A turning point in Mercedes tuning...Performance Supercharger Pulley
03-15-2008, 03:39 PM
#76
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Barbara & Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32, Cobra, 700hp Vespa
Here is the best run by itself. Below it is the data from the run. As you can see, there is no slipping. I let off the throttle just before 6k or so. Power continues to build until we let off. It does not dip or backtrack at all. The slice of data is from 5600-6000 as you requested.
03-15-2008, 03:54 PM
#77
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Barbara & Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32, Cobra, 700hp Vespa
Chicago, just to clarify. The winpep dyno that appears on this page is from an C32 with an ASP crank pulley. That is not my vehicle. The last dyno for our pulley is the one I just reposted for you with the data.
03-15-2008, 04:46 PM
#78
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c32
personally i cant wait to get one! i also commend code-3 for putting in the research and development necesary to make a NEW(and affordable) product for us. its probably sort of discouraging to have all the nit-picking, criticizing, and theories of the pulley not working. it would be one thing had the pulley not been tested on the dyno and street use for several months and thousands of miles without any problems. dont knock it till ya try it. oh wait, people have.
03-15-2008, 05:12 PM
#79
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In a box
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W211 E55
See the following pic for the area in question.
03-15-2008, 05:24 PM
#80
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Barbara & Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32, Cobra, 700hp Vespa
I regapped my plugs down to .035 after that run and never saw that behavior again. As you can see from my latest dyno, which was the best run, that dip does not exist.
03-15-2008, 05:36 PM
#81
Super Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 830
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2003 C32 AMG, 2003 E39 M5
I agree it should be a great product when all questions are answered. Brandon seems to be addressing each one as they arise I do not think anyone is nit picking just curious, excited and asking questions that are of concern. These questions I am sure are not discouraging Brandon but showing him the vast amount of interest in this product. There is going to be more questions since this is a new product that no one else offers. Rather ask questions now then end up with a blown motor. I would be more concerned about someone that did not ask questions. When you are dealing with a changing the dynamics of a very expensive engine then there is going to be concerns and questions.
I myself will probably be going this route
I myself will probably be going this route
personally i cant wait to get one! i also commend code-3 for putting in the research and development necesary to make a NEW(and affordable) product for us. its probably sort of discouraging to have all the nit-picking, criticizing, and theories of the pulley not working. it would be one thing had the pulley not been tested on the dyno and street use for several months and thousands of miles without any problems. dont knock it till ya try it. oh wait, people have.
03-15-2008, 05:56 PM
#83
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Barbara & Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32, Cobra, 700hp Vespa
That first graph was actually the best looking run before we regapped the plugs down to 035. Some of the other runs we did before that, demonstrated just how important regapping the plugs is. So whether you are running a crank pulley, or the new sc pulley, regapping plugs is recommended. I was planning on doing a separate post with before and after dynos in regards to regapping the plugs. To be honest, I regapped in stages. First from 039 to 037, then from 037 to 035. After 035, everything always looked good. That first graph was an 037 run. The last was an 035 run. Every dyno at the stock gap, running the sc pulley, looked far worse. Power drop off was awful. Regapping the plugs will completely reshape the upper part of the power curve.
03-16-2008, 06:14 AM
#84
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Home is Stockholm, Sweden. But my work takes me around the world, right now I work/live in Laos, South East Asia.
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C32 T 2003. Mods? MANY!! :)
Guys, Brandon just send me an updated picture on the pulley! It looks totally different from the first one he showed me, and it looks very professional I have to say. I can't wait to get my hands on one!
Brandon, will I get the first one in Europe!? 
Regards from Lebanon
Brandon, will I get the first one in Europe!?
Regards from Lebanon
03-16-2008, 11:58 AM
#85
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
1991 Toyota MR2, 2002 C32 AMG
Thats nice and all but if you'd like to make a worthwhile contribution to this thread just post the picture along with your opinion. I don't mean to come off as an ***, it's just frustrating when all this conversation about this "magical" pulley claims to do so much yet an eager consumer cannot even get a picture posted on the very thread its about.
03-16-2008, 05:43 PM
#88
SPONSOR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston/ Austin /Toronto / UAE / Minneapolis / Orlando /Cincinnati
Posts: 5,459
Received 149 Likes
on
109 Posts
Eurocharged Performance ML63 and TT lambo
Thats nice and all but if you'd like to make a worthwhile contribution to this thread just post the picture along with your opinion. I don't mean to come off as an ***, it's just frustrating when all this conversation about this "magical" pulley claims to do so much yet an eager consumer cannot even get a picture posted on the very thread its about.
03-16-2008, 11:50 PM
#90
this seems like its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unforutnate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road. To me it seems like if you want more power just go with a LET 181 or 185 pulley or a VRP one. not knocking you it just seems more logical to spend few hundred more and get the crank pullley instead of messing with the complex supercharger pulley.
I'd love to see a picture though if you have one. it is an interesting concept in the least
I'd love to see a picture though if you have one. it is an interesting concept in the least
03-17-2008, 12:52 AM
#91
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Santa Barbara & Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 973
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32, Cobra, 700hp Vespa
this seems like its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unforutnate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road. To me it seems like if you want more power just go with a LET 181 or 185 pulley or a VRP one. not knocking you it just seems more logical to spend few hundred more and get the crank pullley instead of messing with the complex supercharger pulley.
I'd love to see a picture though if you have one. it is an interesting concept in the least
I'd love to see a picture though if you have one. it is an interesting concept in the least
Now, if you are talking about running a crank pulley and sc pulley, then yes, you are pushing the limits of the stock sc. But running either setup independently of each other yeilds sc rpms that are far below the max.
Out of curiosity, what part of the supercharger pulley is complex? Its actually a very simple and elegant design.
03-17-2008, 10:07 AM
#92
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Home is Stockholm, Sweden. But my work takes me around the world, right now I work/live in Laos, South East Asia.
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C32 T 2003. Mods? MANY!! :)
Thats nice and all but if you'd like to make a worthwhile contribution to this thread just post the picture along with your opinion. I don't mean to come off as an ***, it's just frustrating when all this conversation about this "magical" pulley claims to do so much yet an eager consumer cannot even get a picture posted on the very thread its about.
I can se your point, but since Brandon don't want me to show it to anybody, yet, I'll stick to that.....Sorry!
03-17-2008, 01:17 PM
#93
Brandon
Why bother even to post this so soon if you only explain things but don't post a pic like you have done many times in the past? I finally got one answer...that it is not a good idea for already pullied car. I will say it sounds very promising but you are going about it the wrong way my friend....you should have gotten everything ready first then post it. Competition or not on this forum ALOT of people know and trust you and I can see the desperation in every party thats extremely interested. Its been about a week now and only your info with some member responces that you have worked with so its hard to believe. I say if anyone buys this this setup then do a third party(not related in anyway way..even as a tester) dyno to show results and if anyone changed from crank pulley to this mysterious S/C pulley then PLEASE show results cause if this continues the S/C pulley will scare many off. This kind of exposure just scares people not into venturing into this. I write cause I am tired of waiting to see what you say is a great pulley. I would like this to work for you but this is not a good way to start. Your new lighter rotors thread has pics and many can see your product to judge if they are interested or if any paryts of the design is flawed. Please lets finish this already or post that you will come with all answers at a certain time. God bless.
Why bother even to post this so soon if you only explain things but don't post a pic like you have done many times in the past? I finally got one answer...that it is not a good idea for already pullied car. I will say it sounds very promising but you are going about it the wrong way my friend....you should have gotten everything ready first then post it. Competition or not on this forum ALOT of people know and trust you and I can see the desperation in every party thats extremely interested. Its been about a week now and only your info with some member responces that you have worked with so its hard to believe. I say if anyone buys this this setup then do a third party(not related in anyway way..even as a tester) dyno to show results and if anyone changed from crank pulley to this mysterious S/C pulley then PLEASE show results cause if this continues the S/C pulley will scare many off. This kind of exposure just scares people not into venturing into this. I write cause I am tired of waiting to see what you say is a great pulley. I would like this to work for you but this is not a good way to start. Your new lighter rotors thread has pics and many can see your product to judge if they are interested or if any paryts of the design is flawed. Please lets finish this already or post that you will come with all answers at a certain time. God bless.
Last edited by c32used; 03-17-2008 at 01:19 PM.
03-17-2008, 01:27 PM
#94
Super Member
I gotta say, it is most disheartening to read some of the posts in this thread. Some posts are absolutely valid and some are as if people aren’t bothering to read the information already posted. If I got a penny every time I was told I was wasting my time pursuing a project at work, I’d be a very wealthy individual (and I’m not)! I’m sure many of you are the same way. Many of us have already taken the SC pulley off our cars (if only to replace the bearing) and I think we can mostly agree that the SC pulley is not that complex. Yes, people have pursued a smaller SC pulley in the past, but the question is: how much R&D did they invest pursuing a viable product? From the sounds of it, Brandon appears to have invested a LOT in this product. So much so that there’s nothing ‘magical’ about it.
From reading the posts, it appears as if there are several issues regarding the development of a smaller SC pulley that have been already addressed and/or could require additional comments:
1. The SC pulley rpm. Brandon just addressed this, but in light of the information already provided in the thread, where is the logic in: “its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unfortunate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road.” The calculations of SC rpm based on pulley size have been posted (Jerry posted the data from the X-fire forum). How is it mathematically possible for this smaller SC pulley to come anywhere near the SC rpm limit if used on its own?
Calculations alone: if the OE crank pulley is used and we want a target SC rpm that is 10% less than max, you would need to use a smaller SC pulley that is 50.9mm to achieve 18,630rpm. Based on the fact that Brandon is using the original NSK bearing, this smaller SC pulley HAS to be larger than 50.9mm (given the size of the OE NSK bearing). Therefore, the SC rpm MUST be lower than 18,630.
2. Use with 178mm / 181mm / 185mm overdrive crank pulleys. Will this smaller SC pulley used in conjunction with a very large crank pulley (say 181-185mm) put the SC rpm over the max of 20,700rpm? Mathematically, NO. That said, obviously SC rpm is only part of the safety and efficiency equation. It sounds like Brandon is testing his smaller SC pulley on cars with aftermarket OE pulleys right now. Let’s wait for the results.
3. Belt slippage. Again, as alluded to earlier, there is an acceptable amount of slippage in pretty much all supercharged applications. It seems like this is something that is almost required to protect certain parts. The E55 guys deal with it in stock form and we also deal with it in stock form to an acceptable level. I encourage all of you to pull the engine cover off your car and look at the underside of the cover. What is ‘acceptable’ SC pulley slippage? I would say that amount that allows ‘useable’ power, doesn’t shred your belt, or doesn’t adversely affect AFR or timing. According to the SRT-6 guy, TopGun32, and Brandon – slippage isn’t a significant issue. Sounds like the R&D paid off in terms of modifying the pulley ribs (not to mention the fact that the arc of contact doesn’t seem to be altered much). Maybe there IS a slightly increased amount of belt slippage. Wouldn’t you expect slippage with some of the larger overdrive crank pulleys? Is it that big an issue?
4. Warranty. An excellent point made by Ted Baldwin! Given the price of the pulley (~$600), it’s probably unlikely that Brandon is going to cover certain repairs. That said, it would be very reassuring for Brandon to comment on offering a warranty on the SC pulley itself providing the proper installation and application guidelines are adhered to!
5. Photos and other information! Given the purported R&D that has gone into this pulley, I can understand why he isn’t releasing photos just yet. If I was relying on this product being my ‘bread and butter’, I’d do the same thing. I think the reasoning behind the frustration in not seeing photos stems from the fact that most mods we know of are developed and discussed de novo on threads on forums like MBWorld. Obviously, one of the SRT-6 guys shot his mouth off before Brandon was ready to release all information in a manner that is satisfactory to everyone.
From reading the posts, it appears as if there are several issues regarding the development of a smaller SC pulley that have been already addressed and/or could require additional comments:
1. The SC pulley rpm. Brandon just addressed this, but in light of the information already provided in the thread, where is the logic in: “its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unfortunate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road.” The calculations of SC rpm based on pulley size have been posted (Jerry posted the data from the X-fire forum). How is it mathematically possible for this smaller SC pulley to come anywhere near the SC rpm limit if used on its own?
Calculations alone: if the OE crank pulley is used and we want a target SC rpm that is 10% less than max, you would need to use a smaller SC pulley that is 50.9mm to achieve 18,630rpm. Based on the fact that Brandon is using the original NSK bearing, this smaller SC pulley HAS to be larger than 50.9mm (given the size of the OE NSK bearing). Therefore, the SC rpm MUST be lower than 18,630.
2. Use with 178mm / 181mm / 185mm overdrive crank pulleys. Will this smaller SC pulley used in conjunction with a very large crank pulley (say 181-185mm) put the SC rpm over the max of 20,700rpm? Mathematically, NO. That said, obviously SC rpm is only part of the safety and efficiency equation. It sounds like Brandon is testing his smaller SC pulley on cars with aftermarket OE pulleys right now. Let’s wait for the results.
3. Belt slippage. Again, as alluded to earlier, there is an acceptable amount of slippage in pretty much all supercharged applications. It seems like this is something that is almost required to protect certain parts. The E55 guys deal with it in stock form and we also deal with it in stock form to an acceptable level. I encourage all of you to pull the engine cover off your car and look at the underside of the cover. What is ‘acceptable’ SC pulley slippage? I would say that amount that allows ‘useable’ power, doesn’t shred your belt, or doesn’t adversely affect AFR or timing. According to the SRT-6 guy, TopGun32, and Brandon – slippage isn’t a significant issue. Sounds like the R&D paid off in terms of modifying the pulley ribs (not to mention the fact that the arc of contact doesn’t seem to be altered much). Maybe there IS a slightly increased amount of belt slippage. Wouldn’t you expect slippage with some of the larger overdrive crank pulleys? Is it that big an issue?
4. Warranty. An excellent point made by Ted Baldwin! Given the price of the pulley (~$600), it’s probably unlikely that Brandon is going to cover certain repairs. That said, it would be very reassuring for Brandon to comment on offering a warranty on the SC pulley itself providing the proper installation and application guidelines are adhered to!
5. Photos and other information! Given the purported R&D that has gone into this pulley, I can understand why he isn’t releasing photos just yet. If I was relying on this product being my ‘bread and butter’, I’d do the same thing. I think the reasoning behind the frustration in not seeing photos stems from the fact that most mods we know of are developed and discussed de novo on threads on forums like MBWorld. Obviously, one of the SRT-6 guys shot his mouth off before Brandon was ready to release all information in a manner that is satisfactory to everyone.
Last edited by boohooramblers; 03-17-2008 at 01:46 PM.
03-17-2008, 01:54 PM
#95
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
I gotta say, it is most disheartening to read some of the posts in this thread. Some posts are absolutely valid and some are as if people aren’t bothering to read the information already posted. If I got a penny every time I was told I was wasting my time pursuing a project at work, I’d be a very wealthy individual (and I’m not)! I’m sure many of you are the same way. Many of us have already taken the SC pulley off our cars (if only to replace the bearing) and I think we can mostly agree that the SC pulley is not that complex. Yes, people have pursued a smaller SC pulley in the past, but the question is: how much R&D did they invest pursuing a viable product? From the sounds of it, Brandon appears to have invested a LOT in this product. So much so that there’s nothing ‘magical’ about it.
From reading the posts, it appears as if there are several issues regarding the development of a smaller SC pulley that have been already addressed and/or could require additional comments:
1. The SC pulley rpm. Brandon just addressed this, but in light of the information already provided in the thread, where is the logic in: “its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unfortunate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road.” The calculations of SC rpm based on pulley size have been posted (Jerry posted the data from the X-fire forum). How is it mathematically possible for this smaller SC pulley to come anywhere near the SC rpm limit if used on its own?
Calculations alone: if the OE crank pulley is used and we want a target SC rpm that is 10% less than max, you would need to use a smaller SC pulley that is 50.9mm to achieve 18,630rpm. Based on the fact that Brandon is using the original NSK bearing, this smaller SC pulley HAS to be larger than 50.9mm (given the size of the OE NSK bearing). Therefore, the SC rpm MUST be lower than 18,630.
2. Use with 178mm / 181mm / 185mm overdrive crank pulleys. Will this smaller SC pulley used in conjunction with a very large crank pulley (say 181-185mm) put the SC rpm over the max of 20,700rpm? Mathematically, NO. That said, obviously SC rpm is only part of the safety and efficiency equation. It sounds like Brandon is testing his smaller SC pulley on cars with aftermarket OE pulleys right now. Let’s wait for the results.
3. Belt slippage. Again, as alluded to earlier, there is an acceptable amount of slippage in pretty much all supercharged applications. It seems like this is something that is almost required to protect certain parts. The E55 guys deal with it in stock form and we also deal with it in stock form to an acceptable level. I encourage all of you to pull the engine cover off your car and look at the underside of the cover. What is ‘acceptable’ SC pulley slippage? I would say that amount that allows ‘useable’ power, doesn’t shred your belt, or doesn’t adversely affect AFR or timing. According to the SRT-6 guy, TopGun32, and Brandon – slippage isn’t a significant issue. Sounds like the R&D paid off in terms of modifying the pulley ribs (not to mention the fact that the arc of contact doesn’t seem to be altered much). Maybe there IS a slightly increased amount of belt slippage. Wouldn’t you expect slippage with some of the larger overdrive crank pulleys? Is it that big an issue?
4. Warranty. An excellent point made by Ted Baldwin! Given the price of the pulley (~$600), it’s probably unlikely that Brandon is going to cover certain repairs. That said, it would be very reassuring for Brandon to comment on offering a warranty on the SC pulley itself providing the proper installation and application guidelines are adhered to!
5. Photos and other information! Given the purported R&D that has gone into this pulley, I can understand why he isn’t releasing photos just yet. If I was relying on this product being my ‘bread and butter’, I’d do the same thing. I think the reasoning behind the frustration in not seeing photos stems from the fact that most mods we know of are developed and discussed de novo on threads on forums like MBWorld. Obviously, one of the SRT-6 guys shot his mouth off before Brandon was ready to release all information in a manner that is satisfactory to everyone.
From reading the posts, it appears as if there are several issues regarding the development of a smaller SC pulley that have been already addressed and/or could require additional comments:
1. The SC pulley rpm. Brandon just addressed this, but in light of the information already provided in the thread, where is the logic in: “its coming dangerously close to the superchargers threshold. I have an unfortunate feeling over time we are gonna see blown superchargers b/c people will haphazardly install this mod and not understand the longevity issue down the road.” The calculations of SC rpm based on pulley size have been posted (Jerry posted the data from the X-fire forum). How is it mathematically possible for this smaller SC pulley to come anywhere near the SC rpm limit if used on its own?
Calculations alone: if the OE crank pulley is used and we want a target SC rpm that is 10% less than max, you would need to use a smaller SC pulley that is 50.9mm to achieve 18,630rpm. Based on the fact that Brandon is using the original NSK bearing, this smaller SC pulley HAS to be larger than 50.9mm (given the size of the OE NSK bearing). Therefore, the SC rpm MUST be lower than 18,630.
2. Use with 178mm / 181mm / 185mm overdrive crank pulleys. Will this smaller SC pulley used in conjunction with a very large crank pulley (say 181-185mm) put the SC rpm over the max of 20,700rpm? Mathematically, NO. That said, obviously SC rpm is only part of the safety and efficiency equation. It sounds like Brandon is testing his smaller SC pulley on cars with aftermarket OE pulleys right now. Let’s wait for the results.
3. Belt slippage. Again, as alluded to earlier, there is an acceptable amount of slippage in pretty much all supercharged applications. It seems like this is something that is almost required to protect certain parts. The E55 guys deal with it in stock form and we also deal with it in stock form to an acceptable level. I encourage all of you to pull the engine cover off your car and look at the underside of the cover. What is ‘acceptable’ SC pulley slippage? I would say that amount that allows ‘useable’ power, doesn’t shred your belt, or doesn’t adversely affect AFR or timing. According to the SRT-6 guy, TopGun32, and Brandon – slippage isn’t a significant issue. Sounds like the R&D paid off in terms of modifying the pulley ribs (not to mention the fact that the arc of contact doesn’t seem to be altered much). Maybe there IS a slightly increased amount of belt slippage. Wouldn’t you expect slippage with some of the larger overdrive crank pulleys? Is it that big an issue?
4. Warranty. An excellent point made by Ted Baldwin! Given the price of the pulley (~$600), it’s probably unlikely that Brandon is going to cover certain repairs. That said, it would be very reassuring for Brandon to comment on offering a warranty on the SC pulley itself providing the proper installation and application guidelines are adhered to!
5. Photos and other information! Given the purported R&D that has gone into this pulley, I can understand why he isn’t releasing photos just yet. If I was relying on this product being my ‘bread and butter’, I’d do the same thing. I think the reasoning behind the frustration in not seeing photos stems from the fact that most mods we know of are developed and discussed de novo on threads on forums like MBWorld. Obviously, one of the SRT-6 guys shot his mouth off before Brandon was ready to release all information in a manner that is satisfactory to everyone.
I agree 100%
If you think a crank pulley is more complex than a kompressor pulley, you really need to do more work your car to undertand the components.
In factI I'm selling my ASP as soon as the 55 pulley is ready.
Why... Several reasons.. the main one being a pain in the *** to remove or install.
For most is not a DIY job, and things can go terrible wrong if the bolt and palcement is not correct.
If you want a picture of this magical pulley, open your hood and take a look at your kompresso pulley, it looks just about the same.
Brandon is a 1 man show and he has a family.... He is not Renntech or Evosport, relax guys!
03-17-2008, 03:03 PM
#97
Super Moderator
If my opinion makes a difference, I have been in Brandon's car a couple times and I must say...the car picks up faster and is ALOT smoother then before the pulley...I have seen it on his car and you can barely tell it's there... to Brandon...
to Brandon...
03-17-2008, 03:39 PM
#98
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32 AMG
+1
I agree 100%
If you think a crank pulley is more complex than a kompressor pulley, you really need to do more work your car to undertand the components.
In factI I'm selling my ASP as soon as the 55 pulley is ready.
Why... Several reasons.. the main one being a pain in the *** to remove or install.
For most is not a DIY job, and things can go terrible wrong if the bolt and palcement is not correct.
If you want a picture of this magical pulley, open your hood and take a look at your kompresso pulley, it looks just about the same.
Brandon is a 1 man show and he has a family.... He is not Renntech or Evosport, relax guys!
I agree 100%
If you think a crank pulley is more complex than a kompressor pulley, you really need to do more work your car to undertand the components.
In factI I'm selling my ASP as soon as the 55 pulley is ready.
Why... Several reasons.. the main one being a pain in the *** to remove or install.
For most is not a DIY job, and things can go terrible wrong if the bolt and palcement is not correct.
If you want a picture of this magical pulley, open your hood and take a look at your kompresso pulley, it looks just about the same.
Brandon is a 1 man show and he has a family.... He is not Renntech or Evosport, relax guys!
All good points. I'm fully behind this upgrade and can't wait to hear more testimonials. If you're a risk taker, buy it and use it. If not (like me) sit back and wait for reports "from the field" and make a decision on that basis. Personally, another 50 HP or so would be just what I needed to get excited about my car again ('cause frankly, I'm getting just a bit bored with it).
03-17-2008, 07:24 PM
#99
Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c32 AMG
The other issue for no pics of this product is simple... Its generating interest, and anticipation.. This is a great buisness marketting espicially toward the individuals who were thinking of getting a crank pulley.. Now this new pulley has come along and they are holding back on purchasing the crank pulley.
Its simple and every SMART buisness does this and it does not matter how big or small of a buisness you have. Code 3 has a great idea, he believes in it and wants your buisness too. So if this release persuades even 20 neebies from getting the crank pulley.. Humm thats 20 x $600.. hummm well do the math.
NOW not saying this the reason cause i know its because we have seen LET and Code 3 create some amazzzing products for a lot less and their philosophy is screw the greedy companies.. Which is awesome for us but they are investing time and energy away from their families and hell.......... Time is Money toooo..
So guys be patient its going to be here...
Its simple and every SMART buisness does this and it does not matter how big or small of a buisness you have. Code 3 has a great idea, he believes in it and wants your buisness too. So if this release persuades even 20 neebies from getting the crank pulley.. Humm thats 20 x $600.. hummm well do the math.
NOW not saying this the reason cause i know its because we have seen LET and Code 3 create some amazzzing products for a lot less and their philosophy is screw the greedy companies.. Which is awesome for us but they are investing time and energy away from their families and hell.......... Time is Money toooo..
So guys be patient its going to be here...
