Go Back  North American Motoring > 1st Generation MINIs > R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006)
RMW Jesus head vs Thumper TPR2 >

R50/53 - R50/53 RMW Jesus head vs Thumper TPR2

R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006) Cooper (R50) and Cooper S (R53) hatchback discussion.

R50/53 - R50/53 RMW Jesus head vs Thumper TPR2

  #1  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:06 AM
Braminator's Avatar
Braminator
Braminator is offline
OVERDRIVE
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Wherever she takes me.
Posts: 7,211
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
RMW Jesus head vs Thumper TPR2

Little Test we were able to do last week of a RMW Head Vs Thumper Head. Thumper head car had more supercharger pulley and water/meth injection. Yielded 29 less hp.
This what I just saw posted on Facebook. So I am quoting only as I know no other details




 
  #2  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:12 AM
slomofo's Avatar
slomofo
slomofo is offline
2nd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's some serious results. wondering on the cost of that total set up
 
  #3  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:23 AM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Header vs no header, etc, etc....two cars are not even setup close....wonder why they are on the same chart?!


EDIT: ADDED INFO!!!
One difference that I do want to highlight, the 2006 car had 380cc JCW injectors, so they had to limit the redline to around 7k, whereas the 2002 had 450's or 550's (don't remember, but they were larger) and has his redline extended all the way up to 8k
From further down the page....My question, WHY ON THE SAME CHART?
 

Last edited by ZippyNH; 04-03-2013 at 01:19 PM. Reason: Added info!!
  #4  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:25 AM
slomofo's Avatar
slomofo
slomofo is offline
2nd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
Header vs no header, etc, etc....two cars are not even setup close....wonder why they are on the same chart?!
I think that's pretty self explanatory. A well modified head, cam, and header will net better results than a differently modified head, cam, even smaller pulley, and meth
 
  #5  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:28 AM
Braminator's Avatar
Braminator
Braminator is offline
OVERDRIVE
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Wherever she takes me.
Posts: 7,211
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
This was at Matiland IMports with Jan tuning the cars.
Both cars had headers (not sure brand of 1st car) both cars had cat backs. The RMW car was a 2002 and the TPR2 car was a 2006
That 2002 was the highest HP Eaton Supercharged that rolled across that dyno by a fair amount. Whats neat is this was done with 93 octane, and the car had a catalytic converter.
 
  #6  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:30 AM
Braminator's Avatar
Braminator
Braminator is offline
OVERDRIVE
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Wherever she takes me.
Posts: 7,211
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Just goes to show in a head to head comparison on the same dyno and same day and similar mods. The 06 has the later gen supercharger and had Meth and more supercharger pulley so in theory it should have made more power. Stuff makes a difference.
 
  #7  
Old 04-03-2013, 11:31 AM
ViperNL
ViperNL is offline
4th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Park City, UT
Posts: 315
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Different cams too
 
  #8  
Old 04-03-2013, 12:03 PM
Cheerio44
Cheerio44 is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was actually there for these tests, both cars were pretty similarly set up, the 2006 car has a header (don't remember the brand tbh), as well as an exhaust (stratmosphere). Both cars were pretty similarly set up, both had cams, heads, header, exhaust, intake, injectors.

One difference that I do want to highlight, the 2006 car had 380cc JCW injectors, so they had to limit the redline to around 7k, whereas the 2002 had 450's or 550's (don't remember, but they were larger) and has his redline extended all the way up to 8k
 
  #9  
Old 04-03-2013, 12:32 PM
slomofo's Avatar
slomofo
slomofo is offline
2nd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cheerio44 View Post

One difference that I do want to highlight, the 2006 car had 380cc JCW injectors, so they had to limit the redline to around 7k, whereas the 2002 had 450's or 550's (don't remember, but they were larger) and has his redline extended all the way up to 8k
this is huge as this is where the car really started making large gains according to the graph. it was more than the other but it really goes up from there.
I'm assuming both have software to support these mods, etc
 
  #10  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:18 PM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Cheerio44 View Post
I was actually there for these tests, both cars were pretty similarly set up, the 2006 car has a header (don't remember the brand tbh), as well as an exhaust (stratmosphere). Both cars were pretty similarly set up, both had cams, heads, header, exhaust, intake, injectors.

One difference that I do want to highlight, the 2006 car had 380cc JCW injectors, so they had to limit the redline to around 7k, whereas the 2002 had 450's or 550's (don't remember, but they were larger) and has his redline extended all the way up to 8k
Yeah....
So one car was set-up right...and one was starving for fuel....
interesting thing is the TQ numbers...Thumper did better there, matching and slightly beating the RMW.....even with the lack of fuel.
I do like RMW tunes, I have one, but lets be 100% honest...
Putting 2 cars with such an IMPORTANT difference on the same dyno sheet is PURE BS!!

Jan has always been good at self promoting....I think I'll just toss this one in that bin....
The RMW MINI is Impressive....but how can you compare them?! It would have been much more classy to leave the 2nd car off the chart. To folks that don't know much, it seems like a HUGE difference, but lets face it...comparing an apple to an orange is hard!!
 
  #11  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:24 PM
slomofo's Avatar
slomofo
slomofo is offline
2nd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hate side by side dyno graphs without all mods disclosed. for a guy like me, it's important to know what setups actually net what gains. this helps to justify if something is worth the cost. in this instance, the $350 worth of injectors show justification but I would never had known because the info was never disclosed.
 
  #12  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:29 PM
rs53
rs53 is offline
1st Gear
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
Yeah....
So one car was set-up right...and one was starving for fuel....
interesting thing is the TQ numbers...Thumper did better there, matching and slightly beating the RMW.....even with the lack of fuel.
I do like RMW tunes, I have one, but lets be 100% honest...
Putting 2 cars with such an IMPORTANT difference on the same dyno sheet is PURE BS!!
Jan has always been good at self promoting....I think I'll just toss this one in that bin....
The RMW MINI is Impressive....but how can you compare them?! It would have been much more classy to leave the 2nd car off the chart. To folks that don't know much, it seems like a HUGE difference, but lets face it...comparing an apple to an orange is hard!!

If the guy was spraying methanol on top of 380cc injectors wouldn't that in itself act like bigger injectors?
 
  #13  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:32 PM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by slomofo View Post
I hate side by side dyno graphs without all mods disclosed. for a guy like me, it's important to know what setups actually net what gains. this helps to justify if something is worth the cost. in this instance, the $350 worth of injectors show justification but I would never had known because the info was never disclosed.
Now you know why JAN/RMW is on his own board, but not currently on any 3rd party sites (that I know of).
I will point out the site guidelines now to prevent issues!!
POLITICS & BANNING
Discussions related to politics and banning are not permitted. Comments or questions regarding banning should be sent in through the Contact Us link found in the Main Menu block.
https://www.northamericanmotoring.com/guidelines
 

Last edited by ZippyNH; 04-03-2013 at 02:15 PM.
  #14  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:35 PM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by rs53 View Post
If the guy was spraying methanol on top of 380cc injectors wouldn't that in itself act like bigger injectors?
Many folks run a 50% mix of water/meth..act to cool the charge, prevent detonation/PING
To truly MAKE more power, 100% must be used, along with a special tune...and then we would need to know the METH FLOW RATE... and the RPMS used to trigger it, etc...
These charts are nothing more than attempt as self promotion by RMW...
Please see my prior post..it has happened in the past....
Ethical NO, Legal yes.
 
  #15  
Old 04-03-2013, 01:38 PM
rs53
rs53 is offline
1st Gear
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
Many folks run a 50% mix of water/meth..act to cool the charge, prevent detonation/PING
To truely MAKE more power, 100% must be used, along with a special tune...and then we would need to know the METH FLOW RATE...

Wouldn't this add more fuel to the fire?

Thumper himself has shown 8-10hp just by adding 50% water meth on many sites. Are you now saying Thumper is wrong?
 
  #16  
Old 04-03-2013, 02:10 PM
slomofo's Avatar
slomofo
slomofo is offline
2nd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what I'm wondering is what software and what are the cam specs on either. I assume RMW software on the one, obviously.
It's evident by the graph that the fuel may help contribute to the camshaft's ability to provide more lift that is useable at higher RPM's but what are the cam's specs? do we have different valve springs that are more heavy duty to accomodate for the higher rpm use? too many questions.
 
  #17  
Old 04-03-2013, 02:21 PM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by rs53 View Post
Wouldn't this add more fuel to the fire?

Thumper himself has shown 8-10hp just by adding 50% water meth on many sites. Are you now saying Thumper is wrong?
True...cooler intake charge, less timing pull, But 100% meth is needed to really add REAL power!! And this info come straight from JAN/RMW...

Also who's tunes are both cars running...
the second car with the Jesus head, safe to say RMW, other car, unknown...and beyond that in custom tuning, actual engine condition is so important...all UNKNOWN!!
 
  #18  
Old 04-03-2013, 03:12 PM
rs53
rs53 is offline
1st Gear
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
True...cooler intake charge, less timing pull, But 100% meth is needed to really add REAL power!! And this info come straight from JAN/RMW...

Also who's tunes are both cars running...
the second car with the Jesus head, safe to say RMW, other car, unknown...and beyond that in custom tuning, actual engine condition is so important...all UNKNOWN!!
I am confused by your posts as in post 10 you imply not to trust Jan/RMW but when it fits your argument you use his words as gospel. I'm not here to start anything just noting the inconsistent behavior.
 
The following users liked this post:
Goldsmithy (04-26-2019)
  #19  
Old 04-03-2013, 03:29 PM
Cheerio44
Cheerio44 is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
Yeah....
So one car was set-up right...and one was starving for fuel....
interesting thing is the TQ numbers...Thumper did better there, matching and slightly beating the RMW.....even with the lack of fuel.
I do like RMW tunes, I have one, but lets be 100% honest...
Putting 2 cars with such an IMPORTANT difference on the same dyno sheet is PURE BS!!

Jan has always been good at self promoting....I think I'll just toss this one in that bin....
The RMW MINI is Impressive....but how can you compare them?! It would have been much more classy to leave the 2nd car off the chart. To folks that don't know much, it seems like a HUGE difference, but lets face it...comparing an apple to an orange is hard!!
Just wanted to point some things out, the higher torque value of the 2006 car basically came down to the pulley, he had a 17% pulley on there, which in turn provided the extra torque, it had nothing to do with the heads. My car only made 9-10 less torque than the both of them and I don't even have a head on it, just the 17% pulley.

Another reason he didn't tune the RPM's higher was because of the pulley, that would've overspun the supercharger and produced less HP anyways, that's why the 2002 car only had a 14% pulley on it.

You can compare them because other than the injectors, they are basically equal as far as performance modifications, if you take out the high end of the dyno chart Jans head was producing more power from ~5300 RPM and up.

If you also notice the actual TQ curve, the 2002 Mini's torque curve is much flatter and starts up much higher at lower RPM's and maintains that throughout the pull, where as the 2006 Mini's TQ curve starts out lower and climbs up until ~5k RPM where it begins to fall down again.

I also wouldn't say that the 2006 car was "starving for fuel", seeing as the A/F ratios were tuned for, and it's only on the high end that it really made a difference. Without the injectors the 2002 car would've still made ~20whp MORE than the 2006 car(limiting the 2002 car to 7k RPM)
 
  #20  
Old 04-03-2013, 03:33 PM
Braminator's Avatar
Braminator
Braminator is offline
OVERDRIVE
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Wherever she takes me.
Posts: 7,211
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
No matter how you look at the graphs or how you compare the mods. The fact is they represent facts on a dyno for 2 differently set up MINI's. There were too many witnesses to what transpired on the dyno. Whether one was tuned better or had better parts, they clearly made different power. Could one be better then the other? Of course. Was it because of different parts? Of course. Could the one not getting enough fuel be fixed to have the right amount of fuel to perform and get better numbers on the dyno? Absolutely it can. So lets just say these were the facts in black and white of these to totally different MINI's.
 
  #21  
Old 04-03-2013, 03:36 PM
Cheerio44
Cheerio44 is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZippyNH View Post
True...cooler intake charge, less timing pull, But 100% meth is needed to really add REAL power!! And this info come straight from JAN/RMW...

Also who's tunes are both cars running...
the second car with the Jesus head, safe to say RMW, other car, unknown...and beyond that in custom tuning, actual engine condition is so important...all UNKNOWN!!
Jan tuned both cars on the same day, the 2002 car has around 30-40k miles, the 2006 car not much more than that I believe.
 
  #22  
Old 04-03-2013, 03:40 PM
Cheerio44
Cheerio44 is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Everyone seems to be taking offense to this post, it was just a comparison of two similarly equipped cars with parts off of different manufacturers, tuned by the same person on the same day, on the same dyno. I know not all variables are the same, but they're close enough to where we can still somewhat compare. A/F ratios were kept to safe parameters, everything was tuned properly, and different results happened. Just take it at face value and don't go insulting people
 
  #23  
Old 04-03-2013, 04:09 PM
ZippyNH
ZippyNH is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 12,606
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Cheerio44 View Post
Everyone seems to be taking offense to this post, it was just a comparison of two similarly equipped cars with parts off of different manufacturers, tuned by the same person on the same day, on the same dyno. I know not all variables are the same, but they're close enough to where we can still somewhat compare. A/F ratios were kept to safe parameters, everything was tuned properly, and different results happened. Just take it at face value and don't go insulting people
Hope it hasn't come off that way, but there is history here on this forum....
and several others....claims, posts, etc,...
I am honest in saying I run a JAN/RMW tune, am happy, but sometimes his marketing or use of folks as pawns to do it for him is challenging to accept....
If both charts were on separate sheets, then folks would say ok, very different cars....but put them on the same page and it implies THEY ARE THE SAME EXCEPT FOR THE NOTES.
Stealth marketing...and when you look closer..it is not as it appears. Just as was said...
Without the injectors the 2002 car would've still made ~20whp MORE than the 2006 car(limiting the 2002 car to 7k RPM)
but the charts go out, not proving much, cause the cars are set up different....no list of differences, and of course the note EVERY CAR IS DIFFERENT, and react differently to tuning and mods!!
 
  #24  
Old 04-03-2013, 06:15 PM
cct1
cct1 is offline
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Will 50/50 water meth make more power? No, but it will help with cooling tremendously, which will help on the dyno. Every wonder why they run those big fans when they put the car on the dyno? Water/meth will do more than any fan on this earth, to the point that IAT's can go much lower than car without water meth, which is a big advantage, so to imply water/meth isn't helping is disingenuous at best. Cooling is good, very good. It will help on the dyno, not by making a ton more power, but from keeping the power that you're making from dropping off, which is going to result in a significantly better looking dyno plot. Heat soak is bad. Even on a dyno. If you don't believe me, run a car that hasn't been properly cooled on the dyno, after a run when it was at a lower temperature. It'll look like two different cars.

I don't see either car starving for fuel. I see two cars tuned safely, to the best that could be done with what was on each car.

If the car with the Thumper head, with the cam that tends to go along with that head, had 450's, do you honestly believe it still would have been close to the other car?

And for the record, you blast RMW for overlapping graphs of two different cars. You realize RMW's competition actually was the first to do this, to try to "get into the game", but under circumstances much less controlled than these?

Is it a perfect comparison? No. Does that mean inferences can't be made, since the testing was done ON THE SAME DAY ON THE SAME DYNO IN THE SAME AMBIENT TEMPERATURES? Absolutely. It's about as close as you're realistically be able to get. The cars are more alike then they are different.

And the statement that RMW is on no other 3rd party boards with all that implies, is a flat out falsehood; that's almost a malicious statement. Actually, it is, as I can't see any other reason to post it. You just have to know where to look.
 

Last edited by cct1; 04-03-2013 at 06:48 PM.
  #25  
Old 04-03-2013, 06:42 PM
DICKS GARAGE R53
DICKS GARAGE R53 is offline
6th Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: North Denver Colorado
Posts: 2,836
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I just found and read through this thread, and am actually not surprised at all by what I see throughout the thread.
I have had ties to both people responsible for the making of these heads in the past, so you can either take it or leave it for what its worth...

The '02 we know has the RMW head, probably an RMW header?, larger than the JCW 380cc injectors, and a 14-15% pulley on the original non coated S/C. No meth, nothing else that is going to add any kind of real power. (Unless he snuck one of those shiny red OCC's that add an easy 20 HP to a JustaCooper by the guy with the laptop)

The '06 had aTPR2 head (BV), W/M injection with an un specified mix (knowing the guy with the laptop, if it is tuned by him 99% of the time it is tuned for 100% Meth... He will push it to no end), it's also got a header (make unknown, and yes it would be nice to know what one because it does make a difference) and a 17% pulley on the stock '05 and up S/C which has the heat dispersant coating, and is using 380cc JCW injectors.

Minus the meth, and obvious boost increase of the 17%, both cars are pretty similar. And both of those are found on the '06 car which should give it an advantage over the '02. Both where on the same dyno, same day, same guy tuning both cars. You can argue that the tuner didnt agree with the hardware installed on the '06, so he didnt put the same amount of care into the tune resulting in lower numbers. However knowing that said tuner, he is out to make money plain and simple, and it is bad business to do that to a customer, and potential return customer. He also wont tune anything to an unsafe level, and will decline to even touch the car if there are any mechanical issues or if the customer wants or expects too much of what can actually be done.

On to the graph... Its legit, both cars show what you would expect with the hardware installed on each. The 17% brings more low end TQ, due to higher boost at lower RPM. The 380's run out up top where the 450-550s can still supply an adequate amount to remain safe AFRs.

Who cares where the one car stops the run and the other keeps on pulling... LOOK AT THE GRAPH! You can clearly see the difference in power where the '06 had to cut out, and it was already down quite a bit from the '02! More than a header or a weaker motor excuse is good for. Just because the '06 didnt have the right hardware to support higher RPM doesn't mean it was running out of fuel down lower, it just means that at the higher RPMs it couldn't safely run the correct AFR so the run was terminated at that point.

Come on people, there has been enough tuner on tuner trash talk... This graph accurately as possible represents both head to to head, same day, same dyno, same tuner. All bias opinions aside, it should be clear that there is a winner here!
So please stop the excuses, and the whining, and accept the results.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: R50/53 - R50/53 RMW Jesus head vs Thumper TPR2


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.