The torque also hits ealier and stays later as well. Plus, don't forget that the Fuel-Air is now corrected to run less lean (more lean would = even more power) -Pete, Strat

>>If I am reading them correctly, it looks like 8.5 horses and only 2 lbs of torque. And the torque doesn't really seperate from stock until approaching 5k RPMs.

 

Just so I'm clear, the SharkONLY changes WOT performance - it makes no improvement to throttle response in partial throttle conditions?

 

Nope, check the earlier threads, there was a huge discussion on getting the area under the hp/tq curve right.

 

ubercooper,
Found it here:

"I would suggest using the "93 octane" version of the SI if you are NOT running
a pulley. You will gain both a few HP and the throttle response/rev limit gains
but note that running it with a pulley is optimal." - LNDSHK

I wonder how this would work with the 19% pulley....

 

Yup that was the part, after reading the developers comments, it seems this is a solution designed specifically for the pulley.

 

After a few weeks any Shark owners have an update on how things are running?
Still OK or are problems surfacing.
I know a friend got the Shark and tried to install it but only got error codes so he had to send it back.

 

Whew! Just got through reading the entire thread start to finish. I found it to be very interesting reading, especially Mr. Conforti's remarks about the dangers of running too lean. Makes me hesitate to jump on the pulley/ECU bandwagon, even though I realize that a bunch of you have been running with these mods for 10's of thousands of miles.

Andy: Thanks for your doggedness in these forums. It's good that we have someone around to keep everyone honest--even if you do take the form of a Doberman on the leg of every vendor on NAM!

 

>>After a few weeks any Shark owners have an update on how things are running?

Caveat: My expectations may differ from other peoples as I was aiming to improve driveability and throttle response with less emphasis on actual numbers. I could care less if I gained 4 HP or 12.2385 HP, a high dyno number is not the end-all. Throttle response is in my opinion the major test of a street-driven vehicle whether it be a car or a motorcycle - smooth controllable power is much more useful than boggy, unpredictable, or peaky top end rush powerbands. I don't drag race and don't consider the MINI to be a straight-line power type of car to begin with - it was designed to zip through traffic and embarrass expensive sports cars in the curves.

I've had the 93 octane version Shark installed in my `03 Cooper S for close to a month with zero problems. The install went very smooth, rather easy to do (if you read the instructions) and I didn't get any errors. My S currently has a Remus exhaust and a modified OEM air box along with the Shark but the supercharger pulley is stock. My impression of it is that there is a noticeable but not a huge horsepower and torque gain, which is what I expected. It also feels stronger in the lower RPM's and has absolutely no hesitation or surging. Essentially, the throttle is akin to a rheostat now - crisp acceleration that is very linear and predictable. Once the revs build up the engine pulls harder and cleaner up to red line. Fuel mileage has barely changed so far, down about one mpg for in-town driving. Not sure about highway mileage yet - I have not travelled lately. Kudos to Jim Conforti for superior Motronic manipulation!

Overall, I'm satisfied with the Shark and feel it's worth the asking price, especially considering the convenience factors it offers. The Shark accomplished what I wanted: it bumped the HP/torque up and ironed out the lumps in the powerband which in turn helps me control the car better through fast curves. Hell, I'm happy just knowing the EPA no longer has my fuel injection system by the short hairs.

 

I also have had the Shark in for about a month and have the same experience as curmudgion. I am going for a pulley Dec 6th but had a last track day of the season in late Oct so installed it just to see how much of a difference it made.

Most of the day was cold (5C) and rainy so hard to get power down out of corners but as things dried out i did find that my speed into the corner at the end of the straight was quite a bit higher than 'normal' which I took to mean I was getting better performanece. I was going into 5th sooner but was shifting a bit short due to the dampness.

The only potential issue is from an engine shut down into limp home mode which occured as I down shifted into a very tight corner. The best theory is mechanical over-reving caused the EMS to jump in but i can't exactly tell what happened as I was busy shifting turning etc so didn't see the tach. I went back to the pits, checked whatever i could, read the owners' manual - then restarted without any problem.

I emailed Eurosport and got a 'pro-forma' legal - "It wasn't the Injector's fault" kind of answer - joys of doing business inthe USA I guess but i had hoped for some useful info - especially given Conforti's participation in this thread. Randy says he has heard of a couple of others with the same 'problem' I have left it installed and have had no re-occurance of the problem.

On the street I find myself 'flying' if I go WOT in traffic and have had to get out of the gas as i am going way extra-legal. My impression is once it gets rolling it keeps going better than stock.

 

Does the Shark Injector on work for the MCS or can i get one for my MC?

 

>>Does the Shark Injector on work for the MCS or can i get one for my MC?

Right now the Shark is only for MCS. Maybe later it will be available for the MC.
Talk to Pete at Stramosphere and tell him you'd be interested if you are.
http://www.stratmosphere.com/mini_shark.htm

 

Here's my initial input on the shark injector:

I have had the TMS stage 1 kit (which includes a 15% pulley, shark injector, spark plugs) on my MCS for over 2 weeks now and I am very pleased with the performance (especially for the price). I drove the car around after the pulley was just installed and felt a VERY noticable increase in the entire powerband. Then I did the shark injector later that night. The differance wasn't as dramatic as the pulley, but it is still very noticable. You can feel a differance in pull in first and second gears, and at WOT in any gear. Passing power is also impoved, as is the throttle response (compared w/ just the pulley).

Now this is where it gets interesting. Just this last weekend I raced my brother who has a 2002 WRX. The results are quite impressive. We did every type of straight line run imaginable...basically I stayed in front of him in EVERY run (but only by 1-3 car lengths). My car pulled faster and harder than his in every run. But we did one race on another day...colder weather, he changed his oil, added octane booster, cleaned his air filter, put his heater on...he stayed in front of me by 1 car length from a standstill (he also got a really good jump on me), but I was in front of my friend, who has a 1998 Ford Mustang GT by 2 car lengths until I thought he was embarassed enough . Also, I managed to race a late model Pontiac Firebird Trans-Am...now this part is really weird, we turned onto a open road to do this(I was in front of him)...HE DIDN'T PASS ME UNTIL I LET HIM AFTER 120MPH. I was simply astonished with my cars performance from this simple sub-$700 mod(including install). Also I'd like to point out that we did all these races in some middle-of-nowhere country roads in Amarillo, TX.

_________________
Mel A.
you're talking to a kid
2003 Mini Cooper S-DS/B, pkg. 1,2,3, HK, TMS stage 1
1995 Land Rover Discovery-loaded, locked, lifted
looking for a Triumph Spitfire

 

you have had this shark for a week now still feel it was a great improvement. also how long to install and did you do it yourself. in the last week has the car come on even better as the shark has got used to your car. have the pully looking to install the shark. where did you buy it from thanks brg mcs checker top

 

Mini Mania and Stratmosphere both carry the Shark injector for $399 and should have them in stock. Shipping by UPS ground. Specify which of two versions 91 or 93 octane. If your premium gasoline is higher than 91 then choose 93. Doesn't matter if you have the stock MCS or upgraded one, the Shark will adapt to your MINI. Very easy to install.

Edit: It is true that the Shark has a more generic approach to ECU programming given only two versions based on Octane ratings. The two versions are different enough though to be distinct. An MCS that is bone stock would be better off with the 93 Octane version according to Stratmosphere. If you are more interested in an ECU that is finely tuned for your various extra mods beyond basic/generic pulley, intake, cat-back exhaust then you should look into those ECU upgrades from PowerChip/ EvoTech, GIAC, or Webb/PowerChip and the like. It may cost more and be less simple to install but the results are better (greater HP gains/similar throttle smoothness).

_________________
ALOHA

 

Take that adapt line with a grain of salt. It will adapt just like the stock ECU will adapt. Very generic. It appears to increase power somewhat and definitely smooth throttle response from what has been posted. But it isn't programmmed to optimize your mods which means the ones that do will give significantly more power.

 

thanks for the info. do you have a better ecu that will do more or as much as the shark. or is there another message board that gives other good examples of ecu comparisons. have pulley and intake installed don't think i will remove the muffler. have the tower strut. mcs brg checker top

 

Webb Motorsports - Shark vs. Webb ECU

 

Thanks To Eric @ Helix for installing a 15% Pulley and Shark and doing some Dyno pulls. Here's the results:

 

thanks for the dyno it looks like they almost look the same all the way up the curve. just alittle more hp and footlbs. do you think it was worth it. let me know over the next few weeks thanks i'm leaning towards randy's ecu now. brg mcs checkerboard roof pulley

 

Wow, that is an incredibly unimpressive result, really, it is. It doesn't make so much sense though because you could simply feel gains greater than that without a dyno with just the swap of the 15% pulley, don't you?

 

>>Thanks To Eric @ Helix for installing a 15% Pulley and Shark and doing some Dyno pulls. Here's the results:
>>

Looks very similar to the results that Stratmosphere posted on page 6:

 

Nurse Shark?

 

It seems like the Shark torque curve increases at a sharper angle at around 2700-2800 RPMs. It hits a higher peak (4lbs) and maintains that a bit longer. That's about it. Still it gives you something plus it's convenient and relatively inexpensive for an ECU although not inexpensive when you look at price per power. It's definitely not for me but it might be suitable for some. Thanks for the dyno!

 

All I can say is the car has great throttle response and tons of power. Just keep it above 4000 rpm and the part throttle response is great. The dyno can not measure throttle response which is very important in drivability. Keep in mind that I never drove the car with 15% pulley and the factory software. But if Jim wants me to test it that way for comparison, I would be glad to do it for $399.

David K.
Track Instructor for: PCA, BMWCCA, Ferrari Owners Club, TracQuest, PDA
My Track Car

 

Nice 964!

BTW, when are the first track days in the Spring for LRP, the Glen, or Summit Point? I'd like to get some learnin'. :smile: