Innovate/Spritex/Bullet... What I found searching the web.

[industrial]

Originally Posted by Visconti

Don's car sat when the snow was too high for the drag radials that were on his car. But before that he drove it every day.. With the amount of power he was making on ethanol there was a lot of flow going through that filter..which I don't think proves anything... I don't think volume or how many miles you've driven makes a difference. How long the fuel system was exposed to the fuel would. btw Some octane boosts or fuel additives can be very corrosive , wouldn't surprise me if the car in question had used that while it was using its crappy 91 octane.

Wrong. And I don't want to get banned so I'm not going to argue with you. How many miles driven or amount of fuel flowed doesn't make a difference in filter degradation? Are you fucking kidding me? I'm out until there is some data being slung around.

[xxscaxx]

Originally Posted by s2d4

You mean Visconti and the other trolling each other over AEM? All that was needed was a warning, nevertheless that was pretty bad form for a vendor.

I doubt that warrants a thread close as there were ongoing technical questions Visconti did not answer. Someone else did post a testing method which was rather extreme but workable.

Until it has been proven that E85 will or will not destroy components of the fuel system, no one can claim unless they have weak moral fiber that it will or it won't let alone pushing a product/service under false assumptions.

I was trying to stay neutral and keep names out of it. Don't want this thread getting locked up as well.

[Visconti]

I think the amount of exposure plays a bigger role then mileage.

[2forme]

Oy the Visconti trolls at it again. I actually just read that other thread. There were only some people trolling and it wasn't him. Give it a rest guys. It gets old. If you don't like the guy, then don't buy his shit. No reason to continuously slander him (which is illegal, btw).

[xxscaxx]

Well put @2forme. I don't agree with things said or done on this forum but I don't take every chance to bastardize somebody about it. Visconti has had his moments but he did nothing wrong in his responses in the other thread.

Lets concentrate on the issue at hand, and this Twin screw supercharger that hopefully will be on the market soon.

[s2d4]

Originally Posted by 2forme

Oy the Visconti trolls at it again. I actually just read that other thread. There were only some people trolling and it wasn't him. Give it a rest guys. It gets old. If you don't like the guy, then don't buy his shit. No reason to continuously slander him (which is illegal, btw).

I'd be more concerned with running that AEM lol

-John

[2forme]

Originally Posted by xxscaxx

Well put @2forme. I don't agree with things said or done on this forum but I don't take every chance to bastardize somebody about it. Visconti has had his moments but he did nothing wrong in his responses in the other thread.

Lets concentrate on the issue at hand, and this Twin screw supercharger that hopefully will be on the market soon.

Exactly, this forum reminds me a lot of the "pu$$ies, assholes, and d!cks" speech from Team America. One must wade through all the cyclical crap to find the valuable information.

In other news, how IS this kit coming along?

PS. How is the word asshole ok, but pu$$y and d!ck aren't???

Originally Posted by s2d4

I'd be more concerned with running that AEM lol

-John

Yea, as would I. The AEM directly modifies how the engine responds to it's MAF signal. No data has been published on what it physically does to the MAF signal or how safe it is for the motor.

We've already see how fragile the stock spark plugs are, so why anyone would want to go out and throw on an intake that directly interferes with the stock systems physical sensor signal... is beyond me. AEM won't post anything, because then they'd be liable for it.

Regardless of my opinion, that statement was off topic for the thread. Given John's usually means of responding to stuff, I'd consider it rather tame, and not responsible for spiralling that thread down the proverbial toilet.

[s2d4]

That was just to demonstrate a false claim.
Anyway, with a bit of luck let's get back on topic.

[2forme]

Originally Posted by s2d4

That was just to demonstrate a false claim.
Anyway, with a bit of luck let's get back on topic.

Agreed, though we can't really call it a false claim until we see evidence as such.

But yes, back on topic.

[mad_sb]

I for one am willing to kick in some money to an R&D fund... if we need to purhase some filter baskets, or whatever part contains the filter in question so some tests can be run etc etc.......


@robispec, any idea what the oem part costs (in whatever form you have to buy it) and a partnumber?

[xxscaxx]

wonder if you can even get that part separate because its within the canister.

My buddy works at subaru, let me see if I can get a part number and see if its separate.

[mad_sb]

Originally Posted by xxscaxx

wonder if you can even get that part separate because its within the canister.

My buddy works at subaru, let me see if I can get a part number and see if its separate.

Thats what I'm saying, we may have to buy the whole assembly.... Yes, please see what your buddy can find in the parts system.

The part search i found lists just the fuel pump for 250 and the fuel pump assembly for 350... but not the filter portion on it's own... maybe there is a way to buy the assembly without the pump....

[xxscaxx]

Already on it. I sent him a text. If he doesn't answer, I will kick him in the balls when I see him

[brichard0625]

Originally Posted by xxscaxx

wonder if you can even get that part separate because its within the canister.

My buddy works at subaru, let me see if I can get a part number and see if its separate.

That would be a big help...if they are cheap ill change it every 5000miles with my oil change lol