I was going to just make this a post on this existing great thread (https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...-limit-252073/), from which I pulled a TON of great info, but decided that my post was so long that it might be better to start a new thread.

Has anyone pulled the trigger on the Mina Galley lower pulley? The reason I ask is that I just ordered one. I’ll give my reasoning and concern, below…

For almost ten years on my 2011 XFR, I’ve had the ECUTG/Singh Autosport tune (I've absolutely loved it), in conjunction with the Mina upper pulley (60.5mm), cat back exhaust (X-pipe, electric cutouts, and Mina mufflers), and various intakes (I’m currently using wrapped Mina pipes with hybrid OEM airboxes; OEM lower boxes with cone intakes and custom-fabbed upper shielding, but I still have the complete OEM setup, TCP pipes, etc.).

But, since I was forced to remove a bunch of stuff from the engine due to my recent water pump failure, I decided now would be the time to upgrade to a larger crank pulley. However, after paying $1,700 for the ECUTG tune, granted about ten years and 50,000 miles ago, it’s hard to swallow paying another ~$1-2K for a different tune, in addition to ~$1K for the lower pulley, particularly for an eleven-year-old car. And, to make it even worse, I then I started getting a little worried about the potential lack of granular tuning options for the Denso units on the '10-12 cars.

I called Jags Gill with ECUTG/Singh Autosport (who has always been wonderful for me) about potentially modifying my current tune to accommodate a larger pulley (ten years old, but periodically updated to incorporate new Jag releases), and he basically said to just try my current tune out with a larger pulley, without modification, and go from there. He said it should be open-ended enough to be able to learn and incorporate the hardware mods, etc. I was actually a little surprised ECUTG/Singh were still around, and although his advice wasn't as scientific as I’d prefer or what I wanted to hear (and maybe even a really bad idea???), but I then called Chris at Mina Gallery, whom I trust, and he also said to give it a shot. And since I’ve basically bought everything they sell for my car over the past ten years (I didn’t keep it all or even install all of what I did keep), he gave me a really nice deal on his lower pulley.

But here's where it starts to get even more slippery than just using my current ECUTG tune, at least in my mind… when I asked Chris about the Mina pulley size, he said it’s 181mm (T6 hard anodized alloy), which, if correct (I haven’t received it yet), is absolutely massive compared to other lower pulleys on the market (19% larger than OEM, by my math). And, if truly 181mm, when used in conjunction with my already installed 60.5mm upper pulley, and based on the CAPA Performance calculator, I’d be looking at 19,446 SC RPM, which I think is way beyond where I’d want to be and may create some serious heat issues. However, if I removed the upper pulley and put the stock 66mm size on, I’d be right at 17,826 RPM, which seems to be pretty darned close to the sweet spot for our SC.

So, I asked Chris at Mina about the SC efficiency, potential heat, small upper pulley slipping, etc., and he reassured me that, based on his extensive experience over the years, he has zero concerns over my current 60.5mm upper pulley and ECUTG tune used in conjunction with his lower pulley. So, that’s now two people who have a decent amount of experience with 5.0L SCs between them, albeit probably significantly biased, telling me it’s OK to run this setup, and that I should definitely see a lot of benefit, especially since I’m not dragging or tracking it. And, all I'm really risking is non-catastrophic heat soak equaling pulled boost at the upper limits, which could be fixed in several ways (like a larger upper pulley, new tune, etc.).

I should also mention that I already ordered the additional lower auxiliary radiator and accompanying hoses (to mimic the XFR-S and some of the other Jags which have the dual setup), and I’m waiting to hear back from Allisport about their intercooler availability, even though I’ve read/heard conflicting opinions about its effectiveness.

Anyway, I’m a little confused and on the fence about next steps, and would appreciate any intelligent feedback. I really like the proven VAP lower pulley/tune option, but I think I’d be looking at around $3K, all in (vs. less than 25% of that for just a lower pulley from Mina), and that’s before I even look at their nice upper pulley, if I wanted one. And even though I certainly appreciate VAP’s 10% forum discount, it doesn’t really move the needle for me when talking about buying that much stuff together.

Lastly, if I did end up needing a new upper pulley based on the Mina lower pulley size, I feel like I could play around with the Griptec pulleys made for other vehicles using our SC (Examples: https://zpegriptec.com/cts-v-2009-20...percharger=LSA), as they sell hubs and swappable pulleys (you have to buy each pulley to accompany the hub, obviously) for not too much money, and they’re a lot easier to swap sizes and experiment with than adding a whole new one-piece pulley.

Am I missing anything? There are just so many variables and, while I don’t mind spending money on perceived value, I really hate wasting money… especially potentially thousands of dollars for what I might be able to get for a lot less, based on what I already have.

Sorry for my usual long-winded post, but thanks for taking the time to read it and potentially offer an opinion, especially if you have the Mina lower and upper pulley combo and/or could confirm size of the lower pulley and how it plays with other upper pulleys, tunes, etc. Thanks.

 

@Reaxions I have the Mina lower and have it in my hands right now. I just took a tape measure to it, diameter to the raised edge is indeed somewhere around 181-182mm. I think I measured circumference on it and found it slightly smaller to the actual pulley surface.

I had the same reservations based on Eaton literature for top charger speed. I read through VAP's comment in this recent thread Supercharger Speeds - Pulley Options - Over the Limit . I would consider VAP the premier tuner for our cars, so I'll take their word for it. Using that same calculator referenced in that thread, my SC speed is 19553.71 at 6500 rpm's if I have the diameter on the upper correct.

I'm not tuned yet. I'm going with Mike @ Eurotoys tune as he quoted me a good deal for a basic map (Viezu) provided I come to him. If I need anything beyond this I'm going to have someone local do it on a dyno. That may be your best option as well? I have some concern about the Denso ECU here but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it.

I have limited knowledge on how tuning parameters work but I would tend to agree with the two reputable sources of information, that your car will be fine without a retune. That's not to say you couldn't find some more power with additional tuning (which is most likely to be found on a dyno).

 

Brilliant!!! Thank you so much for that feedback!!! I swear, I'd be lost without this forum. I guess I'll give it a go, as-is, once I receive the pulley. I'll keep everyone posted.

Any chance you're using the "upgraded" Allisport intercooler? I'm on the fence about it, as I've read conflicting reports, and I think it works out to be somewhere around $800+ with shipping, etc. As I mentioned above, I already ordered the parts for the dual aux radiator setup, as it's ALWAYS annoyed the crap out of me that I live in Atlanta (Hotlanta), and Jaguar didn't see fit to add a second aux radiator to my car (which I bought new in Atlanta), yet they added it to a bunch of other cars, including non-R models.

I also have the Bosch pump, for what it's worth, but I'd like to tackle additional cooling as much as possible without being too invasive because I really want to get the car back on the road, ASAP, and my to-do list is already a lot longer on my XFR than it was even when it was new. Plus, I've got a data science and monetization startup (just finishing a successful first year), and I'm trying to leave as much money in the company as possible, without having to justify to my wife why I'm asking her to help with our bills, while I'm spending "frivolously" on expensive toys. Ha-ha!

 

My pal @DeviLSh is running the Allisport. I cant see how a thicker all aluminum heat exchanger would be detrimental. I have held off on ordering one as Chris at Mina said he was working on a more economical solution that is comparable. I think with an upgraded pump an all aluminum heat exchanger is a worthwhile upgrade. Perhaps call Chris at Mina and ask him where he is in development of the heat exchanger. I've asked several times.

The second radiator upgrade seemed to really be hit or miss for hot climates. I don't think there was a lot of rhyme or reason to it.

My car is also a "budget" mod car as I have a herd of toys that all require constant infusions of cash. I'm focusing on best bang for the buck.

That sounds like a really cool business venture! I know that fine balance well. "What do you mean I have to pay this tax bill you just bought parts for X Y Z toy?" What you don't know can't hurt you?

 

Don't know if you seen it but VAP now offers the upper pulley with Griptec? It also is a modular style pulley.
Upper Pulley




62mm for the 5.0 and 58mm for the 3.0 engines. Can you run the 58mm on the bigger SC?
.
.
.

 

Thanks. I have seen it and it looks great, but seems to be quite a bit more expensive than other Griptec pulleys I've seen which appear to match its dimensions, etc. I say that with the caveat that I haven't researched them enough yet, since I already have a 60.5mm Mina pulley installed, and was waiting to understand my new lower pulley setup first, and then go back to the upper pulley options.

 

Great thread and thoughts @Reaxions and of course Alex is speaking up in here

Regarding the intercooler, I can't really say what it did for me as a recent installer of it, as I haven't done any logging before/after on if the intercooler helped me gain or even retain/maintain power, temps, etc.I can't think of a reason why the intercooler would hurt anything, especially after doing similar things on other cars. It is hard to notice and discern a 5% difference in power in a car like this, so that brings me to my next point...

Something I want to highlight, is while I admire and agree with the level of thought you are putting into the outputs of all these combinations of tunes, pulleys, RPM, and their respective effects, keep in mind you aren't talking insane changes in total output between them. Then, add to that the amount of time you are WOT and looking for 100% out of the car, its "Value" to me becomes less important. I think you have the hardware and technical understanding to make the right choice no doubt, so I'm just trying to add some reality perspective to the discussion. Any sort of tuning is always best with continuous calibration and experimentation so put the stuff on and see what happens and go from there, but stay realistic about the bell curve of experience the "optimum" setup provides. Again I am on your side for getting the most out of a setup trust me, but I have kinda come to the conclusion that any U&L pulley and any reputable tune should provide solid consistent gains, and then its a matter of managing heat and traction, or hedging for it in the absences of data.

I do feel VAP has done the best job providing the most data, support, and products for this platform as of late. I don't get the same level of confidence from the other providers because they just don't provide as much information upfront. When I finally stop playing with other projects and fixing things on the XF's, I will hopefully get to modding the R-S. Until then, I'll wait to see what you guys do and recommend

 

@Reaxions There was a very encouraging post in the Facebook group "Modified Jaguar (Jaguar Drivers' Club) Official" of a 2012 XK-RS (also Denso ECU, like our cars) that put up 663 whp/ 666 tq with U/L pulley, Allisport IC, Bosch pump, decat pipes, and a Viezu (presumably off the shelf) tune.

I've read quite a bit on how the Denso ECU cars are harder to tune, and don't produce the same numbers, so this was great to see. It solidified my position to do sport cats / decat at some point. Worth noting is the amount of posts I've read where exhaust systems generally hurt performance on our cars, however the Ardent headers have generally been the holy grail of exhaust mods. I think this is largely because they remove the significant restriction/heat of the cats.

 

I too have wondered if Ardent's gains were attributed to cat removal or runner/flow design, or both.

@VicVegas84 Do we know what dyno he was on btw? I only ask as the stock figures look to be pretty high when you add back the DT loss, so I am wondering if this car was a factory freak or it was a generous dyno/calculation. Either way the gains are there.

 

@clubairth1 I don't doubt you could fit a 58mm upper with further material removal on the snout, but that would put you (with the Mina lower pulley at 182mm though I think i'ts a bit smaller but that's what we will work with for the sake of this argument) at the speed below at 6500 rpm. Per VAP in the thread I referenced above, they have held off on spinning the charger faster until they have a better solution for reducing heat on WOT/at the strip. See photo below for SC speed at 6500 rpm with that setup. at 7k you're at 21965 rpm. I would definitely want an interchiller or water meth for another ~10% in SC speed, particularly in a hot climate.

 

edit - duplicate post

 

I do not, but I questioned that as well. Even with a generous dyno that would still put his numbers higher than most Denso cars.

 

Yes good advice and I am aiming at the 62mm version to stay within tuning bounds.
.
.
.

 

Wow – there’s a LOT to unpack here, and thanks for all of the great information and encouragement!!!

Allisport said they’ll let me know next week if they’ll have any intercoolers immediately available. Otherwise, I’ll have to wait 10-15 weeks for another batch to be made. I also talked to Chris at Mina again, who said that he might be able to send me a prototype intercooler (or whatever he’s calling it), which in my understanding would be mounted right in front of the OEM radiator, etc. at the bottom, and I think would be piped into the existing lines. He’s supposed to get back with me to confirm. He said that the hold-up has been the custom hoses from another company, so I’m not sure if it’ll happen soon or not (or at all). And he again assured that his 60.5mm upper pulley should work great with his 181mm lower pulley, without any slippage, etc.

I’m not worried about the difference in a few HP, per se, but rather making sure I’m not completely wasting time/money one way or the other, including utilizing pulleys and tunes which might generate more heat than performance, or cause any other unforeseen issues. Additionally, if I can increase cooling performance to help offset any of the projected additional heat, especially since I live in Atlanta, I want to take a look at bang for buck, with the understanding that it’s probably not a HUGE deal for me, since my XFR will never be my daily driver again, never be tracked, etc.

To the point about upgrading the intercoolers, I’d always just thought it was standard practice to do it whenever increasing performance, boost, etc., as the OEM cooling solution is usually only meant to accommodate the OEM setup, not the increased temps resulting from upgrades. On my Audi S3, to go Stage 2+ with any vendor (which I did with APR), it’s absolutely mandated that you have to upgrade the intercooler, which makes perfect sense (it’s also nice that Audi provided visual representation of boost and engine temps on my dash). However, I’d read some conflicting reports on whether the Allisport intercooler (Paramount, etc.) really improved anything enough on our vehicles to be worth the money, which made me want to do some more digging.

And, you’re right – I absolutely tend to suffer from analysis paralysis (mental masturbation) when I start looking at stuff like this. What can I say? I own a data science company. Ha-ha! But, your point about keeping it in perspective is absolutely correct and appreciated. I also agree about continuous calibration and experimentation, but I'm not aware of any "reputable” tuners for our cars near me, and to your other point, the ROI for a few more ponies probably wouldn’t be there anyway. So, unless something just feels really off about using my existing tune and upper pulley, as well as the new Mina lower pulley, I’ll probably just call it a day and focus on the heat (I’ve given up on the traction solutions for my 2011 rig, as it’s been a hot point since the very beginning with no real improvement options of which I’m aware).

And… last thing regarding the heat (well, at least from me… on this post)… have any of you guys ever had any luck with any combination of coolant and/or additive options, i.e., Water Wetter, Purple Ice, waterless coolant, etc.? I know it’s an extremely contentious subject for multiple reasons, and has no doubt been beat to death across the interwebz, but just thought I’d stir up a hornet’s nest on the Jag forum for sh*ts & giggles. Ha-ha!

That’s definitely GREAT news about the 2012 XK-RS! I’ll have to see if I can track that info down.

That’s also really interesting to hear about the Ardent headers/cats. Maybe I should re-consider.

Wait… dammit… here I go again!!!

 

Worth mentioning is the difference between a factory air to air and a factory air to water intercooler. Factory air to air systems usually have cheap plastic end tanks, are sized proportionally around rigorous testing around IAT and factory boost conditions, and are an easy target for accounting to keep costs down. I feel air to water systems are generally limited by the pump, and as a matter of design are not as limited while upgrading.

I'm glad you got ahold of Chris. I'm real interested in being a test dummy for an upgrade.

 

Yep, he actually mentioned upgrading the pump. I told him that I already had the Bosch installed and asked about some of the other high-flow options, but he said that he actually recommends the Bosch, and it should be able to do the work easily.

 

Quick conundrum... as I'm looking to proactively replace all of my idler and tensioner pulley bearings, I'm wondering how much I should be taking into consideration the maximum RPMs of said bearings, as most of them are rated around 11,000-12,000, but some go as high as 20,000. The tradeoff seems to come via bearing protection (sealed rubber, etc.) and price. Yeah, you can get the same size bearings as OEM for under $10, but if you want a decent seal and high RPM limit, the price can go way up. And, if we're spinning our SC at over 19,000 (as in my predicted case with the smaller 60.5mm upper SC pulley and the larger 181mm crank pulley), shouldn't we also take the idler and tensioner pulleys (OEM and new) RPM ratings into consideration? I understand that the ratios are different, as the idler and tensioner pulleys are larger than the SC pulley, so spin more slowly than the SC pulley, but if I'm looking at size vs. RPM percentages to calculate speed, it seems like we'd need to at least be aware of the limits, no?

 

I didnt even think about Accy/Idler RPM limitations..... I wonder if anyone has cited failure of these on a T&P'd car.

Let the mental masturbation continue! ( i lol'd when I saw you type that, I like to say intense intellectualization)

 

Did I forget to mention the pulleys' bearings' rolling resistance as a factor to overcome??? Ha-ha!!!

 

I don't think your wrong but I will point to the fact that we have almost zero posts about bad idler/tensioner bearings on any car with a pulley or not.
The forums always display the absolute worst thing about any car and that's why they are so valuable. A quick read of any car forum will quickly bring up the common and not so common problems.

And so far we just have not seen that problem to any degree. Much like the carbon on the backside of the valves. Yes it does happen but at least on the 5.0L engine it's not much of a problem.

Now water pumps? I can't even count the threads/posts made about that!
.
.
.