WMI doesn't make power on it's own. It only makes power if you are losing ignition timing due to heat. The 2300 is much more sensitive to heat because the screws are longer. The benefit of WMI on the 1900 is a lot lower than it is on the 2300.

So, it's not simple arithmetic like:
1900 = X
WMI = X + Y
2300 +WMI = X + Y + Z

In much the same way that we've gained around 15 BHP with our carbon intake + V8 MAFS on the 3.0L. That's when we are ALREADY at 600BHP. Putting that intake on a stock 340BHP XE isn't going to yield the same gains.

What I can definitely tell you is this - I've driven.... pretty much everything under the sun on the 3 & 5L platforms. Every combination of Mods, multiple platforms. Even driving our FPace SVR with the 2300 kit and NO WMI, it was noticeably faster than the modified 1900. Just the low & mid range torque delivery is very different.

 

I follow you on that! There is more efficiency on the 2.3L so the WMI injection will net even more gains with the 2.3L. I WILL be buying the 2.3, just want to get more out of it than the 50ish HP I believe it to provide until more fueling options are provided. I do not disagree that it gives much more under the curve power as well. It's not always peak that is important, specifically one a supercharged application whereas the off the line torque makes a huge differnece as well. That is someting I love about the Jaguar, the immediate throttle you get when you give it gas is amazing.

Sounds like I have a winter project I can work on once the Yukon is runing again.

 

I purchased everything I need to install parts on the lid of the supercharger, just not sure it would be of great benefit. What is your advice on that? I am currently running a #14 nozzle before the throlttle body as shown in my earlier picture. Would using one #4 nozzle on each side of the lid as Terrance39 did and one #10 at the throttle body help any? Or perhaps two #2 nozzles on each side of the lid to get more WMI into the cylinders? Don't want to have multiple holes in the lid to determine the best placement.

 

So Stuart, do you think it would benefit me more if I went back to the 62.7mm (2.468" ) pulley vs the smaller 60.96mm (2.4") pulley? If I'm out of effenciency then perhaps, all my WMI is doing is combating the heat and not really adding and beneficial power gains.

**Note to others***
I put my VAP upper back on and am seeing more power and boost in my VAP data logging software and with zero knock retard. This 1.9L is very limited on the boost levels so be aware when trying to chase more power.

 

Although we don't purport to know everything and try instead to show everyone full transparency about what we do/don't know, we have done a LOT of R&D, datalogging and verification and that has informed the decisions we have made about how to structure the tuning products. We love that people want to push the envelope, but that doesn't always yield results if it doesn't have the right combination of parts & supporting modifications.

 

And that's why you are my "go to" for anything Jaguar performance related. After swapping to the original stage 3 upper pulley, I was able to pull a bit more E85 in it as well and it's doing great. Getting the cats removed on Thursday, can't wait to see how that performs.

 

***Update***

I had high flow cats installed as the cat delete was extreamly loud and unpleasant, sounds and performs perfectly.

1st run with the 60.96mm (Griptec) pulley and stock cats ----- 1.7539 - 0-60 ft _ 4.9195 - 330 ft _ 7.5034 ET _ 95.46 mph (1/8 mile track run) E25
2nd run with the 62.7mm (VelocityAP) pulley and cat delete ---1.7588 - 0-60 ft _ 4.9425 - 330 ft _ 7.5278 ET _ 95.34 mph (1/8 mile track run) E30
3rd run with the 60.96mm (Griptec) pulley, high flow cats, ------- 1.78 - 0-60 ft ___ 4.87 - 330 ft ___ 7.43 ET _ 93.19 mph (1/8 mile Draggy run) E30

I will go to the tack once more and update the final comparison.