Got it planeguy.

I would like to point out however that our "Stage 1" kit is consistently quoted as "smoother than the JCW" and always performs better on the dyno.

That is due to the regime we put our cars through, and for a niche product like the JCW, I would bet is close to rivals the abuse, and in some cases, surpasses it.

For instance:

Arizona hot weather testing
Mesa Verde/Mt. Evans high altitude testing
Extensive dyno testing at altitude and sea level, load bearing and inertial
Acceleration testing
Consultation with manufacturer teams
OEM chart analysis
Extensive road course testing - literally hundreds of hours
Series testing in autocross and road racing
Component test to failure

These tests have allowed Webb Motorsports to confidently offer OEM-like warranties to our customers, almost unheard of in the aftermarket industry.

I find it amusing that some (and I won't point fingers, Andy) give our company all kinds of grief and yet don't question the vendors who sell the same items with no testing what so ever and offer no warranty.

I am confident in the testing we do, and as I said over on my forum, I used to test pilot aircraft for a living, so I am completely and accutely aware of scientific method and control.

I hope that clears things up a bit on my position. This isn't a gauntlet being thrown down to anyone, but rather an explanation of the lengths I take our products before we will offer them to the public.

No pissin' matches anymore .

Randy

 

Randy,
Thank you very much for your patient explanations here. I surely did not want to start a battle here and was really only hoping to get answers for my questions.
I feel now a bit more comfortable with a "Cold Air Intake", but am still a bit unsure about larger versus smaller pulleys and how they benefit the car. Plus of course what those pulleys do to the waterpump.
Cheers,
Herbert

FYI Andy, As someone who spends lots of time on all kinds of forums, let me just assure you as someone that it never comes of good to be negative in tone. Even if you are right.
I am a vendor myself in other forums and really have learned to control myself.

 

--Randy, thx for all ur input. "help's" indeed.


--Andy, HMMMM does this sound a bit familiar? ("negative in tone")

--Moskito,
i totally feel U on that 'waterpump & pulley' deal, i'll do a SC pulley but a Crank pulley still not sure.......

 

The effective change of the 2% pulley on a 15% car acts as a 17% reduction from stock water pump pulley (supercharger pulley).

Our testing showed no ill effects with a 17% reduction, and only with a 19% pulley at extended operation over 6500RPM did we see any effect at all. That was a small rise in oil temp, and it would cool down almost straight away below 6500RPM. It was the small volume of the oil cooler showing us the problem. It will show a change before the water temp will due to the volume of mass in the cooling system. That was all discovered under testing on the track.

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

so since ill b running a 16% a 2% C. on top of that would almost put me on the edge!? (right under a 19% reduction) so whats ur take on IC's do u believe the designs out there r good enough?

 

That was a water pump cavitation illustration. While the oil temps are higher in this car tha most, as long as you don't spend all day above 6500RPM, you shouldn't have a problem. The oil pump is relatively small, so if you do an external oil cooler, I would suggest a boost pump inline.

hop tht hlps u

Randy

 

If there was cavitation occurring in the water pump, wouldn't you see a sharp increase in COOLANT temps rather than OIL temps? Also, wouldn't there be damage to the impeller? Is it possible that the reason for the oil temp increase isn't cavitation at all, but rather that the flow rate of the coolant is too fast for good heat transfer from the oil? I don't see the clear-cut connection between rising oil temps and cavitation in the water pump.

P.S. Sorry in advance if anyone thinks my tone is negative. It's not intended to be, but if I see inaccurate statements, I correct them.

 

If you see in what your definitition is to be inaccurate, you correct them with what you believe to be correct.

It is a question of volume, and where you will see the change first. If there is only a very short momentary cavitation, and there is enough mass due to volume to absorb heat energy in the entire cooling system, you wouldn't see that as a sharp increase in temp.

If you have a small volume, and that mass stalls, it will show an increase in the mass it was trying to cool, in this case the oil.

Not inaccurate at all - in fact it has been discussed with my old fluid dynamics professor at Embry-Riddle, one of the best engineering schools in the country.

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

Sorry but I think you misinterpreted my post. It had 2 parts. The first was addressed to you, asking questions about your cavitation statement.

The second part was addressed to Moskito, joker, etc. who were offering critiques of my behavior. My statement about addressing innacuracies was more about statements of yours like "What you find is that the inlet temp is even more important on a force induced car than a normally aspirated car." ... which IS inaccurate ... and which I corrected.

Hope that clears it up!

BTW, I follow what you are saying about the coolant momentarily stalling in the coolant/oil exhange but was just looking for clarification on your reasons for attributing it to cavitation.

 

It's always been my opinioin the the larger thermal mass of the water cooling system would buffer out small high temp loads...up tp a point. The proper location for a water temp gauge is where the coolant exits the head so the reading is closer to measuring what heat is being generated by the combustion process, subject to the thermal mass of the head.

the oil temp usually reads more quicky, since that system picks up considerable heat directly from the smaller thermal buffer of the piston crowns. Generally, the best place to read the temp would be in the pan (not necesarily at the drain plug though). I'm measuring the temp at the entry to the oil gallery, sort of late in the heat pickup cycle.

peaks in oil temp give a more immediate indicator of heat in the combustion chamber. For the most part, the hot oil (typically 240defF) loses its heat to the block and the stock, puny water cooled oil cooler, but does not significantly gain heat from the hot water (220deg F). I doubt the tiny oil cooler contributes much to the oil temps anyway, implying cavitating the water would be a minor contributor to oil temp rise.

has anyone ever seen pump cavitation? how about those boys revving their engines to 8500rpm?

 

so is it safe to say that a larger radiator would be the mod to go w/before a larger IC?? cuz to me where the IC is mounted under bonnet sux, it needs to be moved to the front of the car for larger benefits to offset the high cost of a IC mod

 

"The person, 400ex, was making a point saying that the inlet temp of a force induced car doesn't matter "

Randy[/QUOTE]
UH, sorry Randy. I was claiming no such thing. Just that pulling air from under the car or the base of the window was less important, since the heat added by the S/C and the efficiency of I/C were what had a larger impact on IAT on the MCS. That may be B/S, but that was what I meant. Besides I resent being called a person. I am not a person but a former customer !!!

Let me take this opurtunity to say fair well since this will be my last post. I was strongly considering re-entering the MINI community. However my test drive in a MCSA at the local dealer brought back too many bad memories. You see there tester had not only a cracked windshield but the check engine light was glowing away as well. This is nothing against the MINI so much as my local dealership. There willingness to send customers out in a car without taking the time to fix the windshield and replace the wiring harness or whatever was causing the error just reminded me of why I sold the first one, so that was that.


Thanks to people like Randy and Andy for pursueing correct info and sharing it with us less informed, Happy Motoring to all !!! Maybe I look at the 09 MINI's again. :smile:

 

...