Why are you so quick to doubt my recipe? Did you even look around for dyno results?

Heres a guy with an Alta CAI and 15% pulley, 62 mm TB, MTH ECU remap, and "one-ball" exhaust. If anything this would be LOWER than my plan which calls for a header AND a smaller supercharger pulley.

He got whp: 174 torque: 164.
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...highlight=dyno

 

Because you've never cooked it?

 

Are you serious?

you have never cooked it either...so you have just as little right to doubt it. Atleast his post was posing a positive idea or topic for conversation....yours was just another negative post that helped no one

 

Well, he listed two specific lists of mods with power figures for each. I am trying to find out where he came up with the numbers since I haven't seen dynos for those lists of mods.

 

he also said they were estimations....last i heard there is no estimation dyno

 

here he states his numbers arent exact and that his numbers were derived from other dynos he has seen....

now he was being helpful by proposing a hypothetical recipe for power....how have you helped this thread?

 

I have helped this thread by asking where he got his numbers from, in the interest of shedding some light on the actual effectiveness of these mods. How have you helped this thread?

 

LOL

 

ARE YOU LISTENING< LOOK AT THE FREAKING DYNOS !!!!!!!!!!

You keep ignoring the fact there are hundreds of dynos out there that have PROVEN these total power figures!!!!! You have very selective reading capabilities.

Im sorry i dont know the exact amount of HP a 15% pulley adds when used with 5 other mods

 

He didn't...........

 

Where are the dynos again? I skimmed this topic but didnt see any. Thanks!

 

Minispilot,

Thanks for putting this together. I know it would have taken me hours.

By not attaching a dyno result, I understood them to be estimates, but having spent the past month or so on this site, I didn't find it unrealistic. (Supported by prior dyno tests/claims of other Mini owners.)

I can't believe the big fuss!

-Pete

 

Where? I don't recall seeing any dynos for:

one-ball + header + 15% pulley + Crank pulley + mth + plugs + hai

According to you, this should give a total of 45 hp. I'm just wondering whether you have actually seen that result or results close to it from those specific mods.

I also don't recall seeing any dynos for the above car with the following substitutions:

AGS + GRS IC + 380cc injectors

According to you, this should give a total of 70 hp. I'm just wondering whether you have actually seen that result or results close to it from those specific mods.

Seriously, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, but you must know that mods like that aren't necessarily additive. Different combinations of parts can yield different results, but you usually cannot just add up manufacturers' claims for dyno figures.

I can tell you that I have a recipe for a sandwich that has tuna, SPAM, cole slaw, bbq sauce, capers, malted milk *****, and beets. If you look around, you'll find tons of recipes that include one or more of those ingredients, and those recipes probably taste good. But that doesn't mean that the recipe I provided tastes good since AFAIK, nobody has ever tried it.

I see what you are trying to do with making a list of mods and their effect, but I just don't see where you are getting some of the individual figures or any of the cumulative figures. Do you see my point?

 

I thought this thread seemed familiar:

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...d.php?p=487451

 

Hmmm...so you are shedding light by doubting? Seems like you could HELP him by finding the dynos or maybe showing him YOUR idea of a recipe for power....seems much more helpful than questioning and doubting him

I'm helping by attempting to haulting unnecessary negative comments that dont help thinds

 

See andy...here it is. I agree with you that his numbers are a bit off....but THIS is how you should handle it. Give him a thorough explanation as to why they arent additive (i know you are smart, and i know you are capable of putting together a great explanation)

SO....your original post could have been you giving explanations as to where he may have over estimated or missed the non-additive nature of some mods instead of jumping on him and doubting his numbers....keep things positive and help people learn things....

 

So the idea is you create a 'recipe' and someone else is supposed to find out if it works? What is one supposed to search on, 205HP?

It's great if you've found a setup/recipe that works. It would be prudent if you had example(s) of that recipe in action, otherwise it's just a theory and not really helpful to the next guy who is modding.

Scientific Method (my paraphrasing)
1. State a theory
2. Test it to see if theory is correct
3. Adjust theory to embrace results

The point is your recipe may or may not work. As you say, one can certainly search for dynos that prove or disprove the theory. But to say, "it's my theory, prove it's wrong, or right" doesn't make much sense.

RallyMINI - The above is an attempt to teach a man to fish vs. giving him a fish. The basic concepts of mod gains being additive (or not) were covered in his last thread.

 

OK. BTW, I like your front bumper.

 

bolting goodies on my rig have proven time and time again what a pig it is.

 

thanks buddy I prefer it over the much more cluttered cooper bumper

 

I think that what i'm asking for is teaching the man to fish. All i saw earlier was people telling him that he wasnt fishing or that he wasnt fishing correctly. I agree you shouldnt give him a fish(in this analogy, giving him your recipe ONLY). You should teach him where he is making the mistake in his fishing and teach him what is right. I'm sorry but didnt realize there was another thread, there are lots on NAM.

 

Minispilot,

Thank you for sharing with us your theory about the additive effects of performance modifications in the MCS. I do have several comments, that I trust you'll take in a constructive way, because that is how they are meant.

1) IMO, your drivetrain loss for power (15%) is an overestimate. I believe that a more accurate projection would be closer to 10% for this FWD car.

2) You have suggested power and torque gains for at least one product for which their is no documentation (the AGS). If I have missed any dyno testing that supports your contention for that product by itself, then I do apologize.

3) The GRS intercooler is a great product, however, I don't believe it adds horsepower. Rather, it may decrease, or even eliminate, the power loss from the compressed, but hotter air coming from the supercharger. My observations with the GRS may be of interest. With the 19% pulley, IAT's were anywhere from 10-20 deg F. greater than with a 15% pulley. While boost pressure was greater with the 19% pulley, the greater IAT probably "robbed" some of the benefit from that size reduction pulley. Your setup has a 3% crank pulley with a 15% SC pulley, which would be the near equivalent of an 18% SC pulley. The additional heat generated must be considered in any projections of power gain.

4) I have done a number of dyno runs on my MCS, and have found the results to be somewhat disappointing. BTW, I have a very extensive, and expensive , array of drivetrain mods. Engine realted ones include:

Pipercross Viper CAI, modified for the MCS
65-to-62mm TB
19% Alta SC pulley
Ported-polished SC, head and intake manifold
GRSmotorsport IC
Schrick performance camshaft (264)
JCW 380cc injectors
NGK IX platinum plugs
MM/Comptech header
Miltek exhaust
MTH software adjustment

The dyno run I mentioned gave maximum power of 208 whp (? 230 at the crankshaft) with 91 octane petrol. There was definite pre-ignition/detonation at the upper rpm range, so it's possible the power value may have been higher with different software and/or fuel.

Based on your projections, and some interpolation, I should have obtained a substantially greater response than I did. Perhaps I would have seen better results with proper adjustment of timing and the A/F, and the use of different fuel. However, I still believe that modifications are not additive in nature. As we do more and more to our cars, subsequent mods give smaller increments of improvement when compared to the gains from early, and important changes, e.g., a 15% pulley.

5) Your enthusiasm and effort in presenting a provocative theory is to be complimented, however, one must be very cautious in concluding that "the whole indeed equals the sum of its parts". Reality in this case suggests that "the whole does not equal the sum of its parts".

6) I wish your confidence in low labor costs was true. My accountant could tell you otherwise .

Motor and mod on :smile:

 

Actually in my analogy I was referring to almost literally 'fishing' (searching) for the dyno/data needed to support his theory. It's very probable that it's out there, but doing the searching is tanamount to doing your kid's homework for him. Just as I'd tell a child "It's not MY homework.", I say to him "It's not MY theory - don't ask me to prove it for you."
He's not asking how one could get there, he's telling us.

Andy posted a link to the first thread from February in post #39.

It would actually be a good service to NAM to compile before and after dynos (would be nice, though probably impossible if they came with an 'area under the curve number') with a host of different mods.

BTW, I should have added a #4. THEN publish.

 

Oh, crap! I didn't mean to start-up something here!

It did occur to me that we have a number of incredibly bright engineers on this board, in fact some have posted to this thread. One thought would be to contact folks like Ryan Malcom, Randy Webb and present company, asking them to review your "recipe" for their feedback BEFORE posting. That way you have a chance to interact with some of the really great minds in the MINI world, learn a great deal about the nuances of modding, AND educate us with your findings.

It's obvious you are only trying to help, and I certainly appreciate the effort you made in posting your recipe. However, these boards (and plenty of others) are rife with pseudo-engineers whose ego-posts can unintentionaly lead a newbie down a path of disappointment. I'm not saying you have done this nor am I saying it was your intent.

It's just that the worst cases have happened too often and a number of the best minds on these boards feel a sense of responsibility for cutting through all the crap, and are looking for mod posts that are based on somewhat of a scientific process with lots of data to back up claims.

We all drive MINIs; we all love them....hey, can't we all just get along?

Theo

P.S. Don't say it...I know..."Up yours, Theo!"

 

You want dyno results?

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=26937

Pilo intake, Milltek cat back, 19% pulley, one-click ECU flash:
198.9 HP and 178.63 TQ (Flywheel corrected)

This setup has basically everything in the 205 recipe spare a header which im positive will yeild the extra 5hp. I don't even know why you're doubting this, if you've spent any time on this forum you have seen plenty of dynos with the 19%, ECU tuning, and Intake making 175-180 hp.

Here's another one I posted earlier in the thread.
A note for all readers:
All of the installs are DIY and you CAN do them. Read the how-to pages, they really aren't that difficult!!! Shipping will vary per person/location so you will have to figure for that yourself.

Bottom line, I KNOW the 205hp recipie is correct and I will follow it when the time comes. The 230 is untested by me personally and now that I reconsider, it may be a little high. I will do more research once I am done with the 205hp recipie and will make my decision then.

I guess I will just have to apologize for trying to make a simple plan that most people can follow to have a quick little car with minimum investment.