engifineer

And you base any of that on?????? What a company selling them told you. I know this because you havent shown the knowledge or understanding of the concepts to argue it any other way. Not being an **** to you.. but that is fact if you read your arguments. You keep speculating what engines need it and dont, while you first didnt know why it was there really, then dont seem to understand that the engineers saw it fit to include it on our engine (and pretty much every engine on the market over 2 liter) and most importantly didnt even know we had one to begin with. So you dont have much stance to argue on it. Again, I am not trying to insult you (as so many have been quick to do me in this argument) but simply stating what has been shown in this thread. Hell, even the company selling them didnt know what NVH even meant to start with. So there is a lot lacking in the support argument.

Toyota took time and money to design the pulley for OUR MOTOR. Not a 900 hp version of it or anything else. The take that the manufacturer was trying to go cheap doesnt hold water, since a solid pulley would have been cheaper. And the take that they are less knowledgeable than a guy with a CAD program and access to a machine shop is also pretty dense thinking. People seem to always jump to the conclusion that the designers of our cars were just so stupid that any aftermarket company can do it better. That simply is not the case. People rarely take the time to sit back and think out WHY something was designed the way it is.

Now, will adding a turbo reduce engine life? Nearly every time. So no one is saying that trade offs are bad. But a trade off for nearly nothing makes little sense to me. Especially when it can be done right (a flywheel) with much more effect with a little know how and a little bit more cash. But everyone wants that magic part that is cheap, super effective and has no side effect... that simply doesnt exist here.

Sly_dawg19

so basically the whole reason pulley companies make money is by showing lame dyno increases and lying to people about a product.

im 50/50 on the whole pulley thing.

i understand both sides. and their arguments and conclusions.

you are right though as i stated in my last reply. and always stated in ALL my replies.

there is a little gain in pulley changing.

150 dollars can be spent elsewhere.

the only reason i still post here is because im not so sure about the apocalypse of the engine these pulleys are supposed to cause.

i understand the resonance and too saw how that little actuator made the whole bridge shake slightly.

but where not talking reciprocating movement, were talking circular movement. and where not talking about a weighted end, were talking even balance.

im not saying OEM is ____, it is just heavier.

and last time i heard, light (but strong) parts where easier on engine and better overall.

So the cause of all this ruckus is a simple hard rubber ring in the OEM pulley, that is not in the aftermarket pulley.

is this rubber ring so important that removal of this ring will immediately cause wear and tear on the engine? This is where I am having some doubts.

can this rubber ring stop all resonance? All uneccesary torsional vibration? And be the end all to quality and durability on the engine? this is my question.

If i can see for real and for fact that the ring is the key, i will remove my perrin pulley tomorrow morning. But if it is a minute degradation, or no degradation at all, i will keep my perrin pulley.

Im into keeping and teaching right automotive knowledge as much as anyone else. So lets really decide what this rings capabilities as a savior to the engine really are, and if it really is neccesary to keep.

engifineer

We are not talking uniform, smooth movement. There is a not so smooth combustion process and a group of parasitic loads attached to the crank. Nothing about an engine is completely smooth and uniform.

And as far as companies lying.. your damned right they do, every day. People sell brass pyramids telling you they will perform miracles overnight, turbonators, fuel line magnets, you name it, with "proven" results. So simply trusting that since they advertise and sell them so it must be true is a dangerous route.

As far as whether the damper does what it is supposed to. Since we dont have a car, unlimited money, time and test equipement to measure the resonances involved in each application, under tons of circumstances and then enough testing to rule out all other causes, and a control unit under the same exacting circumstances, we are kind of held to taking knowledge from what is already there and tested. So, you have every auto manufacturer , as well as the larger, serious aftermarket companies and solid priciples of science.. against a few, smaller aftermarket builders who never seem to be able to directly answer the physics or even the correct automotive terms. So we can either get the first scenario together, or pick the knowledge from the most trusted source. That is left to each individual.

engifineer

I think a lot of the point of argument is either missed or taken the wrong way. I know I at least am not out to call those that want to run a particalur part stupid, or anything like that, although the arguments always turn bad in the end.

The point we try to make is that people should take into consideration all of the valid info that is out there and the design considerations taken rather than what they want to hear. A lot of what you are saying is on the same theme, Sly. And what Lance was saying to you regarding why he should listen to you is most likely trying to get you to state why you are saying what you are other than gut feeling. In other words, telling us what facts you are basing it off of.

I dont think anyone wants to make enemies here, only to have a disagreement that is at least based on all the facts rather than dismissing all of what the engineers have done when designing the car.

Fahk

I read a few times in this discussion that it gives you no real gain unless ur boosted.

Does this mean it gives u more substantial gains when turbocharged or just supercharged?

Sly_dawg19

I totally agree with you that the Big 3 and other companies that make high quality vehicles with billions of dollars and more than 50 years of experiance are well knowledged on making engines powerful small and last long. The aftermarket industry only makes money because of peoples greed, that is all.

Think about a Scion tC, it is a nice car with good mileage and pretty quick compared to same priced vehicles. Now Johnny A. has a Scion tC and gets greedy, it may be a different from or greed than conventional ways, however, it is greed in a simply and harmless form. He wants more power, style, attention, independance, anything..

Thus the after market is born, Turbo's, Superchargers, Nitrous, Pulleys, Intakes, Headers, Suspension, ETC.. All these things are made to make a Simple and Nice Scion tC more than what the other person has, or more than it was designed to be.

Now we can agree that some aftermarket products exceed the manufactuers quality and design, but this is only for one reason, greed.

No company out there can design an intake for the tC that increases power, increased mileage, decreases sound, and maximizes the tC effeciency of a stock intake like Toyota. What the aftermarket does is forgets sound, forgets mileage, and focus's on power, or style only.

So in truth, yes you are and always were correct. The stock pulley on any vehicle with the rubber ring is a better design. A better design in the categories of speed, decreased sound, mileage, reliability and effeciency. But to the aftermarket crowd and aftermarket companies where speed and power is everything, they will cut and remove any uneccesary and sometimes neccesary component to save a few ponies or tourqe.

But this we all know, all above this sentance is a given, and with though we already know this. Factory is better. It is better to go buy a 350Z than to make a tC have 300hp, even if the tC would be faster. For numerous reasons I dont think I need to explain.

A Nissan motor is desinged to run beyond 300,000 miles in normal driving conditions, as well as most other engines. Now taking a tC and making it 300HP with all sorts of upgrades will be as fast or faster as a 350Z but severly cut its reliability.

The basis of all our upgrades wether is relativly safe like an intake, or relatively dangerous like a pulley, should be based soley upon on the length of wanting the vehicle.

Most people trade their vehicles within 3 years. Some people trade yearly, some people keep their cars for 10 or longer years.

Does any of us plan to keep our tC's well beyond the 300,000 mile mark? Most of us it is a no. So we upgrade and change things, because by the time it affects the engine severly we will have a different vehicle.

This is why I will not remove my Perrin pulley, it may degrade my engines durability, but not much. My engine should and most likely will last beyond the 100,000 mile mark. Especially since I am using a N/A engine. (saving for 09' skyline )

Like you said we just dont know how long it will take to kill the engine. A turbo can kill an engine in one night, or kill it in 10 years. It all depends onf quality of product and tuning and the driver. The way I drive my xA i will not blow my engine by tomorrow, i will not blow my engine in 3 years, or even 8, which by then I will no longer have my xA or i will retire it to my collection.

The simple rule exists. If you want to keep your daily driver, your daily driver forever, dont modify its engine or transmission. Simple and true.

But none of us will keep our scions forever, and those that do will be willing to spend the money to repair whatever malfunctions that happens to their engine, whether its a pully, turbo, or natural causes.

I for one will keep my xA for as long as I possibly can, and If I have the money I will continue to learn and rebuild it as long as I live.

And a word of caution to young buyers, and to old timers. Choose carefully what you upgrade on your car.. You may regret it years down the road.

(holy crap i wrote alot..)

But to make most of the people on here happy, yes I admit I was wrong to a point. However that only matters on your plans with your vehicle, and the time you choose to keep it...

lo_bux_racer

Simple point: Save your money for a light flywheel. It will give a far better return than any pulley ever will at zero risk.

Also - if you hit resonance on the crank and stay there you might very well experience immediate failure. If you never do, you might never have failure. Regardless, there are a hundred other things you can do to make more power with less risk.

And you still don't seem to get the fact there is NO POWER INCREASE FROM LIGHTWEIGHT ANYTHING. To get more power you have to move more air. If you don't move more air, you don't make more power. A better measure is top speed. Top speed is the ultimate measure of power, and it doesn't care about weight. If top speed increases, you made more power. If it doesn't you didn't. No lightweight pulley, flywheel, crank, rods, pistons, or wrist pins ever changed top speed. Ever. There is no power increase, only the rate at which top speed is achieved.

Sly_dawg19

When I redo my engine in the airforce, i will put back on my pulley, and possibly turbo it.

light weight may not make more power on the dyno, but a stock car, and a car with lighter weight and equal driving skill will pull foward faster.

however, on that note too, a 4 lb difference isnt worth losing the damper in the pulley

now if the pulley swap removed 200 lbs, then great. but it doesnt.

kungpaosamuraiii

Oh, lighterweight is always a good way to increase acceleration but the point is, people who are looking for more power are ignorant if they look to lightened products for power.

I would argue it's more important to decrease weight than it is to increase power. Less weight is "present" at all times while power only comes during the specific region of the power band that you've tuned for. But as you say, 4 lbs isn't worth 150 dollars and potential for disaster.

Djicey702

wow this post really grew

mattvs

And it still didn't get past Square 1. Funny, isn't it?

Sly_dawg19

I did alot of reading on Harmonic Balancers, and Torsional Vibration Dampers, and all sorts of crap.

I have also succesfully ran my Crank Pulley for many months now with no ill effect.

Until my engine catastrophically fails, I will support the crank pulley mod.

Theory and Text is useless without concrete evidence of engine failure in our little engines.

So I will drive my pulley, and see if my engine fails :p If it does, then I will be the first to say I was wrong. If It doesn't blow then w/e it doesnt matter, im not going to rub it in anyones faces. Not like I will be on this forum or even know anyone in this thread 300,000 miles from now.

AcrimoniousBear

im suprised at how many people are willing to argue down and get downright ugly about sumthing that plenty of gearheads already KNOW to be a bad mod. how it is that so many people who've come on this thread feel they are smarter than Toyota of all companies, is BEYOND ME!

So are u guys telling me that if a company tells you that buying their lighter fluid and dousing your car in it and setting it aflame while drag racing will make ur car faster cuz it will get continuously lighter as the flames are fueled is a GOOD mod? thats what yall are saying. u dont mind hurting ur car that your dropping so much money into just so u can say u took .1 sec off ur 1/4 ET? if u wanna blow 150 bux give it to me! i can def find better ways to take a tC lower in the 1/4 than using a buncha bad mods that physics PROVES do not truly help in the longer than 1/4 run (days weeks months years of driving)

from everything that i've learned about this matter it seems like if they were to make a lighter pulley which STILL contains the torsional ring or even a thicker torsional ring then we might just have a GOOD mod here. but....until then...i'll just get my Lightweight flywheel and decrease 1/4 ETs and increase engine service life and not drop money into replacing waterpumps, rods, cylinder walls, and everything else that will break or be definitively damaged, and use that money toward getting my M3

do sum homework? even the original poster was open to learn and he isnt fighting as hard as summa u other guys. READ LEARN and UNDERSTAND THE CAR YOU OWN! dont try to create ur own understanding and physics cuz it doesnt work. man STILL cant fly.
GEEZ!

kungpaosamuraiii

Without theory and text, concrete evidence means nothing either. No experiment is good without having an explanation to accompany the data.

Besides, the current data doesn't disprove a damn thing either. It proves that it's apparently unlikely that a driver will attain the conditions for destroying the engine.

You have to realize the pulley doesn't necessarily act as wear and tear on the engine. A turbo can destroy an engine in one day, true, but only if a safeguard fails or the tuning is poor. But the idea that a turbo can kill an engine in ten years is NOT applicable to a pulley killing an engine in ten years. The turbo example is a function of time, wherein the added power wears on the engine more rapidly than an engine making less power. This is a linear sort of a destruction, a slow death if you will.

A pulley doesn't necessarily wear on the engine more. If you hit resonant, your engine is DEAD. It could happen now it could happen then but when it happens, it can do ALL of its damage in a few seconds, a sudden death.

This isn't smoking a pack a day, this is Russian Roulette.

That isn't to say that the pulley does not wear and tear on the engine like a turbo does. The evidence shows that generally in a wear/tear sense, catastrophe doesn't occur within 50-75k miles and counting. I can cede that. I really don't think a person driving normally will hit resonant frequency with the pulley installed. But when the throttle is open and gears are bangin up and down, very bad things can happen.

The science is there. To prove that it won't happen someone will have to prove that the tC can not attain resonant frequency within its RPM band.

I honestly don't care much if anyone buys these pullies but I do want everyone to know what exactly is in play.

Sly_dawg19

what if resonant frequency for out cars crank pulley isnt until 10k rpms? or what if it is 300 rpms? None of knows the absolute resosnant frequency, if we did , we could know for sure when engine failure will happen.

From what I understand about resonant frequency, its more of a slow movement, then a rapid one. For example the bridge on mythbusters hit resonant frequency at like 50 or 60 pumps per minute, Now I am not saying that our cars are a bridge, but if they are, 50 or 60 rpms is very very hard to attain for more than a split second.

But then again, we could hypothetically say resonate is at 3156.78 rpms, but hitting that exact frequency, and keeping that frequency even for a second will be very very hard to do in our accelerating and decelerating engines.

we both know resonance only does catastrophic damage if it can be kept, not if passed. If they pumped the pump one time, the bridge would be like, zzzz... but keeping it pumping to build resonance, and build momentum, and build energy, then the bridge was vibrating a little and a little more... and a little more...

I am not saying it is impossible to hit resonant frequency, but I am saying it is an extremely hard thing to do, and keep. Because we both know resonante frequency gets more powerful if stayed at the frequency, however with our contiously variable this, and gas that, and brake that, it will be almost silly to worry about resonante frequency in our engines. key word, almost. Especially if it is like 40 rpms, or 10k rpms.

engifineer

Pretty sure the engineers knew when they designed the damper. But I forgot, you know more than they do right?

And other than hitting resonance and dying quickly, a non-dampened pulley can and will cause extra wear on an engine.

But then again, everyone here who almost knows enough about engines and the principles involved just enough to be dangerous knows better than the guys that designed the engine, so what do I know?

engifineer

That word harmonic... Do you know what it means??? At all??

Harmonics exist at multiples of a fundamental frequency. They are the components that make up a fundamental frequency. So you dont necesarrily have to have a fundamental that is hitting the resonant point.

And resonant frequency is not an "rpm". It can be caused by things that occur at a particular rpm, a certain frequency vibration caused by any shock load or anything attached to the crank (timing chain, oil pump chain, rods, alternator, compressor, etc).

Sorry sly, but you keep on quoting what is and isnt, but you still arent grasping the basic concepts.

Sly_dawg19

Remember that post you made about always ____ing people off? Its the way you type dude. It seems like your always being sarcastic.

Did you ever think to consider the rubber ring is for NVH? Noise, Vibration, and Harshness? The sounds, vibrations, and harshness that enters into the cabin? There is alot of rubber this and that on the engine to reduce NVH..

Im not claiming to own knowledge over the engineers of toyota. Did you ever stop to think its you that thinks its a torsional vibration dampener or a Harmonic balancer? Try emailing toyota and see what THEY say its for.

- Jeff

engifineer

Know what... I will get rid of the long explanation I just gave and shorten it

1) READ THE OTHER POSTS MADE HERE, HALF OF YOUR ARGUMENT WAS CORRECTED LONG AGO

2) A uniform rubber ring as a balancer????? No

3) You continually argue, and dont have the basic knowledge to back it up... sorry if patience is lost or if "the way I type" is bothering you.

kungpaosamuraiii

I don't blame engifineer; no ones said anything new for a long time. The only arguments the pro-pulley side can muster is that, it hasn't happened for x number of miles. If someone can come up with a scientific theory as to why a 2AZ will not destruct ever, please bring it up. Vague discussions about race engines not being applicable to our engines is irrelevant. Obviously they're not similar but some traits will carry over especially since it's basic physics.

And like engifineer said, resonant frequency isn't just one RPM. It'd be nice, huh, if the crank's natural frequency was something like 40k RPM and that's it. I still don't think its RF is within regular driving range. But it's there. It's somewhere. Even if you don't sit at resonant for a while, just passing it will cause damage. Since engines run so fast it'll pass over any given RPM very quickly but that also means at 3k RPM you rotate about 12 times in a quarter of a second.

My biggest beef by now is that no one gets the point. We KNOW why a pulley could cause disaster. We DON'T know why it wouldn't.

And yes, Toyota always puts their dampeners on their pullies. http://www.suprasonic.org/public_htm...atedamper.html