See what I mean! Numbers are just around the corner now. The suspense has been painful, but it's almost over now.

 

Have you ever heard of marketing?

 

Look at the photo again. [Post #33] I think that's just the way the tubes rest when placed on a horizontal surface. Maybe more care should have been taken to make the visual comparison easier, but to assert that there was intent to mislead... I dunno.

 

Hmm, I just said the picture of the two tubes appears to be misleading -- note that "appears to be" = "apparently". I don't claim to know M7's intent, and I stand by the statement that, without any further detail given, the picture appears misleading.

 

No worries.:smile:

I'm just saying that using words like "misleading" and "exaggerate" seems to imply intent. If I read it wrong, my bad.

 

I prefer independant testing. It's better for numbers to come from independant testers than from the one out to make money from a product/service.

BTW, thank you Peter for providing the numbers!

 

No argument on the value of independent testing. But, these numbers did not come from an independent source! They came from M7! If the independent source themselves had published the data so folks could directly ask the investigator questions about the tests, no problem. But when M7 posts the data, M7 implicitly says "We agree with this information". I think this is contradictory behavior - claiming all sorts of reasons why it is not in M7's interest to divulge their own data (that they know all the details about), yet publicizing someone else's (that M7 doesn't know anything about) !

 

I cant believe there are still doubters on this product.
Peter has put pics up cuz people keep asking...and yet ive just read someone say theres no difference/misleading between the too...i mean WTF...theres a massive difference! I agree with an ealier comment bout this becomming an opera

 

ask yourself the million dollar question....

why are there no dyno numbers from a stock MCS?

therein lies your answer

 

Some people here need the "Get in sit down and shut up" on the driver side of their car.

JD

 

I agree! One comment to M7, and I hate that all of these posts come across negative, but did you do multiple flow testing and multiple dyno's while tweaking this design? Or was the focus on the design? It appears a lot of emphasis was made on making a straight pathway, not on flow.

 

We here at MINI-Madness advised Spike to have this product tested and dynoed before he installed it. We also loaned him the stock pipe and referred him to loynings engine service for the test. The AGS did infact flow more air. Unfortunately, Spike declined to do a dyno run to see if the AGS actually made power. Loynings and Madness agree that CFM does not equal power. A dyno test would have put this issue to bed, but unfortunately the customer was unwilling. The jury's still out in our book.

FYI, Loynings engine service is one of the premiere builders of Toyota Formula Atlantic engines.

 

I've seen enough now... We've got a vendor criticizing the testing method of a product from another vendor . mmMatt, I would like to think that you, or someone from Madness had the common courtesy to directly contact M7 with your opinions first, prior to such a display here. Because if not, this is simply pathetic.

M7 did have flow numbers, but given that they orginated from an evaluation he was part of, they were not provided. A customer takes it upon himself to have some testing performed, and shares the fruits of such with Peter. Maybe now he might have something "worthy" to share? Apparently not...

If this product was not a threat to others on the market, we would not see such a behavior. By these measures, Peter, I think you have something good!

 

so you people are getting a bit on the obsessive side over numbers. like posted before its only a car, but a car that is different. Please enjoy the car. You bought a mini because its different we are all of a different breed. if you wanted a really fast car and want a aftermarket world with manufactures that post the most far-fetched numbers on there products then you should have put your money toward a car that can do it. i left the honda tunning world because of people after the numbers. please do what you are supposed to do and motor, and enjoy your car for what it is. i love my mini and think its the hottest thing since sliced bread, and yes i think its fast. but there making a product let them make it. if you think its good then buy and test it yourself and post numbers but enough of the constant badgering of m7.

 

Driving cool cars that are incredibly enjoyable doesn't obviate logic and reason.

M

 

No offence to you Tony but Spike contacted us to test this product. We were not involved in the actual test whatsoever. Spike took the product to Loynings and tested it, not us. We provided the stock unit for him to test against the M7 AGS. Spike sent Peter the chart. No denying better flow, all we're saying is that Spike, the customer who came to us, for help in testing the product did not do a dyno run to see if there was any kind of a horsepower gain. We're not sure why you're up in arms about this, we're merely stating the facts. Not bashing anyones product at all so please don't insinuate that. All we're saying is what everyone else has stated; that being a dyno run before and after is needed to prove a horsepower gain. End of story.

 

Oh, you are NOT gonna like this particular forum.

I'm not threatened by the product, but I am curious.
My assumption (big caveat there!): The product goal is to make more power.
(perhaps the only goal was flow rates??)
To know it makes power, one has to test to see that it makes power. (ok, they could have just trusted based on principals, but stay with me.)
They say it was tweaked and refined, so logic dictates they must have had some test results which caused them to tweak and refine until they met (or approached) their goal(s).
They say they tested in in conjuction with other products, but they must have isolated the AGS to identify that the tweaks to the AGS had the desired effects.

So for me there's just a logical gap in the process (assuming power was the goal.)

 

If M7 gets me the AGS and other parts requested, I will be working on that. I promise to get yo a whole lot of cold air there.

Bomboasy

 

I saw JCampos' (thanks for coming by!) setup yesterday, and he had a nice tube set up to direct air from the stock intake location to the AGS. More is always better, but it seemed pretty good. That, and with the scoop constantly flushing air through the engine bay, I can't see the temps at the filter in that location getting all that high. I'm sure Andy's done some engine compartment testing and has posted it somewhere...

 

Peter's point is very important. You really have to try to remove the stock tube or install the AGS to understand how little space is availabe to run air from the TB to the SC. I have done it, so I know exactly how little space is there. I am very pleased that Peter build the part. Months ago, before AGS was even mentioned, I tried to modify/improve the stock tube by removing plenty of excess material at the SC side. Really, there is a lot of problems with the stock tube in regards to the way it is put together from many parts. This excess plastic can be seen on the left side of the picture of the stock tube, in this thread. It is a lip that extends in to the path of the airflow and would cause all kinds of eddies. They are like airbrakes along the path of airflow. You can see also that Peter does not have this excess in the AGS. Again, you would have to have the stock piece in your hands to see how much improvement can be done in the stock piece, in regards to this excess. I removed more than half an inch of plastic on the left side and a quarter of an inch all around the SC side. Then you have the excess adhesive that was used to put together the stock tube. This varies from one sample to the other. The I filled the dip that the curved surfaces make at the ends of the pieces that were glued together. All of this to improve airflow. What is the point of buying a bigger TB if you have air obstructions and unsmooth surfaces on the path to the SC? I know of other vendors that looked at improving the airflow, but could not see how to make it better. Peter came up with a definite improvement to this component. If you had the stock tube in your hands, all arguments would be mute. I only wish that he also had come up with a better way to secure this piece to the SC. It is exactly the same as the stock piece and I wish that there was a way to improve that. The AGS is better than what I was hoping to make on my own. It is clever, in that it lines up the TB to the airflow path of the SC. I do not have one, yet, but you bet that I will add it to my MINI.

Bomboasy

PS. Peter, I am still waiting...

 

Matt,
Since you folks seem to be the root of the experiment, maybe you can elaborate what the purpose of this test was or what the results mean? Thanks!

--
Cheese

 

Tony,
Since you've come to a conclusion, maybe you can explain to me what these numbers mean? I'm not entirely sure how CFM effects engine dynamics. Is bigger better? I checked a few references but I couldnt find it mentioned. Thanks!

--
Cheese

 

are we making this more complicated than it has to be? Think about drinking liquid from a straw. The longer the straw and the more bends it has, the harder it is to get the liquid to your mouth. Remember those curly-q straws, took forever to get juice through those as a kid. Same with an engine intake, the less resistance for a path of air the better.

Now I am not sure if more air is better or not, but there are always products that try and introduce more air. CAI and filters that are less restrictive are touted as being better--probably because there is more air going through them. I think that is also the purpose behind turbos and SCs is to get more air in the engine. Assuming that more air is better and the AGS increases the flow of air over stock ( i am not a rocket scientist but i would assume that this means more air into the engine), it should perform better.
Therefore, the only issue would be the temp of the air going through the tube, because cold air is more dense. So the AGS would work better than stock and better than CAIs if the increase in flow introduced a greater amount of air particles on the whole. (a smaller volume of cold dense air could have more particles than a larger volume of hot air). This theory could easily be put to rest if someone has a dyno showing the difference in hp produced by an HAI over a CAI or stock. Why? because if the HAI is better, and peter's tube allows 20% more air in than the stock tube, you have 20% more air than the HAI.
These thoughts have not been approved or supported by the folks at NASA, but they seem logical to me.

 

I appreciate the respectful reply, really. I apologize if you feel that I was 'up in arms' about this, but I do find it bothersome.

The reality is that you felt compelled enough to chime-in here; to share with us all that in your opinion air flow is not a telling factor, and that a dyno number would settle everything. Most assuredly, there are others who feel differently, and even the opposite. A dyno is not going to put this to rest for all, and it might just be another rat hole...

This thread is about a product, and one that you don't sell. We know that your company sells a competing product. Some of us also know that vendors (I'm being diplomatic) have gone to extremes to attack competitors and make their products not look desirable. So, coming into this M7 product thread, and saying what you did, is not professional; and does make one wonder if this is just another ill-conceived attempt to taint the competition in a public forum...

Start a thread here on one of your products, and see if other vendors or tuners post their opinions on your product ('jury is still out') or that the testing is not telling ('CFM does not equal power'). Even if other vendors/tuners disagree, and feel that their products are superior, precedent reveals that they will show a degree of respect, and refrain from posting in that thread. We didn't see that here. By entering this thread in the manner that you did, insinuations are only natural.

And the fact that Madness was involved in the sense that they advised the M7 AGS customer to have this tested at a certain engine shop just seems even more fishy. Heck, given the escapades we seen before, for all we know, this whole thing might be a set-up to get M7 on the hot seat again regarding dyno time...

There are many who will disagree with the content of your message (CFM vs. dyno), and I am one. In the whole scheme of things, that's minor as folks can and will decide for themselves. What's most disconcerting is the Madness presence, and expression in this M7 product thread.

For the record, my first two mods for my MCS were from Madness. They were the first tuner that I was aware of for our MINI. I helped arrange two Madness group buys (QuickSilver catback & rear sway bar). My first impressions were good ones. Subsequent dealings, and things that I've learned and seen have had me change my mind, unfortunately.

mac, when I said "By these measures, Peter, I think you have something good!" that was in reference to another vendor feeling compelled to poo poo the AGS...

 

I've been away for a week, so missed a few threads. Did we ever get that vid and dyno numbers of the skeptics orgy?