Now that the water pump pulley is redundant (on paper at earlky stage), and there is potentialy two or three hp gained from the exercise, the next question would be; do you need an alternator and could you therefore save another one or two hp (data from the interweb so its probably dodgy). Each engine situation will differ but I guess you could reasonably say no belts and pulleys is worth a few ponies on a n/a 2 litre four cylinder.
Counter arguements (or support for the total loss electrics approach) gratefuly received before I commit to engine water pump surgery.
John
Some "real world" numbers for your consideration, all verified by dyno testing:
A/ On the Milwaukee Midget 999 cc BMC "Grenade" the change to a gilmer belt driven under drive system from the stock based overdrive setup netted ~ 1.5 bhp, rpm range was 5500 rpm to 9000 rpm (planned, exceeded by driver
)
2/ Again on the MM Grenade, change to an electric pump netted ~ 2.3 bhp over previous best, same rpm range.
d/ On 7000 rpm to 10,000 rpm Cosworth BDD F/Atlantic engines, a 30% under drive Vs crank speed water pump drive netted ~ 2.8 bhp. The engine was originally run to only 8500/8800 rpm.
Cheers,
Fordboy