First, the stats on my car,
1999 TA M6
Whisper Lid & K&N filter
EGR pipe cut short
removed screen from MAF and added a MAFT
Vortex Muffler
Electric water pump
Everything else is stock, right down to the programming, spark plugs & wires. All the dyno pulls were done at the same engine temp, the only times the motor was turned off was to adjust the MAFT between pulls.

I will have the sheets scanned and posted if anyone wants to see them.
The full street belt first pulls right off the street were 323.4 horse @ 5,400 RPM and 334.5 Torque @ 4,400 RPM with a A/F of 11.9 across the board (little rich).

Then, we pulled the motor 5 times back to back to monitor the temp gain of the heads under that kind of torture and showed a gain of only 4-5 degrees more from the 1st run.

Then I installed the race belt and the motor pulled 331.4 horse @ 5,500 RPM and 343.1 torque @ 4,400 RPM with the A/F still at 11.9 to 12.0. SAE correction was 0.96.

Some side notes, I would really like to see the A/F in the 13.0 - 4 range.
The stock plugs need to be replaced with NGK TR 55's
I run 89 - 91 octane fuel all the time.
Just for comparisons sake because I never base lined this car, Jim (the dyno operator) pulled up 3 examples of some 2000 cars that have recently been tested, 2 were of modded Camaro's with Borla cat backs and 1 TA M6, these cars had Y pipes and a few other mods that I do not and I was pulling right along side of them. I then went to instal the stock water pump and realized I forgot the 6 face bolts to the pump and I could not do a EWP vs stock pump contrasting pulls, kinda wasted my day at that point.

[ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: Joe Prince ]</p>

 

Joe, in all honesty, these numbers do not tell us much. We really want a before/after comparsion showing the stock vs JPR pump setup dynoed on the same day. At least three baselines for before/after would be nice.

I'd also like to see the same tests run on a higher HP car. At least 450 rwhp perhaps. (Hint..hint <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0"> )

You do that, and you will satisfy alot of people's curiosity on this product.

Thanks,
Tony

 

Tony, all I did was post what my car pulled, I had the stock pump with me and I forgot the 6 face bolts, soo, I will have to go back, I mentioned that I screwed up and the dyno report posted above was basicly a waste of time and money for me to an extent.

 

Joe, I read your post carefully and understood it just fine. Just telling you my opinion of what people are buzzing about in regards to the EWP. But, I'm sure you know this too, so I guess my reply was just a waste of time as well <img src="gr_grin.gif" border="0">

Tony

 

I'm not trying to stir up anything here, but Tony's right... I believe I speak for a lot of folks when I say we want to see before/after results on the same car, same dyno, same day. Results from a bigger HP car would be even better.

 

Okay, well, maybe I shouldn't have posted this report at all then. refer to post # 3. I'm sorry for taking this posture but I too am frustrated because I forgot the MWP face bolts. I have a 400 + RWH car that I just finished recently, I will pull it on the dyno with a back to back comparison for Thurs of next week.

"Then, we pulled the motor 5 times back to back to monitor the temp gain of the heads under that kind of torture and showed a gain of only 4-5 degrees more from the 1st run"

Atleast this test wasn't a waste of time anyway.

BTW, Does anyone know what an average 1999 M6 should pull on the dyno stock?

[ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: Joe Prince ]</p>

 

A stock 99 M6 will typically pull 295 rwhp. Some SS/WS6/Firehawks clear 300 rwhp.

The test on the higher horsepower cars will be more informative for your target consumers Joe. Its not the nearly stock car owners that are gonna fork down the dough for these water pumps. They have a plethora of cheaper mods available that will gain the same or more power. Its the guys that are running out of modifications to do that are going to be more interested. You might consider finding a 500+ rwhp NA car to do testing on.

Tony

 

So a short belt is worth 7-8rwhp?!?

 

Terry,
In my case, yes, the short race belt was worth more than average due to the fact that I am catagorically rich across the board (11.8-11.9) so the short belt actually leaned me down to 12.0 across the board so there was a little more power hiding in there because of that.? Maybe Tony can lend more input to clear that up? Another thing I just noticed on the WB chart, is that there is no lean trim after the torque peak.

[ January 05, 2002: Message edited by: Joe Prince ]</p>

 

Tony i sent you mail

 

I will be glad to run my new setup wit hthe stock pump and then take it off and run the car with the JPR/JFP pump bak to back on the same dayh at Cartek..

Julio will then give the results
IMO whoever does it this way will give the real results.U cant test a car one day and then come back a week later.Back to back,PERIOD...


JS

 

Im just glad to see you striving to clear up all the stuff ive been reading. I personally would have told everyone to blow it out their collective *** by now. I sure as hell didnt SLP trying to substantiate the claims they were making about their headers. And suprise suprise, look how many they have sold.

 

I wanna see a test on a Heads/cam/m6, yall should have some of those up there right? There are probably 500-1000 guys out there with heads/cam looking for the next thing to give them horsepower...and this pump is it. I think heads/cam and up are the guys you'll sell stuff to, not "joe bolt on".

 

I'm interested in the EWP, also a 12 bolt has crossed my mind. <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[Burnout]" />

 

[quote]Originally posted by Palm Beach Z:
<strong>I'm interested in the EWP, also a 12 bolt has crossed my mind. <img src="graemlins/burnout.gif" border="0" alt="[Burnout]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Same here. I've been waiting for this thing for awhile. Have to wait til spring though.Then its a new clutch, moser rear, and the EWP. woohoo its gonna be fun.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot tuning <img src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" border="0">

 

Ok, what is a "race belt". Is it the 'short' belt to bypass the PS pump ??

Joe, did you do a pull with no belt ? That, would've made for a good same day look at the EWP with stock-belt, short-belt, no-belt... <img src="graemlins/gr_cheers.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

Joe, please keep us informed with the good, the bad, & the ugly, as you have been doing. Keep up the "relentless pursuit of power", it's great <img src="gr_grin.gif" border="0">

I'm not a 'heads/cam' guy, & have placed an order for the JFP/JPR EWP <img src="gr_grin.gif" border="0">

1998 Z28 A4/2.73 w/stock convertor, stock wheels/street tires, ASP crank pulley, direct-flow lid/SLP cold air, catback. Running 13.2s @ 106mph. I just want a 12.9s car without heads/cam or weight reduction or 15" wheels/tires or gear change or NOS or convertor.

Dave

 

The belt that I used that I call the "race belt" runs from the stock crank pulley (or an under drive) to an ideler pully just above the Alt to the Alt in a circle and is pretty short. I couldn't find a really short belt to run the Alt only at my local car parts store, I didn't do any pulls without the belt because I didn't feel that was too realisic because our cars require alot of current to run our on board computers and I would never suggest to race the car like that, But, there is something you can do, set up an Alt switch, right when you stage the car on the first beam, turn off the alt, and at the end of your run, turn the alt back on. That should be worth some time in the Quarter. Another point that I would like to make is the pump it's self dosen't make ALL this power on it's own, what it does is enables you to run different belt configurations that the stock water pump assembly would never allow you to do in the present. For example, I know what drag there is expressed in horsepower that every pulley on the front of the motor absorbs, or pullies by passed = power. Another point that I would like to make is the reverse cooling allows you to Hot lap at the track with no cool down time, it holds a steady head temp all the time,(especially with a low speed fan switch if you have stock programming) The 5 pulls in a row test I did yesterday only added 4-5 degrees of head temp,(no fan switch) and the worst pull (#5) was only 1 horsepower off from the first pull so I hope people can see why I did that test. I know , I know, I forgot the MWP bolts! Sorry, I am just posting my results as an ordinary enthusiast.

 

I think it was a good first test especially considering the consistency of the head temp between pulls. Should be interesting to see a back to back comparo stock WP to EWP next. Then a HCI car after that <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0">
Cheers,
Chris

 

My car is still at MTI... (cough cough) ;-)

I would *love* to say "Wow! leave that thing on there. Let me call Joe and send him ANTOHER $150. I'll post the results today."

Otherwise...I'll just hang out for awhile <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0">

chris

 

joe, thanx for the info.
you said jimmy was the dyno operator. was that done at larocca's?
if so, you can compare my numbers to your because i was dyno'd there.
1999 firebird 6M with lid, !EGR, random tech cat-back and GMS MAF. same mods except for the meter, which is probably very similar to your descreened stock meter and MAFT, right?
318 HP and 334 TQ

[ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: 2MCHPWR ]</p>