RE-medy - Is it better?
 

I purchased one of these pumps and recorded flow and pressure data of both the stock and supposedly improved RE-medy pump. The tests were done at a 200F operating temp and without a thermostat.
The stock pump pushed fluid at higher rates across the range of my tests.

At 8000 RPM and 0 restriction, the stock pump pushed 37 GPM compared to 27 GPM for the RE-medy. At the maximum restriction that I tested, the stock pump pushed 20.6 GPM compared to 16.6 GPM for the RE-medy. Just food for thought for those considering the swap. If a company is unwilling or unable to provide scientific data to support their claims, there may be a reason. A company generally provides a pump curve for any legitimately designed pump.

The RE-medy impeller certainly looks like an improvement compared to the stock design but my testing did not show that to be true.

Does anyone else have any data or is there any other testing on water pump flow rates and pressure for the Rotary or specifically the Renesis?

The main advantage of the remedy pump is elimination of the cavitation that occurs at sustained high rpm with the stock pump. I am putting in a new radiator on my 2008 RX8 and I am installing a new remedy pump to go along with the remedy lower-temp thermostat I already have.

That's the only advantage. There are literally no other advantages.

Remember when I simulated them a couple years ago? It's still on this forum somewhere.

I would be interested to see more detailed information about the testing methodology. What was the nature of the testing rig?

If this was a Renesis engine in situ:

• What was the reason for omitting the thermostat?

If this was a custom bench bench-top system:

• Did you measure the restriction in a Renesis?
• How did you drive the pump?
• How did you measure the RPM?
• Did your RPM measurements take into account any possible gear reductions?

In either case:

• How did you measure the flow rate?
• How did you control the restriction?

I'm not trying to be confrontational or cast doubt on your results. I just need more information to properly evaluate your claims.

I'm also curious as to what you used to measure the flow rate.