Snake oil

[Bob Stommel <rstommel@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Mark Kibort writes:

>(eRAM is .5psi and relieves .5psi of pressure drop in most intakes for 5%
hp gain)

.............................

Well, I see that Mr. Kibort has finally slipped up and proven to us that
his HP gain numbers are contrived.  First it was 9-10 HP gain.  Then, after
several astute Digesters confronted him, he dropped it to 6-9 HP gain.
Then it dropped to 5HP gain.  Now he's back up to 5%, which by the way
would be 12 HP on a 95 M3.  Which of his stories is the real one?

Several months ago, I made a public offer to Mr. Kibort on this Digest to
dyno-test his device on my 95 M3 with a Euro HFM and open K&N cone filter.
If it didn't increase HP by at least 5 HP (which is only about a 2%
increase), he pays for the dyno test.  If it did, I pay.  Either way, the
results get posted to the Digest and I return the device to him.  What I
received in return was a few e-mails suggesting that we run the test using
the stock airbox.  I politely declined and suggested that a true test of
his device in the real world would be to dyno it on an E36 M3 with an open
K&N filter, since that configuration reduces most of the initial airflow
restriction caused by the OEM airbox.  He agreed with this.  

Several months have now passed and Mr. Kibort has posted dozens more
messages about his eRAM device.  Yet I still haven't received the test
device from him.  Why do you suppose he's so reluctant to allow an
independent test?  After all, this type of testing is done by car magazines
all the time.  Someone claims to have a great new device; the car magazine
tests it; the results are published.  

Until Mr. Kibort is willing to have his wonderful little invention tested
under real-world conditions by someone other than himself, he's just
selling snake oil.  

The offer stands, Mr. Kibort.  You have my mailing address. 

Bob Stommel 

------------------------------