I read your post and my reply was completly valid. Exactly what did I say what was in anyway incorrect? In fact YOU are the one implying my information was incorrect. I put this dyno sheet up as my "proof". All I ask is you do the same when presenting yours. Especially when you are the one making the accusations.

What part of my reasoning do you not agree with? Exactly where did I say the Kinetix would not work??

In fact, where did I saw your post WASN'T valid?

On what dyno proof are you stating the the plenums NOT listed on the dynos are fine choices. Hydrazine has mentioned that the MREV and diff plenums would "work". To what degree, he didn't know. Hence my request to you for dyno proof. Which would be great to see. Would it not?

 

Jeff, you copy pasted a SportZ shootout dyno chart... la-dee-da... it's on MD website and in the magazine - you didn't provide anything spectacular, we all have seen it countelss of times... however, you expect me to pull dyno's out of my butt from the countless dyno days I've been to.

Put it to rest... why are you so damn relentless?... You said Kinetix/MREV is not worth it... you were wrong - there are various viable choices as I stated.

The end. Now drop it.

 

but... does it blend?....


thanks for the info, man. I'm actually debating whether getting a spacer with the MREV2 would reduce my torque and responsiveness. These cars are sluggish enough as they are and I wouldn't want to kill what's left of the acceleration for some redline power (as seen on dynos). Theoretically would the 1/2 spacer rob me of more low and mid torque than the 5/16? I actually have a thread on this, where you can see the 5/16 and MREV2 combo decreases the mid range a tiny bit, so I wonder if the 1/2 spacer would magnify that. Seems to me so far JUST the MREV2 would do the job for what I need; maximum added responsiveness and acceleration throughout the band.

 

1) What is wrong with the dyno sheets?? If they are wrong,, fine. What's wrong with it?? At least I provided SOME data. Not just your random opinions on the matter. If you don't have some dyno sheets to provide then spit that out. Hell even LINK me to a thread discussing someone dynoing that combo. I'll even to some of YOUR legwork for ya. Sheesh

2) Yes to me it's not worth it. For the many reasons I listed. None of which you seem to be able to refute.

Given the costs to buy one vs the alternatives that are PROVEN to work, it's not worth it to me. Why would one pay to be behind the ball from the get go unless they happened to get one for dirt cheap to justify the loss in performance???

Like I said, if you have a dyno that shows the Kinetix + Mrev is a viable option, then fine. Post it. If not, then no need to reply as anything you type won't add to the conversation.

Have a great day

 

Seems like hp and torque are improved thoughout the dyno rpm range. If loss of torque is an issue, I'd do the 5/16".

 

as usual you take things out of context... I even said you would in a previous post... I also said the dyno are valid but not the say all end all... I predicated everything you have followed up with and prefaced everything before you even posted it... amazing isn’t it! What’s pathetic is that you don’t comprehend it.

The one thing I will say - is all the bad info you provide does help me! I never need to worry about anyone following your advice ever beating me at the track...

I didn’t bother reading the rest of your post - once I got as far as I did I realized its jut a waste of my time because you apparently aren’t able to grasp any of what I stated.

 

I have MD 1/2" spacer with a modified lower collector similar to MREV2 type... with dyno and street tuned Osiris I have ample low end and strong mid - I can’t tell you your car would end up like mine... but the concern you have about peak power only isn’t the case for me.

I will say that musch of my low end trq came by means of HFC... so as usual it's a combination of mods that will give best results... there is no one or two things that will address all areas.

 

And I SAID if you have dyno proof post it. Which you did not, will not or cannot. All we have is your opinion.

One doesn't even HAVE to acount for my opinion when I posted up data to back it up. Hell one is even welcomed to disagree and come to their OWN conclusions based on the data that was posted.

All you said was "kinetic etc were viable". So? Based on what?? In exactly what way are they "viable". You didn't even have the courtesy to EXPLAIN why these are viable. No data, no dynos, not even a 1/2 hearted explaination. Wonderful

Why don't you concentrate on the issue at hand vs trying to flame me for no reason whatsoever?

The thing is I could care less about "beating you on the track". I have a life and don't live my life "a 1/4" mile at a time".

Damn, grow up will ya?

 

HFC huh? Hmmm... might have to look into those. Which ones did you have? From the searches I've done it seems the FI 300 cell seems to be the "best" and most popular.

Just a note: my concern is about having lots of low-end power, not peak power, like most people advocate with the spacer combo. Hence why I am skeptical about getting any kind of spacer to complement the MREV2. The spacer plus MREV2 only jacks up your peak and takes a bit of your mid-range. I don't think that's a good use of money in order to have this insane redline power (I won't be keeping my car above 5600 RPM that often). For me it's about acceleration and low to mid range torque. These cars have plenty of high end power for the freeways.

 

Jeff... RE-READ my post!!!!! I have been to countless dyno days that Kinetix have shown respectable numbers on... so have MANY other people.... You don't "live you life in a 1/4 mile" because you live your life getting info on the internet.... Why don’t you get to a track or a dyno event and add some real world experience to your posts... Oh and BTW be sure to get a copy of the dozens of dynos so you can post them up for everyone

To anyone reading this - an intelligent individual can decipher what goes on in these forums... I've said for years there is real good info if you can sort through the BS...

 

the concern you have hasn't happened to my car... I have Crawford, but know several people with FI, it's a good choice too.

 

hey i live my life at 1/4 mile at a time... what's wrong with that?

 

Absolutely nothing... especially when you are looking for performance from the car... Some people can’t seem to even grasp that concept.

 

In case you haven't noticed, I've READ your posts. What good does "been to countless dynos" mean when you are unable to even describe what these gains are? Or in what manner are these plenums "viable"?? You do realize I'm not disagreeing with you right? You are at least getting THAT from my posts. Is soo hard to ask for something a tiny bit more descriptive than "viable"?

Exactly what are "respectable numbers"???? How about a number? A guess? Guessimate? Approximation? Hell make up something.

In this lengthy and no doubt pointless discussion, I GAVE UP asking for a dyno. Your attacks could have been better used giving a decent description as to HOW you came to your conclusions. "I've been to the promised land" doesn't do it for me or anyone else really.

I never attacked you. But you sure don't have a problem attacking me now do you?

BTW. When our group goes to a dyno day, we all post up them up for future reference. Apparently, that thought has never crossed your mind. Hell, your dynos would be great. I'm sure it's on your computer, hosted and ready to go. I'd like to see them.

 

can you guys just agree to disagree and tell me something about the low-to-mid power robbing capabilities of the spacers?

I just wanna know if I should get the MREV2 by itself or the MREV2 + any kind of spacer or plenum mod.

My goals: low end and mid range power/acceleration.

Dynos show that the 5/16 spacer actually decreases the mid-range of power with the combination of MREV2 as opposed to the MREV2 by itself. Only by a little though, I am not saying it's night and day, but every little bit adds up. Now I am wondering if the 1/2 spacer or the plenums (Kinetix V+) would do even more of this "power robbing" on the mid-range, since it seems increasing volume in the upper plenum with the MREV2 seems to decrease mid range to lift the high end power up. Not to mention, the spacer doesn't make any difference in the low-end.

Recap: adding a spacer to MREV2 seems to make no low end gains, decreases mid-range power, and lifts up the high-end. For my goals, this seems opposite of what I want, but I want to hear some opinions from people who have tried these setups separately and perhaps hear from people with similar goals as mine.

Here is the dyno I'm talking about. Notice the GREEN line is the MREV2 by itself and the BLUE line is the MREV2 + 5/16 spacer. Take a look at mid-range and then the high end. It's great that there is bigger peak power near redline, but to me low and mid ranges are more important.

http://motordyneengineering.com/imag...page_large.jpg

No one's been able to clearly say whether the spacers will actually reduce mid and low range power. And whether the size of the spacer correlates to more robbing of that mid range power. People who put on the MREV2 and spacer AT THE SAME TIME do not really count in terms of answering my question, because they would not have experienced the difference between MREV2 by itself and then experienced what happened after adding the spacer. I am fully aware that the combination of spacer and MREV2 is superior to stock. That is not what I want to question about. I want to question about the difference between MREV2 by itself and MREV2 with any kind of spacer/plenum modification.