Heresay does nothing to contribute to the conversation -- especially on a site that's 75% speculation in the first place.

 

Everything breaks in time. Entropy at work. It's one of the Laws of Thermodynamics. It's not a theroy of Thermodynamics, now is it? :smile:

Here's a good read: Things Fall Apart: An Introduction To Entropy

:smile:

 

This is somewhat analogous to the lowriders that have little tiny tires on them - you know, the guys with the tires that stick out a foot from the fender wells with the sideways mudflaps. The speedo says they are going 70 while they’re actually doing 45 (in front of you the carpool lane of the freeway.)

 

Rick: what's it gonna' be then, eh? a tolchok in the litso? gleaming zoobies covered with red krovvy?


I'll say hearsay 65%, not 75%, except M7: data does not compute.

 

Let's just say this. The worlds biggest VW/Audi/BMW/Mercedes chip tuner IS making MINI programs for people who run 20+% pulley's in Mexico, and it was confirmed from this chip tuner to be safe, reliable and had enough mileage on it to proove the fact that the MINI can handle it. Hearsay is not a factor in this as this chip tuner is a very reliable source and I have worked with him for 5+ years in chip tuning.

 

It's not heresay or hearsay: it's the truth. Autodynamica in Mexico City.

 

Over on MINI2, there is a warning from a user about failures. It seems that sustained high boost will "overheat" the charger's rotors, and cause them to start shedding the coating, thus lose boost. The comment was related to tuneup time on a "rolling road" which I think means a Dyno.

The JCW Supercharger, and all production superchargers from some time in 2004, are supposed to have coated rotors. This allows closer clearence and higher boost, thus the 2005 has 7 hp more than the earlier cars.

I know that cars running 19% on the track have shred belts. I saw one at the 2004 EMW meet. The belt was really destroyed. I wonder if it is because the supercharger rotors heat up and grow enough to cause interference with each other or the walls of the Supercharger?

John

 

Maybe my logic is flawed but I believe that any moving component, especially bearings, have a finite service life. Working a component harder and at a higher speed can only serve to shorten its functional life. But, as with anything mechanical, there is a curve in service life and utility.

 

did he mean heresy? and do we say: Here, Here! or Hear, Hear?

 

I thought belt shredding was a result of poorly fitted belts. I doubt the rotors would heat up enough to cause interference inside the supercharger. That would be a lot of expansion, and it would seize the whole unit and cause a massive failure.

There are other threads on here about which belt to use on which pulley, if you're curious.

 

Bingo

 

speaking of hearsay, the "special" thermal coating on the first issue of M7 pulleys was apparantly abrasive enough to whack belts; either that or the "special" groove design was doing it. Points to the need for care and testing in pulley design

"...the first run of pulleys where the thermal coating was too abrasive. We have since upgraded to a more belt friendly material and replaced the few that were sent out .

Randy
M7 Tuning"

 

...or suck it up because YOU decided to overboost your engine.

You wanna play, you gotta pay.

 

This will sound a little bit crazy. But I had a SC failure using a 15% pulley approx. a month ago. I will post pictures if you guys are interested...

 

I had my stock SC "fail" at 1200 miles. I had a squeal that sounded like the belt. Otherwise it ran fine. Replacing the tensioner & belt didn't help. They replaced the blower & the squeal went away. I'd like to hear the story behind yours, gclass.

 

Blow up wasn't the right term to use, sorry about that.


Let me put it this way, when you ge that supercharger spinning that fast for extended periods of time things tend to malfunction. Nothing "blows up". Bad choice of words on my part

 

I mean frequent track use. As in 10 or more times a year. The cars that I mentioned were dedicated track cars.

 

Correct, I'm not sure what the Rasmussen race car is using as a rev limit but the other two were at 7500 I believe. It was a while ago.

 

Please post the info... thanks

 

This is true. Apparently the company that coats the pulleys for M7 applied the wrong coating. My belt was pretty much destroyed in three weeks and was actually already squeaking after about a week due to the abrasive coating. M7 notified me about the issue before there were any problems - only a few days after the pulley was installed. They replaced the pulley and the belt (at their cost, of course), and now it has been running great for a month or so, including a long track day. The pulley still has a coating, but it's the "correct" one now.

 

Well a month ago when i got to work i noticed a rattling sound coming from the internals of the SC and started to worry because everything else (external) was looking just fine. After work i drive home and the car was running ok (Producing boost) but the rattling sound was getting worst and worst. So i stoped and decide to tow it to my house.

Day after, when i took the SC i found out that one the gears in the secondary housing (The side that move the Water pump) was bended making the SC rods to vibrate and scratch with the walls. I'm at work right now so i'll be posting the pictures for you guys to see it.
Well in my case my car i heavily moded and I use it almost every day and travel like 30 miles to go to work.

 

Just posted in the vendor announcements, a "23%" dyno....

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...050#post579050

 

I'm not an expert, but doesn't the AFR plot at higher rpms indicate that the 380's are too small? Like he said, they got knock. I guess so . Great improvement in TQ when the fuel could keep up.