: pulley questions



lawnstripes
04-29-10, 06:00 PM
I'm trying to understand how the upgrade pullies for the car work.

Can you put a 2.55 pulley on the snout and be done with it?. or do you have to do upper and lower ones together?

or can you change the lower pulley and leave the top one alone? and still get extra boost?

also what is stock boost on these motors?

2.55- i hear is good for 3-4 extra psi (could be wrong)

-is there a list of what the other combos make for psi?


thanks and sorry for all the questions

Joel

newcadman
04-29-10, 06:13 PM
Joel

Don't apologize for asking those pulley questions. That's how we learn!

cbloveday
04-29-10, 06:42 PM
You can do independant of one another or together. I had both done. You will need a tune to get the most out of the mod and have piece of mind knowing the AF is correct. I did both mods. There are members who have done either or both. Some maintain concern over belt slippage with the SC pulley upgrade caust there is less
contact than OEM. Also the upper is permanent.

The lower can be swapped out for larger or smaller fairly easily once the quick change adapter is installed.

You'll have to talk to someone else about differences in boost. Not sure there. Good luck!

lawnstripes
04-29-10, 09:34 PM
Joel

Don't apologize for asking those pulley questions. That's how we learn!

lol- i know...... its been a while since i messed with gas engines.... esp with my old mustang 5.0 with a paxton ball bearing supercharger.

Now turbo diesels i understand..... my DD truck (780hp) did 11.7@119 with small injectors- ive since upgraded the injectors:histeric:

Anyways........
I get and understand the need to tune and have the correct AF ratio---

-the upper 2.55 (to me) seems to be a cheaper/easier upgrade if they all net 3-4 extra psi

my mod ideas are.... intake mod/ pulley of some sort/and tune (hopefully around 500 @wheel)


cbloveday-- you have a bunch of mods--- what are you seeing for psi with the 2.55 and 8.5 pulley?

Gary Wells
04-29-10, 10:07 PM
Curtis will probably disagree with me on this, but as far as what mods to run for how much RWHP, I would pretty much go by what your tuner / installation shop recommends.
If I had Lingenfelter close by, I would have no hesitation having both pulleys or the upper pulley done.......by them, if I was doing the work myself, I would stick with the lower only.
Every installation shop seems to have their own opinion about whether to change the upper pulley.
Most people seem to leave the upper alone.
Another alternative if you are doing the work yourself, or even another shop, would be to send the supercharger to Lingenfelter for them to modify. HTH

cbloveday
04-30-10, 07:29 AM
lol- i know...... its been a while since i messed with gas engines.... esp with my old mustang 5.0 with a paxton ball bearing supercharger.

Now turbo diesels i understand..... my DD truck (780hp) did 11.7@119 with small injectors- ive since upgraded the injectors:histeric:

Anyways........
I get and understand the need to tune and have the correct AF ratio---

-the upper 2.55 (to me) seems to be a cheaper/easier upgrade if they all net 3-4 extra psi

my mod ideas are.... intake mod/ pulley of some sort/and tune (hopefully around 500 @wheel)


cbloveday-- you have a bunch of mods--- what are you seeing for psi with the 2.55 and 8.5 pulley?

14psi

Low_ET
04-30-10, 10:25 AM
I tried to compile all the pulley information from the Forum. Here is what I have so far:

Stock pulley sizes: Crank=8.0", Supercharger=2.95" (I just measured mine with a caliper) Stock SC pulley has been reported as 2 7/8" (2.875") and 3.06" on this forum. That is why I took off my belt and measured mine.

Crank _____SC Pulley___Ratio_______Boost
8.0------------2.95--------2.71--------8.6 psi (stock)
8.0------------2.55--------3.14--------13 psi (change only SC pulley)

8.6------------2.95--------2.92--------10.5 psi (change crank pulley)
8.6------------2.55--------3.37--------14 psi (change both pulleys)

9.1------------2.95--------3.09--------11.5 psi (change crank pulley)
9.1------------2.55--------3.57--------15.5 psi (change both pulleys)

9.6------------2.95--------3.25--------13 psi (change crank pulley)
9.6------------2.55--------3.77--------17 psi (change both pulleys)

10.0-----------2.95--------3.39--------14 psi (change crank pulley)
10.0-----------2.55--------3.92--------18 psi (change both pulleys)

Notes:

The boost values above are claimed by vendors or measured by Forum members. When I found disagreement, I used the Eaton Blower map to try to sort out the most representative numbers.
You can use the stock tune up to a 9" pulley (reported by several members)
The pulley sizes are actually 8.6", 9.1", and 9.55" not 8.5", 9", and 9.5" (Source: Metco)
Above 11 psi you need to cap the "P-Valve" (see other threads on that subject)
The Metco/Innovators West crank pulley set-up uses a hub with changable pulley rings so you can easily change the ratio (boost).
Changing the SC pulley requires removing the SC snout (Wait4me posted a video of the process)
Pulleys 9.6" and above require a smaller belt idler pulley.
Pulley changes 10" and above require fuel system changes.
Stock boost is about 8.6 psi above the intercooler and 7.5 psi below. (those are median values from the many reported readings from other Forum members and myself)


Disclaimer: I have all stock pulleys. Everything I know I learned from this Forum. I welcome additional info and corrections. It would be nice to have it all in one easy place to find.

Vrocks
04-30-10, 11:44 AM
lol- i know...... its been a while since i messed with gas engines.... esp with my old mustang 5.0 with a paxton ball bearing supercharger.

Now turbo diesels i understand..... my DD truck (780hp) did 11.7@119 with small injectors- ive since upgraded the injectors:histeric:

Anyways........
I get and understand the need to tune and have the correct AF ratio---

-the upper 2.55 (to me) seems to be a cheaper/easier upgrade if they all net 3-4 extra psi

my mod ideas are.... intake mod/ pulley of some sort/and tune (hopefully around 500 @wheel)


cbloveday-- you have a bunch of mods--- what are you seeing for psi with the 2.55 and 8.5 pulley?
If you put a 9" lower pulley on and keep the tune / airbox stock you'll be right at 500RWHP.

GMX322V S/C
04-30-10, 12:47 PM
The other thing to keep in mind is stock supercharger's efficiency begins to drop off around the stock redline of 6200 RPM with a 3:1 ratio (~18,000 SC RPM). Beyond this point, you may also want to consider additional charge cooling capacity and porting (snout, body), etc.

Low_ET
04-30-10, 01:06 PM
The other thing to keep in mind is stock supercharger's efficiency begins to drop off around the stock redline of 6200 RPM with a 3:1 ratio (~18,000 SC RPM). Beyond this point, you may also want to consider additional charge cooling capacity and porting (snout, body), etc.

What GMX322V S/C said is very important. The Eaton TVS R1900 Supercharger performance graph is at:
http://www.eaton.com/ecm/groups/public/@pub/@eaton/@per/documents/content/ct_127899.gif
To read it, Pressure Ratio = (14.7 + Boost)/14.7
The dotted lines are blower speed = Engine RPM*Pulley Ratio

From that you can see air flow and pumping efficiency. Loss of efficiency manifests itself as heat (intake charge temperature). The upgraded heat exchanger will help you with the additional heat load

qictrk
04-30-10, 04:52 PM
I tried to compile all the pulley information from the Forum. Here is what I have so far:

Stock pulley sizes: Crank=8.0", Supercharger=2.95" (I just measured mine with a caliper) Stock SC pulley has been reported as 2 7/8" (2.875") and 3.06" on this forum. That is why I took off my belt and measured mine.

Crank _____SC Pulley___Ratio_______Boost
8.0------------2.95--------2.71--------8.6 psi (stock)
8.0------------2.55--------3.14--------13 psi (change only SC pulley)

8.6------------2.95--------2.92--------10.5 psi (change crank pulley)
8.6------------2.55--------3.37--------14 psi (change both pulleys)

9.1------------2.95--------3.09--------11.5 psi (change crank pulley)
9.1------------2.55--------3.57--------15.5 psi (change both pulleys)

9.6------------2.95--------3.25--------13 psi (change crank pulley)
9.6------------2.55--------3.77--------17 psi (change both pulleys)

10.0-----------2.95--------3.39--------14 psi (change crank pulley)
10.0-----------2.55--------3.92--------18 psi (change both pulleys)

Notes:

The boost values above are claimed by vendors or measured by Forum members. When I found disagreement, I used the Eaton Blower map to try to sort out the most representative numbers.
You can use the stock tune up to a 9" pulley (reported by several members)
The pulley sizes are actually 8.6", 9.1", and 9.55" not 8.5", 9", and 9.5" (Source: Metco)
Above 11 psi you need to cap the "P-Valve" (see other threads on that subject)
The Metco/Innovators West crank pulley set-up uses a hub with changable pulley rings so you can easily change the ratio (boost).
Changing the SC pulley requires removing the SC snout (Wait4me posted a video of the process)
Pulleys 9.6" and above require a smaller belt idler pulley.
Pulley changes 10" and above require fuel system changes.
Stock boost is about 8.6 psi above the intercooler and 7.5 psi below. (those are median values from the many reported readings from other Forum members and myself)


Disclaimer: I have all stock pulleys. Everything I know I learned from this Forum. I welcome additional info and corrections. It would be nice to have it all in one easy place to find.
I believe the numbers using a stock SC snout are higher if you have a modified exhaust and air intake. I have most of the pulleys and the boost was about two psi more in each case. Cecil...........

GMX322V S/C
04-30-10, 06:18 PM
^^^
Ah! Good point, Cecil. Opening up the intake should theoretically increase boost (if it's a bottleneck); however, opening up the exhaust/heads/cam could actually lower boost due to less backpressure--even though the engine will be making more power. It's all about minimizing pumping losses...

lawnstripes
05-01-10, 06:02 PM
I tried to compile all the pulley information from the Forum. Here is what I have so far:

Stock pulley sizes: Crank=8.0", Supercharger=2.95" (I just measured mine with a caliper) Stock SC pulley has been reported as 2 7/8" (2.875") and 3.06" on this forum. That is why I took off my belt and measured mine.

Crank _____SC Pulley___Ratio_______Boost
8.0------------2.95--------2.71--------8.6 psi (stock)
8.0------------2.55--------3.14--------13 psi (change only SC pulley)

8.6------------2.95--------2.92--------10.5 psi (change crank pulley)
8.6------------2.55--------3.37--------14 psi (change both pulleys)

9.1------------2.95--------3.09--------11.5 psi (change crank pulley)
9.1------------2.55--------3.57--------15.5 psi (change both pulleys)

9.6------------2.95--------3.25--------13 psi (change crank pulley)
9.6------------2.55--------3.77--------17 psi (change both pulleys)

10.0-----------2.95--------3.39--------14 psi (change crank pulley)
10.0-----------2.55--------3.92--------18 psi (change both pulleys)

Notes:

The boost values above are claimed by vendors or measured by Forum members. When I found disagreement, I used the Eaton Blower map to try to sort out the most representative numbers.
You can use the stock tune up to a 9" pulley (reported by several members)
The pulley sizes are actually 8.6", 9.1", and 9.55" not 8.5", 9", and 9.5" (Source: Metco)
Above 11 psi you need to cap the "P-Valve" (see other threads on that subject)
The Metco/Innovators West crank pulley set-up uses a hub with changable pulley rings so you can easily change the ratio (boost).
Changing the SC pulley requires removing the SC snout (Wait4me posted a video of the process)
Pulleys 9.6" and above require a smaller belt idler pulley.
Pulley changes 10" and above require fuel system changes.
Stock boost is about 8.6 psi above the intercooler and 7.5 psi below. (those are median values from the many reported readings from other Forum members and myself)


Disclaimer: I have all stock pulleys. Everything I know I learned from this Forum. I welcome additional info and corrections. It would be nice to have it all in one easy place to find.

NIce job!!!!!:highfive:


If you put a 9" lower pulley on and keep the tune / airbox stock you'll be right at 500RWHP.

I wouldnt think it would be safe- AF wise- to do the the pulley and keep the stock tune? Yes/ No?

well most pulley/airbox mods/ tune put out 500-550hp so that would be good for me......... i just want SAFE / and RELIABLE!!!!

i would be doing the work good old NH (no ones up here-lol).... but lingenfielder does do the pulley swap/port for you if you buy one of there packages

PremierJosh
12-09-10, 01:33 PM
Yes I dug up a old post but it has very good info. Has anyone had good luck with running a 2.55 upper and a 9.1 lower. Right now I have a 2.55 and 8.6 and like always want a little more.

cbloveday
12-09-10, 01:48 PM
I tried but lost hp with the 9. Here are the 2 runs. One with the 8.x and one with the 9.

May be different on your build FWIW.

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x99/cbloveday_bucket/wait4meinstall/90pulley.jpg

Domsz06
12-09-10, 08:36 PM
lol- i know...... its been a while since i messed with gas engines.... esp with my old mustang 5.0 with a paxton ball bearing supercharger.

Now turbo diesels i understand..... my DD truck (780hp) did 11.7@119 with small injectors- ive since upgraded the injectors:histeric:

Anyways........
I get and understand the need to tune and have the correct AF ratio---

-the upper 2.55 (to me) seems to be a cheaper/easier upgrade if they all net 3-4 extra psi

my mod ideas are.... intake mod/ pulley of some sort/and tune (hopefully around 500 @wheel)


cbloveday-- you have a bunch of mods--- what are you seeing for psi with the 2.55 and 8.5 pulley?

Remember that you have to get the upper pressed on and off so you have to count in for labor, the lower you can do by yourself with some jack stands, and a 10mm socket, pulley puller and a sat.

also the upper will be a dead give away your not stock if your concerned....

Lots of info on this thread, I recommend you use google to search though as this search function doesn't always seem to work.

kirbyCTSV
12-22-10, 12:42 PM
I tried to compile all the pulley information from the Forum. Here is what I have so far:

Stock pulley sizes: Crank=8.0", Supercharger=2.95" (I just measured mine with a caliper) Stock SC pulley has been reported as 2 7/8" (2.875") and 3.06" on this forum. That is why I took off my belt and measured mine.

Crank _____SC Pulley___Ratio_______Boost
8.0------------2.95--------2.71--------8.6 psi (stock)
8.0------------2.55--------3.14--------13 psi (change only SC pulley)

8.6------------2.95--------2.92--------10.5 psi (change crank pulley)
8.6------------2.55--------3.37--------14 psi (change both pulleys)

9.1------------2.95--------3.09--------11.5 psi (change crank pulley)
9.1------------2.55--------3.57--------15.5 psi (change both pulleys)

9.6------------2.95--------3.25--------13 psi (change crank pulley)
9.6------------2.55--------3.77--------17 psi (change both pulleys)

10.0-----------2.95--------3.39--------14 psi (change crank pulley)
10.0-----------2.55--------3.92--------18 psi (change both pulleys)

Notes:

The boost values above are claimed by vendors or measured by Forum members. When I found disagreement, I used the Eaton Blower map to try to sort out the most representative numbers.
You can use the stock tune up to a 9" pulley (reported by several members)
The pulley sizes are actually 8.6", 9.1", and 9.55" not 8.5", 9", and 9.5" (Source: Metco)
Above 11 psi you need to cap the "P-Valve" (see other threads on that subject)
The Metco/Innovators West crank pulley set-up uses a hub with changable pulley rings so you can easily change the ratio (boost).
Changing the SC pulley requires removing the SC snout (Wait4me posted a video of the process)
Pulleys 9.6" and above require a smaller belt idler pulley.
Pulley changes 10" and above require fuel system changes.
Stock boost is about 8.6 psi above the intercooler and 7.5 psi below. (those are median values from the many reported readings from other Forum members and myself)


Disclaimer: I have all stock pulleys. Everything I know I learned from this Forum. I welcome additional info and corrections. It would be nice to have it all in one easy place to find.

would be good to add 2 more columns for avg labor hours and cost of pulley.

Domsz06
12-22-10, 01:24 PM
would be good to add 2 more columns for avg labor hours and cost of pulley.

totally dependant on shop.... least the hours.....

Luna.
12-22-10, 02:12 PM
I've traveled a very significant range in terms of pulley combinations and the biggest/best selection in my mind is going with a 9.5" lower pulley and "opening" the intake and exhaust side up so the air can move (e.g. CAI, full exhaust, ported LS7 TB, etc.). At this point, the blower IS still able to feed the motor with useable air at seemingly both low and higher RPMs; your peak rwhp/rwtq can/will essentially be the same, which is what I shoot for, in general.

I tried the 9.0" lower pulley and 2.55" upper pulley and it DID work for me, but while the rwtq shot up significantly, the peak rwhp did NOT (it increased, but not anywhere near what the rwtq did). I believe the blower simply can't supply the motor with enough useable air at higher RPMs with this combination, even WITH methanol. There doesn't appear to be an easy answer to get useable air through the motor to effectively/efficiently use a 9.0" lower and 2.55" upper.

Stated again, you can do it, it can work, and you will get gains, but it definitely isn't the "best" combination in my humble opinion, as the blower is "tapping out" at higher RPMs.

I would recommend to simply shoot for the 9.5" lower pulley, leave the upper pulley alone, then work on "opening" up the motor, both intake and exhaust, and the motor will breathe nicely. Methanol works really with this combination as well, as the boost is pretty significant. If you don't, you'll lose some timing and, as such, lose HP/TQ.

All considered, at this point, with a manual, you can expect, say, 585 rwhp/rwtq (on a roller/load-cell dyno), which is an awfully nice ride. That's almost 600 rwhp with nothing but bolt-on's...

You can get over 600rwhp with nothing but bolt-ons using the 9.0" lower and 2.55" upper, but expect a big gap between peak rwtq and rwhp...

kirbyCTSV
12-22-10, 02:34 PM
totally dependant on shop.... least the hours.....

True..but there should be a ballpark hr.

aj660
12-24-10, 03:14 AM
I've traveled a very significant range in terms of pulley combinations and the biggest/best selection in my mind is going with a 9.5" lower pulley and "opening" the intake and exhaust side up so the air can move (e.g. CAI, full exhaust, ported LS7 TB, etc.). At this point, the blower IS still able to feed the motor with useable air at seemingly both low and higher RPMs; your peak rwhp/rwtq can/will essentially be the same, which is what I shoot for, in general.

I tried the 9.0" lower pulley and 2.55" upper pulley and it DID work for me, but while the rwtq shot up significantly, the peak rwhp did NOT (it increased, but not anywhere near what the rwtq did). I believe the blower simply can't supply the motor with enough useable air at higher RPMs with this combination, even WITH methanol. There doesn't appear to be an easy answer to get useable air through the motor to effectively/efficiently use a 9.0" lower and 2.55" upper.

Stated again, you can do it, it can work, and you will get gains, but it definitely isn't the "best" combination in my humble opinion, as the blower is "tapping out" at higher RPMs.

I would recommend to simply shoot for the 9.5" lower pulley, leave the upper pulley alone, then work on "opening" up the motor, both intake and exhaust, and the motor will breathe nicely. Methanol works really with this combination as well, as the boost is pretty significant. If you don't, you'll lose some timing and, as such, lose HP/TQ.

All considered, at this point, with a manual, you can expect, say, 585 rwhp/rwtq (on a roller/load-cell dyno), which is an awfully nice ride. That's almost 600 rwhp with nothing but bolt-on's...

You can get over 600rwhp with nothing but bolt-ons using the 9.0" lower and 2.55" upper, but expect a big gap between peak rwtq and rwhp...

I did exactly what you recommend on my V-Coupe and I love it. I went with 9.5" lower, CIA, and tune. My car dynoed at 556rwhp. I decided next month I will buy headers and install into my stock mufflers. I'm also going to swap my 9.5 for a 10" lower. I will probably need larger injectors too but my car should dyno at about 590-610rwhp with the headers and 10" lower. I think this is the most sensible combo for 600 rwhp instead of cams/heads etc....

Luna.
12-25-10, 03:44 PM
I did exactly what you recommend on my V-Coupe and I love it. I went with 9.5" lower, CIA, and tune. My car dynoed at 556rwhp. I decided next month I will buy headers and install into my stock mufflers. I'm also going to swap my 9.5 for a 10" lower. I will probably need larger injectors too but my car should dyno at about 590-610rwhp with the headers and 10" lower. I think this is the most sensible combo for 600 rwhp instead of cams/heads etc....

In my opinion, I wouldn't even waste your time going with a 10" (or larger) lower pulley. I don't believe the 1900 blower can handle it efficiently, at all RPMs. In other words, while you might shoot up your rwtq at mid-range, you'll probably not see the corresponding gains at higher RPMs, as the blower is "tapping out;" it simply seems to be spinning beyond it's efficient capabilities. Further, don't forget to get a serious intercooler, as heat/IATs will likely skyrocket with that much boost & I don't believe there's any question whatsoever you will want to open up the exhaust with headers and such. Even then, you'll probably want to add methanol if you want to get 600+rwhp (roller dyno). I have a manual transmission and that number isn't easy to crack at all.

If you want more boost above the 9.5" lower, I would simply recommend changing blowers and going with the 2300. The damn thing will probably be yawning with the amount of boost that many of us are shooting for anyways, which is a good thing, from many perspectives. Then, the world is your oyster. :)

aj660
12-26-10, 08:16 AM
In my opinion, I wouldn't even waste your time going with a 10" (or larger) lower pulley. I don't believe the 1900 blower can handle it efficiently, at all RPMs. In other words, while you might shoot up your rwtq at mid-range, you'll probably not see the corresponding gains at higher RPMs, as the blower is "tapping out;" it simply seems to be spinning beyond it's efficient capabilities. Further, don't forget to get a serious intercooler, as heat/IATs will likely skyrocket with that much boost & I don't believe there's any question whatsoever you will want to open up the exhaust with headers and such. Even then, you'll probably want to add methanol if you want to get 600+rwhp (roller dyno). I have a manual transmission and that number isn't easy to crack at all.

If you want more boost above the 9.5" lower, I would simply recommend changing blowers and going with the 2300. The damn thing will probably be yawning with the amount of boost that many of us are shooting for anyways, which is a good thing, from many perspectives. Then, the world is your oyster. :)

Thanks, I appreciate your response. I actually thought about my options quite a bit before I decided to go with the 10" lower (my upper is stock). I recently purchased the parts from Jesse, but I didn't install yet. I'm getting AR headers next week and then I'll have everything installed at the same time.

I can't recall, but there is an active member on this forum who switched to a 10" lower from a 9.5 and gained 30rwhp; he seems pretty happy with the swap to 10" from 9.5". I also recently spoke with a member who switched from a 9" to a 10" lower (stock upper) and he had only positive things to say. Jesse also told me that a 10" lower should be fine as long as the upper is stock. I'm definitely going with larger injectors + headers and I'll stop there. If necessary for whatever reason, I can always switch the 10" ring back to the 9.5".

I agree that changing blowers is probably the better option; however, I don't want to spend the money right now on a new blower. I'm spending less than $1000 for the 10" ring, larger injectors, and re-tuned on dyno. The headers are pricey, but I'd be spending money on headers either way. I'm going to pass on the Methanol for now. If necessary, then maybe I'll do it. Many people here have 600+rwhp and don't use Meth. I'm not racing my car and I never go to a track etc... I like having the power but I don't use it all the time.

wait4me
12-26-10, 09:08 AM
Yeah i havent heard anything bad nor have i seen any loss in power from the 10inch kits. I sell the kits all the time with 0 issues. It is a much better route to go instead of making the upper pulley smaller with less belt grip.



I havent seen any positive proof of a tvs2300 zr1 blower showing any gains either... The added horsepower needed to turn, the need for larger pulley ribs, and more parasitic loss, isnt worth it on most if not all the caddies out there.. A kenne bell or Procharger/turbo would be a better route.

I know of a few people that went that route, and ended up pulling them off and putting the 1900 back on...

Luna.
12-26-10, 01:04 PM
Yeah i havent heard anything bad nor have i seen any loss in power from the 10inch kits. I sell the kits all the time with 0 issues.

I didn't say loss in power, anywhere.



It is a much better route to go instead of making the upper pulley smaller with less belt grip.

Unless one is concerned about the pressure put on the crank snout with a 10" or larger crank pulley.



I havent seen any positive proof of a tvs2300 zr1 blower showing any gains either... The added horsepower needed to turn, the need for larger pulley ribs, and more parasitic loss, isnt worth it on most if not all the caddies out there..

I never said tvs2300 ZR-1 blower, maybe I was referring to, say, a Magnason 2300 blower.

In any case, you're right; most caddies out there aren't doing the radical mods needed to get the power that might be available from a 2300 blower.

For those people that are radically modifying their cars, however, it should become at least something to consider. By definition, a 2300 blower will flow more air than a 1900 blower, which clearly is being pushed past it's efficient limits with a 9"0/2.5" upper or ~10" lower pulley configurations. With the right pieces, yeah, an upgrade in superchargers, including a 2300, might be a wise mod to make.


A kenne bell or Procharger/turbo would be a better route.

The point is that an upgrade in blower might be a good option when shooting for very high levels of boost. So, yes, if these supercharges blow your hair back, have at it.

kirbyCTSV
12-26-10, 05:06 PM
so it looks like a 9.5" lower is equivalent to 2.55" upper in power increase. So is the difference basically upper is lower overall cost (price+install) but has higher chance of belt slip vs lower which is easier to revert back to stock but costs more? Are there any other things to consider when choosing which route to go?

PremierJosh
12-26-10, 05:17 PM
The 9.5 gives you slightly more than a 2.55 but damn close. It's best to decide how far you plan to go before you start buying parts. I know goals and plans change but if you know you are one to never have enough just go ahead and do lower only. If you are happy to have a kick ass V that is very effecent, cost effective, but not the fastest V on earth then the upper has a place.

Bushidopupil
12-26-10, 05:25 PM
Well said PremierJosh...I say all out or nothing ;-)

Everyone has different goals though.

6speeder
12-27-10, 08:46 AM
I agree with Josh, I'm putting on the 2.55 which looks just like stock until you go through the trouble of micing it, and a tune. Period. Will be a fast sleeper.:cool2:

PremierJosh
12-27-10, 09:11 AM
Guys I'm not suggesting that doing more than a upper pulley is a waste by any means. I was just stating that the upper combo has its place for some people. I'm one that fits into the never enough catigory. I have 2.55 upper, 8.6 lower, custom heat exchanger, mild but high lift camshaft (.660 lift), cutouts, and drag radials. Since our local track Memphis is going to reopen I will continue with ported heads, ported blower, meth, and probably at some point nitrous.

Ross L
12-27-10, 09:55 AM
Josh, do you think the meth/alcohol injection can "extend" the efficiency of the 1900 blower to say,,,, 18 psi(assuming a pulley arrangement to allow it). It sure seems to work for turbo applications.
Ross

wait4me
12-27-10, 10:34 AM
Turbos are not effected as much from liquid volume entering the inlet like a Roots style supercharger. This rotor type blower has a more restricted inlet that needs all the air it can get and anything else being sucked thru it takes up that precious volume of air that it needs.

This can be seen on a large cube engine using this blower "one of my personal cars" , and the horsepower wall it hits at various conditions. Like a 300 shot of nitrous wet kit, and it only adding 235 hp to the wheels, then putting a 250 shot on it and it makes the exact same horsepower with no other changes. BUT change the blower to a stock ls3 intake and put on a f1 and totally different. As the liquid doesnt have to be compressed thru the blower itself taking up that precious intake volume, then you see that same 300 shot makes 328 extra...

stuv
12-27-10, 09:41 PM
Drove my 09 red V for the first time today and I am still smiling:bouncy:! So can you run the 9.5 pulley with the stock tune? I dont wnt to change the stock tune yet. If so what are the options for vendors?

Bushidopupil
12-27-10, 10:19 PM
Drove my 09 red V for the first time today and I am still smiling:bouncy:! So can you run the 9.5 pulley with the stock tune? I dont wnt to change the stock tune yet. If so what are the options for vendors?

If you live any where near Indiana, check out Jesse, Wait4me Performance. I hear very good things about him. ;-)

kirbyCTSV
12-27-10, 10:35 PM
Drove my 09 red V for the first time today and I am still smiling:bouncy:! So can you run the 9.5 pulley with the stock tune? I dont wnt to change the stock tune yet. If so what are the options for vendors?
you dont want to change pullies without a tune....gotta correct the air/fuel ratio.

stuv
12-27-10, 10:39 PM
Thanks but I live in great falls Mt. and no access to a dyno. I thought there wire guys running the 9.5 with the stock tune.

kirbyCTSV
12-27-10, 10:41 PM
if u ok with changing a pulley why r u not ok with a tune to correct the A/F?

aj660
12-27-10, 10:45 PM
Unless one is concerned about the pressure put on the crank snout with a 10" or larger crank pulley.

.

I was under the impression that the gain in boost is only about 1 psi after switching to 10" from 9.5" with the stock upper. I am not very familiar with this stuff, so I listen to other members that have done it and I try to learn. If lots of people are happy with the 10" lower/stock upper combo and none of them had problems, then I'm willing to give it a shot instead of buying a new supercharger. If something happens, then I'll fix it and put the 9.5" back on.

stuv
12-27-10, 10:56 PM
I was assuming the boost increase was minimmul and the computer with the stock tune would compensate for the increase in boost. If this is incorrect I would send the ECM in for recallibration, but will probably wait.Would like to get to know the car a little better before throwing my warranty away. Dont think our dealer here would notice a different lower pulley but an ECM change is hard to miss and would likely void any powertrain warranty.

Domsz06
12-28-10, 09:10 AM
I was assuming the boost increase was minimmul and the computer with the stock tune would compensate for the increase in boost. If this is incorrect I would send the ECM in for recallibration, but will probably wait.Would like to get to know the car a little better before throwing my warranty away. Dont think our dealer here would notice a different lower pulley but an ECM change is hard to miss and would likely void any powertrain warranty.

No can't run 9.5 with stock tune, talk to jesse at wait for me and he can mail you a tune since you don't have a dyno and then if you have an issue you can go back to stock.... :)

Luna.
12-28-10, 02:33 PM
I was under the impression that the gain in boost is only about 1 psi after switching to 10" from 9.5" with the stock upper. I am not very familiar with this stuff, so I listen to other members that have done it and I try to learn. If lots of people are happy with the 10" lower/stock upper combo and none of them had problems, then I'm willing to give it a shot instead of buying a new supercharger. If something happens, then I'll fix it and put the 9.5" back on.

Potential issues that may arise from using a 10" lower pulley wouldn't necessarily rear their ugly heads immediately; it would more likely show up later in the engine's life.

That seems like a lot of mass on the snout of the crankshaft that not only needs to be accelerated to peak RPM, but it also needs to be slowed from such high RPM; something has to absorb that.

Don't take my word for it though, talk to engine engineers or those that specifically interact with engine engineers. My understanding is that many/most cringe at the idea of a 9.5", to say nothing about a 10" pulley. (on a related note, I'm still woefully confused as to how you'd fit a friggin 10" pulley anyways. A 9.5" almost kisses the AC line as is, so a 10" is surely going to force such AC line to be moved/adjusted in some manner, which doesn't seem like a cheap & easy process to me, but...)

Further, as stated above, a 10" pulley is probably going to be spinning the stock supercharger way past its efficient range, causing unwanted issues, like heat and such.

At the end of the day though, it's your car, so if you are comfortable with the risk, knock yourself out.

I would simply ask yourself what your goal is. If you want 585rwhp/rwtq (roller dyno, manual trans) or less, you can probably get there with the 9.5" pulley and other mods. If you want more power than that, then I'd strongly consider revising your budget. Just my humble opinion, of course.

And, on an unrelated note, I would never recommend a mail-order tune. Get your car in front of the tuner, it's a much, much better answer. So much so, I'd personally hold off on doing any mods until a tuner could look at it immediately after the installation of said mods. Note that some tuners don't even use a dyno and can tune the car while driving it.

Bushidopupil
12-28-10, 04:36 PM
First, I'm a new V owner, and I am learning the platform. Second, I still have A LOT to learn, but this statement has me baffeled "some tuners don't even use a dyno and can tune the car while driving it". I hope you mean, drive it, then stop and make some adjustments, drive then repeat...I am assuming that is what you meant. Again I know very little about the V platform. I have datalogged other platforms, stopped and made adjustments and then back to driving, but have never heard of making adjustments WHILE driving.

I just want to make sure you convey your information as intended.
Thank you for your knowledge and input on the pulleys. I have read this thread a few times already.

cbloveday
12-28-10, 05:17 PM
He must be referring to diving it and then stopping to make adjustments. I had this done on srt8 and you have to cycle the key to upload changes to the tune.

Dr. Design
12-28-10, 05:36 PM
These are all really good points for anyone looking to modify their V's.

There is an EXTREME amount of force being exerted on the interface of the crank snout and the balancer hub. Not to mention you have increased the leverage of the forces being exerted on the crank snout. There are also the increases in rotational masses that will become more prevalent when you try to measure the increase in parasitic losses. There are some pretty heavy pullies out there in the market. There is a "weight" penalty that is not being addressed.

Looking at the application. A 10" pulley looks like it will basically hit everything. There are a couple of hard AC lines that are present. Unless you are bending the lines back (fatiguing the thin walled tubing) and potentially increasing the likely hood of blowing an AC line down the road, leaking R34 into the atmosphere I cant see how it is done properly. Unless someone has designed a proper bracket to relocate the line or provided a newly designed hardline I cant see how it is done properly (zip ties don't count!). Either way, there is no proper way of doing this, not to mentioned the issues from an engineering standpoint....

It should also be mentioned that anyone looking to go to a 2.55 upper, we like to point out that it is considered a NON-Servicable part. This means that the supercharger cannot be returned back to factory without finger prints and indication that the vehicle has been modified. If your service rep is cool with that, then have at it. But for those that were not aware of that, please do take this into consideration before making that decision. We make sure we disclose this information to all or our customers.

Thank you,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac






Potential issues that may arise from using a 10" lower pulley wouldn't necessarily rear their ugly heads immediately; it would more likely show up later in the engine's life.

That seems like a lot of mass on the snout of the crankshaft that not only needs to be accelerated to peak RPM, but it also needs to be slowed from such high RPM; something has to absorb that.

Don't take my word for it though, talk to engine engineers or those that specifically interact with engine engineers. My understanding is that many/most cringe at the idea of a 9.5", to say nothing about a 10" pulley. (on a related note, I'm still woefully confused as to how you'd fit a friggin 10" pulley anyways. A 9.5" almost kisses the AC line as is, so a 10" is surely going to force such AC line to be moved/adjusted in some manner, which doesn't seem like a cheap & easy process to me, but...)

Further, as stated above, a 10" pulley is probably going to be spinning the stock supercharger way past its efficient range, causing unwanted issues, like heat and such.

At the end of the day though, it's your car, so if you are comfortable with the risk, knock yourself out.

I would simply ask yourself what your goal is. If you want 585rwhp/rwtq (roller dyno, manual trans) or less, you can probably get there with the 9.5" pulley and other mods. If you want more power than that, then I'd strongly consider revising your budget. Just my humble opinion, of course.

And, on an unrelated note, I would never recommend a mail-order tune. Get your car in front of the tuner, it's a much, much better answer. So much so, I'd personally hold off on doing any mods until a tuner could look at it immediately after the installation of said mods. Note that some tuners don't even use a dyno and can tune the car while driving it.

Dr. Design
12-28-10, 05:44 PM
Hello,
Meth will increase the efficiency of the supercharger range. But even so you are still fighting an uphill battle. There becomes a point where even meth cannot stave off the thermal efficiency losses at the top end. Also that threshold is a few PSI back than 18.... There are few ways to get around the thermal efficiency losses. They can become costly and extensive. You will eventually need to ask yourself if the 1900TVS blower is still adequate for your demands.

Maybe time to start looking at other combination's like our customers that are looking for more HP than what the 1900 can provide...


Thank you,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac


Josh, do you think the meth/alcohol injection can "extend" the efficiency of the 1900 blower to say,,,, 18 psi(assuming a pulley arrangement to allow it). It sure seems to work for turbo applications.
Ross

snzuloz
12-28-10, 05:59 PM
Luna are you sponsoring D3's lower pulley setup? Kind of sounds like it. How much mass difference could there possibly be from a 9.5 to a 10" ring? Most of the hub weight is in the center area of the pulley/hub as well (not slung around on the outside diameter)...

How many people have the 10" setup and how is it working for you?

Luna.
12-28-10, 06:37 PM
First, I'm a new V owner, and I am learning the platform. Second, I still have A LOT to learn, but this statement has me baffeled "some tuners don't even use a dyno and can tune the car while driving it". I hope you mean, drive it, then stop and make some adjustments, drive then repeat...I am assuming that is what you meant.

Absolutely. Apologies if I wasn't clear there. Of course, they are going to stop, make adjustments, drive more, evaluate, etc. :)

I don't think it's possible to upload changes while driving the car.

Luna.
12-28-10, 07:02 PM
Luna are you sponsoring D3's lower pulley setup? Kind of sounds like it.

Huh? :hmm:

Let me get this straight...

I've gone from the 9.0" lower pulley, to the 9.5", then BACK to the 9.0", but used in conjunction with the 2.55" upper. The fact that I opted to go with a 2.55" upper pulley is especially interesting, as you're talking to someone who is painfully worried about belt-slip, as I suffered belt-slip on my V1 with the upper 2.6" pulley with Magnacharger (I eventually yanked the 2.6" pulley and went with the 8" lower pulley). As such, the mere fact that didn't go with the 10" pulley strongly suggests I really believe what I'm typing here.

To top it all off, I didn't even MENTION D3 AT ALL in ANY of my replies.

And this suggests a pattern in which I'm sponsoring D3's lower pulley setup??

SERIOUSLY?? :nono:

If anything, that patterns suggests I'm a moron 10-fold than that of being biased towards D3's lower pulley setup.

Besides, EVEN IF I was being biased, what's it to you? Seemingly 1/2 the god-da*n threads on this forum say, "Talk to Jesse!" yet no one calls them out for being biased towards him. You're dealing with someone who's about as unbiased as they come, as I have had 4 different shops work on my Vs, 5 if you include the dealer.

Maybe--JUST MAYBE--I don't have an agenda. Maybe I'm simply trying to share my experiences so that everyone can learn. Maybe I'm trying to be helpful and contribute to the forums...

I remain...just stunned...

If some of you don't like my thoughts, fu*k 'em; install the 10" pulley and have a fu*king field day. It's your god-da*n car, do whatever the hell you want.

Ross L
12-28-10, 09:04 PM
I have the 2.55 upper and stock lower. My upper was pressed on( not pinned) only. I haven't had any issue with belt or pulley slip. *shows* a little over 12psi on the factory gauge.:thumbsup:

Bushidopupil
12-28-10, 09:39 PM
Absolutely. Apologies if I wasn't clear there. Of course, they are going to stop, make adjustments, drive more, evaluate, etc. :)

I don't think it's possible to upload changes while driving the car.

No apologies needed, just didn't want anyone (including me) to get confused. I thought that was what you meant, just making sure. I appreciate anyone on the forum who is going to test a product from any vendor and report back with their results. It gives others a baseline to determine what they may want to do with their car. People can say what they want, but if someone has experience in an area, I will at the very least listen to them. Gather info and make the most informed decision, that has seemed to work well for me in the past. Again, thanks for giving us your history with the different pulley setups.

B

neuronbob
12-28-10, 09:47 PM
Just read through the thread. I have the upper pulley only, with tune, CAI, exhaust. I now have 7000 miles on the combination and absolutely no belt slippage, ever. I felt the upper was a cost-effective and quick upgrade. It helped that Jesse and his crew installed it.

Just adding a data point. I'm not trying (yet) to own the fastest V, and I am satisfied with the feel this particular mod gives the car.

Domsz06
12-28-10, 09:50 PM
These are all really good points for anyone looking to modify their V's.

There is an EXTREME amount of force being exerted on the interface of the crank snout and the balancer hub. Not to mention you have increased the leverage of the forces being exerted on the crank snout. There are also the increases in rotational masses that will become more prevalent when you try to measure the increase in parasitic losses. There are some pretty heavy pullies out there in the market. There is a "weight" penalty that is not being addressed.

Looking at the application. A 10" pulley looks like it will basically hit everything. There are a couple of hard AC lines that are present. Unless you are bending the lines back (fatiguing the thin walled tubing) and potentially increasing the likely hood of blowing an AC line down the road, leaking R34 into the atmosphere I cant see how it is done properly. Unless someone has designed a proper bracket to relocate the line or provided a newly designed hardline I cant see how it is done properly (zip ties don't count!). Either way, there is no proper way of doing this, not to mentioned the issues from an engineering standpoint....

It should also be mentioned that anyone looking to go to a 2.55 upper, we like to point out that it is considered a NON-Servicable part. This means that the supercharger cannot be returned back to factory without finger prints and indication that the vehicle has been modified. If your service rep is cool with that, then have at it. But for those that were not aware of that, please do take this into consideration before making that decision. We make sure we disclose this information to all or our customers.

Thank you,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

not sure what 10" ring your using but there will be plenty of room in my bay for a 10" (by plenty I mean no bending of lines. Just moving what they are tied down to. Yes it's tight, but lots of room. More room then the 92 mm TB and the top belts)

also the stock pulley weighs 2 lbs (if i recall correctly) more then the 9.55 set up when I weighed it......:confused: (I'll reweight to confirm, but if someone has their stock pulley weigh it, and I'll weight the 9.55 that is sitting in a box in my garage. It weighs in at.....12 lbs. Stock weighs in at 16 pounds... so it's 4 lbs lighter..... so no extra weight on the crank snout.


LOL I find this funny that here the Dr. is harping at us about the extra weight that the pulleys add to the crank snout, yet here in his words his pulley weighs in at 5 lbs less then stock. So I'm assuming that he is saying that all the other "Non CNC'd" pullies (aka everyone but D3) weighs in more then stock and will create more stress on the crank snout.....

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/176584-2009-cadillac-cts-v-crank-pulley.html

Come on someone, weigh your stock set up.

snzuloz
12-29-10, 03:07 PM
Huh? :hmm:

Let me get this straight...

I've gone from the 9.0" lower pulley, to the 9.5", then BACK to the 9.0", but used in conjunction with the 2.55" upper. The fact that I opted to go with a 2.55" upper pulley is especially interesting, as you're talking to someone who is painfully worried about belt-slip, as I suffered belt-slip on my V1 with the upper 2.6" pulley with Magnacharger (I eventually yanked the 2.6" pulley and went with the 8" lower pulley). As such, the mere fact that didn't go with the 10" pulley strongly suggests I really believe what I'm typing here.

To top it all off, I didn't even MENTION D3 AT ALL in ANY of my replies.

And this suggests a pattern in which I'm sponsoring D3's lower pulley setup??

SERIOUSLY?? :nono:

If anything, that patterns suggests I'm a moron 10-fold than that of being biased towards D3's lower pulley setup.

Besides, EVEN IF I was being biased, what's it to you? Seemingly 1/2 the god-da*n threads on this forum say, "Talk to Jesse!" yet no one calls them out for being biased towards him. You're dealing with someone who's about as unbiased as they come, as I have had 4 different shops work on my Vs, 5 if you include the dealer.

Maybe--JUST MAYBE--I don't have an agenda. Maybe I'm simply trying to share my experiences so that everyone can learn. Maybe I'm trying to be helpful and contribute to the forums...

I remain...just stunned...

If some of you don't like my thoughts, fu*k 'em; install the 10" pulley and have a fu*king field day. It's your god-da*n car, do whatever the hell you want.

Before you burst a vein by getting all worked up, it just seemed funny that after your response D3 would chime in about the negative effects of the 10" setup. Let me say this, we are talking about the difference from you running a 9.5 compared to a 10" ring (I know you currently are using the 9.0" lower), remember that the radius (not diameter) is being affected by the extra size of the pulley (so 1/2 inch is going to cause catastrophic failure down the road?) I'm quite sure if you are not using the D3 hub assembly that you have the Metco unit, which I'm quite sure is like splitting hairs in weight differential between the 9.0" and 10" unit.

As far as extra load, has anyone actually had any bearing related issues or crank snout issues? I personally have never heard of any issues with these as of yet.

Has someone weighed the stock hub/pulley arrangement and compared it to the other units?

Luna.
12-29-10, 03:21 PM
LOL I find this funny that here the Dr. is harping at us about the extra weight that the pulleys add to the crank snout, yet here in his words his pulley weighs in at 5 lbs less then stock. So I'm assuming that he is saying that all the other "Non CNC'd" pullies (aka everyone but D3) weighs in more then stock and will create more stress on the crank snout.....

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/176584-2009-cadillac-cts-v-crank-pulley.html


Nonsense. That's not what he said, nor is that what he's saying. Your entire reply here is a Strawman argument, to say nothing about the fact that he's referring to a 10" pulley in this thread, not a 9.5" pulley in the one you quoted.

Hell, I probably am wrong in the way I described my concerns than they are or what he said above.



Come on someone, weigh your stock set up.

Yeah, because if the numbers come in the way you want them to, that will prove that they are an evil organization, out to fu*k all their customers & provide bad information on a public forum. What better way to generate revenue than that??

I'm been on this forum (or the V1 forum) since 2005 and I've NEVER seen a vendor take as much sh*t from a certain group of people as D3 does on this forum.

WTF? Did D3 employees have relations with your wives/girlfriends or something? Piss in your morning orange juice?

Give it rest for Christ's sake... :bigroll:

It makes absolutely no difference to me if D3 makes $10M per annum or loses $10M per annum. I have no financial stake in that company; I'm simply one of their customers (and they AREN'T the only vendor I use at this time either, as discussed above). It just gets exhausting reading the same bullsh*t, over and over. Some on this forum are so biased, it's pathetic. And I thought the V1 forums were bad; some on this board make that look like a picnic...

Domsz06
12-29-10, 03:38 PM
Nonsense. That's not what he said, nor is that what he's saying. Your entire reply here is a Strawman argument, to say nothing about the fact that he's referring to a 10" pulley in this thread, not a 9.5" pulley in the one you quoted.

A 10" and 9.55 weigh just about the same. It's just one pulley swich out. ZERO difference. As far as the whole a 10" won't fit, have you looked? I personally have been under the hood and car and know for a fact that a 10" will fit without ANY problems. All it has to do is relocate the idler pulley. Jesse said in another thread he has 43 people running the 10", really an issue? I have not heard of any have you?Hell, I probably am wrong in the way I described my concerns than they are or what he said above.

To be clear I have nothing against D3 or you Luna, my one time experience was great, they sent me Tony's spring covers he never got and I have personally never bought anything direcdtly from them so from my one time experience they have provided me great customer service. I enjoy reading your posts and your information.




Yeah, because if the numbers come in the way you want them to, that will prove that they are an evil organization, out to fu*k all their customers & provide bad information on a public forum. What better way to generate revenue than that??

based on the thread from d3, his pulley would weigh 11
Metco weighs 12.
Stock weighs 16
so no extra stress on the crank snout, if anything it makes it easier on the snout.

I'm been on this forum (or the V1 forum) since 2005 and I've NEVER seen a vendor take as much sh*t from a certain group of people as D3 does on this forum.

again I have nothing against it. I believe the reason d3 takes so much crap is for a few reasons:

1) Price. They are easily 3 times higher then anyone else out there and the v2 crowd tends to be a picky crowd, ESPECIALLY the v1 crowd (cheap is the word used on ls1tech for v1 guys)

2) They always like to justify the cost for their "CNC and blueprinted" comment. To most that means nothing.

3) Lots of times/complaints is they never answer calls or emails and only the customers that are there in the shop get the service

4) they sneak out products then NEVER EVER EVER produce them or do we see them

5) They put out claims without any facts (although they are not the only vendor to do this on this forum and the one's that do really chap my ARSE!!

WTF? Did D3 employees have relations with your wives/girlfriends or something? Piss in your morning orange juice?

Give it rest for Christ's sake... :bigroll:

It makes absolutely no difference to me if D3 makes $10M per annum or loses $10M per annum. I have no financial stake in that company; I'm simply one of their customers (and they AREN'T the only vendor I use at this time either, as discussed above). It just gets exhausting reading the same bullsh*t, over and over. Some on this forum are so biased, it's pathetic. And I thought the V1 forums were bad; some on this board make that look like a picnic...

there ya go.

Domsz06
12-29-10, 03:45 PM
These are all really good points for anyone looking to modify their V's.

There is an EXTREME amount of force being exerted on the interface of the crank snout and the balancer hub. Not to mention you have increased the leverage of the forces being exerted on the crank snout. There are also the increases in rotational masses that will become more prevalent when you try to measure the increase in parasitic losses. There are some pretty heavy pullies out there in the market. There is a "weight" penalty that is not being addressed.

Looking at the application. A 10" pulley looks like it will basically hit everything. There are a couple of hard AC lines that are present. Unless you are bending the lines back (fatiguing the thin walled tubing) and potentially increasing the likely hood of blowing an AC line down the road, leaking R34 into the atmosphere I cant see how it is done properly. Unless someone has designed a proper bracket to relocate the line or provided a newly designed hardline I cant see how it is done properly (zip ties don't count!). Either way, there is no proper way of doing this, not to mentioned the issues from an engineering standpoint....

It should also be mentioned that anyone looking to go to a 2.55 upper, we like to point out that it is considered a NON-Servicable part. This means that the supercharger cannot be returned back to factory without finger prints and indication that the vehicle has been modified. If your service rep is cool with that, then have at it. But for those that were not aware of that, please do take this into consideration before making that decision. We make sure we disclose this information to all or our customers.

Thank you,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

This was the comment I was trying to make, not sure if I miss explained it or what happened but he says there is a weight force not being factored in due to the heavy pullies, yet in his thread he says the D3 is lighter, 5 lbs. I'm simply saying that metco's is 12 lbs, with a 9" ring, 9.55, or 10" and D3's 9.55 is 11 lbs. SO the 10" will not have a heavier weight on the snout.

Also, with the bigger ring now the crank still spins the same, but spins the top pulley faster. So there will be no extra forces on the crank. If any the larger pulley will make the crank have less stress then factory since it weighs in at 16 pounds.

Again, I'm not bashing D3. If it comes out that way I'm sorry as I didn't mean it. Just point out facts.

Dr. Design
12-29-10, 03:59 PM
I don't see what is funny about someone bringing up, what should be valid concerns from most of you on the forums, and us reinforcing those same concerns. What seems funny to me is that some people are willing to slap on generic parts onto their cars and think, "since there have been reportedly no "failures" it must be okay to install on my car!!" The failures would take time to show themselves. Let's check back in a few ten thousand miles, or a few years from now. Send your crank out and have it magnafluxed, check the bearings, etc... At the end of the day you guys can do whatever you want to your cars and install whatever generic parts you can slap onto your LS motor.

Why stop at 10", lets see what happens when you put a 11" on there? The car would make great torque down low and fall off before it even hits 4500RPM, but if it fits, then it must be good. Have you ever used a torque wrench or breaker bar? Do you notice that the longer arm you use for leverage increases the the amount of force you can exert on the bolt you are trying to break lose or tighten? The supercharger is trying to do the same thing, but to the crank snout. You putting a 10" pulley on increases the leverage point giving more ability for the supercharger to do damage to the crank snout.

But hey, it's your car and you can do what you want to it. Installing quality parts like that will only add to the resale value of the car down the line...

We did weight ours before we started advertising what the weight difference was. We are 5 lbs lighter than factory and much stronger! As for other companies products and their weight, that's a good question...

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac



Before you burst a vein by getting all worked up, it just seemed funny that after your response D3 would chime in about the negative effects of the 10" setup. Let me say this, we are talking about the difference from you running a 9.5 compared to a 10" ring (I know you currently are using the 9.0" lower), remember that the radius (not diameter) is being affected by the extra size of the pulley (so 1/2 inch is going to cause catastrophic failure down the road?) I'm quite sure if you are not using the D3 hub assembly that you have the Metco unit, which I'm quite sure is like splitting hairs in weight differential between the 9.0" and 10" unit.

As far as extra load, has anyone actually had any bearing related issues or crank snout issues? I personally have never heard of any issues with these as of yet.

Has someone weighed the stock hub/pulley arrangement and compared it to the other units?

Luna.
12-29-10, 04:24 PM
Thanks for the respectful reply, Domsz06. I found much of it interesting.

EDIT: I just thought about this and I realize this is a major thread-jack. Humble apologies ahead of time...


A 10" and 9.55 weigh just about the same. It's just one pulley swich out. ZERO difference. As far as the whole a 10" won't fit, have you looked? I personally have been under the hood and car and know for a fact that a 10" will fit without ANY problems. All it has to do is relocate the idler pulley. Jesse said in another thread he has 43 people running the 10", really an issue? I have not heard of any have you?

Yeah, I looked, very closely, and it looked like a tough fit to me, but I'm not an expert by any means, so my opinion on this means little... /shrug



again I have nothing against it. I believe the reason d3 takes so much crap is for a few reasons:

1) Price. They are easily 3 times higher then anyone else out there and the v2 crowd tends to be a picky crowd, ESPECIALLY the v1 crowd (cheap is the word used on ls1tech for v1 guys)

2) They always like to justify the cost for their "CNC and blueprinted" comment. To most that means nothing.

3) Lots of times/complaints is they never answer calls or emails and only the customers that are there in the shop get the service

4) they sneak out products then NEVER EVER EVER produce them or do we see them

5) They put out claims without any facts (although they are not the only vendor to do this on this forum and the one's that do really chap my ARSE!!

This is the part of the reply I found really interesting.

1) and 2) are basically the same &, if that's an issue to some, that's fine. While I find it pretty strange, if not retarded, for someone to be "cheap" yet be driving a, say, ~$70k car, I honestly don't necessarily disagree.

However, as stated above, I work and have worked with several shops in the So. Cal area and their customer service is right at the top in my mind. I'm a professional and they treat me as such, including listening to me not only shoot meaningless sh*t for way too long, but also answer my seemingly endless questions.

Want to know something I like about them? While they have good expertise, they don't know everything and will admit such right up front. But they have a pretty serious pool of experts that they tap into and that's the part I really like; you often get opinions of people that are specific to the issue at hand, instead of a jack-of-all-trades, master of none scenario.

3)...I gotta be honest, this one made me laugh out loud in my office. Really? I guess I've been asleep at the wheel, but I can't recall enough threads to get off 1 hand (hell, I can't think of any off the top of my head) where people have bitched at D3 for lack of getting back to them. Compare this to some other vendors on this forum where that's seemingly a weekly/monthly occurrence. As for me, I can say this without hesitation: I've NEVER had a significant issue related to them not getting back to me on a timely basis.

4) I just don't understand at all. What products are you referring to?

5) Similar to #4. What claims have been totally false? What's really interesting, if not 100% inconsistent, is that I don't recall any of D3's tunes getting trashed, especially to "that extent" that recently took place on this forum or patently incorrect comments like you can't use a boost-a-pump on our cars or anything like that, but that doesn't stop people from loving certain, other vendors... That's strikingly inconsistent in my opinion, which seems strange, if not completely stupid. This inconsistency is the part that drives me crazy (short-trip). If all vendors were treated substantially the same, that would make logical sense. It doesn't seem that way to me though, which is pretty much the only reason why I chime in to begin with...

Dr. Design
12-29-10, 04:28 PM
Your comments highlighted in bold are incorrect. Its not just about the weight. It is the forces and leverage against the crank/balancer interface. We would still have the same stance if the aftermarket pulley weighed 8 lbs. total @ 10" dia. The problem is that is too much leverage on the crank snout. That's not marketing BS, just facts. As I am sure you are aware, we could have come out with a 10" pulley a long time ago. We could have engineered proper relocation brackets, new hard lines for the AC, and provided a new idler to release a 10" pulley. And guess what, it would have been VERY light. There has to be a reason why we didn't, right? As a matter of fact, we just got finished machining up a 7" and 7.5" pulley for the LSA application. We have sold and installed hundreds of pullies in the 9" and 9.5" variant. All we have to do is a quick email blast to our current customer list and let them know about the new 10" magic pulley and we would be booked for a month. But we didn't because our engineering team didn't think it would be safe for this application. If you want to talk about the facts, those are the facts.

As for all of our fancy blueprinting and CNC work we are so fond of. Yeah, we go the extra mile to make sure everything is done to the engineering tolerances the factory has set out for your car. Could we get away with less, sure? But why compromise quality & engineering when you don't have to? This is a Cadillac, right? Our customers don't ask for a little less quality please, or can you give that part to me less all the engineering that went into it? Not to mention anything about having adequate and proper product liability insurance? The dealerships we work with require us to have proper business structures in place or they wont even take your phone call. Not to mention anything that we do with GM direct. We have made great strides in being competitive with our prices without compromising the quality or integrity of our parts. Sure everyone wants 5% over cost and the cheapest price possible. But as one of our customers said, "No matter how much money you saved, you didn't save enough to buy it twice!".

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac






This was the comment I was trying to make, not sure if I miss explained it or what happened but he says there is a weight force not being factored in due to the heavy pullies, yet in his thread he says the D3 is lighter, 5 lbs. I'm simply saying that metco's is 12 lbs, with a 9" ring, 9.55, or 10" and D3's 9.55 is 11 lbs. SO the 10" will not have a heavier weight on the snout.

Also, with the bigger ring now the crank still spins the same, but spins the top pulley faster. So there will be no extra forces on the crank. If any the larger pulley will make the crank have less stress then factory since it weighs in at 16 pounds.

Again, I'm not bashing D3. If it comes out that way I'm sorry as I didn't mean it. Just point out facts.

Domsz06
12-29-10, 07:12 PM
Your comments highlighted in bold are incorrect. Its not just about the weight. It is the forces and leverage against the crank/balancer interface. We would still have the same stance if the aftermarket pulley weighed 8 lbs. total @ 10" dia. The problem is that is too much leverage on the crank snout. That's not marketing BS, just facts. As I am sure you are aware, we could have come out with a 10" pulley a long time ago. We could have engineered proper relocation brackets, new hard lines for the AC, and provided a new idler to release a 10" pulley. And guess what, it would have been VERY light. There has to be a reason why we didn't, right? As a matter of fact, we just got finished machining up a 7" and 7.5" pulley for the LSA application. We have sold and installed hundreds of pullies in the 9" and 9.5" variant. All we have to do is a quick email blast to our current customer list and let them know about the new 10" magic pulley and we would be booked for a month. But we didn't because our engineering team didn't think it would be safe for this application. If you want to talk about the facts, those are the facts.

As for all of our fancy blueprinting and CNC work we are so fond of. Yeah, we go the extra mile to make sure everything is done to the engineering tolerances the factory has set out for your car. Could we get away with less, sure? But why compromise quality & engineering when you don't have to? This is a Cadillac, right? Our customers don't ask for a little less quality please, or can you give that part to me less all the engineering that went into it? Not to mention anything about having adequate and proper product liability insurance? The dealerships we work with require us to have proper business structures in place or they wont even take your phone call. Not to mention anything that we do with GM direct. We have made great strides in being competitive with our prices without compromising the quality or integrity of our parts. Sure everyone wants 5% over cost and the cheapest price possible. But as one of our customers said, "No matter how much money you saved, you didn't save enough to buy it twice!".

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

I guess I still don't get it. I have forgotten a lot of my structural mechanics, and dynamics. I remember weight was a HUGE factor, but extra .25 inch on each side just doesn't add up to me. Care to throw in a engineering diagram of both from your engineers with total forces calculated? Should be pretty easy if your using any Cad program. I'm interested in it.

Also not sure if my early 09 is different or not, but there is no way a 10" would hit anything on my car except the idler pulley. I have so much room....

the other part is these pullies have been around for as long as Superchargers have been around. It's not like Metco or anyone just designed them. They just modified to fit our crank. So they to have been around for a long time.... The difference I see is that your pullies are designed for the cts-v, where there's (I do agree there is crap out there but for example Metco is on 7 second cars...) are designed for lots of cars, so they can offer a lower price.

Oh well, back on topic, Would love to see those drawings with total forces calculated.

Dr. Design
12-29-10, 09:19 PM
I don't know that our engineers would give up their research and data so it can be published on the internet to prove some other companies products. Furthermore, wouldn't it be prudent for the people that are actually trying to sell and install 10" pulleys to bring forth that information?:confused:

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac




I guess I still don't get it. I have forgotten a lot of my structural mechanics, and dynamics. I remember weight was a HUGE factor, but extra .25 inch on each side just doesn't add up to me. Care to throw in a engineering diagram of both from your engineers with total forces calculated? Should be pretty easy if your using any Cad program. I'm interested in it.

Also not sure if my early 09 is different or not, but there is no way a 10" would hit anything on my car except the idler pulley. I have so much room....

the other part is these pullies have been around for as long as Superchargers have been around. It's not like Metco or anyone just designed them. They just modified to fit our crank. So they to have been around for a long time.... The difference I see is that your pullies are designed for the cts-v, where there's (I do agree there is crap out there but for example Metco is on 7 second cars...) are designed for lots of cars, so they can offer a lower price.

Oh well, back on topic, Would love to see those drawings with total forces calculated.

cbloveday
12-29-10, 09:47 PM
Perhaps Paschal can shed some light here. They have one for sale.

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/218448-upper-lower-pulleys-available.html

snzuloz
12-29-10, 09:56 PM
I don't see what is funny about someone bringing up, what should be valid concerns from most of you on the forums, and us reinforcing those same concerns. What seems funny to me is that some people are willing to slap on generic parts onto their cars and think, "since there have been reportedly no "failures" it must be okay to install on my car!!" The failures would take time to show themselves. Let's check back in a few ten thousand miles, or a few years from now. Send your crank out and have it magnafluxed, check the bearings, etc... At the end of the day you guys can do whatever you want to your cars and install whatever generic parts you can slap onto your LS motor.


Where do you arrive at all this with no support on your behalf? Generic meaning? (METCO perhaps...) Lets see, 1-1/2 inch crank snout (forged steel) having problems going up 1 inch in radius length to run a 10" ring or 3/4 inch for a 9.5"
Why stop at 10", lets see what happens when you put a 11" on there? The car would make great torque down low and fall off before it even hits 4500RPM, but if it fits, then it must be good. Have you ever used a torque wrench or breaker bar? Do you notice that the longer arm you use for leverage increases the the amount of force you can exert on the bolt you are trying to break lose or tighten? The supercharger is trying to do the same thing, but to the crank snout. You putting a 10" pulley on increases the leverage point giving more ability for the supercharger to do damage to the crank snout.


Have you personally seen a problem with the use of a 9.5 or 10" ring? I am a licensed mechanic by trade (yes I use torque wrenches and realize what you are trying to say- don't personally buy the argument that the crank is not capable of withstanding the load, leverage is increased how much by 1" diameter (1/2 inch radius) Dr.



But hey, it's your car and you can do what you want to it. Installing quality parts like that will only add to the resale value of the car down the line...



Meaning buying overpriced parts will further enhance the value?



We did weight ours before we started advertising what the weight difference was. We are 5 lbs lighter than factory and much stronger! As for other companies products and their weight, that's a good question...



According to the other post your setup is 1lb lighter than the 9.5 Metco setup.


Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac




Show us some evidence please...

aj660
12-29-10, 11:48 PM
These are all really good points for anyone looking to modify their V's.

Looking at the application. A 10" pulley looks like it will basically hit everything. There are a couple of hard AC lines that are present. Unless you are bending the lines back (fatiguing the thin walled tubing) and potentially increasing the likely hood of blowing an AC line down the road, leaking R34 into the atmosphere I cant see how it is done properly. Unless someone has designed a proper bracket to relocate the line or provided a newly designed hardline I cant see how it is done properly (zip ties don't count!). Either way, there is no proper way of doing this, not to mentioned the issues from an engineering standpoint....

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

I purchased my 10" kit (already had 9.5" lower installed) from Jesse and it came with the 10" ring and bracket which I think was designed specifically for the reasons you mention.

I do respect your knowledge and I know you have great products. I also believe the "potential issues" that you mention are true regarding switching to a 10" lower. However, there are also other vendors with knowledge and experience that say the 10" with stock upper is fine. There are also many people in the real world driving their cts-vs with 10" lower with no problems so far. I understand that it may take time for the "potential issues" to show-up. So, what's the worse case scenario? What can break? My crank snout? How much would it cost to replace? I guess I'm trying to learn a bit more considering my warranty is pretty much toast...

Bushidopupil
12-30-10, 12:07 AM
I purchased my 10" kit (already had 9.5" lower installed) from Jesse and it came with the 10" ring and bracket which I think was designed specifically for the reasons you mention.

I do respect your knowledge and I know you have great products. I also believe the "potential issues" that you mention are true regarding switching to a 10" lower. However, there are also other vendors with knowledge and experience that say the 10" with stock upper is fine. There are also many people in the real world driving their cts-vs with 10" lower with no problems so far. I understand that it may take time for the "potential issues" to show-up. So, what's the worse case scenario? What can break? My crank snout? How much would it cost to replace? I guess I'm trying to learn a bit more considering my warranty is pretty much toast...

Great post!
Me too, I agree that there is room for concern, D3 I don't think anyone here is trying to discredit you. I just think that people want specific explanation to your conclusions, ie stress at X equals broken crank snout....or stress at X equals....Have your engineers tested the crank pulley's to the point of failure? If so, please give us the info. To my VERY limited knowledge I do not think there has been a "to failure test report" published. MY humble, uneducated opinion.

jrcmlc
12-30-10, 12:10 AM
One thing that has reared it's head on one of my other blower cars, a YSi supercharged Z28 is the single keyway wasn't enough for even moderate forces, a double keyway was enough for more force (more boost, bigger bottom pulley, smaller top pulley, heavier-to-turn blower), but even a double keyed setup isn't enough for many of us. We had to switch out to a bigblock style crank snout, to my recollection it was provided by lonnie's.

I have no idea at all how the forces my Vortech YSi set on kill on an LT1 compares to the forces a 10" x 2.95" pulley setup on a CTS-V, I'm just adding some food for thought.

Joe

Domsz06
12-30-10, 08:32 AM
I don't know that our engineers would give up their research and data so it can be published on the internet to prove some other companies products. Furthermore, wouldn't it be prudent for the people that are actually trying to sell and install 10" pulleys to bring forth that information?:confused:

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

A comment like that means there has not been any research done on your 10" (IMO FWIW). The engineers would not be revealing any trade secrets in simply setting up some drawings with weight, diameter and force load. It's comments like these that just about every vendor on here says that just makes me irate (I believe we went through the same route with Paschacl performance and the TB issue). As a vendor if your going to say you have the data, then prove it, otherwise it's just like me saying x company's pulley is stronger but not putting any numbers behind it. Neither will float in water....

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that your products are more expensive then others due to research. Well if you want us to believe you most of us need proof of this. Otherwise we just think your prices are high.

I think another thing that it comes to is this. MOST (NOt all by anymeans) cts-v guys are not gear heads or wrench turners. They don't work on cars and they don't know a lot about them. They bought the car because it's a beast, great reviews, and sexy as hell. Then they like us all get the bug to mod it and want to know what to do. They see something that says it goes fast, but want more details and what not. They tend to get picky and ask questions and then the vendors do not post data to support and it gets us all in a tizzy. There is a thread where someone chimed in about headers stating, "How do you expect to sell them with out a sound clip?" In this forum it seems that words mean nothing, but facts, sounds, data mean everything.... off my soap box.

Domsz06
12-30-10, 08:32 AM
Show us some evidence please...

Agreed. If there is an issue then show it!!!

Domsz06
12-30-10, 08:42 AM
Great post!
Me too, I agree that there is room for concern, D3 I don't think anyone here is trying to discredit you. I just think that people want specific explanation to your conclusions, ie stress at X equals broken crank snout....or stress at X equals....Have your engineers tested the crank pulley's to the point of failure? If so, please give us the info. To my VERY limited knowledge I do not think there has been a "to failure test report" published. MY humble, uneducated opinion.

I dont' think the Dr is saying pulleys will fail, but he is saying the bigger pulley adds stress to the crank snout, and then the bearings.... Least that's how I read it FWIW

cbloveday
12-30-10, 09:01 AM
I gotta say that D3 makes alot of claims about blueprinting extensive testing blah blah blah. I am still trying to get over the lowering spring debacle that was
claimed to have been extensively tested. In my opinion, that product hurt your reputation. I know there are alot of loyal fans of D3 and that is great. I just wish you would back up some of your extensive testing and provide proof of said testing.

Oh, and don't give me your BS about believing other vendors claims without proof. They other vendors do not claim don't blueprinting, engineering, flow bench etc. etc. etc.

Domsz06
12-30-10, 09:25 AM
I gotta say that D3 makes alot of claims about blueprinting extensive testing blah blah blah. I am still trying to get over the lowering spring debacle that was
claimed to have been extensively tested. In my opinion, that product hurt your reputation. I knoe there are alot of loyal fans of D3 and that is great. I just widh you would back up some of your extensive testing and provide proof of said testing.

My thoughts exactly.

snzuloz
12-30-10, 09:29 AM
I don't know that our engineers would give up their research and data so it can be published on the internet to prove some other companies products. Furthermore, wouldn't it be prudent for the people that are actually trying to sell and install 10" pulleys to bring forth that information?:confused:

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

Maybe the reason I don't see this being a huge risk is the fact that you sell a 9.5" setup but that an extra .5" is going too far. I would really like to see from proof that a 10" is going to cause any snout/bearing issues than your 9.0 or 9.5 setup would. Your research and data might get you more sales after all if it were the case.

Domsz06
12-30-10, 10:26 AM
Maybe the reason I don't see this being a huge risk is the fact that you sell a 9.5" setup but that an extra .5" is going too far. I would really like to see from proof that a 10" is going to cause any snout/bearing issues than your 9.0 or 9.5 setup would. Your research and data might get you more sales after all if it were the case.

hit the nail on the head with that one.

mannyz
12-30-10, 12:12 PM
I understand everyone's argument in this topic as everyone has their opinion. Though I havent been a customer of any vendor on this site, I would like to thank all of them for producing parts for our cars and taking the time of the day to enlighten us. Understandibly some are going to be more expensive than others...thats with everything in life (Mac vs. HP computers etc...). I am not saying anyone's product is better than others, but for a vendor to take the time to properly engeneer something and provide "peace of mind" to customers that know their product is of high quality is good business. We would be all be at a loss if there were no competition so lets be thankful.

Luna.
12-30-10, 01:27 PM
I dont' think the Dr is saying pulleys will fail, but he is saying the bigger pulley adds stress to the crank snout, and then the bearings.... Least that's how I read it FWIW

That's the way I read it as well. It certainly doesn't appear unreasonable in my mind, but, perhaps, I'm more risk-adverse than some other people. Maybe the risk is minimal; I don't know. I risked belt-slip in exchange for that decreased risk though.


I gotta say that D3 makes alot of claims about blueprinting extensive testing blah blah blah. I am still trying to get over the lowering spring debacle that was claimed to have been extensively tested. In my opinion, that product hurt your reputation.


I have no interest whatsoever in lowering my V. In my mind, I purchased a 4-door car to hold 4 or even 5 people and not worry about rubbing my tires, which HAS happened in my 2005 V (grrr). The reason I bring this up is because I DIDN'T read that thread very carefully, as it has minimal, specific relevance to me.


In any case, my limited understanding was that such was an installation issue, & not the product, correct?? I could be totally wrong here, but that's what I thought.





Oh, and don't give me your BS about believing other vendors claims without proof. They other vendors do not claim don't blueprinting, engineering, flow bench etc. etc. etc.


If I'm reading these comments correctly, including the one above, what I'm interpreting is that D3's comments that they do extensive research and such, which is why they have higher prices, is causing people a great deal of angst. Yes??


Stated another way, if they are going to say that they have done a lot of research, prove it. Yeah, I can understand that point & that's a fair request.



IF, however, it ultimately goes back to higher price, that would simply make me roll my eyes... :helpless:


A lower priced vendor certainly has no more veracity than a higher priced vendor. Some lower priced vendors on this forum have made patently incorrect comments, but those seemingly get swept under the rug because...I have no clue. They're cheaper or something??? :hmm:

Luna.
12-30-10, 01:32 PM
Want to know what I'd like to see from these dozens/100s of people running 10" lower pulley? I want to see their dyno runs and I am especially interested in seeing if they were able to get their rwhp substantially equal with their rwtq. Now THAT would be interesting...

Domsz06
12-30-10, 01:44 PM
That's the way I read it as well. It certainly doesn't appear unreasonable in my mind, but, perhaps, I'm more risk-adverse than some other people. Maybe the risk is minimal; I don't know. I risked belt-slip in exchange for that decreased risk though.

see my brother had belt slippage and it sucked butt! kinda why I don't want a smaller upper for that reason.. we all have our risk we are willing to take it seams.



I have no interest whatsoever in lowering my V. In my mind, I purchased a 4-door car to hold 4 or even 5 people and not worry about rubbing my tires, which HAS happened in my 2005 V (grrr). The reason I bring this up is because I DIDN'T read that thread very carefully, as it has minimal, specific relevance to me.


In any case, my limited understanding was that such was an installation issue, & not the product, correct?? I could be totally wrong here, but that's what I thought.

cliff notes version: there was no explanation from D3, they blamed it on not being installed properly or needing the fabric sleeves. Honestly it wasn't a lot of people having issues, so maybe it was just a QC issue. We will soon see I guess as I also bought a pair used from someone who hated them. Will seee how I think of them when I get them installed.... I know another person who didn't post here that had "squeeks" and D3 told them to sand the powder coating off, well that didn't help so then he dipped them in the "plasitc coat" dip stuff, and now the squeek is gone.






If I'm reading these comments correctly, including the one above, what I'm interpreting is that D3's comments that they do extensive research and such, which is why they have higher prices, is causing people a great deal of angst. Yes??

I read it that way too and also feel the same way. If I knew for a fact that their pulley was better due to fatique, force, etc and I was buying a crap pulley I would pay more and buy it, but as of now it's just like me saying, "Luna I can make you a great deal on some Beachfront property in Kansas"


Stated another way, if they are going to say that they have done a lot of research, prove it. Yeah, I can understand that point & that's a fair request.

agreed.


IF, however, it ultimately goes back to higher price, that would simply make me roll my eyes... :helpless:


A lower priced vendor certainly has no more veracity than a higher priced vendor. Some lower priced vendors on this forum have made patently incorrect comments, but those seemingly get swept under the rug because...I have no clue. They're cheaper or something??? :hmm:

yup good point as well and I was trying to say that. Right now I feel a lot just buy the cheaper because there is no real reason not too. Just like there really is no real reason to buy the expensive one.

all interesting statments..... ;)

Domsz06
12-30-10, 01:46 PM
Want to know what I'd like to see from these dozens/100s of people running 10" lower pulley? I want to see their dyno runs and I am especially interested in seeing if they were able to get their rwhp substantially equal with their rwtq. Now THAT would be interesting...

This is something I want to do and see as well. I plan on giving the forum this data in the next few weeks...... If I can find a bracket for the idler pulley relocation and I get a car back from GM..........

Luna.
12-30-10, 02:07 PM
This is something I want to do and see as well. I plan on giving the forum this data in the next few weeks...... If I can find a bracket for the idler pulley relocation and I get a car back from GM..........

If the forum still had casino cash, I'd bet you $1,000 casino cash that the rwtq dwarfs the rwhp. :)

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's where I'm leaning...

DrumStix
12-30-10, 02:51 PM
A comment like that means there has not been any research done on your 10" (IMO FWIW).

I'd bet you are right.

Also, I can tell you that the ladies have done a lot of research on my 10".
Happy new year.

wait4me
12-30-10, 03:14 PM
Hi Luna, This thread has gone nuts.

You made a post a couple pages back saying that im wrong in saying that a kenne bell boost a pump will not work in our cars. I would like to fly you over to me, and i have one on a few cars here that are mine, and show you exactly why they dont work right.. Including showing you the amperage demand on the pumps while it is kicked on. Im not making shit up when i tell you guys things.
The only way to make it work is by settin the voltage to WAY less than a quarter of what it able to put out. Like a setting of 2-3 on the dial. Even then sometimes it will do that hard restart on the bus.

I sold and put on 80 or so last year at that setting before i figured out how to do the fpdms.. After that point the bap mods wherent needed..

Im not sure why you would ever question me on that kind of thing. I tell you guys how it is all the time based on REAL WORLD stuff that i see in person. Not internet hear say....

I mess with these cars EVERY DAY. If not a customers, then my own personal cars.. Trying out new stuff, seeing what works and what dont.

As for pully count since 2008, 68 10inch kits, 318 9.5 kits, 72 9inch kits, and 39 8.5s.

I have not heard of any issues with any one of those kits. Some with TONS of drag races and 30k miles on them.

The balancers we used are by 2 BIGGEST NAME COMPANIES that are on thousands and thousands of RACE CARS. Innivators west is a massive company that puts out EXTREAMLY high end quality stuff. I have used them for years on Every RACE ENGINE 1200+ stuff that i build. ATI is our other manufacter. They are the TOP Company out there.. So saying cheaper is not better is pretty much full of crap. Balancers from reputable companies i would trust WAY before some no name company making one offs....

There are a ton of people on this forum and all over running all different sizes of them.

There isnt much need to spend all our time fighting about shit. If someone doesnt like something said, then prove them wrong.. I guess it is easy as that...

And for horsepower with JUST GOING FROM A 9.5 to a 10inch kit, Even GNXS on this forum has proof that he can see gains. Look what it did to his quarter times.. I dont post customers dyno graphs anymore, but im sure a customer running them will post up eventually. Even though most dont like this forum so they dont come on it....

Dr. Design
12-30-10, 03:15 PM
So let me see if I understand this correctly. The simple fact that we bring up what should be a valid concern in regards to adding a pulley to the vehicle combined with the fact that you think we have higher prices means now we have to be accountable for providing data on other companies products. But if we had cheap prices, we wouldn't have to provide such information? Yes. Correct me if I am wrong, but is that what this looks like? Not once have I seen ANY vendor/manufacturer provide data, that includes us. But we are also the only vendor/manufacturer to build off actual blueprints rather than reverse engineer it. Nobody wonders why you get a longer replacement bolt with the other "Aftermarket balancer"? That is of no concern to people? Why is the bolt longer than the one you are taking out of it? Maybe because the balancer was not designed for this motor. Are we to assume that the harmonic frequencies between a 6.2L are the same as a 5.7, 6.0, 7.0 motor? Then wouldn't that defeat the purpose of what the balancers function is?

If our engineers tell us that going to a 10" crank pulley is too much and we should not do it for reasons deemed important to engineers that actually do this for a living specializing in Harmonic Balancers for over 30 years... Then guess what, we are going to listen to THEM. Sure the gear head in me sees the forged crank, single key, etc.. and thinks, well heck this looks like it can take a bit more. 10" shouldn't REALLY push it over the top, right? That's also why I am not an engineer specializing in the Harmonic Balancer field.

What I think is funny is how there is this free pass for those looking to sell products through the forums. Since they have cheap prices, they don't need to show validation of anything. We didn't come on here and tell everyone the sky is falling if you use the 10" pulley. We just explained why we didn't produce one and some of concerns around them. So now we are being asked to prove why it wouldn't, when the real question should be for someone to prove why it will...

I can't speak for any other company. But I know we have a strict policy about providing too much information on the internet. However, with that being said, I will ask the engineers for some generic data that we might be able to share that will provide information for those that are interested. But I am sure the people that made the 10" pulley already have that data, cause surely it was done to ensure the quality of the product and to prove its worth, right?

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac



A comment like that means there has not been any research done on your 10" (IMO FWIW). The engineers would not be revealing any trade secrets in simply setting up some drawings with weight, diameter and force load. It's comments like these that just about every vendor on here says that just makes me irate (I believe we went through the same route with Paschacl performance and the TB issue). As a vendor if your going to say you have the data, then prove it, otherwise it's just like me saying x company's pulley is stronger but not putting any numbers behind it. Neither will float in water....

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that your products are more expensive then others due to research. Well if you want us to believe you most of us need proof of this. Otherwise we just think your prices are high.

I think another thing that it comes to is this. MOST (NOt all by anymeans) cts-v guys are not gear heads or wrench turners. They don't work on cars and they don't know a lot about them. They bought the car because it's a beast, great reviews, and sexy as hell. Then they like us all get the bug to mod it and want to know what to do. They see something that says it goes fast, but want more details and what not. They tend to get picky and ask questions and then the vendors do not post data to support and it gets us all in a tizzy. There is a thread where someone chimed in about headers stating, "How do you expect to sell them with out a sound clip?" In this forum it seems that words mean nothing, but facts, sounds, data mean everything.... off my soap box.

GMX322V S/C
12-30-10, 03:36 PM
The OEMs build margin into everything. We have 8.5s stock. What if a 9.5 uses up all the margin? So a 10 fits and it's made by a reputable racing parts mfgr. Works great for thousands of miles and/or laps/passes. How many street engines are going to be torn down and inspected or serviced as often as race motors?

Domsz06
12-30-10, 03:49 PM
If the forum still had casino cash, I'd bet you $1,000 casino cash that the rwtq dwarfs the rwhp. :)

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's where I'm leaning...

will too bad it doesn't... lol. how about this if your right I'll buy you a beer if we ever meet up in real world, if not then you buy me one ;) lol


I'd bet you are right.

Also, I can tell you that the ladies have done a lot of research on my 10".
Happy new year.

lol I don't wanna know about that!!! ;) ha ha ha

Domsz06
12-30-10, 03:59 PM
you bring up points of concern, but offer no proof that they are concern. Sure I worry about harmonics or frequencies. I'm not however pushing these engines to their extremes based on what others are running. I just, like others, would like to see all of this huge concern that your company says we should worry about.

That's all. If you reread my comments I also said I would like to see it from all the vendors. no one does it, this thread just turned into a "D3 bashing" which was not what I wanted. Myself and others just want to see number and reasons to be concerned, otherwise it just looks like a scare tatic to us, Least I feel it's that way. W4M has just under 500 pullies out there with out a failure that any of us have heard about. Not sure how many Paschal has, or you have (Feel free to add the number if you would like)

Hope we can see those drawings. Would really be interesting.


So let me see if I understand this correctly. The simple fact that we bring up what should be a valid concern in regards to adding a pulley to the vehicle combined with the fact that you think we have higher prices means now we have to be accountable for providing data on other companies products. But if we had cheap prices, we wouldn't have to provide such information? Yes. Correct me if I am wrong, but is that what this looks like? Not once have I seen ANY vendor/manufacturer provide data, that includes us. But we are also the only vendor/manufacturer to build off actual blueprints rather than reverse engineer it. Nobody wonders why you get a longer replacement bolt with the other "Aftermarket balancer"? That is of no concern to people? Why is the bolt longer than the one you are taking out of it? Maybe because the balancer was not designed for this motor. Are we to assume that the harmonic frequencies between a 6.2L are the same as a 5.7, 6.0, 7.0 motor? Then wouldn't that defeat the purpose of what the balancers function is?

If our engineers tell us that going to a 10" crank pulley is too much and we should not do it for reasons deemed important to engineers that actually do this for a living specializing in Harmonic Balancers for over 30 years... Then guess what, we are going to listen to THEM. Sure the gear head in me sees the forged crank, single key, etc.. and thinks, well heck this looks like it can take a bit more. 10" shouldn't REALLY push it over the top, right? That's also why I am not an engineer specializing in the Harmonic Balancer field.

What I think is funny is how there is this free pass for those looking to sell products through the forums. Since they have cheap prices, they don't need to show validation of anything. We didn't come on here and tell everyone the sky is falling if you use the 10" pulley. We just explained why we didn't produce one and some of concerns around them. So now we are being asked to prove why it wouldn't, when the real question should be for someone to prove why it will...

I can't speak for any other company. But I know we have a strict policy about providing too much information on the internet. However, with that being said, I will ask the engineers for some generic data that we might be able to share that will provide information for those that are interested. But I am sure the people that made the 10" pulley already have that data, cause surely it was done to ensure the quality of the product and to prove its worth, right?

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

wait4me
12-30-10, 04:12 PM
"Copying off of factory blueprints" wouldnt that mean that the units would look exactly the same then as the factory blueprints would show? Changing it in ANY form would then make it not based off of a factory blueprint. That just sounds silly... I think this thread needs to be zapped from the interzonez...

Dr. Design
12-30-10, 04:23 PM
Maybe you dont exactly understand the importance of this. Since we have the blueprints that means we dont have to guess what the OEM tolerances are between the interface of the crank and balancer hub. We also dont have to guess what the harmonic frequency range is when we build ours. We also dont have to guess or measure all the different dimensions of the balancer. We also dont have to guess what the key way dimensions are. We also dont have to guess the taper angle on the balancer and snout interface. We also dont have to guess if our product is built correctly.

The changes we make after those dimensions are locked in are to then enhance the product, reduce weight without compromising strength. In addition to that we are also able to run the CAD data through solid works and determine where we can remove material to decrease weight. What is silly is for someone to think that none of this stuff is important and just because you can install it on a car and call it good, it must be okay. Thats silly!





"Copying off of factory blueprints" wouldnt that mean that the units would look exactly the same then as the factory blueprints would show? Changing it in ANY form would then make it not based off of a factory blueprint. That just sounds silly... I think this thread needs to be zapped from the interzonez...

PhxTriode
12-30-10, 04:36 PM
Absolutely. Apologies if I wasn't clear there. Of course, they are going to stop, make adjustments, drive more, evaluate, etc. :)

I don't think it's possible to upload changes while driving the car.

Some of the older GM computers could be "Real Time Tuned" but ours can not.

PhxTriode
12-30-10, 04:39 PM
Is this another dyno debate thread????

Oh wait, different topic but same debate. geeez

Luna.
12-30-10, 05:01 PM
Hi Luna, This thread has gone nuts.

You made a post a couple pages back saying that im wrong in saying that a kenne bell boost a pump will not work in our cars. I would like to fly you over to me, and i have one on a few cars here that are mine, and show you exactly why they dont work right.. Including showing you the amperage demand on the pumps while it is kicked on. Im not making shit up when i tell you guys things.
The only way to make it work is by settin the voltage to WAY less than a quarter of what it able to put out. Like a setting of 2-3 on the dial. Even then sometimes it will do that hard restart on the bus.

I sold and put on 80 or so last year at that setting before i figured out how to do the fpdms.. After that point the bap mods wherent needed..

Im not sure why you would ever question me on that kind of thing. I tell you guys how it is all the time based on REAL WORLD stuff that i see in person. Not internet hear say....

LOL. A Kenne Bell boost-a-pump is INSTALLED ON MY CAR RIGHT NOW AND I HAVEN'T HAD A SINGLE ISSUE WHATSOEVER (this April will be ~2 years). All of the issues you talk about above, as well as in that other thread (the name escapes me at the moment) have NOT occurred on my car.

Now, if that isn't real world, WHAT IS? (Stated another way, that IS direct experience and ISN'T hearsay...)

Further, I believe that RWTD also posted that this was perhaps one of the easiest routes to go.

Even further than that, I believe that many other companies use boost-a-pumps as well. Hell, I think D3 installs boost-a-pumps all the time and I'm not aware of any issues on anyone else's car. Granted, I can only speak for myself (NOTE: NOT hearsay), but I'm certain I'd hear about it if it was an issue on others' cars.

Can you explain that?

My 2005-V is my daily driver, so I don't have my '09V with me, otherwise I'd post a picture of it for all to see (which I can do tonight, if anyone desires).


There isnt much need to spend all our time fighting about shit. If someone doesnt like something said, then prove them wrong.. I guess it is easy as that...

Yes, I will eagerly await your response to my question above.


This comment was especially interesting to me:


I'm not sure why you would ever question me on that kind of thing.

Are you SERIOUS??

You, D3, RWTD and god knows who else have had serious disagreements, yet I/we should just take your word for it??

To say NOTHING about the fact that I'm running a boost-a-pump right now...

Simply...in awe at that comment...


And for horsepower with JUST GOING FROM A 9.5 to a 10inch kit, Even GNXS on this forum has proof that he can see gains. Look what it did to his quarter times.. I dont post customers dyno graphs anymore, but im sure a customer running them will post up eventually. Even though most dont like this forum so they dont come on it....

I don't doubt that HP will increase; I NEVER said it wouldn't. It DID in my case when I went with the slightly more aggressive 9.0" lower with 2.5" upper (rwtq shot up much, much more than rwhp though...)

My contention is that the 1900 blower is probably spinning far past its efficiency-zone (for lack of a better word), particularly at higher RPMs & that, perhaps, a blower switch might make sense when high levels of boost are desired.

I don't see how that is illogical in the slightest, but, perhaps someone can enlighten me if I'm wrong.

Hey, I'll gladly buy DOMS06 a beer if I'm wrong, but I'm still betting I'm right! (And it will be a BIG beer!) :cool:

wait4me
12-30-10, 05:28 PM
Then you must be hooking them up differently for them to be working at 100% and turned up all the way Luna, I tried everything i could to figure out a way around the MASSIVE amp draw when it kicked in. Did you put it on yourself Luna or did someone else do it for you? Find the box that has the dial on it, and see where it is set at. Sounds like i should fly out to you if you would allow me to and i could check it out. I would love a trip back to ca, I could work on a few exotic cars while i am down there anyways so i could make it worth the trip.

GMX322V S/C
12-30-10, 05:59 PM
Cali tuning fest anyone? Jesse, you like Margaritas?

Dr. Design
12-30-10, 06:04 PM
There are 3 ways to hook up the BAP or Magnavolt. 2 of which are wrong. This might be why you are not successful in running them in your setups.

We do not have any issue with amp draw when the system engages or problems with the car stalling out, etc... We have done multiple setups using both BAP and Magnavolt without any issues. These are REAL WORLD drivers too. We have full range of adjustment with the gain knob.

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac




Then you must be hooking them up differently for them to be working at 100% and turned up all the way Luna, I tried everything i could to figure out a way around the MASSIVE amp draw when it kicked in. Did you put it on yourself Luna or did someone else do it for you? Find the box that has the dial on it, and see where it is set at. Sounds like i should fly out to you if you would allow me to and i could check it out. I would love a trip back to ca, I could work on a few exotic cars while i am down there anyways so i could make it worth the trip.

Luna.
12-30-10, 06:24 PM
Did you put it on yourself Luna or did someone else do it for you?

LOL. WAY past my level of expertise to install myself. I'm an educated man, but my degree(s) isn't in automobiles. :)

snzuloz
12-30-10, 06:26 PM
If your headed to Cali Jesse you better head North of the border after that...

wait4me
12-30-10, 06:51 PM
I hooked them Straight up to the positive and negitive terminals of the battery and put the output to the input of the bap. A kennebell 40amp is what is used, My observations are that a Kennebell bap does not work if you turn the dial past 3. It runs fine, then when you hit 4psi it does a stall then kicks back in. It is like shutting of the engine.

Maybe the others work but not a kennebell. 80 amps of load at activation is 80 amps, I can see and record that load with the dvom.

RapidRob
12-30-10, 06:52 PM
If your headed to Cali Jesse you better head North of the border after that...

Canada, VIA Seattle as well .... ;-)

Rob

snzuloz
12-30-10, 06:58 PM
:pop2: Just waiting for the proof that the 10" ring is going to cause issues...:suspense:

Luna.
12-30-10, 07:35 PM
I hooked them Straight up to the positive and negitive terminals of the battery and put the output to the input of the bap. A kennebell 40amp is what is used, My observations are that a Kennebell bap does not work if you turn the dial past 3. It runs fine, then when you hit 4psi it does a stall then kicks back in. It is like shutting of the engine.

Maybe the others work but not a kennebell. 80 amps of load at activation is 80 amps, I can see and record that load with the dvom.

KB DOES work though, including through a 9.0" lower and 2.5" upper



:pop2: Just waiting for the proof that the 10" ring is going to cause issues...:suspense:

Strawman argument

wait4me
12-30-10, 08:55 PM
Luna can you look at the control knob itself and see what setting you have it set to?

snzuloz
12-30-10, 09:54 PM
Strawman argument

Is this your new word of the week?

I can't believe that someone can bring up this whole issue of saying that the 10" ring is going to cause issues and then backtrack and not actually come forth with any hard evidence to the situation. Then this ridiculous display of everyone fighting amongst each other because of the prior comments. What credibility is being gained here? (if you have some proof PLEASE share it with us and quit trying to descredit anyone else... Why with all the ENGINEERING did the ride control rods have to be made up way after the fact of the springs from this vendor (Maybe the engineering forgot about those sensors?) Maybe some of these criticisms should be aired, I'm done with this crap and would just like some good old fashioned proper communication and good feedback with some knowledge/facts behind it.

Luna.
12-31-10, 12:07 AM
Luna can you look at the control knob itself and see what setting you have it set to?

It's set a little below 10, like 8 to 9.

I'd like to be more precise, but it's tough to get a straight look at it based on where and how it's mounted (diagonally up from the battery, behind the opening). In any case, I can guarantee that it is very close to the 10 mark and far from the 0 mark.

I have a few pictures that I'd like to upload, but the main picture I want to upload is too big and it has to be resized manually. I don't do this well, so if someone is interested & can resize it easily, let me know and I'll send the pic so it can be uploaded.


Is this your new word of the week?

Truth hurts, doesn't it?


I can't believe that someone can bring up this whole issue of saying that the 10" ring is going to cause issues and then backtrack and not actually come forth with any hard evidence to the situation.

Please point out exactly where D3 said the 10" ring, "is going to cause issues."

Summarizing, my interpretation is very similar to Domz06, which is it MIGHT cause issues, which seems like a very reasonable and fair position (note that dom doesn't necessarily agree with the latter comment, but we are in agreement based on what we think D3 is saying).

You know what? Maybe it's not a big deal; maybe the engine will last 50,000 miles or more. I would simply ask, where does the burden really fall here, on the party suggesting that the 10" ring might be a problem or the person saying it probably isn't a problem?

If weight isn't an issue (which it very well could be with some pullies, if they are heavier), it appears that leverage still might be regardless.

The ONLY comment suggesting it isn't an issue that I can recall/read is that there hasn't been any failures to date. Well, perhaps if we had 5+ years of history, I might be a little more comfortable with that, but I'd say that the current perspective isn't exactly the strongest position.

You sound like a smoker from the '50s; "Show me the issues! If none, then it must be okay!"

I wonder how those people feel now that once held that viewpoint.


Then this ridiculous display of everyone fighting amongst each other because of the prior comments. What credibility is being gained here? (if you have some proof PLEASE share it with us and quit trying to descredit anyone else...

As far as my replies go, Jesse has said, several times now, you cannot use a boost-a-pump on V2s. He then modified his position above to say maybe some other boost-a-pumps might work, but not a Kenne Bell; I found that change alone interesting, to say nothing about the fact that, as stated above, and will be shown when I post some pics (which is pretty good proof, if you ask me), that Kenne Bell boost-a-pumps can work just fine. In other words, I believe that position to be patently incorrect.

Humbleness is frequently good, which is why I often pick my words carefully. "I believe" is overwhelmingly superior to something like, "It is [or isn't]" As such, if I'm wrong, I chalk it up to a learning experience.

This, however, seems like a monumental hurdle...I'm currently using it and have been for coming up on multiple years now, to say nothing about the fact that D3 installs them frequently as well. To say, "you can't" do something seems very, VERY flawed to me in situations like this.

Want the icing on the cake? Charlie from RPM Motors, which is where I got my roller dyno numbers from (since Church uses a hub dyno, which seemingly drives many nuts), looked at all this (tune, intercooler, etc.) as well and was impressed with the work done (we both wanted more rwhp, but that's okay. :)). I would be cautious suggesting another expert is ignorant...

Domsz06
12-31-10, 07:27 AM
Maybe you dont exactly understand the importance of this. Since we have the blueprints that means we dont have to guess what the OEM tolerances are between the interface of the crank and balancer hub. We also dont have to guess what the harmonic frequency range is when we build ours. We also dont have to guess or measure all the different dimensions of the balancer. We also dont have to guess what the key way dimensions are. We also dont have to guess the taper angle on the balancer and snout interface. We also dont have to guess if our product is built correctly.

The changes we make after those dimensions are locked in are to then enhance the product, reduce weight without compromising strength. In addition to that we are also able to run the CAD data through solid works and determine where we can remove material to decrease weight. What is silly is for someone to think that none of this stuff is important and just because you can install it on a car and call it good, it must be okay. Thats silly!

If your using Solid works it will calculate all the forces for you. I have used it a bit way back in the college days and know friends who use it now. It's an AMAZING program. I know your engineers are smart if they are using that, and know that your company can easily give forces and numbers without jeopardizing your trade secrets.

I really hope you will choose to show us these numbers and issues so we can know the "Potential failure" we are heading for by not using your pulley, or going to a 10" pulley.

Thanks and happy racing!!!

Domsz06
12-31-10, 07:31 AM
:pop2: Just waiting for the proof that the 10" ring is going to cause issues...:suspense:

Check your PM's, looks like it's going to be a little longer :(

@Luna. Oh I'll be sending you my paypal address LOL!!!! ;)

@Dr. Design This forum has been a great learning tool for lots of us if not all of us, if there are 3 ways to hook up a BAP, but onlye 1 to make it work, why not share it with us so we can all learn..... Most probably can't turn the wrenches anyway, so it's not going to take away your business, plus not all of us live near a reputable shop (Or in Cali)

Thanks.

snzuloz
12-31-10, 08:43 AM
It's set a little below 10, like 8 to 9.

I'd like to be more precise, but it's tough to get a straight look at it based on where and how it's mounted (diagonally up from the battery, behind the opening). In any case, I can guarantee that it is very close to the 10 mark and far from the 0 mark.

I have a few pictures that I'd like to upload, but the main picture I want to upload is too big and it has to be resized manually. I don't do this well, so if someone is interested & can resize it easily, let me know and I'll send the pic so it can be uploaded.



Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Ahh not really when it's not the truth


Please point out exactly where D3 said the 10" ring, "is going to cause issues."


Right here and several other posts have had mentions, But I'm not searching everything for answers you already know...Your comments highlighted in bold are incorrect. Its not just about the weight. It is the forces and leverage against the crank/balancer interface. We would still have the same stance if the aftermarket pulley weighed 8 lbs. total @ 10" dia. The problem is that is too much leverage on the crank snout. That's not marketing BS, just facts. As I am sure you are aware, we could have come out with a 10" pulley a long time ago. We could have engineered proper relocation brackets, new hard lines for the AC, and provided a new idler to release a 10" pulley. And guess what, it would have been VERY light. There has to be a reason why we didn't, right? As a matter of fact, we just got finished machining up a 7" and 7.5" pulley for the LSA application. We have sold and installed hundreds of pullies in the 9" and 9.5" variant. All we have to do is a quick email blast to our current customer list and let them know about the new 10" magic pulley...


Summarizing, my interpretation is very similar to Domz06, which is it MIGHT cause issues, which seems like a very reasonable and fair position (note that dom doesn't necessarily agree with the latter comment, but we are in agreement based on what we think D3 is saying).

You know what? Maybe it's not a big deal; maybe the engine will last 50,000 miles or more. I would simply ask, where does the burden really fall here, on the party suggesting that the 10" ring might be a problem or the person saying it probably isn't a problem?

If weight isn't an issue (which it very well could be with some pullies, if they are heavier), it appears that leverage still might be regardless.

The ONLY comment suggesting it isn't an issue that I can recall/read is that there hasn't been any failures to date. Well, perhaps if we had 5+ years of history, I might be a little more comfortable with that, but I'd say that the current perspective isn't exactly the strongest position.

You sound like a smoker from the '50s; "Show me the issues! If none, then it must be okay!"

I wonder how those people feel now that once held that viewpoint.

I am saying that if someone brings it up as an issue then PLEASE PROCEED TO GIVE SOME ACTUAL KNOWN FACTS ON THE MATTER rather than just their opinion or what their "ENGINEERS" say is going too far, thats all. And no I don't smoke thanks, could care less.


As far as my replies go, Jesse has said, several times now, you cannot use a boost-a-pump on V2s. He then modified his position above to say maybe some other boost-a-pumps might work, but not a Kenne Bell; I found that change alone interesting, to say nothing about the fact that, as stated above, and will be shown when I post some pics (which is pretty good proof, if you ask me), that Kenne Bell boost-a-pumps can work just fine. In other words, I believe that position to be patently incorrect.

Humbleness is frequently good, which is why I often pick my words carefully. "I believe" is overwhelmingly superior to something like, "It is [or isn't]" As such, if I'm wrong, I chalk it up to a learning experience.

This, however, seems like a monumental hurdle...I'm currently using it and have been for coming up on multiple years now, to say nothing about the fact that D3 installs them frequently as well. To say, "you can't" do something seems very, VERY flawed to me in situations like this.

Want the icing on the cake? Charlie from RPM Motors, which is where I got my roller dyno numbers from (since Church uses a hub dyno, which seemingly drives many nuts), looked at all this (tune, intercooler, etc.) as well and was impressed with the work done (we both wanted more rwhp, but that's okay. :)). I would be cautious suggesting another expert is ignorant...

Not saying that anyone is ignorant, just want some factual information. Obviously they do good work and make products that work or they wouldn't be in business. What would be nice is if people shared some information to help the community rather than play cloak and dagger all the time.
Have a great day!

DrumStix
12-31-10, 01:30 PM
Riddle me this harmonic "balancing" whiz of innerwebz blueprintz from SoCal. What is the internal crank balance of an LSA? How do you get away with using a 5 lb lighter "balancer" on an otherwise stock motor with no internals changed? Is it really externally balanced or harmonically dampened. I will not answer here but the terms and theory I am seeing throw around here are way off. Use the force and answer wisely.

DrumStix
12-31-10, 01:42 PM
There are 3 ways to hook up the BAP or Magnavolt. 2 of which are wrong. This might be why you are not successful in running them in your setups.

We do not have any issue with amp draw when the system engages or problems with the car stalling out, etc... We have done multiple setups using both BAP and Magnavolt without any issues. These are REAL WORLD drivers too. We have full range of adjustment with the gain knob.

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

So please friggin jump in and provide the damn answer. All of this "generic" bs as you put it and these claims abounding from all sides are a waste of breathe as so many have pointed out. I say there are 9 ways to hook up a BAP. 8 are wrong. Guess which one isn't. C'mon man. If you think your helping the community with this than I'm here to tell you you're not. If you'd just like to sell "blueprinted" parts on the innerwebz (Like I said 10 months ago, who would pay $15,000 to blueprint an oil dipstick but D3 and never produced an answer to that question) then open up a store front and sell quarts of oil for $120 each. This factless pissing contest is a joke.

DrumStix
12-31-10, 01:52 PM
My summation on the 10" pulley is as follows. If the rotating mass has not increased, and we all know those rings are very light, along with the angle off the snout not changing, we all know that would be nearly impossible unless the damper was bad, it is left to one remaining key point and that's belt tension. If the tensioner is not pulling up on that crank snout in astronomical numbers far higher than stock then the main bearing just behind the face of the block (M1) will not suffer from any adverse affects. A 100% balanced pulley is going to be bullet proof. Any out of balance or vibrate is going to exacerbate loads on the snout and failure would occur sooner. That's an easy thing to detect.

I've run God awful tension on 5.0 blower pulleys on that weak block for 30-40000 miles before 10 rib systems were available, torn the motor down and the front main still has no copper showing but was wearing a littler faster than other bearings. We did not test to a failure but I am fairly certain it was 10's of thousands of miles less than a stock motor would go. That said, we tripled the tension and it lived just fine.

Now it's all left up to the efficiency of the TVS 1900. That's another thread.

cbloveday
12-31-10, 02:28 PM
Stix, you have to call them on the blueprinted bat phone to get an answer in scrambled code.

DrumStix
12-31-10, 03:44 PM
Stix, you have to call them on the blueprinted bat phone to get an answer in scrambled code.

I don't have a like system on my end with the proper codec.

Luna.
12-31-10, 06:27 PM
@Luna. Oh I'll be sending you my paypal address LOL!!!! ;)


LOL. No way! I'll be sending you mine! ;)


Right here and several other posts have had mentions, But I'm not searching everything for answers you already know...Your comments highlighted in bold are incorrect. Its not just about the weight. It is the forces and leverage against the crank/balancer interface. We would still have the same stance if the aftermarket pulley weighed 8 lbs. total @ 10" dia. The problem is that is too much leverage on the crank snout. That's not marketing BS, just facts. As I am sure you are aware, we could have come out with a 10" pulley a long time ago. We could have engineered proper relocation brackets, new hard lines for the AC, and provided a new idler to release a 10" pulley. And guess what, it would have been VERY light. There has to be a reason why we didn't, right? As a matter of fact, we just got finished machining up a 7" and 7.5" pulley for the LSA application. We have sold and installed hundreds of pullies in the 9" and 9.5" variant. All we have to do is a quick email blast to our current customer list and let them know about the new 10" magic pulley...

I'm sorry, but where exactly does he state the 10" ring, "is going to cause issues" in the quote above?

I guess my reading comprehension skills are not working right now, but I don't see that above...


So please friggin jump in and provide the damn answer.

Just like I'm waiting for Jesse to provide an answer.


If you think your helping the community with this than I'm here to tell you you're not.

I'm not sure you speak for the community.


This factless pissing contest is a joke.

War away on the risks of a 10" pulley; I don't care & I bet many others don't either. It's your car, do what you want.

But it isn't factless that I'm running a KB BAP.

Bushidopupil
12-31-10, 07:21 PM
LOL. No way! I'll be sending you mine! ;)



I'm sorry, but where exactly does he state the 10" ring, "is going to cause issues" in the quote above?

I guess my reading comprehension skills are not working right now, but I don't see that above...



Just like I'm waiting for Jesse to provide an answer.


I'm not sure you speak for the community.



War away on the risks of a 10" pulley; I don't care & I bet many others don't either. It's your car, do what you want.

But it isn't factless that I'm running a KB BAP.

Sorry, Jesse has been VERY busy today ;-)

09V
12-31-10, 07:51 PM
I do not have a 10" ring, nor do I have a BAP in my setup, but one thing that I can say is everyone has an opinion on what is the best way to go and things that they wouldn't dare venture into. I have unfortunately learned first hand that once you dive into high horsepower upgrades there is always a potential to watch your money get pissed down the drain. Sure we all want the "BEST" possible outcome when we pay large sums of money to upgrade things, but lets face it. Things happen and motors go ^^up sometimes. Who should we blame? I don't know the answer to that question and everyone would most likely have a different finger to point at a different culprit.
Just remember folks opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one(some two), and they all stink to some extent.

Good luck for those of you that began this thread looking for answers, the only way to truly know is to use trial and error on your own ride.

I hope you don't have to pay above and beyond the initial upgrade to play!

snzuloz
01-01-11, 11:30 AM
LOL. No way! I'll be sending you mine! ;)



I'm sorry, but where exactly does he state the 10" ring, "is going to cause issues" in the quote above?

I guess my reading comprehension skills are not working right now, but I don't see that above...

What would I expect as an answer from you, I guess all of the comments leading up to now about the dangers of running a 10" ring have just been fabricated by "MYSELF" . I know damn well what comments I have read, why do you think I responded if I wanted an answer in the first place (how hard is it to get some real info and facts...really). Obviously you knew about the issue potentially as you brought it up as well in some of your posts... I'm gald you have your KB BAP setup working otherwise I could show you another use for it. Happy F*$^ing New Year



Just like I'm waiting for Jesse to provide an answer.



I'm not sure you speak for the community.

I think the majority of the people in this community understand exactly what he's saying...


War away on the risks of a 10" pulley; I don't care & I bet many others don't either. It's your car, do what you want.

But it isn't factless that I'm running a KB BAP.

I bet that most people would like some answers regarding these comments about the 10" kit, just to put this to rest once and for all.

Luna.
01-01-11, 04:53 PM
What would I expect as an answer from you, I guess all of the comments leading up to now about the dangers of running a 10" ring have just been fabricated by "MYSELF" . I know damn well what comments I have read, why do you think I responded if I wanted an answer in the first place (how hard is it to get some real info and facts...really). Obviously you knew about the issue potentially as you brought it up as well in some of your posts... I'm gald you have your KB BAP setup working otherwise I could show you another use for it. Happy F*$^ing New Year


I asked a simple question, you provided a quote, at which point I thought I politely replied that I didn't understand...and this is your reply?

WTF? Got called out on your incorrect quote & you're getting mad like a little, spoiled, brat? Want some tissue?

It's people like you that let rumors fester into facts. I don't believe he EVER stated it will cause issues. The message seems pretty clear to me--it might cause an issue.

Then again, I don't need to speak for D3, they can do it themselves.

What I can state, with confidence, however, is that my concerns were/are that the risk was too high for my blood, NOT that it was guaranteed to cause a failure. If you disagree, fine, do whatever the hell you want.

And I'm happy that you are glad my KB BAP is working. And no, I don't EVER need to have you show me ANYTHING, as if you even could. As a matter of fact, why don't you just never reply to my comments again. I don't need to have a discussion with an immature, arrogant, punk. Thank you

snzuloz
01-01-11, 05:49 PM
I asked a simple question, you provided a quote, at which point I thought I politely replied that I didn't understand...and this is your reply?

If you look back at these prior posts you Have BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT THE 10" WILL POTENTIALLY CAUSE PROBLEMS BUT NEVER SAY WHERE YOUR INFO CAME FROM and I know D3 has mentioned this as being an issue whether or not in this thread but I know thats where it originated. Politely doesn't ridicule does it?


WTF? Got called out on your incorrect quote & you're getting mad like a little, spoiled, brat? Want some tissue?

I'm getting pissed off because nobody will answer the question, and YOU keep bugging me with these replies just like this one. We would see in person who would need the tissue...

It's people like you that let rumors fester into facts. I don't believe he EVER stated it will cause issues. The message seems pretty clear to me--it might cause an issue.

You better go thru some of the prior posts, I know what I have read, and it has been mentioned-even by yourself.


Then again, I don't need to speak for D3, they can do it themselves.


Good luck with this, have you seen any response from anyone else's questions towards them?



What I can state, with confidence, however, is that my concerns were/are that the risk was too high for my blood, NOT that it was guaranteed to cause a failure. If you disagree, fine, do whatever the hell you want.

And I'm happy that you are glad my KB BAP is working. And no, I don't EVER need to have you show me ANYTHING, as if you even could. As a matter of fact, why don't you just never reply to my comments again. I don't need to have a discussion with an immature, arrogant, punk. Thank you

Think what you want I'm definately not a punk, nor little, nor immature or arrogant I do however value the truth or as some may say FACTUAL INFORMATION if something is brought up I would like to see it and prove it rather than what I see as bad mouthing someone else's credibility or work or products they sell. And you might be surprised at what I'm capable of-like you know me at all anyways. I always try to help people if I can be of assistance and would appreciate the same courtesy back in return. That is the reason for the forum isn't it? This type of crap really makes my blood boil.

Thank You and Happy New Year

DrumStix
01-02-11, 04:42 PM
I'm not sure you speak for the community.



You certainly can't.

Domsz06
01-03-11, 07:29 PM
Riddle me this harmonic "balancing" whiz of innerwebz blueprintz from SoCal. What is the internal crank balance of an LSA? How do you get away with using a 5 lb lighter "balancer" on an otherwise stock motor with no internals changed? Is it really externally balanced or harmonically dampened. I will not answer here but the terms and theory I am seeing throw around here are way off. Use the force and answer wisely.

lol ;) I love this!! "use the force Dr."


So please friggin jump in and provide the damn answer. All of this "generic" bs as you put it and these claims abounding from all sides are a waste of breathe as so many have pointed out. I say there are 9 ways to hook up a BAP. 8 are wrong. Guess which one isn't. C'mon man. If you think your helping the community with this than I'm here to tell you you're not. If you'd just like to sell "blueprinted" parts on the innerwebz (Like I said 10 months ago, who would pay $15,000 to blueprint an oil dipstick but D3 and never produced an answer to that question) then open up a store front and sell quarts of oil for $120 each. This factless pissing contest is a joke.

I agree, help us all out. we are all out to learn, why keep all the freaking secrets?


My summation on the 10" pulley is as follows. If the rotating mass has not increased, and we all know those rings are very light, along with the angle off the snout not changing, we all know that would be nearly impossible unless the damper was bad, it is left to one remaining key point and that's belt tension. If the tensioner is not pulling up on that crank snout in astronomical numbers far higher than stock then the main bearing just behind the face of the block (M1) will not suffer from any adverse affects. A 100% balanced pulley is going to be bullet proof. Any out of balance or vibrate is going to exacerbate loads on the snout and failure would occur sooner. That's an easy thing to detect.

I've run God awful tension on 5.0 blower pulleys on that weak block for 30-40000 miles before 10 rib systems were available, torn the motor down and the front main still has no copper showing but was wearing a littler faster than other bearings. We did not test to a failure but I am fairly certain it was 10's of thousands of miles less than a stock motor would go. That said, we tripled the tension and it lived just fine.

Now it's all left up to the efficiency of the TVS 1900. That's another thread.

see this is what I was feeling as well, if the tension isn't as bad, and the weight is better, it will be fine..... but I'm just a loely oilfield engineer, lol ;)


Stix, you have to call them on the blueprinted bat phone to get an answer in scrambled code.

I HAVE ONE!! but you can't see or use it ;)

DrumStix
01-03-11, 08:57 PM
if the tension isn't as bad, and the weight is better, it will be fine..... but I'm just a loely oilfield engineer, lol ;)

I HAVE ONE!! but you can't see or use it ;)

That and the pulley must be 100% symmetrical and balanced before going on so not to introduce any new harmonics where none exist. I used to spin balance mine to 10,000 rpm before installing on motors.
Also, the on and off throttle thing like sprint car racing only on a smaller scale is also something to consider. Those forces could lead to belt slippage and put extra wear on bearings with any extra mass on the snout. That it's keyed is good but also it has 0 give.

Domsz06
01-03-11, 09:05 PM
Riddle me this harmonic "balancing" whiz of innerwebz blueprintz from SoCal. What is the internal crank balance of an LSA? How do you get away with using a 5 lb lighter "balancer" on an otherwise stock motor with no internals changed? Is it really externally balanced or harmonically dampened. I will not answer here but the terms and theory I am seeing throw around here are way off. Use the force and answer wisely.


So please friggin jump in and provide the damn answer. All of this "generic" bs as you put it and these claims abounding from all sides are a waste of breathe as so many have pointed out. I say there are 9 ways to hook up a BAP. 8 are wrong. Guess which one isn't. C'mon man. If you think your helping the community with this than I'm here to tell you you're not. If you'd just like to sell "blueprinted" parts on the innerwebz (Like I said 10 months ago, who would pay $15,000 to blueprint an oil dipstick but D3 and never produced an answer to that question) then open up a store front and sell quarts of oil for $120 each. This factless pissing contest is a joke.


My summation on the 10" pulley is as follows. If the rotating mass has not increased, and we all know those rings are very light, along with the angle off the snout not changing, we all know that would be nearly impossible unless the damper was bad, it is left to one remaining key point and that's belt tension. If the tensioner is not pulling up on that crank snout in astronomical numbers far higher than stock then the main bearing just behind the face of the block (M1) will not suffer from any adverse affects. A 100% balanced pulley is going to be bullet proof. Any out of balance or vibrate is going to exacerbate loads on the snout and failure would occur sooner. That's an easy thing to detect.

I've run God awful tension on 5.0 blower pulleys on that weak block for 30-40000 miles before 10 rib systems were available, torn the motor down and the front main still has no copper showing but was wearing a littler faster than other bearings. We did not test to a failure but I am fairly certain it was 10's of thousands of miles less than a stock motor would go. That said, we tripled the tension and it lived just fine.

Now it's all left up to the efficiency of the TVS 1900. That's another thread.


That and the pulley must be 100% symmetrical and balanced before going on so not to introduce any new harmonics where none exist. I used to spin balance mine to 10,000 rpm before installing on motors.
Also, the on and off throttle thing like sprint car racing only on a smaller scale is also something to consider. Those forces could lead to belt slippage and put extra wear on bearings with any extra mass on the snout. That it's keyed is good but also it has 0 give.

so am I catching what your throwing and that it's not really as big a deal as some are making? I know you know your stuff Stix..... :)

Oh yeah, check your PM's

DrumStix
01-04-11, 10:29 AM
so am I catching what your throwing and that it's not really as big a deal as some are making? I know you know your stuff Stix..... :)

Oh yeah, check your PM's

No idea what they are stuck on. This stuff has been around for eons. It's not rock science.

Domsz06
01-04-11, 12:42 PM
No idea what they are stuck on. This stuff has been around for eons. It's not rock science.

IMO FWIW I think it's a sales pitch. In Cali the norm is to drive a VERY nice car and trick it out. And most know NOTHING about cars. In Cali I have seen it a lot where vendors talk a mean game and through words and what not around and the customer spends $1000's on stuff that is overprice, not needed, or just "blingy" I'm sure it goes on elsewhere, but I really noticed it a lot when I lived in Cali....:hide:

DrumStix
01-04-11, 02:05 PM
IMO FWIW I think it's a sales pitch. In Cali the norm is to drive a VERY nice car and trick it out. And most know NOTHING about cars. In Cali I have seen it a lot where vendors talk a mean game and through words and what not around and the customer spends $1000's on stuff that is overprice, not needed, or just "blingy" I'm sure it goes on elsewhere, but I really noticed it a lot when I lived in Cali....:hide:

Me too, so I moved. All about perception and no content, kinda like mtv.

Domsz06
01-04-11, 02:44 PM
Me too, so I moved. All about perception and no content, kinda like mtv.

You and me both. Some love it and are all about it. I never did and still don't fit the norm, so guess the reason why I didn't like it and moved too.

gnxs
01-04-11, 04:22 PM
How many people have the 10" setup and how is it working for you?
I've had the 10" lower on my car for a while now. No issues. Yea it's a bit tight with one of the AC lines (had to modify the bracket so the line stayed away from the pulley) and it required a custom bracket on the tensioner side (that Jesse makes and sells), but I haven't had any issues so far. I put the 9.5 lower on the car a week after I bought it and changed to the 10" about 20,000 miles ago (45,000+ on the car now). FWIW, I've put tons of miles and probably more than 50 1/4 mile passes on the car with zero problems to this point.

I'm sure it's putting more stress on the crank, but I can't say I've heard of one single car that's had an issue with a lower pulley (knocking wood :shhh: ) busting the snout on the crank. I've also run a 6 lb lower on my Cobra for nearly 100,000 miles and never hurt that crank either. Then again I don't own a shop and see CTS-V's passing through every day. Maybe it is an issue, but I would have thought that I'd have seen somebody post by now if it were a problem.

snzuloz
01-04-11, 05:24 PM
That's exactly what I have been thinking as well, was just trying to get some info from some others and dispel the myth somewhat. Thanks for the post!

Dr. Design
01-28-11, 08:15 PM
Hello,
Since it was asked that we provided more data supporting our stance on this subject regarding pulley's, we have made a formal response on this thread:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/220771-harmonic-balancer-crank-pulley-complete-breakdown.html#post2480200

Please let us know if there are any questions.

Thank you,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

DrumStix
01-28-11, 09:04 PM
Wow, so you used Wiki like a dictionary to try to tell all the stupid folk what all of those definitions are? Nice. That only took you a month. The topic had calmed down but you brought it back up and in such a way that you actually thought you said something. You said nothing original actually.

I couldn't find a cookie so here's some bacon. :bacon:


Oh, it's not real bacon either. It's perpetrating a fraud. That rings familiar.
Not a bit of engineering fact about your product, just a great camera and a lot of empty words. I mean really. I'm not satisfied. I guess all can wait until I post some key product info next week on a D3 product. Stay tuned.

JOEYCTS-V
01-28-11, 09:40 PM
:histeric: :pop2:

cbloveday
01-28-11, 10:59 PM
waffles

RapidRob
01-28-11, 11:09 PM
^^^ - You forgot the milk with the cookies Curtis, he he.

Rob

dvandentop
01-29-11, 12:23 AM
wow cant believe i just read this whole thread i must be bored outta my mind tonight