if your talking about the rivets being even with the backside of the backing plate instead of being recessed that could pose an isse down the road as the plate wears against the clutch. this could wear down the rivets and cause them to break under stress. interesting

 

what crazy said is exactly what I was thinking.

 

There are plenty of miles on the pulleys without any issue but that is something being addressed with the next build.

 

Just got the tune. Max HP was 367 and Max torque was 365. Air fuel leanest was 12.1

 

Dyno jet 224 xlc

 

oops Jerry is not done. My bad

 

Does the EC 65mm pulley have the room to be machined down 2mm to an overall 63mm?

According to Sparkie's math, the 63mm S/C pulley puts the overall effect near the 181's effect... the 185 pulleys have historically put up fantastic dyno #'s but the 1/4 mile times have been poor due to the IAT's being insane with any crank pulley >181mm... Historically the 181 has proven to be the best blend of horsepower vs/ IAT's... which translates into great 1/4 mile times.

So, is there enough room between the bearing and the s/c pulley grooves to allow another 1mm to be reduced from the radius? If so, I may pursue this option.

I have the EC 65mm pulley and love it, although there is a bit of warp in the backing plate. Nothing severe enough to prevent me from running it, but Steve had to add extra shims to prevent the pulley from being constantly engaged with the s/c clutch.

 

Well Jerry did two more modifications on the ECU tune but I had to leave after the last download. He thought we were very close though. I will upload the dyno results when I get home. Car feels much faster.

 

HP to the wheels?

 

yup HP to wheels. I'll upload the charts tonight

 

what were your iat's during the pull? 3 or 4 gear pull?

 

Well I have tried to get the files to open but I must not have the correct program to view the data that was emailed to me. I have a physical copy of the first and last pull so I will see if I can have someone scan it as a picture and post here. My pulls were all made from 3rd gear and I do not have any way yet to measure my AIT's. Car is much faster with a lot more power from take off so much that I see new tires in my future.

 

Dude, you own an SRT-6, there will always be new tires in your future. Awesome numbers you are
reporting. 367 at the wheels, now that's nice, very nice. Now, you just need that pulley saver kit.
I just installed one of those, and it is not a hard job. Should take you about an hour to install that.
Today, I'm changing my supercharger oil. I'm sure it's time, with 108K on the clock.

Looking forward to seeing what you've got on your dyno printout. Very interested to see if the torque
curve stays "flat" across the RPM band, or if it is more curved. The idea having close to 370 foot
pounds of torque across the power curve is just staggering for this engine.

 

how many miles and whos putting them on the car? this pulley seems to have appeared from nowere was the seller doing testing prior to the sale for how long? i do wish there was some more info on the seller and or who actually is building the unit

 

Ditto !!!!!

 

It's been tested for about 5k miles and who cares if it came out of nowhere. Code3 pulleys came out of nowhere, Eurocharged's the same and does it really matter who is doing the manufacturing?

Now the real question is would you buy it or are you just poking and prodding for reaction.

 

I don't think anyone is out of line for questioning the source, especially given the debacle on MB-World with the "ASP" crank pulleys that have been rounding off crankshafts... I could bore us all to tears with links of multiple pulley failures in the last few months...

Not that the mysterious immaculate conception of the 62mm pulley is at all related, we're just wondering. I spoke to Steve at length regarding the 62mm pulley the other day. Both of us are considering it, but the rivet issue behind the clutch is a concern, as is the lack of R&D on the unit. 62mm puts the pulley in the performance/boost range of a 185, which is fairly extreme in the heat/IAT department.

Your defensive response to Steve's question is a bit... suspect. I mean, if you're affiliated with the 62mm production, simply come out and say it. That would likely even reassure some folks, because we know you know your stuff. For all we know, these are coming from China.

All poking and prodding on this forum results in one of two outcomes -- the purchase of a product, or the abandonment of one.

Respectfully,

 

2 clarify the code 3 was built and tested for the mercedes cars before the xfire was ever built. it had problems and was refined and went out of buisness.
e/c pulley was built due to the demand for another s/c pulley and has the backing of actual people who can be contacted with questions. still in buisnness
i care if it came out of nowere and there wasnt suffiecent testing done . if the bearing seizes and causes a failure the belt can cause a large amount of damage to expensive engine parts on the car.
if asp is the manufacturer they have the capabilty to ensure strict quality control of the product being built. if its a china built unit its only made to a set of specs without regard to the possibility of failure.

would i buy 1? if the price is right and the data backs up the pulley sure why not?
if i wanted to poke and prod i would ask much more personal questions. like are you the builder and designer? did you have the pulley made? since you bought my oem pulley to machine down then sold it because you said you found a c3 then this popped up and you seem to be the beta tester is this your design?
sorry rudy your a brillant builder and smarter than most i know but i dont take anyones word as gospel without asking a few (what i consider to be pertinent) questions .
since you know more than any of us about the builder and the pulley why wont you disclouse all the info?

 

My response was more of a everything comes out of nowhere. I haven't posted my results because I haven't put enough miles on the pulley to put my stamp of approval on it and my affiliation with the seller has no bearing at this time. They're not coming out of China and a lot of thought went into these so they wouldn't have the issues other pulleys have had in the past and would really be a smaller version of the factory pulley, reliability and all. If these made it to a final production point, the way the rivet in the back wasn't countersunk wasn't ever going to be part of the final design but to make the first ones to test, it ended up that way and it won't affect the outcome of the testing.

 

Good to know, thank you.

I can understand the reluctance in pinning an organization to the pulley, perhaps it was the defensive answer that caught me off-guard. I have no doubts that it will be a good seller once it's proven. In a perfect world, I'd like a 63mm pulley as it would put the performance near the 181 pulley, which has always been a proven performer. I'm simply not keen on the way the 181 is installed (locking the flywheel) so I've stuck with my 65mm EC pulley.

If I thought the EC pulley could have another 2mm overall trimmed off of it, I'd be pursuing that route.

What kind of IAT's are being observed with the 62mm? Sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread...

Cheers,