Comments on: Pulley Party http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/ Life with MINIs (and other cars!) Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:33:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Chapel http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-67 Chapel Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:56:32 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-67 Wait... your car made 193.7whp on a DYNO DYNAMICS 4WD Lowboy HeartBreaker? That's close to 230bhp! That's astounding! Those dynos aren't very happy to hand out big numbers like that. Wait… your car made 193.7whp on a DYNO DYNAMICS 4WD Lowboy HeartBreaker?

That’s close to 230bhp! That’s astounding! Those dynos aren’t very happy to hand out big numbers like that.

]]> By: jwardell http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-66 jwardell Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:15:13 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-66 Maybe we should. :) I assume I'll be seeing you at the rally this weekend anyway. If nothing else, I would like to hear it while revved above the 4500 while parked just to notice the intake noise. Before this I was intending to get the Dinan intake. Not that it matters, I still fully plan on getting the upgrade, it's just the price tag that is making me have to wait a while. Maybe we should. :) I assume I’ll be seeing you at the rally this weekend anyway. If nothing else, I would like to hear it while revved above the 4500 while parked just to notice the intake noise. Before this I was intending to get the Dinan intake.
Not that it matters, I still fully plan on getting the upgrade, it’s just the price tag that is making me have to wait a while.

]]> By: Ian Cull http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-65 Ian Cull Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:41:10 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-65 Josh, I have not commented much on the feel of the JCW intake improvement because I am not sure how to evaluate what I feel. There is an obvious improvement in general driveability but I am unsure if this is due to the JCW upgrade or due to V39. I do not feel the "nitrous like kick" that others have reported when you reach 4500rpm - but I don't often drive up near red line anyway so when I do, I have no before reference experience to compare the after experience. Maybe you & I need to meet and switch cars for half an hour :) Josh,
I have not commented much on the feel of the JCW intake improvement because I am not sure how to evaluate what I feel.
There is an obvious improvement in general driveability but I am unsure if this is due to the JCW upgrade or due to V39.
I do not feel the “nitrous like kick” that others have reported when you reach 4500rpm – but I don’t often drive up near red line anyway so when I do, I have no before reference experience to compare the after experience.
Maybe you & I need to meet and switch cars for half an hour :)

]]> By: Greg V (onasled) http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-64 Greg V (onasled) Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:03:08 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-64 Ian ask that I try and go into a bit more detail on my header comments, so I have given it some thought and have come up with the following comments. Yes, it is somewhat common knowledge that a header might equal a loss of some HP in the lower RPM. I am not one to even try to completely understand why as I have many other hobbies besides just spending $$ on my MCS (smiley face inserted here). The Dyno shows power from the car accelerating , in third gear I believe, from about 1700 rpm up to redline. Not what a header is designed for! A header is used for racing conditions where your RPMs are usually up in the upper middle to redline. Ian’s comparison shows my car trying to ‘catch up’ after some bogging down (almost unnoticeable on the street) in the very low RPM. I might bet that if the dyno started at 3000 rpm, after the car was steady that for a few seconds, that you would see the header doing it’s job and giving my car the edge. Remember, Ian’s car has some JCW head work already installed. Head work is probably the second best thing you can do to the MCS after the pulley. My header is not serving a true purpose yet as the flow of the stock head is not what it should be. I installed the header with the thought that a new Webb head and cam were just down the road. In looking at my Dyno printout, it seems that I have some problems that need addressing such as the lower redline and most of all that dip in power up in the 6000 range. I also would like to point out that the last two test were interesting. As we saw, the cold air blast over the intercooler added a WOPPING 15HP!. The last test just after this showed that the 104 octane was either not in the motor yet, or it made no difference since the dyno was back at 199. I would say that the higher octane had no effect on performance being that I beat on the car for two days afterwards and felt NO difference. I let the car run just about empty and just filled it with 93. The car felt more powerful this AM as it was about 38 degrees out. INTERCOOLER, INTERCOOLER, INTERCOOLER! This is so obviously a KEY factor to better HP! Ian ask that I try and go into a bit more detail on my header comments, so I have given it some thought and have come up with the following comments.
Yes, it is somewhat common knowledge that a header might equal a loss of some HP in the lower RPM. I am not one to even try to completely understand why as I have many other hobbies besides just spending $$ on my MCS (smiley face inserted here).
The Dyno shows power from the car accelerating , in third gear I believe, from about 1700 rpm up to redline. Not what a header is designed for! A header is used for racing conditions where your RPMs are usually up in the upper middle to redline. Ian’s comparison shows my car trying to ‘catch up’ after some bogging down (almost unnoticeable on the street) in the very low RPM. I might bet that if the dyno started at 3000 rpm, after the car was steady that for a few seconds, that you would see the header doing it’s job and giving my car the edge.
Remember, Ian’s car has some JCW head work already installed. Head work is probably the second best thing you can do to the MCS after the pulley. My header is not serving a true purpose yet as the flow of the stock head is not what it should be. I installed the header with the thought that a new Webb head and cam were just down the road.
In looking at my Dyno printout, it seems that I have some problems that need addressing such as the lower redline and most of all that dip in power up in the 6000 range. I also would like to point out that the last two test were interesting. As we saw, the cold air blast over the intercooler added a WOPPING 15HP!. The last test just after this showed that the 104 octane was either not in the motor yet, or it made no difference since the dyno was back at 199. I would say that the higher octane had no effect on performance being that I beat on the car for two days afterwards and felt NO difference. I let the car run just about empty and just filled it with 93. The car felt more powerful this AM as it was about 38 degrees out.
INTERCOOLER, INTERCOOLER, INTERCOOLER! This is so obviously a KEY factor to better HP!

]]> By: jwardell http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-63 jwardell Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:43:25 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-63 Nice writeup Ian (and on motoringfile too). I love the comparison between JCW & others throughout the rev range...much more power at "real life" rpms. Should also translate to quicker acceleration times. But what I haven't seen from you is much mention of any difference in feel of the new upgrade. Plenty on MINI2 say it feels much quicker, better sounding, even more fun to drive...do you share this? That's the most important part of shelling out the money, do you get extra "smile points" from the 04->05 upgrade? Nice writeup Ian (and on motoringfile too). I love the comparison between JCW & others throughout the rev range…much more power at “real life” rpms. Should also translate to quicker acceleration times.
But what I haven’t seen from you is much mention of any difference in feel of the new upgrade. Plenty on MINI2 say it feels much quicker, better sounding, even more fun to drive…do you share this? That’s the most important part of shelling out the money, do you get extra “smile points” from the 04->05 upgrade?

]]> By: Greg V (onasled) http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-62 Greg V (onasled) Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:18:20 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-62 Ian. I would bet that the difference in the lower hp of my car compared to yours in the lower rpms is due to my header. It’s about what you might expect with one I guess. Randolph, I believe I paid Yarrow $5 A GALLON FOR THAT FUEL and I also believe it was 104 octane. He put the entire five gallons in and the tank then read just about full. My guess is that it was now about a 50/50 mix of 104 and 93, so I figure I’ve been running 98 octane all day today. Have to say that I feel absolutely no difference. I do have the A and B map on my Unichip. Both seem to work equally well on the usual 93 octane. We switched them back and forth during the dyno runs, and the difference between the two was at most 1 or 2 hp. The effect of the cooled air from the almost empty nitrous tank was just huge, 15HP! I hade posted on mini2 that I believe that my typical street HP might be somewhere around 210 to 217 in the cooler air. I bet that in summer it would be down around 197 to 200. I have also come to the conclusion that to get anything over 215-219, you would have to do head work and or cam. Ian. I would bet that the difference in the lower hp of my car compared to yours in the lower rpms is due to my header. It’s about what you might expect with one I guess.
Randolph, I believe I paid Yarrow $5 A GALLON FOR THAT FUEL and I also believe it was 104 octane. He put the entire five gallons in and the tank then read just about full. My guess is that it was now about a 50/50 mix of 104 and 93, so I figure I’ve been running 98 octane all day today. Have to say that I feel absolutely no difference.
I do have the A and B map on my Unichip. Both seem to work equally well on the usual 93 octane. We switched them back and forth during the dyno runs, and the difference between the two was at most 1 or 2 hp.
The effect of the cooled air from the almost empty nitrous tank was just huge, 15HP! I hade posted on mini2 that I believe that my typical street HP might be somewhere around 210 to 217 in the cooler air. I bet that in summer it would be down around 197 to 200. I have also come to the conclusion that to get anything over 215-219, you would have to do head work and or cam.

]]> By: Ian C. http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-61 Ian C. Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:04:39 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-61 Randolph, some fine searching you did there :) General note: A higher octane fuel will make no difference to the performance of your car unless either you get knocking with the fuel you are using, or (like Randolphs Dads old car) you have a mode to switch the octane rating - which allows the car to alter its timing. The Unichip aftermarket engine computer does have an "A/B" mode switch so I guess you could have one of the modes loaded for high octane fuel. Randolph, some fine searching you did there :)
General note: A higher octane fuel will make no difference to the performance of your car unless either you get knocking with the fuel you are using, or (like Randolphs Dads old car) you have a mode to switch the octane rating – which allows the car to alter its timing.
The Unichip aftermarket engine computer does have an “A/B” mode switch so I guess you could have one of the modes loaded for high octane fuel.

]]> By: Randolph Lee http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-60 Randolph Lee Sun, 07 Nov 2004 09:43:46 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-60 Well a touch of Google show 3 places that sell it in Mass. Massachusetts Interesting... and one of them is not far from the Cod! Sunoco GTTM 100, which has the highest octane rating of any street legal fuel, is now available at selected retail locations.  Sunoco GT 100 is designed for high performance street cars, muscle cars, classics, street rods, motorcycles, karts and marine applications.  Sunoco GT 100 contains no metallic compounds to harm catalytic converters or oxygen sensors.  It contains a comprehensive additive package for greater engine protection and reduced fuel system deposits as measured by the BMW test.  Sunoco GT 100 is also compatible with virtually all two-stroke synthetic and mineral based motor oils. Brad's Service 817 Frank Street Chicopee, MA 01020 (413) 592-5187 Gas Express 52 Tarkin Hill Road New Bedford, MA 02740 (508) 995-0500 W. Harwich Sunoco Tre. 28 & Division Street West Harwich, MA 02671 (508) 432-4344 Well a touch of Google show 3 places that sell it in Mass.
Massachusetts Interesting… and one of them is not far from the Cod!
Sunoco GTTM 100, which has the highest octane rating of any street legal fuel, is now available at selected retail locations.  Sunoco GT 100 is designed for high performance street cars, muscle cars, classics, street rods, motorcycles, karts and marine applications.  Sunoco GT 100 contains no metallic compounds to harm catalytic converters or oxygen sensors.  It contains a comprehensive additive package for greater engine protection and reduced fuel system deposits as measured by the BMW test.  Sunoco GT 100 is also compatible with virtually all two-stroke synthetic and mineral based motor oils.
Brad’s Service
817 Frank Street
Chicopee, MA 01020
(413) 592-5187
Gas Express
52 Tarkin Hill Road
New Bedford, MA 02740
(508) 995-0500
W. Harwich Sunoco
Tre. 28 & Division Street
West Harwich, MA 02671
(508) 432-4344

]]> By: Randolph Lee http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-59 Randolph Lee Sun, 07 Nov 2004 09:25:13 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-59 My father had a M-Benz 300 Sl Gullwing from 1956 to 79 and when he wanted max performance he went to the Airport at BDL and filled up with 135 octane Av Gas the Gullwing had an 'octane selector' on the dash that would let you get the best out of the engine depending on the fuel avaiable (some places in the 50s you would be lucky to get 80 octane south of the border in Mexico) it would improve the 0 to 60 time by over 1.5 sec compaired to standard 'hi-test'... then later on by the late 60s Sunoco for had a 'almost race fuel' available on their selector pumps that was almost as good as the av gas... what do those 5 gal cans go for BTW? I wonder what NO2 and CO2 on the intercooler would add to Onasled's numbers... what is the engine good for in max 'street' tune? 260 280 hp? and how long will it last when pushed that high... Inquiring minds and all that :D Cheers, ~R~ My father had a M-Benz 300 Sl Gullwing from 1956 to 79 and when he wanted max performance he went to the Airport at BDL and filled up with 135 octane Av Gas the Gullwing had an ‘octane selector’ on the dash that would let you get the best out of the engine depending on the fuel avaiable (some places in the 50s you would be lucky to get 80 octane south of the border in Mexico) it would improve the 0 to 60 time by over 1.5 sec compaired to standard ‘hi-test’… then later on by the late 60s Sunoco for had a ‘almost race fuel’ available on their selector pumps that was almost as good as the av gas…
what do those 5 gal cans go for BTW?
I wonder what NO2 and CO2 on the intercooler would add to Onasled’s numbers… what is the engine good for in max ‘street’ tune? 260 280 hp? and how long will it last when pushed that high… Inquiring minds and all that :D
Cheers,
~R~

]]> By: Jared/pezboy http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/comment-page-1/#comment-58 Jared/pezboy Sun, 07 Nov 2004 03:44:55 +0000 http://www.gbmini.net/wp/2004/11/pulley_party/#comment-58 Sounds like a great day. I would have been there but I had lunch with some co-workers in China Town! Sounds like a great day. I would have been there but I had lunch with some co-workers in China Town!

]]>