Bullet Performance supercharger by Mercury Performance

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by DriftEightSix

With this system, does boost start from idle?

Is there any graphs?

Yea positive displacement SC you'll get boost from idle, how much is a question of the supercharger's VE which is lower at low speed due to air leaking backwards through the rotors.

[Tradewind]

This system will be AUD$5.5k +

[Visconti]

Originally Posted by Tradewind

This system will be AUD$5.5k +

AUD is about the same a USA.

I guess the big question is, what do you get for 5500?

[mines13]

Originally Posted by Coheed

dynojets read correct hp numbers imho. Simple inertial dyno. No eddy current generators or strange algorithms to measure torque output, then calculate it into hp.

Steady state inertial dynos are as simple and consistent as it gets. Realistically, do you really think that ANY engine is going to lose more than 25% of its power through the drivetrain? Perhaps perception should be altered to reflect that your dynos just read too low? Like was said before though, its a tuning tool. It's a tool for measuring against a benchmark. That's what he said that I "thanked" him for.

Doesn't anyone down under have a dynojet?

There is so much wrong with this... You can not have a "steady state inertial dyno" You can have one or the other, but you are not going to be doing any "steady state" testing of any form of inertial dyno.

The standard for high end load tuning dynos would be either a water brake (commonly found in engine dynos) or an eddy current brake.

As in real life, your drive tires do not accelerate a drum with a fixed mass. You mention the eddy current dyno using "strange algorithms to measure torque output, then calculate it into hp." But it is indeed the inertial dyno that does this, NOT the eddy current brake dyno. The inertial dyno works out the power needed to accelerate the fixed roller mass and records the RPM and ramp rate to calculate torque. An eddy current brake reads the braking torque and determines engine power output based on feedback from the PAU or load cell, in real time by the way.

An eddy current dyno will provide a much more accurate measurement of what a vehicle actually puts through its drive wheels as it actually loads the drive train as if it were being driven on a road. I would not put much weight on numbers from an inertial dyno unless you are only concerned with a peak number back to back on that same dyno and completely ignoring everything under the curve.

I have about 5 years experience as a dyno operator and have seen and heard just about everything. Hell, even Dynojet now offers eddy current brake dynos.

There are superior options offered in Australia, Dynopak Dynodynamics, etc. All superior machines in comparison to an inertial Dynojet model.

[sw20kosh]

Originally Posted by Visconti

AUD is about the same a USA.

I guess the big question is, what do you get for 5500?

The reason why i'd consider a supercharger over a turbocharger is for less complexity and less cost (due to less parts). For $5k and less power than a turbo... your question is valid John.

[BRAWL]

Originally Posted by sw20kosh

The reason why i'd consider a supercharger over a turbocharger is for less complexity and less cost (due to less parts). For $5k and less power than a turbo... your question is valid John.

Bullet make OEM quality setups, so cost could be justified. Will hold judgement until all the details are released though. Install cost will interesting depending on how it is all setup also

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by mines13

There is so much wrong with this... You can not have a "steady state inertial dyno" You can have one or the other, but you are not going to be doing any "steady state" testing of any form of inertial dyno.
taken out of context, steady-load.
The standard for high end load tuning dynos would be either a water brake (commonly found in engine dynos) or an eddy current brake.
water brake dynos suck
As in real life, your drive tires do not accelerate a drum with a fixed mass. You mention the eddy current dyno using "strange algorithms to measure torque output, then calculate it into hp." But it is indeed the inertial dyno that does this, NOT the eddy current brake dyno. The inertial dyno works out the power needed to accelerate the fixed roller mass and records the RPM and ramp rate to calculate torque. An eddy current brake reads the braking torque and determines engine power output based on feedback from the PAU or load cell, in real time by the way.
the dynojet reads actual hp. not torque output. No tach signal required. There's a lot more to go wrong with eddy-current dynos. I've run a dynojet, and it makes me feel confident in the numbers it produces because of their consistency. there are better tuning dynos out there, but the dynojet has a more accurate "whp" number imho. Would you be satisfied with a 40-50% drivetrain loss? It is far from a realistic representation of actual hp numbers. Seems like everyone else just comes up with their own idea of how much a whp actually is. Well, if you are happy with others reinventing a form of measurement, that's fine. Whatever. For me, an inch and a pound is a set measurement, not an arbitrary number to get tossed around.

An eddy current dyno will provide a much more accurate measurement of what a vehicle actually puts through its drive wheels as it actually loads the drive train as if it were being driven on a road. I would not put much weight on numbers from an inertial dyno unless you are only concerned with a peak number back to back on that same dyno and completely ignoring everything under the curve.
Which is what I'm after for a peak hp number. I don't need rolling resistance, or tuning for climbing pike's peak. I'm after a realistic whp number under a steady load. Might be juvenile, but there is less to go wrong, and the numbers are accurate and consistent with proper 15-20% drivetrain loss ratios. But like I said, eddy dynos are better for tuning. But their whp numbers can't be correct if they are saying the BRZ has 30-40% drivetrain loss. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that.
I have about 5 years experience as a dyno operator and have seen and heard just about everything. Hell, even Dynojet now offers eddy current brake dynos.

There are superior options offered in Australia, Dynopak Dynodynamics, etc. All superior machines in comparison to an inertial Dynojet model.

There are better tuning options out there. But until they have accurate whp dyno numbers within the measure of what a hp actually is, i'll trust the dynojet for peak hp numbers. A monkey can run a dynojet. The weather station keeps the operator from messing things up, and produces accurate measurements regardless of where you are or what the weather is like.

Imagine I tell you the BRZ weighs 2770lbs on my scale. You pick one up, strip it down to a bare shell, and find out your "scale" reads 3100lbs. Well, that's how silly some of these dyno numbers are. Which is fine if you are tuning with the same dyno and measuring a benchmark. But the numbers aren't going to calculate anywhere close to what a real whp measure out to be. Perhaps we all should be happy to have only 140whp in our BRZ. That's only 27.5% drivetrain loss.

A real engineer laughs at this calculation. What a joke.

[mines13]

Originally Posted by Coheed

There are better tuning options out there. But until they have accurate whp dyno numbers within the measure of what a hp actually is, i'll trust the dynojet for peak hp numbers. A monkey can run a dynojet. The weather station keeps the operator from messing things up, and produces accurate measurements regardless of where you are or what the weather is like.

Imagine I tell you the BRZ weighs 2770lbs on my scale. You pick one up, strip it down to a bare shell, and find out your "scale" reads 3100lbs. Well, that's how silly some of these dyno numbers are. Which is fine if you are tuning with the same dyno and measuring a benchmark. But the numbers aren't going to calculate anywhere close to what a real whp measure out to be. Perhaps we all should be happy to have only 140whp in our BRZ. That's only 27.5% drivetrain loss.

A real engineer laughs at this calculation. What a joke.

"taken out of context, steady-load." The problem with this is, there is no "steady load" or load for that matter. You are literally accelerating a fixed mass. There is no "steady load" I do not know how I can take out of context what you claim is there, yet is not. If you want steady state load, you need a brake dyno. Period. The only way to simulate what occurs on the street.

water brake dynos suck This is based on what exactly? The majority of Pro Mod or Pro Stock engine builders, making well over 2000hp would beg to differ. Water brake dynos (mainly Superflow) are the gold standard for engine dyno tuning.

Which is what I'm after for a peak hp number. I don't need rolling resistance, or tuning for climbing pike's peak. I'm after a realistic whp number under a steady load. Might be juvenile, but there is less to go wrong, and the numbers are accurate and consistent with proper 15-20% drivetrain loss ratios. But like I said, eddy dynos are better for tuning. But their whp numbers can't be correct if they are saying the BRZ has 30-40% drivetrain loss. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that.

Any dyno, including your preferred inertial dyno can have skewed results if there are any issues with calibration. (Not uncommon I might add) I can spend 5 minutes, utilizing a fixed calibration weight and re calibrate an IMP series Mustang dyno. Including compensation for aerodynamic drag and vehicle mass. Again, my experience is based on practical, not theory. YMMV.

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by mines13

"taken out of context, steady-load." The problem with this is, there is no "steady load" or load for that matter. You are literally accelerating a fixed mass. There is no "steady load" I do not know how I can take out of context what you claim is there, yet is not. If you want steady state load, you need a brake dyno. Period. The only way to simulate what occurs on the street.

water brake dynos suck This is based on what exactly? The majority of Pro Mod or Pro Stock engine builders, making well over 2000hp would beg to differ. Water brake dynos (mainly Superflow) are the gold standard for engine dyno tuning.

Which is what I'm after for a peak hp number. I don't need rolling resistance, or tuning for climbing pike's peak. I'm after a realistic whp number under a steady load. Might be juvenile, but there is less to go wrong, and the numbers are accurate and consistent with proper 15-20% drivetrain loss ratios. But like I said, eddy dynos are better for tuning. But their whp numbers can't be correct if they are saying the BRZ has 30-40% drivetrain loss. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that.

Any dyno, including your preferred inertial dyno can have skewed results if there are any issues with calibration. (Not uncommon I might add) I can spend 5 minutes, utilizing a fixed calibration weight and re calibrate an IMP series Mustang dyno. Including compensation for aerodynamic drag and vehicle mass. Again, my experience is based on practical, not theory. YMMV.

I've run thousands of dyno runs on the same dynojet without any "calibration" other than when added ballast weight was added to the roller. And yes, there IS a steady load in comparison to an eddy dyno. You either know what I am saying, or you are oblivious. Of course, all words are open to interpretation, you're just wrong, that's all. Just keep believing inertial dynomometers don't generate load.

Have you ever used a water brake dyno? Well, if you had you would realize what I meant by "they suck". Regardless of who uses them, they are notorious for being complicated and unreliable and inconsistent. But you haven't used one, that much is obvious. in comparison to what is available, a water brake dyno is the LAST one I'd consider.

And furthermore, like I've said numerous times. On hp numbers I don't care about aerodynamic drag, tread squirm, vehicle weight etc. I don't need to simulate the road. That's all great for tuning, but spitting out arbitrary numbers to represent whp is a fail.

Now, a eddy dynojet and inertia dynojet are calibrated to read within 1% of each other. I trust their numbers. Here's some good reading material for you.
http://imageftp.dynojet.com/CMD/Trut...Runs_Final.pdf

All bias aside, a yard stick is a yard stick. Just don't be mad at me if yours comes up a bit short.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by LazyZed

Bullet make OEM quality setups, so cost could be justified. Will hold judgement until all the details are released though. Install cost will interesting depending on how it is all setup also

Say, don't you Aussies get a TRD Aurion SC? That supercharger is an Eaton TVS R900 I think, someone should pluck one and stick it in an 86!

[ahausheer]

You Aussies are worse than us USA blokes with the bickering. Save it for another thread. I don't care about mpg this or efficiency that, look how f-ing sweet that thing looks under the hood. Its like a euro sports car made love to a Japanese motor and then their offspring got knocked up by American muscle. Its the best of all worlds and it look awesome.

[Coheed]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

You Aussies are worse than us USA blokes with the bickering. Save it for another thread. I don't care about mpg this or efficiency that, look how f-ing sweet that thing looks under the hood. Its like a euro sports car made love to a Japanese motor and then their offspring got knocked up by American muscle. Its the best of all worlds and it look awesome.

What's worse though, is we're both american lol.

I agree it looks sick under the hood. But perhaps there would be less off topic bantering if there were some OP productive posts about numbers, claims, dynos, concerns, plans, price etc. There is literally nothing here except direction to their facebook page for updates.

I know I'm not the only one interested in this kit, but no updates is sad.

[E92M3Guy]

Originally Posted by Coheed

Have you ever used a water brake dyno? Well, if you had you would realize what I meant by "they suck". Regardless of who uses them, they are notorious for being complicated and unreliable and inconsistent. But you haven't used one, that much is obvious. in comparison to what is available, a water brake dyno is the LAST one I'd consider.

I'm very familiar with water brake dyno's and have known them to be very simple, very reliable, and extremely repeatable results. I have experience both with engine dyno's and Dynapack hub-attached dyno's.

I'd like to know more about your experience and other less reliable water brake dyno's than the types I mentioned. Can you give examples of which dyno, and what happened to you?

Now, a eddy dynojet and inertia dynojet are calibrated to read within 1% of each other. I trust their numbers. Here's some good reading material for you.
http://imageftp.dynojet.com/CMD/Trut...Runs_Final.pdf

All bias aside, a yard stick is a yard stick. Just don't be mad at me if yours comes up a bit short.

A buddy of mine is in the market to buy a Dynojet. I'm advising him on the purchase. The Dynojet sales guy told us that the eddy current model is mostly for tuning, and the eddy current must be turned off when trying to capture a whp run. This was only two months ago. Maybe he was wrong, or maybe I remembered the conversation incorrectly. Are your experiences different? How is the eddy current used to capture a full whp run?

EDIT: I just finished reading the white paper. It looks like the DJ can run in eddy current mode; but it also looks like it's pretty finicky. At this point, I'm guessing the sales guy was just talking for ease of use (not absolute requirements), one should turn off the eddy current when testing a whp run.

Now, here's my $0.02 on this debate -- having collected and assimilated 500+ dyno runs in the BMW Dyno Database (www.s65dynos.com). My preferred dyno is the Dynapack. I believe it to be the most accurate non-engine dyno I've ever used. However, I also recognize that the Dynojet is the most widely used Dyno here in the US. I think of it as the defacto standard, regardless of the results and how they are obtained.

[Coheed]

As long as the results are consistent, that's great. All I'm asking for is an actual reliable representation of what the hp is. Imagine going to 10 drag strips and seeing full-second variations in time. Its just frustrating that after 10 years I've seen no progress in companies rectifying this issue.

I'm really just ranting about how everyone's dynos read wildly different.