coolingmist

Scott,

Honestly I dont know what you want from me. In your new test you are saying you had a 1 GPH jet and it did not vary the flow much. That is probably true, you are not going to have much variation in a 1 GPH jet.

Our varicool kits ship with a 6 GPH and 14 GPH jet, those will show a variation in flow. We make no warranties on how much variation the kit will have, the variation depends on many factors including jet size. I dont recommend giving a super large jetsize and scaling it back, I recommend to give a jet size that is a little larger than required and then scaling back to where you need it.

There are many factors that influence the system, its designed to be an effective and cost effective system.

David

BDC

Are we still on this whole "pulsing is bad" thing?

B

borgue

Ok David, i have the M5 jet some were i will give that a go Monday.

Being objective i have found that the tune function does reduce the overall flow of the jet,
However this is a user dependent function and seems to drop the pressure and there fore
The jet seems less effective in vaporizing the liquid.

how much is the kit designed to vairy the flow of an M5 jet?

Ollie

coolingmist

Let me explain what the system does.

setting 10 gives you 100% duty cycle at max setting.
setting 9 gives you 92.5% duty cycle at max setting
setting 8 gives you 87 % duty cycle at max setting

Each setting below that will drop the duty cycle of the pump 7.5 percent. Thats what it does.

I do not make any representation of what the variance is. All that feature does is give you more control than other progressive style controllers that dont have that feature. We have had many customers that have had a competitors controller that did not have that function and they had hesitation. Using the same nozzle, but our controller they are able to dial that hesitation out. Its designed for fine tuning.

I will not get drawn into a flame war like in that last thread. At the end of the day, if you dont like that feature, you dont have to use it. I can say factually many customers do and it works great for them.

At 40 PSI our nozzles atomize fine, you will not have an atomization problem by changing that dial. I dont recommend to put the dial on 1, 2, 3, 4 for most applications. Its something for the customer to use and find best setting for them.



David

sdminus

David... I'm not getting in to an discussion as such. howeva. I will make my point for the last time.

If the device controls the flow like you say then the size of the jet should be irrelavent. ie. lets compare a power shower with a shower head on and one with a garden hose attachment.

now the flow will alter to some extent. do you get where i am coming from ?

The above data does not reflect any variance in the flow at all and your are blaming the jet size !

Scott

sdminus

Brian.. when has pulsing ever been good ?


Scott

sdminus

Back to the threads title and main aim ( defend progressive controllers ) I am yet to see any info or data that suggests the kits work correctly.

Howard it is very hard to understand your graph. The afrs look very unstable when compared to mine.

Scott

hondahater

iTrader: (2)

maybe we should all take a field trip to all the differant ai forums out there and see the results of these kits. Then and really only then can we say that these systems do or don't work as they say. I'm willing to bet that progressive kits work just fine and many, many people out there will agree. When has pulsing ever been good? when people first put these systems in their cars and started seeing incredible results.

Howard Coleman

iTrader: (6)

"The kit is suposed to flow any jet and clearly from the evedence we have seen this is not the case."

i read the through your link....

it doesn't say that

the system is shipped w 5, 10 and 16 gph. i can't imagine how a 1 gph jet would work w any controller on a 100+ psi pump. so why the hell would anyone test it w a 63 cc/min jet? is this for a go kart?

i look forward to any proper test w a M5. and i will be happy w whatever the outcome is.


it is hard to understand my graph?

how about the much ballyhooed run-on scott? do you see any of that?

as to unstable afrs, i am not totally tuned as i mentioned and if you note i was feathering the throttle.

my progressive controller looks o k to me in that graph. 1100 egt and 500 hp o k you?

finally as to your comment about "main aim ( defend progressive controllers )"

i find that personally offensive.

nothing i have stated would lead one there. i took offense to alot of people piling on a vendor before all the facts were known. as it turned out your test was not of a CM system as sold w the controller. that does not mean it wasn't correct but it is different that a complete CM system. the jury is out.

i am not defending anyone. if the M5 jet doesn't work right and the test is fair i am all for finding out whats up. no matter who the vendor might be. including CM.

lets do the test and stop hypervenitilating.

howard coleman

Richard L

The videos has been redone, here is the new set up: 5g/h @100psi jets





Click the links below to view; pulsed flow is captured. Run on is evident.

http://media.putfile.com/A-14-81
http://media.putfile.com/B-97
http://media.putfile.com/C-24

coolingmist

Here is a fun vid.

I have heared that the pump requires anywhere from 1 to 3 seconds to start injecting. I have also heard that the system continues to inject for a second or 2 after the system shuts off. Alot of interesting comments. I did this video today.

I stopped in my warehouse today and ran a fun video.

Here is the setup:

16 GPH nozzle
15 feet of hose from tank to sink
checkvalve at the pump

I am not able to take a video from a distance from the tank so I hooked up an LED to show you when it gets power and activates.

Pic of the checkvalve/tank.


Nozzle size


Here is the setup, sorry its not pretty I did not have much time today.





http://coolingmist.com/info.aspx?key=newvid

dis1

Interesting stuff... I'm no expert yet on AI but I want to make sure every one of these tests includes a checkvalve. Scott told me his "faulty" system didn't include a checkvalve and I can't see one for the "faulty" system in the tests posted here either. If there is no checkvalve then the test is no good in my opinion. In fact it appears in the test videos that the one kit has a checkvalve and the other doesn't. I'm very suspicious that the tests being talked about in these hotly debated threads are not about pumps and stuff but about running no checkvalve.

I mean look!

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4724393

This doesn't seem like a fair test unless the checkvalve is hidden for the faulty kit... Now can somebody please tell me I'm stupid and that these tests are in fact fair? Thanks,

coolingmist

Every single one of these "tests" have been a one sided joke designed to make a competing product look great. We have a few toys coming out shortly that will prove or disprove anything said in this thread. For now I am patient to watch these threads, copy down certain things that are said.

When you dont have a checkvalve or a solenoid the hose will empty after you are done spraying. This is simply because the pressure in the line forces all the water in line out (or most of it). When the system starts up again there will be a delay, when it shuts off it will continue spraying.

Im not going to debate which system is "better". My only point is that for 99% of the customers progressive kits work exceptional and will do what they need.

David

dis1

I see how you feel. In the test it seems the controller is not what is being tested as much as the AM PMW valve vs changes in pump speed with no checkvalve. The CM kit comes with a checkvalve so this doesn't seem to be a good comparison when Coolingmist's name is mentioned so many times. Granted we have different designs here and we can test which works better but how do you think the AM kit would function if we removed a part of the system? Not well I bet.

dis1

radkins

I can tell you that the Cooling Mist system I tested yesterday did not have any run-on or lag. I watched the other vids that showed the run-on, but it didn't do that on my kit.

Richard L

The test was done purely for the interest of response time. Not to bash anyone.

Put an inline checkvalve will improve the non-dribble and run-on, but it will also impair the system's operating range if a progressive pump speed controller is used.

borgue

ok here goes,

we tried to get the controller to reduce the flow with boost first using manifold pressure, and secondly using the 'tune function' on the controller.

M5 jet on tune 10 (which is 100% pump duty) :

30psi : 250cc/min
20psi : 250cc/min
10psi : 250cc/min

M5 jet on tune 5 ( which is 37.5 % reduction )

30 psi : 250cc/min
20 psi : 250cc/min
10 psi : 250cc/min

we then repeated this but with an M3 jet: The results mirrored the above test

30psi : 140cc/min
20psi : 140cc/min
10psi : 140cc/min

next the tune function was adjusted at 30psi of manifold pressure.

tune function 10: 140cc/min
tune function 5: 140cc/min

qoute

''Let me explain what the system does.

setting 10 gives you 100% duty cycle at max setting.
setting 9 gives you 92.5% duty cycle at max setting
setting 8 gives you 87 % duty cycle at max setting

Each setting below that will drop the duty cycle of the pump 7.5 percent. Thats what it does. ''

so setting 5 should be 7.5% x 5 = 37.5% reduction in pump duty.

we saw no reduction in flow untill you drop down to 'tune 3' which david has said he wouldnt recommend.

if your quick on the uptake i may be able to sort out some videos.

Ollie

sdminus

Sorry ollie you also forgot to mention that the pump only delivered 1000cc/1 with no nozzle on ( ie at low pressure )

Scott
( still dont believe me ? )

borgue

forgot to mention my kit is the Full kit with the check valve, which does reduce the run on with the larger jets.

my main concern is that although you choose to run M5/M10++jets i olnly required 1or2 gph on my elford turbo first gen as the water/methanol was pre turbo.

it had a carb pre turbo and i used pre turbo water/methanol injection as an intercooler and to maximise the flow of the compressor and suppliment my overstretched carb.

it was a pig to tune though.

Ollie

coolingmist

You are using a 100 psi pump. Once again, this test is invalid. If you tell me your not using a 100 psi pump, you need to put a pressure gauge in the line because its only 100 psi. I ran tests all day long the last 2 days and the only way I could re-create this is to lower the pump pressure to 100 psi.

Its really easy for anyone to lower the pressure on the pump, its also very possible for the pump to be shipped lower than 150 in which case you can easily adjust it higher..

It doesn't take much to look at your results to know something is wrong. Its sad when you decide to publish this information, yet your test bench is not correct. Im just speaking the truth, I ran my tests today and can say you results are not correct.

As far as the tune gain goes there is an effect by changing it, it depends on the size of the nozzles and pressure of the pump. Many of our customers have had great results. Those that dont like that feature or if that feature doesn't work great with your nozzle size, dont use it. Keep it on 10.

I saw your "videos". If you want to post videos that I will not be dispute you need to do the following. Get your checklist out:

1) hook vari-cool to the laptop and show the dutycycle of the controller. Dont show me a video that shows the vari-cool and then just a cup of water with a hose in it. Our software settings can be changed to keep the max dutycycle lower than what it is. The curve can also be changed.

2) Take the fittings off your checkvalve and look in the outlet side make sure the o-ring is not bad as your system should have shut of instantly, yours didn't.

3) Hook up a glycern filled gauge after the checkvalve so we can the pressure. My guess it your pump is seeing 80-100 psi and not 150. Infact I would bet on it.

4) show the nozzle upclose in the vid to see the markings on it.


You need to have the controller, gauge, dutycycle and your flow test all in the same vid. its so easy to mess with the software or the pump to get a lower reading than what is there. Pressure is everything with this kit.

Forgive me for being skeptical, but I dont buy any of these so called "tests" that have been done. I am not dis-agreeing that traditional progressive kits dont have the greatest range, however if you have the controller at 100% dutycycle and you are not getting between 5.8 to 6.1 GPH on your M5, something is wrong.

The other possiblity is the nozzle, if its partially obstructed it will not have full flow.

This is nothing more than wanting your so called test to be reasonably accurate.

There is going to come a time and its not to long from now that our customers (and customers of other kits) will be able to see the good, bad and ugly of what ever system they are running. I will be able to prove or dis-prove anything that has been said in this and other threads.

At the very least you need to accurate testing which this clearly is not.

sdminus

David... on borgues behalf.

the m5 jet was brand new

the system has run for 3 days tuning and 1 day on the strip. The tests are valid no matter how badly conducted becasue they are all done in the same fashion.

the duty cycle of the controller on pc bares no relation to that of the real life situation. the controller does not need the pc to run or be programed since it runs the stock set up

The data was posted up on monday afternoon Uk time. It is now tuesday going on wednesday. there was time to do further testing but now the time has past ( the kit has been past on to another person )

This data is real. There is no hiding from this.

Scott

coolingmist

Your data is valid on a 100 psi pump. The dutycycle of the controller is EVERYTHING. If your pump is only at 100 psi, that will dramatically drop the range of the system.

We have never sold a progressive kit with a 100 psi pump, ever. If you want to test this, the pressure in the line needs to top out around 150 psi. That makes a huge difference in flow.

Your test is not valid, sorry.

sdminus

the pump is 150 psi. sorry i didnt add.
the kits is as supplied

coolingmist

Thats my point, your pump was NOT running at 150 psi. There is no way. if it was you would have had somewhere between 5.8 and 6.2 GPH on that nozzle at 150 psi. Frankly, you proved that it wasn't running 150 psi by your 100% dutycycle flow test.

As I said, I tested back and forth for the last 2 days (thats why I didn't post) and I could duplicate that running 80-100 psi, but when I adjust the pump back up to 150, that number goes back to normal.

I would even be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were running a 150 psi pump, but it was not putting out 150 psi, its not possible. Had you put a gauge in the line you would see that.

David

sdminus

Sorry david. we didnt have a gauge to hand. I need to stress the video you watched was of the m3 jet not the m5 jet. the results were for both but he was unable to get a video of both jets.

Sorry if you were mislead