Peter has some serious projects taking up his time right now, so it is on hold.


The RMS kit is going very well though. We will have the kit with the BMW 6 series water pump that is integrated with the stock ECU ready be the end of next week. So far, at 18psi, the kit is putting out 280BHP. I will have full specs, dyno runs, and pictures available shortly. The Mule is getting this kit within the next few weeks for development in the States.

Here is a shot of the unit with the new electric water pump:



The intercooler you see is the water-air RMS unit we have here in testing. This unit is also downright amazing. It is also available in any color - painted to match the MINI colors.

The kit will be a joint venture between RMS and Webb Motorsports - it uses our head/cam, our header/cat-back, our injectors, our supercharger, and the RMS mounting hardware, ECU, water pump, and associated ancillaries.

The pricing will depend on the fluctuation of the Euro, but at current rates, and with shipping costs, it will be in the $5500ish range.

Stay tuned!
Randy

 

Cool! Any close-up pics?

 

Twin screw superchargers are measured in liters of air per revolution. The RMS kit uses a .87L.

Randy

 

so.... are we going to see a dyno of the car at the wheels SAE corrected???????

 

I'll post a whole slew of them - the unit that uses the electric pump is pictured above. It's actually huge, an shows a lot of detail, but it won't fit well.

I'll post more of the kit. Here are a few of the intercooler close up:

You can see the specific core design for the airflow:


And the waterflow:


The kit:


The radiator:


Note the thickness to dissipate heat effectively:


And the intercooler has two supply and return lines, to split the thermal load and prevent heat soak of the thermal mass (the water):


It also uses a Bosch pump which has proven to be reliable on the track.

This unit addresses all of the issues I've seen with water-air units - the thermal mass of the water being to great to dissipate under continuous load has been dealt with using a dual mass system and a correctly sized radiator combined with an optimized pump rate. The pump failures have been addressed with using a high cost Bosch unit. The core issues have been addressed by using a specific unit for this application, not a jacketed stock unit or a gimmicky core.

Even though the costs are high, the quality of the items are worth it to me, and I am excited about these new products. There isn't much money to be made on them, believe it or not, but having the items available in the States, and working together with RMS makes this a project worth pursuing!

I'll share more as I can.

Randy

 

Ah, yeah - that is my biggest concern right now...

I do have a run in metric I'd be happy to post - anyone know how to post a .pdf file?

Randy

 

why is it so difficult to get everyone to set a standard hp measurement?? Maybe it is too much to ask.

Never knew that vendors would always like to compare apples to oranges. Baffling to say the least...

 

Approx. 53ci or approx 18% increase over stock. Add that to the more efficient twin-screw plus cooler AIT temps and we should see some rather large gains in HP/TQ. Very cool.

 

Why would anyone want to present actual data when the products sell just fine without it?

 

silly me..............rofl

 

I'd be happy to share my thoughts on why. The biggest reason is that it doesn't matter much to the bread and butter consumer. That leaves most in a quandry from a marketing standpoint, because if vendor Y is using BHP (like most do), and vendor X is using SAE, and both products are the same money, then Joe Customer is most likely going to buy the product with the higher number.

That is a fact I've seen in regard to marketing campaigns by many of the aftermarket vendors which has caused grief in my world. Posting realistic numbers is about all you can ask - trying to get everyone to use a standard that is lower in a number sense is going to be very difficult. You are not the average customer, in that you are aware of how to measure on a dyno, and the tricks that can be played with the numbers. Most aren't.

Which brings me to the last point - be happy with honest numbers. You can interpolate from BHP close enough to know if a vendor is fudging dyno numbers. Most agree that a 12% driveline loss is reasonable. That leaves us with as close to apples to apples comparison as you are going to see. For you, I will be sure to post numbers in SAE wheel once I start doing the testing Stateside...

Remember that my philosophy regarding the dyno is to have a useable tool. I could give a flip whether or not it is SAE - as long as it is consistent. That makes it apples to apples for me. It is only part of the package. I also do same gear acceleration runs and track testing, as well as data gathering (temps and pressures for instance).

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

Seriously, do you know how to post a .pdf?

 

Quick question, Randy. Any chance you can sell the RMS in different kit formats. Say a Stage 1: autorotor w/water pump. Stage 2 adds: new pulley, H2O intercooler, & injectors... etc?

 

Convert the .PDF to a .JPG using any image software (photoshop, Corel draw, even Preview on a Mac will do it) then post as an image like a regular photo. If you don't have a image program then email me the pdf at macman@rogers.com and I'll convert it and email it back for you to post.

Macman.

 

Maybe we should get some RossTech and El Diablito Rojo approved stickers.

Andy,

I am still waiting for the 19% GIAC results! I have not seen anything on that yet.

El,

you went with the twin charge because you saw which data?
I guess you are still figuring out some problems with the setup to get more power.....so you pay and test it for the vendor. Therefore you might get a better deal.

Guys,
this is starting to get silly. The product just arrived in the States and you are already starting this whole testing and data stuff. Buy it and test it yourself.
You have to realise that at some point you bought something you believed in before the data was there.
Give Randy some time....and if you do not like the results then speak up.

Everytime something gets posted that is new that gives everybody more product to choose from gets the same old story.

Alex

 

You have mail...

 

But wouldn’t it be nice if all the data used on this site was the same. There seems to be many intelligent people here and we could all benefit from uniform information.
This site and most of its members are from the US, I would suggest the Standards of Automotive Engineers. SAE factors in all atmospheric conditions and elevations so it would be the most correct everywhere.


Dave

 

The additional capability of the blower makes the injectors, and most everything else, a necceisty right off the bat.

Call me though, and I will do what I can.

Randy

 

It seems that a more efficient supercharger would make replacing the intercooler even less necessary than it is with the stock supercharger.

 

randy: can you explain this:

"the intercooler has two supply and return lines, to split the thermal load and prevent heat soak of the thermal mass "

doesn't "heat soak"( in this context) usually refer to the intercooler core warming up from the proximity to hot engine components and results from low vehicle velocity and therefore zippo cooling airflow? how do split lines address this?

 

That's my understanding also Andy. However, I'm sure this new IC will help in the muffling of some of the added twinscrew noise, not to mention to aid in dropping the IAT's further... That being said, eventually, I would love to see and hear the results of this with the stock IC...

 

No problem, I think you just misunderstood my meaning - or I stated it wrong


What I meant by heat soak was the water mass. The issue with it in the past was the stability and higher thermal mass of water when compared to air. This is great until you continually load the motor - making the intake temps considerable for extended periods. What happens is the water temps continue to slowly rise, and because of the higher thermal mass, the recovery rate is over minutes rather than seconds like an air-air system. You end up with a cooling medium that gets heat soaked.

By splitting it into two lines, you avoid that as such a problem - the two masses and the more efficient core design.

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

re. dyno numbers:

I remember a TV episode of That's Life. Paulie was asked

by his sister "didn't he realize those breasts were fake?

His response: "why should I care?"

 

I agree with the idea, but since I haven't had the unit under load here yet, I have to follow the info I've been given by those I trust. I will certainly be testing it with the stock intercooler as well as air-air units along with teh RMS unit.

Remember, I just finished hammering out the details! Give me some time, and I promise I'll tell you everything I can.

Randy

 

can you diagram the flow system; I still don't get the two mass idea.