this on every project you have done from what I can tell by reading these forums.

 

Par for the course And I actually thought this product might have some potential!

 

obviously, the product can be sold, regardless, eh?

what bs.

 

My My what a busy weekend you all had Many thanks to all that kept this thread hopping .

Randy
M7 tuning

 

yeah, all it is is a marketing thread.

 

Other manufacturers have claimed that their product is superior, or generates impressive power, or like words. We've seen it on websites, and I probably still have some emails responses that can I dig-up. And for whatever reason, the vast majority did not provide supporting proof in the way of numbers. Right or wrong, depending on one's perspective, this is a reality...

If I were a vendor/tuner, I certainly wouldn't appreciate another vendor/tuner revealing data that I chose not to, and especially at the expense of making my product look inferior. I think many of us would feel that is not exactly professional, and M7 agrees to such conduct.

Peter had his AGS and many others flow-tested in the filter manufacturer’s lab. The results were positive, and some minor changes from that testing have made subsequent results even more fruitful. As shared with me, my current aftermkt intake got the lowest marks. Even though M7 doesn't have a constructive working-relationship with that vendor/tuner, he doesn't want to divulge that information as a matter of principle. He doesn't feel that it's right to do so. The only delta shared was a "safe" one - how his runner compares to the stock one that it replaces, not vs. a cohort's offering...

He used such testing to further validate and refine his System, probably just like many others in his line of business. And also like others, sharing all of the details is not always exactly prudent. He has decided not to; and I do believe it's still ok for one to change his mind - especially for good reason.

And for those who must have a dyno pull to compare in some ill-conceived attempt to make an informed decision, he said that it will come. M7 did quite a few dynos in the past couple of weeks, but like any good tuner, he's using the dyno as a tool to tune a combination of mods so they work in unison, in a way he finds most ideal.

There are reasons why many vendors are not spewing performance data on their products. We all know about false or bloated claims... Even when such vendor assertions are legit, there will be someone, somewhere, for God knows what reason (hopefully not intentional), will not get such gains. A private beef once ago, now has the opportunity, due to the internet, to become a massive negative exposure. And if this is unjustified, it is obviously an unwelcome matter for that vendor to address. The simple way is to not provide such objective claims anymore, or at least limit them, and provide the proper disclaimer with legalese...

So Peter said his AGS will be the best... With the TV blaring in the background with commercials, and an open magazine with ads staring at me as I type... so what else is new! Big deal. He provided reasons as to why, and it's up to us to judge for ourselves, just as we do with virtually everything else we must contemplate in life. If I come across like I'm "rambling," it's because I feel like an adult amongst a few children who just whine way too much... The only whining I look forward to hearing is the SC being fed by an AGS

kursplat, welcome to NAM, and we're glad you decided upon a MINI! A new and fresh perspective is always nice. Thanks for the filter info, confirming what I read around here, and other places.

A good week to everyone!

 

Are you serious? So as a manufacturer, your obligations are to other vendors and not the consumer?

 

This whole debate over five or six or even ten horsepower is silly to me when we are talking about a road going car. Such a relatively small gain in HP really isn’t that important. What I prefer is throttle response and drivability, neither of which will show up on ANY dyno sheet because they are based on subjective seat-of-the-pants evidence. If HP was all that mattered we would be better off doing small block Chevy transplants in our MINIs!

The Alta is generally accepted as being the end-all in street MINI performance (probably because of the beautiful whine it makes more than anything else.) Bill K. told me that the drivability difference between his MINI with the Alta - which he absolutely loved - and the M7 AGS is like night and day. That’s enough for me because that’s what I am personally looking for, not HP bragging rights.

As mentioned earlier, any vendor tested product will be criticized and scrutinized. I am sure there will be plenty of objective independent testing and comparisons made by consumers in the very near future as is the case with most other products out there.

 

Originally Posted by TonyB
If I were a vendor/tuner, I certainly wouldn't appreciate another vendor/tuner revealing data that I chose not to, and especially at the expense of making my product look inferior. I think many of us would feel that is not exactly professional, and M7 agrees to such conduct.


Sure, ideally, there are obligations of fair play amongst vendors. If that info were to be provided by M7, there would be some unbelieving consumers, and most assuredly some unhappy vendors. This is so because he is indeed an interested party; and why he won't go there...

The testing had the purpose of design validation and to seek areas of further improvement. This was done and accomplished successfully. M7's time and money to make this happen was just a part of bringing a well-designed product to market. That is and should be a vendor's ultimate obligation to a consumer.

 

Okay, so they've changed their mind and decided not to publish dyno numbers. That's their choice and nothing any consumer can do will change that.

So, here is a chance for M7 to put on the salesman's hat. Why should I, as a consumer, buy this product?

 

All sales no substance.

M7, regardless of what your good friend recommends you do.
We, the possible customers of your product called the AGS expect you to follow through. I don't care about what else you found out about other vendors products. We only want to know what you found out about yours.
A very simple dyno on a stock MCS then put the AGS on that same MCS on the same day and dyno again, give us the horse power to the wheels with no changes to the dyno and let the chips fall where they may.
You said you would provide the numbers, period.

 

As M7 has written before, the AGS is the best, it outperforms all other intakes on the market, and you should hold off on buying any of the competitors' products because the M7 product is better. Isn't that enough?