RyanJ

[quote]Originally posted by Joe Prince:
<strong>Okay, but there are two pump housings, one that installs on the block (Manifold), and one that is remote from the engine that houses the electric pump that is connected by over $200.00 dollars worth of AN fittings and Stainless Steel Braided hoses. Now, there are cheaper lines that use worm style hose clamps but I personally don't like the appearance or the quality of the hose. I wouldn't want to sacrifice customer safety for hoses and fittings of a lesser quality and possibly lose a hose going down the quarter mile. The unit price was derived from the Manufacturing/parts cost and our fair compensation of profit. As for the more attractive prices that have been mentioned above, we can't even make it for that cost. I know that I have done my best to bring an advanced product to the LS1/LS6 forefront. If you feel it is too expensive than you don't have to purchase it. Somebody above mentioned "This high price should give the competition (meaning other pump builders) some incentive". I specifically reverse engineered it and put a patent on those housings as well. Any one who duplicates or copies that design would be infringing on those laws.

Joe.</strong><hr></blockquote>

so can i have one for 600 bucks with rubber hoses and cheapo clamps? what happened to the "budget" version and "high-end" version you talked about before.

Jay 95WS6

Okay, here's the deal Raugh, you should pick up the 25rwhp claimed, but, as I stated before with your trap speed (which indicates your HP level) you'll have diminishing returns the faster/quicker you go. Any true racer knows this. You'll see a greater ET improvement with 25 HP in a 13-second car, then you will in an 11-second, or 10-second car, you should have known this. To clarify we said you'll pick up .2-.35 tenths on a stock vehicle (13.0s) with this pump alone, but, you should pick up 25rwhp on any given vehicle, it will just not translate into as great of an ET reduction. And, we have documented our gains on a dyno, which is posted on the Jay Fisher Pontiac web site.
Lastly, we will not compromise our product for those looking for a less than premium product, or for those who are extremely "frugal."

I will say this, we are discussing the option of selling the pump less fittings and hoses altogether at a reduced price of $675.00. You will need to obtain all of the misc. pieces on your own, but we will include the part#s of what you will need to complete the package. However, we will not guaranty any performance gains, or reliability statements with this package, due to the fact the consumer is completing assembly and we can NOT vouch for their mechanical prowess. Tech support will also be minimal, due to time restraints and the fact that you have purchased an imcomplete package at a REDUCED price.

Jay Fisher
www.jayfisherpontiac.com

[ December 21, 2001: Message edited by: Jay 95WS6 ]</p>

racer7088

I would say that someone independent should dyno an LS1 engine, say a 422, with it's higher compression and larger chambers, like one of the sponsors, chosen by poll on this board. Then several tune programs should be chosen and run with both pumps such as the JPR reverse flow and the best standard flow pump and the board members can see for themselves what gains can be had. We could log Autotap and also record knock retard. ALL tests would be done with HOT engine and the same cool down routine and starting engine temp as verified by an infrared heat gun. We would also log AF ratio and anything else to make sure the programs and tests were legit.

I think on some engines reverse cooling does more than on others but it CAN be worth a little bit so everyone should give this a chance if they are willing to do some legit testing that is guaranteed not to be biased. The results may surprise some people and then again they may not. I have heard several reasons as to why reverse cooling was dumped from the LSx engines and none were becasue of any patents. There is no patent of reverse cooling that I know of and more than a few engines have used it. The main problems are air getting trapped and causing hard to diagnose hot spots when certain individuals work on reverse cooled engines. Sometimes even higher water pressure with more pressure cap can reduce detonation as well for instance but reverse cooling is probably the best if your current system isn't working.

RyanJ

[quote]Originally posted by Jay 95WS6:
<strong>And, we have documented our gains on a dyno, which is posted on the Jay Fisher Pontiac web site.
</strong><hr></blockquote>


Are there any same-day, same-car, same-location dyno's up on the site? If its so easy to swap, dyno your 30th, swap it, and re-dyno. Then do the same to Talon's or Brien's car. Simple. NO changes to programs just dyno. Then change up timing tables and what-not and re-dyno. I'll chip in $5 and im sure others will too just to see what the REAL deal is.


Ryan

The Alchemist

iTrader: (19)

I'll step up as a test mule if you like. I have a set of JPR S1 heads, 218/221 cam, stock manifolds, ls6 intake and am a m6 3.42 car.

I should be in the 365-370 rwhp range right now, we could see what kind of number it would pull.

Let me know.

Ebbsnflows

iTrader: (15)

I think Viscerals Idea is a terrific one. You guys can work out the details....all I care about is a non-biased test on someone other than the "Joe Prince cheerleading squad".

To be honest, I'm surprised that there aren't more dyno reports available from engines that span the entire performance spectrum (422, Heads/cam, Turbo, and N20 cars). You've obviously put MUCH effort and planning behind this....even taking time to put a stranglehold on the market, via multiple patents....but no time was spent testing various other formats?? All of these #'s should've been in hand already.

I agree with the others....show us HARD proof that the pump makes the promised #'s, and despite the enormous price, you'll sell a ton of them.

Jay 95WS6

to clarify tery's last post, we were going to have two seperate setups one "race" and one "show", but quality issues with the "race" style shelved that idea so we have one pump now and no "other" design.

Jay

Cool28

iTrader: (2)

Well guys one thing you got to remeber is tooling costs and R&D. Hell we have some sutff in our work that done r&d pieces are 1200 bucks a piece <img src="gr_eek2.gif" border="0"> . I would say if like 50 people bought this piece the price would mostlikey come down a bit. I can see it working for us s/c and t/c guys. Maybe even high compression n/a guys. I would buy it if I really needed it but as of right now I dont. In the future I could see my self buying on though.

jmX

Jay, you guys have multiple offers from multiple people...me, visceral, etc.....its time to step up. People want proof, unbiased proof, by a 3rd party who's not standing on yalls nuts.

The fact you aren't jumping at these opportunities makes me(us?) think you dont beleive in your claims.

ls1fun

Sounds like a pretty good offer to me.

Tim98TA

iTrader: (7)

[quote]Originally posted by Joe Prince:
<strong>Now, there are cheaper lines that use worm style hose clamps but I personally don't like the appearance or the quality of the hose. I wouldn't want to sacrifice customer safety for hoses and fittings of a lesser quality and possibly lose a hose going down the quarter mile.
Joe.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Joe, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't every auto manufacturer today, use rubber hoses and band style clamps?

Tim98TA

iTrader: (7)

[quote]Originally posted by Raughammer:
<strong>Hi Jay. If you would please back up your claims...I would appreciate it. I know of no independent tester that has used this pump and gained 3.5 tenths. If you have one that you have used... can you please post his email? We would like to ask him a few questions.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Correct me if I'm wrong again, but weren't several of these pumps sent out to people in different parts of the country for "independent" testing? What happened to those testers?

Terry Burger

iTrader: (4)

Jay, here is what you need to do. Offer two versions of the pump. Keep what you have now as a "show" version.

Offer a light weight tubular pump with 5/8" rubber hose and cheap clamps/fittings as a "race" version for around $550.

RyanJ

They were Terry, but they dont want the repercussions if someone with the race version complains.

Visceral

iTrader: (1)

Jay,

We on this board are very excited about HP that can be obtained without compromise. And from what I can see, this is what you are saying the EWP offers. You have also said that this pump offers .2 (two tenths) improvement in the 1/4 mile, and roughly 25 hp of gain. Understandably, we are leary of this, and would like to see some backup testing. It seems to me that you would stand to gain from some objective testing being publicized. Because I truly believe that if this pump were to offer 25hp, objectively confirmed, you would sell *many*, even at $850. You may control the market, due to your research and patents, but you dont control the SIZE of the market per se.

My car is sitting at MTI right now waiting for the heads to be returned from ARE. It is a 99SS with LS6 ARE stage 2 heads, a MTI Hammer cam, and all the other bolt on goodies. The last dyno had it running 411 rwhp peak through the 4" mufflex.
I believe Jeff at MTI is totally objective. MTI will never get into the business of manufacturing waterpumps. They only stand to gain by installing your product and seeing the gains you advertise.

Here is my proposition: *I* will pay for MTI to install the waterpump to your instuctions. *I* will pay for a before/after dyno, with the ONLY change being the waterpump. I will pay you in advance $850.

If the waterpump makes 25 or more hp gain at the peak hp rpm on the 1st dyno, I will pay you an additional $150.

If the waterpump makes 17 or more hp gain at the peak hp rpm on the 1st dyno, we are even.

If the waterpump makes between 10-16.99 hp gain at the peak hp rpm on the 1st dyno, you will refund me $250

If the waterpump makes between 4-9.99 hp gain at the peak hp rpm on the 1st dyno, you will refund me $450.

If the waterpump makes anything less than 3.99 hp gain at the peak hp rpm on the 1st dyno, I will return the waterpump for both a refund of the price and shipping, but also 2 hours of MTIs time.

If you do not want to get involved in something like this, I understand. It sets an interesting precedent. But it would absolutely provide objective results that would be respected by everyone here and on LS1.com and www.corvetteforum.com. I would post objective results on all 3 boards.

The thing is... I dont think most here believe it makes 20+ hp gain. But if it could be objectively shown to, I think many folks here would spend that $850.

thanks for listening,

Chris

AgaveCorvette

If it makes 25 hp, I'll pay $850 for it.

Tums

Ahhh, I find it very hard to believe that the weather and track conditions were the same for both passes to be identical to make the determinations about time gains. DYNO numbers before and after would be more what I would use to compare to determine any gains from the pump.

Jay 95WS6

tim the testing situation has been modified, because of a design change in the pump, for a quality issue. We are currently negotiating with some possible "independant" testers and more information is forthcoming.

Jay

Raughammer

[quote]Originally posted by Jay 95WS6:
Okay, here's the deal Raugh, you should pick up the 25rwhp claimed, but, as I stated before with your trap speed (which indicates your HP level) you'll have diminishing returns the faster/quicker you go. Any true racer knows this.
<hr></blockquote>
Man, me NOT being a "true" racer, I had no idea. Are you sure? You claimed that the more modified the motor... the more gains that were possible. Diminishing returns? Just earlier you said that the more modified the motor, the more power to be gained.
Did'nt you quote?:
"25hp rwhp and 15lbs rwtorque on a modified car

13 rwhp and 10lbs rwtq on a stock engine."

Sure looks like you said the modified motor would pick up more HP therby more E.T.? yes? You did say two stock cars AND a modified A4 gained this E.T. drop of 3.5 thenths, did you not?

Or maybe I'm going too fast for this pump to show any significant gains. Is that what your saying?


[quote]
You'll see a greater ET improvement with 25 HP in a 13-second car, then you will in an 11-second, or 10-second car, you should have known this.
<hr></blockquote>
Really? I had no idea. (heavy sarcasm)
When I read your post you claimed 3.5 tenths on a modified A4. Yet now you seem to crawfish back off those SLPish claims. So will it give more of a performance boost to a modded motor or not? Will it give the 3 and a half tenths you promised or claimed earlier? (You did say on a modified A4)

To clarify you said [quote]"You'll pick up .2-.35 tenths on a stock vehicle (13.0s) with this pump alone, but, you should pick up 25rwhp on any given vehicle, it will just not translate into as great of an ET reduction. And, we have documented our gains on a dyno, which is posted on the Jay Fisher Pontiac web site."

<hr></blockquote>
But Jay, You also said:
[quote]"Testing has confirmed of an average ET reduction of two-tenths, and a gain of two mph in the quarter mile. These figures were accomplished on two stock 1999 6-speed Trans Ams and a modified 2000 Camaro SS, equipped with an automatic. When the improved times were accomplished on these vehicles, none of them had received any other changes besides the installation of the water pump. It was also found that by removing the accessory belt, a function you can perform safely with this pump, an additional ET reduction of 1.5 tenths and a gain of 1.5 mph was had."
<hr></blockquote>
Nowhere in the above quote does it say that these were ALL STOCK vehicles. You make mention of a modified A4. Hey I'm a modified A4! Yet you say these claims dont pertain to MY car. Only "other" modified A4's. Matter of fact you then say that this product is a MUST. A MUST you say. Yet offer ZERO independent testing. Your asking 850 dollars for a WATER PUMP!
One that has had NO ONE out side of your "little" group of adulators verify it's performance. Sorry if I am scepticle of your 3.5 tenths of performance gains you claim on a modified A4. But I find them without merit or proof. (Especially since they only work on YOUR modified A4's, and not mine) Who other than your cadre of sycophants has done this deed? Who has purchased this pump and actually recieved 3.5 tenths drop in E.T..

I offered you 1700 bucks if the pump acutually performed as you say it would. It seems you have liitle faith in your product... either that or your claims were so much, well, B.S., what ever. So now it is 3.5 tenths on a STOCK vehicle. (never mind what you said earlier) Who other than the person selling this product has had this WONDEROUS drop in E.T. with no other change other than this water pump? WHO?

[quote]
Lastly, we will not compromise our product for those looking for a less than premium product, or for those who are extremely "frugal."<hr></blockquote>

Is that a nice way of saying "cheap"? <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0"> The reason I asked if the product was available equipped with the less expensive rubber hoses was your price is so freaking high, 850 dollars. At 600 dollars I could maybe live with myself if I got burned by your SLPish claims of performance. Please forgive me for "compromising" your premium product. My bad.

Jay, all anyone is looking for is PROOF that the pump will deliver the gains you claim. Please no crawfising or avoidance. Show us it works.. then people will beat a path to your door. Independent tests would go a long way in convincing folks to buy one of these. I WANT one... no doubt about it. But will I be the 850 dollar guinnea pig? Not a chance in hell.


I need you to clarify the earlier statments you made:
Would a BONE stock car gain 3.5 tenths? Or are you backing off the whole of "3.5 tenths" thing and just sticking to the "25 hp" claim?

This quote you made:
[quote]
Testing has confirmed of an average ET reduction of two-tenths, and a gain of two mph in the quarter mile. These figures were accomplished on two stock 1999 6-speed Trans Ams and a modified 2000 Camaro SS, equipped with an automatic.
<hr></blockquote>
The above statement leads me to beleive that ALL the vehicles, not just the two stock ones gained this mythical 3.5 tenths. Did they or didnt they?
You say the more modified the car.. the less gains you will see. Yet in the magazine you quote more HP for the modified car. Then in the post above you say the results were proven on two stock cars and a MODIFIED car. Then later you say that my modified Camaro equipped with an automatic wouldnt see the gains that you saw on your modified Camaro equipped with an Automatic.
I apologize that I am not a "true" racer. But your posts have begun to confuse me.


Raugh.

[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: Raughammer ]</p>

jmX

[quote]Originally posted by Jay 95WS6:
<strong>tim the testing situation has been modified, because of a design change in the pump, for a quality issue. We are currently negotiating with some possible "independant" testers and more information is forthcoming.

Jay</strong><hr></blockquote>

9 months ago I was supposed to be an independant tester...guess that went out the window. I'd love one of these, but $850 isnt gonna happen for it for me, ever. <img src="gr_sad.gif" border="0">