100%.
If you feel like collateral damage, I understand. You may not have said "anything besides your opinion is dumb", but, folks in this thread have definitely said worse. So I get it, you may have gotten lumped in a bit.
My point in all of this is that application absolutely matters. What you would do for a pro stock car, for a strip only car, for a street/strip car, and for a commuter are all different things.
I've been driving classics my entire life. I daily drove a '56 Austin Healey 100 for years, so, I've dealt with cooling issues. My focus has always been street driving and lots of it, with autoX and road course work on the side. And yeah, those tunes are different than street/strip, and different again than strip only cars.
To be polite, you can't prove anything without providing evidence. You have provided ZERO evidence. None. So let's see all those dyno pulls with the same engine at different temperatures and tunes. And then let's see the videos of it on the street with those different tunes to prove the driveabilty stayed the same. That's proof. Yes, colder air charges make more power- that's the theory. When you've been driving for an hour in stop and go traffic and it's 100°+ out, that theory doesn't mean much. Application matters.
And yet, it also shows that application matters. Pro Stock has nothing to do with being a real street car either. Yeah, Pro-Stock runs at 100-120°, they chill their intakes, the whole bit. It's also racing where a thousandth of a second could make a difference, that's splitting it mighty fine. They also run 118 octane fuel, and how many miles do they go between engine tear downs? I thought we were talking about street cars? You're just showing all your reasoning is based on drag racing.
Yes, NASCAR runs their coolant around 300° because aerodynamics are the most important thing for them. They also manage to make plenty of horsepower that way, and tune accordingly. Kinda been my whole point, application matters.
And again, they tear their engines down every how many miles? And the street drivability is what now? Non existent.
Not really. Neither of your examples are cars that see one second of street time, and on the long end get a full engine teardown every 500 miles? Outside of being internal combustion engines, they're about as different as can be. And the rules of those classes dictate most of what those guys do. Time between races, aero requirements and standards, engine requirements and standards, etc, etc.
Funny you think using NASCAR and Pro-Stock as examples are relevant, but an OEM engine that makes 700-800 hp and can be driven for 100k+ miles is somehow not. Neither of your examples are streetable in the least. But an 800 hp car you can drive off the lot and take grocery shopping? Yeah, that's relevant. And if Chrysler could run another 50 hp, it WOULD matter. Just like blaming it on emissions is a cop out, those ECU's and those cooling systems could absolutely run those cars colder than 200° and still pass everything exactly as they're built.
Then let's see it. You haven't posted one thing that could be called evidence yet. Post your dyno pulls with your irrefutable evidence. You need data to provide proof, not just anecdotal stories.
Oh please. I don't expect you to do anything. You're the one that said it would be so easy to "fix" my car and make more power AND have better drivability. All I asked was "how" and you deliver a ration of crap. Which is what I expected, because none of this is new for you. You do the same thing every time, and every time you fail to deliver the "how".
You keep saying how simple this is, then won't explain it because it would take too long? What happened to "5 simple things"? If you're so sure you already know 5 things that would prove you right and make my car run colder and drive better too, just PM me. If you already know, it would take a lot less time than your last post did.