Again yet they do free up power but do so by moving less water.

Far as the timing set options that is an argument used by those to stupid to see the reliability of the stock set and insist on spending more.

 

I vote for stock pump and stock chain and gears.

 

Thanks for calling me "stupid", BTW if you are going to call me "to stupid" how about you use the right word (too)......When you are running close to #400lb of spring pressure and 6,500 rpm I am not willing to bet on the stock set. So if being conservative in my eyes make me stupid in someone else's, I'll take that any day. BTW total for the e-pump, and timing set cost me $225 all new. Even a cheap replacement timing set from advance or autozone will run around $100, plus $50 for a replacement water pump. So that's $75.00 more for me for cheap insurance. Before we start calling people "stupid", take into consideration that it helps no one here.

 

Stock replacement chain is about $40. I turn the same RPM's with no problems on the stock set.

 

Last time I bought was $20 apiece for each of the three pieces of the timing set.
I run beehives so I do not run that kind of pressure but I do turn near that rpm and will be exceed that soon.

People ASSume the stock chain is weak without any reason to believe it other than some kid on the internet told them it was. ONE guy here admits to having broken a chain, two chains at that and then found an external cause. Beyond that I can not say I have heard of any other cases of stock chains breaking.

Most guys will admit a spare electric pump is the best bet so add the cost of a second pump to your $225.

 

Listen to this guy, electric waterpumps moved less water than the OEM at higher RPM's. At idle they might flow more, but that doesn't matter . If you are building a track car then yeah, go for an e-wp for the 5-10rwhp, but for a dialy I like knowing that my WP wont just take a **** on me possibly causing me to blow a head gasket or warp a head or something of that nature. Oh yeah, I can't even run an eletric waterpump, there's no room since I have a becool radiator, + I don't want my car to overheat on the track (road coarse).

 

I went with the Meziere trying to eek out every last little bit of hp I could with my set up, trying to hit 10s with my baby cam...I don't DD it anymore, maybe 5000 miles a year so I didn't worry about pump failure as much...I have same day before and after dyno pulls to say that I got 9-10 rwhp on Mustang Dyno across the whole tested rpm range...I don't know if I'd have done it if I was still DD or road racing it though...

Because it flows at a constant speed regardless of enginee rpm it does run a wee bit hotter at cruise, around 190 instead of 170, but, in my situaton I wanted every last little bit of power...I am going to get a spare to keep on hand for emergencies as it is very easy to replace one...I do, however, have all kinds of faith in the stock timing chain...When we did the cam and head work I just bought a new chain from GM...Joe Overton used to run 9s with his and never broke it, and LPE just recommended replacing the stocker with a new stocker...

In a nutshell, is it worth it for drag racing? I say yes...For DD or road racing I would not be so confident...

--Alan

 

Hey don't feel bad, he said the same thing to me on camaroz28.com when I said that I replaced the stock timing chain with a cloyes double roller and the stock WP with a CSR ewp. The guy just likes to go around and try to bring you down because you don't agree with his way. I'd rather spend a little extra money and get a good timing set rather than a "cheap" set for a little piece of mind, but go ahead and run the stock WP and timing chain, I really don't care but don't come on here and tell people that they are stupid for not doing it the way that you would have. Remember I have the right to make my own decisions and I'll do just that

 

Again you guys are ASSuming the stock chain is somehow inadequate and no amount of reality seems to able to get thru.

This is the stuff that drives me wild some kid says something once based on NOTHING and it becomes fact.
You think I am wrong find examples of broken stock chains.

It is not that I like to bring people down it is that I like real accurate information presented for people to make decisions on. If they then make a poor decision fine but I think most of you make this decision based on poor information. Alan and speed demon get it, they understand the realities of this and what the electric and mechanical strengths and weaknesses are which is all I want people to see.

Turnin20s I will see you at the track in the rearview .

You have people who research things and figure out what truth is and you have people who buy whatever someone tells them too. One group goes faster for less money.

Honestly I know I should stop wasting my time on such stuborly ignorant people but the reason I keep trying to to stop you from streading your ignorance, it is a disease spread by the internet.

 

Stay on topic or it gets locked fellas.

Tony.

 

The stock water pump I thought ran off the cam and the EWP don't. that is were you pick up the power. but what do I know, can you show me were the stock water pump out flows the EWP

 

GREAT, KEEP GOING

 

Do a search its been posted a million times....

 

C'mon guys this is easy stuff. The EWP is..... well, an electric motor. It turns the same speed all the time (whatever that may be). Therefore the pump moves the same amount of water all the time because the pump neither speeds up nor slows down. Stock pump is cam driven. It speeds up and slows down all the time. At 1000 rpm idle, water pump is turning 500 rpm (cam turns 1/2 speed as crank). Turn that bitch up to 6000 and water pump is turning 3000 rpm. Now that's how I'm showing you the stocker will outflow the EWP.

 

I agree completely. I also thank you for not calling names, like some illiterate posters in this thread.
The flow rate (speed) of the pump is one issue. As you note, the EWP is constant, the mechanical pump is variable. Thus, the mechanical will always have a higher flow rate given the fact that the RPMs are high enough. Not having seen any figures for the mechanical pump, I cannot tell when this limit is met.
The power consumed (as briefly mentioned previously) is another. Any driven device, be it electric or mechanical, requires power to drive it. The mechanical pump is driven off the crankshaft, and its power demands vary with the RPMs. The EWP is driven off the alternator, and its power demands are constant. But electricity is fairly efficient, and its byproduct, heat, should be easily dissipated into the water it supplies. So power gains of 5-10 hp. seem reasonable, if a bit modest.
The leaking water pump into the opti must also be considered. Not having to replace the opti, or only having to replace it once, must be considered a plus. I have no data on this issue, and perhaps it is not intended to be included.
Due to the opti, the difficulty of replacing the water pump, offset by the fact that an EWP requires the extra expense of the wiring and relays, I would probably go with an EWP. If it fails, well, I watch my gauges constantly. I wonder what the failure rate of EWPs, especially the HD Meziere, really is. (Real data, please, not just opinionated statements.)

 

Completely agree with you. But I have a question, what RPM does the ewp turn? Just curious. And does the stock pump really turn at half of the motor speed? Reason that I ask is because of the gearing on the waterpump drive is big on timing gear - small on the water pump drive = more RPMs for the pump right???

I'm not trying to start a war or anything, but I get tired of the name calling for no reason. These are all opinions and its always going to be 2 sided, one for motor driven pumps and one for EWPs, theres no way around that and both sides have their reasons, but why does it have to come down to someone calling someone else stupid? Its honestly childish, and calling someone ignorant for not agreeing with you mabye you should go and reread the posts that you have made

I chose the CSR EWP and Cloyes double roller because that is what I have used in the past on Gen1 motors and I never had any problems with that setup, so when it came time to upgrade on my LT1, I did the samething, it worked for [U]MEU] before and it doesn't cost that much more than the stock replacements. And if the water pump does go out it won't leak on my opti causing me more problems. Then there is the problems with air pockets in the LT1s and overheating and with the EWP it makes it alot easier to bleed the air and not have to worry about overheating since the car doesn't have to be running.

Theres my .02 and when my motor is up and running I'll let you know how I like the EWP setup

 

Well, since I have a turbo that spins at 100k plus, the rpm of the electric motor is not a concern to me. The amount of fluid it moves does concern me, which is why I would go with the HD model of the Meziere. It is claimed to flow (some amount) gpm more than the lower rated model. I am not sure of the ratio of the mechanical water pump pulley versus the pulley that drives it, but that could be easily calculated given each radius, diameter, circumference, etc. And yes, short answer is that the larger the driving pulley (timing gear) versus the driven pulley (water pump) the faster the driven pulley will go.

 

My take on this is that most of the time my car is at high rpms it is at high load too building more heat which is why I think the mechanical and it's rpm varying output is the right answer. Think of it like this would it be aceptable if the oil pump ran a set rpm all the time or do you want to to vary with rpm?

Far as efficiency think of it this way you are taking rotation and turning it into electricity which you want to turn back into rotation, that whole operation is inherently inefficient, if you honestly believe anything is to be gained by doing so go do the world a fabvor and invent us a perpetual motion machine because that is what you are talking about.

SAE published a paper on the LT1 cooling system now before you can make sense of it you have to understand the electrics are rated unrestricted and the cooling system is a pretty substantial restriction to flow.
At 3000rpms the stock pump as restricted by the cooling system is already moving over 30gpm which is the freeflow rate of some of the electrics. By 5500rpms it is exceeding the 55gpm freeflow rate of the HD electrics. Now consider the WP is more like a fan than anything else so restriction will seriously hinder flow unlike something like the oil pump which will move a set volume per revolution no matter restriction, restriction to them just builds pressure.

Maybe it will do more to convince you if I tell you the stock pump according to SAE requires .17hp per gallon per minute, now take the amperage draw rating of the electrics and find an online calculator to take that amperage and 13.5 volts and give you a HP output of that little electric motor you have so much faith in.

Again I KNOW electrics will result in more power on the dyno and a little better ET, I am not disputing that what I am disputing is all the other "reasoning" people apply. We will all be further ahead if you guys all take the time to understand the science and inner hows and whys of things.

 

Yeah I forgot about that secondary gear there. But you get the point I was trying to make. Let's say the gear is 1/2 the size of the crank gear so it's turning twice the speed of the engine or something. It's variable is what I was wanting to say.

 

First, I am not promoting electric or mechanical. I personally do not care. I have the stock mechanical pump and I have no complaints.
If you truly run your car at high rpm only (or mostly) I find it difficult to believe that you drive on the street. Even my motorcycles run mostly lower rpms unless I can find an empty stretch of road where I can open them up.
If you drive on the street, your rpm are mostly lower (IMHO), and the maximum flow rate of a mechanical pump must be discounted. Our LT1s are supposed to shift at 5700, IIRC.
If you change a part for a different one, and gain horsepower, then the new part must be more efficent than the old one. How could it be otherwise?