[Abdul]

This question has come up before, so I’d like to provide some additional context and clarify it properly.

First, I genuinely appreciate Ben’s work and the discussion surrounding the different products available. Every product brought to market should be open to fair criticism and technical scrutiny, and I welcome it. These conversations ultimately benefit all of us as owners and push manufacturers to build better products.I’m always open to revising our designs when evidence shows that a change will produce a meaningful improvement. Adding the factory-style hump would actually be very easy for us because our covers are machined from billet.

With that said, Ben raised a theoretical concern. He did not provide testing or evidence showing that our valve covers reduce CCV performance. Ben says “presumably”, his own word, meaning it’s an assumption, not a measurement. We’ve had these on cars for two years with zero reported CCV issues. Real-world results beat a presumption. The “mid hump” concern has never been supported by real-world evidence. Repeating a theoretical concern does not turn it into a proven defect.

The claim that any change in internal surface area automatically compromises the CCV system is an assumption, not a demonstrated engineering conclusion. CCV performance depends on the complete system. Continuous internal path, cross-sectional area, pressure drop, baffling, and drain-back. Not simply whether the cover reproduces every contour of the factory casting.

Our V1 covers have been installed on cars for more than two years and driven for thousands of miles. In that time, we have received zero reports of increased oil consumption, excessive oil entering the intake, abnormal crankcase pressure, smoking, or any other symptom indicating reduced CCV performance.

Our V2 Billet Valve Covers retains the proven internal design while adding fully integrated spark-plug tubes, eliminating additional seals and potential leak points. Calling this a “trade-off” assumes a CCV compromise that nobody has actually demonstrated. If someone produces controlled testing showing otherwise, we will examine it seriously and change our design instantly. Until then, the available real-world evidence supports our design.

Finally, every one of our products goes through independent review by third-party engineering companies, including IPF Racing, Performance Driven Design, RCE Technologies, and others. These are established automotive engineering firms that conduct their own design analysis and testing. If the internal geometry presented any legitimate concern regarding CCV performance, it would have been identified, flagged, and corrected during development. Our final designs are based on collective engineering analysis and real-world validation, not the unsupported opinion of any one individual.

Abdul