>>Alittle worst fuel economy compared to just having the Alta intake system.>>>

That's only because you're driving the car harder - maybe much harder. I have the madness intake and since I got the pulley 10k miles ago I'm driving it harder and STILL getting better mileage.


>>Still get smoked by WRX , RSXs, etc.>>>>

I no longer get SMOKED by WRXs. A stock S has no chance on a straight away against a WRX. But a pullied MINI can be respectable. I'm guessing with ECU it will be competitive.

 

GEATGRO, my car is getting much better fuel milege than stock. The higher boost took close to 1 mpg from just having the Alta intake. I drive my car to work everyday the same way, cruise control 70mph. With the Alta my computer was telling me that I was getting between 31.3 and 31.7 mpg. Now it says I'm getting 30.9, if I drive a little more agressive then it's telling me I get 30.5 mpg. While this numbers may not be accurate, they show me a difference in fuel consumption. Before mods I was getting between 27.9 and 28 mpg according to the car computer.
A wrx or an rsxs have more hp compared to an mcs, even if you went and purchase a worx kit for your mcs.
I have not had the chance to race anybody yet but I'll let you know if the car excedes my expectations.
I didn't buy this car thinking it would be the fastest car on the road, I took it home because it was fun to drive.
The fact that a subaru or an acura or a neon have more hp and should smoke my car in a straight line makes me loose no sleep. I love the little car, it's more fun to drive now with the little extra power.
Gone motoring!!!!!

 

A stock WRX does have more driveline loss due to the 4 wheel drive, so all the factory HP numbers are a little different. Not sure what the 0-60 times are, but I suspect that a pullied MCS with an ECU upgrade could them a decent run for their money. Even without the ECU - I've seen Greatgro's MCS in action...pretty darn quick

 

Not only with the added power/throtle response my MPG went up 2.1 did this over
the weekend, drove 450 miles in two days on the Hwy. avg speed 70 to 80.
after the pulley/ecu my mgp got better, now I understand that if I am hammering
it hard the SC will suck the gas, but the hwy driving keeping a nice stady speed
my MPG has gone up.

 

>>A stock WRX does have more driveline loss due to the 4 wheel drive, so all the factory HP numbers are a little different. Not sure what the 0-60 times are, but I suspect that a pullied MCS with an ECU upgrade could them a decent run for their money. Even without the ECU - I've seen Greatgro's MCS in action...pretty darn quick>>>>>

Thanks Dan!

 

For me the pulley mod is well worth the $400 including installation that I paid Randy. It's easily the most HP for the buck mod out there. And it really improves not just peek performance but drivability too since it adds substantial low-end torque making stop light to stop light acceleration a breeze. Even though it does void the SC warranty, it's worth it.

 

The reason this mod helps with the MPG for a lot of people is that you don't have to rev the engine up into its powerband of 4k and above to get moving. Driving normally, shifting at 2-3k gives you adequate acceleration in most situations, a lot better than stock anyway, which doesn't get moving really well in that range.

 

It's quite simple IMHO. The SC is designed to run for X miles before needing to replaced. By spining the SC y% faster, expect that much less longevity. That might be at 150,000 miles or more.

Ken

 

The day after I picked up my '03, with under 500 miles,
Randy installed the pulley. Now, 2 months later with 5000
miles, no problems to report. My '02 S never got better
than 21 mpg. I'd say my average with the pulley is better
than 25 mpg. Change your oil, change your oil, change
your oil and your car will last a long, long, time.
I've driven a Cooper Works. I'd rather buy a new engine but
doubt I'll ever have to.

 

I understand the theory Ken, but I'm not sure that wear on the supercharger is quite that logrithmic. You're basically saying that the SC service life is only a function of the number of revolutions it makes in its lifetime. More revolutions per minute = shorter life? That's part of it, but I'm not sure that RPM is the only factor in service life.

 

>>I think the con about the 15% pulley is that it's not like an intake where you can pop your hood and go, look look what i got! Instead you got people scratching their heads wondering, what is it, where am I supposed to look, I dont see a change!
>>>

Greetings!!

I love the idea of STEALTH power !! Looks stock but goes like h*## !!

Ron

 

>>I understand the theory Ken, but I'm not sure that wear on the supercharger is quite that logrithmic. You're basically saying that the SC service life is only a function of the number of revolutions it makes in its lifetime. More revolutions per minute = shorter life? That's part of it, but I'm not sure that RPM is the only factor in service life.

The number of rotations of a supercharger is directly proportional to the lifetime of the supercharger. That doesn't mean that other factors don't come into play like bad maintenance, heat damage.... But this is how companies perform stress testing against their products, and if their products are made well, and all other factors are isolated, items tend to break consistently after a set number of actions. For a supercharger, spinning is it's main wear factor. That is how companies determine warranties, increase the ability of the item to last longer.... This is especially important at the limits of a product. The closer you maintain something at it's limit the greater chance it has to break. Formula 1 engines could last a lot longer if you drove the cars at 60mph and a low rpm all the time. It is when you are stressing them at their maximum that they wear quite quickly.

An interesting side note, is that scientist are trying to map out this type of thing with the life of a mammal. Data is increasingly showing that the average life expectancy of any mammal (mouse to an elephant) is about 2.7 billion heartbeats. That is why sluggish turtles last a great many years, sometimes a few hundred, while a hummingbird may only last a few years. Just an interesting note.

 

Along the same lines of my posting above, I have an interesting question to propose, and maybe someone here has an answer.

I know that the limit of the pulley at this point is about 15%. I think Randy had stated that this was because of the number of rotations for the supercharger was starting to hit the manufacturer's limits (which I think was 17,200) not sure though.

Since the supercharger w/15% pulley really gives a lot of oomph at the lower ranges as well. It would seem to me to be more beneficial to put a 20% pulley reduction or more on and limit the redline of the engine. This would start giving you more useful horsepower/torque at an area of the engine powerband that would be more useful. The benefits would be not only preserving the life of the supercharger, but also the engine, since the engine would, at a maximum spin much lower anyway. I would be willing to give up some of my rpm (i.e. maybe only redline up to 5750) but gain quite a bit of extra torque over the 15% reduction pulley.

Does this make sense?

 

It makes sense but the engine itself has its limitations as well. Already with a 15% reduction, the car gets peppy after 2k+, in the 1-2k RPM range, the engine itself, because of it's size, can make only so much more power on the low-low-end with all the forced induction helping it. I think the 15% is plenty of difference for what it is, and this engine specifically seems to like the boost in the higher RPM's, so lowering the RPM limit may be too much of a sacrifice for many people.

 

>>It "may" void your warranty and it costs $$ unlike free improvements like the intake plenum mod for your intake.
>>

I'm sorry....what?

:?

 

>>A stock WRX does have more driveline loss due to the 4 wheel drive, so all the factory HP numbers are a little different. Not sure what the 0-60 times are, but I suspect that a pullied MCS with an ECU upgrade could them a decent run for their money. Even without the ECU - I've seen Greatgro's MCS in action...pretty darn quick

I wooped a 2003 WRX. That can be done w/o question if you have pulley, intake, header, exhaust and Cryo2.

Edited by DiD: Profanity (and alternate spelling with ! % @ counts) WILL BE DELETED In the future I will delete your post instead of editing. Clear enough?

_________________
187.6 whp, 161.2 tq,CryO2 system (first in a MCS!), Mania pulley, Madness intake, Alta diverter/sprayer, Supersprint header (stock cat), Magnaflow, H&R springs, Hamann splitter, drilled/slotted brakes, Superlite 15" Monza/Falken Azenis on order...this rea

 

Bisch - with the mods you're running, I'm not really surprised.

 

>>Bisch - with the mods you're running, I'm not really surprised.


.

 

okay...let my put my 2 cents in here. I drive a stock 2003 Mini Cooper S, my younger brother drives a stock 2002 Subaru WRX. On a dyno, the WRX puts down about 190hp. Which is +35hp of what my car does. In ANY straight-line acceleration test, the WRX will school me(is that better Dave ). This includes 0-130, 10-100, 50-70, ANYTHING. Even if I get the jump, the WRX will pull harder and longer. By the time a reach 100mph, he's 4-5 car lengths in front of me. The only time when my mini will catch up is when he's on 5th with more than 3 people in the car.

So...to put it straight. A WRX will always win in straightline performance, if the two drivers don't completely suck, and if both cars are carrying the same amount of baggage (like just a driver).

I plan to get the pulley and ECU mod for my Mini by the end of August, then me and my bro will race again...the results (from what I hear and hope) will be interesting to say the least. Well that is until he gets the Vishnu stage I package for the rex, which should give my dad's M5 a run for its money.

_________________
Mel A.
just a warning...you're talking to a 18 year old
2003 Mini Cooper S (DS, packages 1,2,3, HK)
1995 Land Rover Discovery (for sale)

 

Just so it doesn't get missed by anyone:

Profanity will not be tolerated. Just because you come up with some cute alternate spelling with @ * % or ! doesn't mean it doesn't count. We do watch the forums, and clean posting preserves the atmosphere of MCO.

Dave

 

>>
>>So...to put it straight. A WRX will always win in straightline performance, if the two drivers don't completely suck, and if both cars are carrying the same amount of baggage (like just a driver).

Stock vs. Stock, yes WRX will chew you up.
>>
>>I plan to get the pulley and ECU mod for my Mini by the end of August, then me and my bro will race again...the results (from what I hear and hope) will be interesting to say the least. Well that is until he gets the Vishnu stage I package for the rex, which should give my dad's M5 a run for its money.

As stated earlier, with the pulley you will have great improvements. Add the ECU tune and you may be competitive with WRXs. But, remember, air flow to and from the engine should be looked at as well. Exhaust/header/intake.

Bottom line: If you have the $means$ to do it, DO IT! If you can go even further with mods, you will have a ton of fun! Just BE SAFE!
:smile:

 

I have done the pulley and intake on my car and it made a big difference. It felt really fast at first(still does), but now I want more.

I can understand how changing the pulley could cause the supercharger to where sooner, but performance has its price and I think it's worth it.

Along the same lines, I was talking with an auto journalist whose mag has a modified mini and they said the engineers that built the motor tested it all the way up to 32 lbs of boost with no problems. Any thoughts?

 

>> It would seem to me to be more beneficial to put a 20% pulley reduction or more on and limit the redline of the engine.

I like the way you think

 

Chitown, if you're asking about the free mod I'm referring to cutting holes in the wall behind your air intake to allow air to be pushed in by the high pressure at the base of your windshield. There are more than a few threads out there that will give you a far better explanition.

As for 20% pulleys the problem you face is two fold. One, you run the risk of spinning your s/c past it's maximum rated rpm. Two, the water pump mounted to the s/c shaft will begin to cavitate the water (where the water turns to gas due to high pressure found at the tips of the rotor blades) rather than pump it which is REALLY bad too. You get a similiar problem from raising your redline over 7200 with the 15% pulley as well.

The 15% pulley is about as good as it gets in this system without changing the s/c outright along with a bunch of other things. I hope that helps.

Jim

 

I have 16500k on my car with the Pulley (JLM) Style. I had to go back to the factory belt once because the NAPA smaller replacment is not exact in the notches inside and it got a bit chewed up. Thats it no other issues.

15% is the smallest you can go because of the size of the shaft. You cannot go any smaller.

I get worse MPG by about 4mpg overall. My driving style has not changed.