*Pics* Why you should do a Solid Isolator Coupler...

[silverds]

Originally Posted by sonic656

Why is there any argument over this? Why are people quoting Ford's warranty?
Its simple. If your ZL1 rattles and you hate it, change to a solid coupler. GM has already choose to go with the "its normal" answer. Which to their defense with the way its designed, is completely normal.
Its just annoying and sounds like crap.

Because some people remain deliberately ignorant of the the very simplest of the immutable laws of physics.

Shock is transmitted through matter. The more "SOLID" the matter, the more shock is transmitted through it. Shock causes noise. Reduced shock equals reduced noise. A shock absorber...well you get the picture.

I know some who might not, but ignorance and belief in "marketed magic" does not change the realities of physics.

Ignorance of the whole picture for the sake of focusing on a specific part is a perfect example of "cutting off ones nose to spite their face". If you cut off your nose, you can't smell bullshit.

[Modern07]

Originally Posted by sonic656

Why is there any argument over this? Why are people quoting Ford's warranty?
Its simple. If your ZL1 rattles and you hate it, change to a solid coupler. GM has already choose to go with the "its normal" answer. Which to their defense with the way its designed, is completely normal.
Its just annoying and sounds like crap.

Because unfortunately we have this guy in the thread...



....and he thinks his opinion is better than EVERYBODY elses including all those people who actually have experience of this issue/resolution to the issue.

And if you don't agree with his opinion and he doesn't get it all his own way then he resorts to insults.

So basically I've been trolling him for the last 3 pages and it has been much fun.

But now I'm done as it's the work week again, and I think everybody has read enough about the Isolator to make their own decision on the matter.

But thanks for the fun Silver

[Medi0cr3]

Originally Posted by silverds

Because some people remain deliberately ignorant of the the very simplest of the immutable laws of physics.

Shock is transmitted through matter. The more "SOLID" the matter, the more shock is transmitted through it. Shock causes noise. Reduced shock equals reduced noise. A shock absorber...well you get the picture.

I would also add vibration to your list.

Oddly enough there is zero noise produced after the solid coupler is installed so as shops say and customers concur with. However I haven't heard a motor with a ton of solid isolator miles be brought forward yet. Maybe somebody could attach an accelerometer to the housing and measure the vibration between gear rattle at low idle of the stock coupling and vs solid.

They describe how the lash and or back lash of timing gears... Sounds like they need a way to control the recoil effect of the timing gear torque. Like maybe an extra spring loaded gear that dampens incoming torque and outgoing torque.

Need data on a solid coupler with a ton of miles on install to some how compare the wear rate on an old supercharger timing gear vs a new one. You could probably measure the depth of any galling between the timing gears to get that data...

Seems like a lot of trash talking going on, but we need data to back up all' these theories of operation and description of components.

[BaylorCamaro]

I think it can be agreed that since these are all mechanical components they WILL wear out at some point, the question then becomes when or how soon. I believe what is questionable is that GM (or Eaton?) says a 30% decrease in life because of the solid isolator coupler. Well I'd like to see proof of that 30% how did they get that number? Are they just throwing it out there because it is a large percentage and they want to use "scare tactics" so that people won't change it? Is it actually proven?

Also, what is the expected life of the blower? Obviously more than 100,000 miles (or should be) since that is what GM is covering in the warranty. Lets say the blowers only last 100,000 miles. Then with a solid isolator coupler it should only last 70,000 miles. 70,000 miles is still A LOT of miles for a ZL1. Lets then assume that you have to get a new blower at 70,000 miles because the OEM blower broke because of the isolator coupler. Those 30,000 "missed miles" or extra miles you could have gotten cost you $6 a mile (30,000 miles divided by the cost of a new TVS1900 and I'm assuming $5,000 for that which is MORE than enough money for a TVS1900).

So then the question becomes, is having the isolator coupler worth $6 a mile? Also, 70,000 miles on a ZL1 may take a lot of time to achieve. Maybe that is why we haven't seen CTS-V owners with broken blowers due to after market isolator couplers.

This thread really is just going in circles. It's like arguing that putting a blower on an engine is bad for the engine and going to make it break sooner, yet people still do it. The blower puts more stress on the components of an other wise N/A engine, of course the engine will wear out sooner because of the blower. Except the isolator coupler and the potential problem it may cause is a cheaper fix than a new engine. Just like with any mods, this is a cost/benefit analysis. Those of you that think the isolator coupler is terrible, don't install it. Those that think the isolator coupler is the best invention since the wheel, install it. As for me, I'm on the fence and I see the advantages and disadvantages of both designs.

No need for a pissing match.

[silverds]

Originally Posted by Modern07

Because unfortunately we have this guy in the thread...



....and he thinks his opinion is better than EVERYBODY elses including all those people who actually have experience of this issue/resolution to the issue.

And if you don't agree with his opinion and he doesn't get it all his own way then he resorts to insults.

So basically I've been trolling him for the last 3 pages and it has been much fun.

But now I'm done as it's the work week again, and I think everybody has read enough about the Isolator to make their own decision on the matter.

But thanks for the fun Silver

Put simply, caveman who believe in magic rock with holes, think caveman who no believe in magic rock with holes, Mr. Uppity.

[Modern07]

Originally Posted by silverds

Put simply, caveman who believe in magic rock with holes, think caveman who no believe in magic rock with holes, Mr. Uppity.

Silver - Let's just agree to disagree and move on

[silverds]

I have contributed data. These concepts are universal and as such, may confuse some people. However they absolutely apply.

Torsional Vibration overview

Torsional Vibration in Reciprocating and Rotating Machines

Torsional output of Piston Engines

Practical Design against Torsional Vibration

Smoothing the Stresses of Torsional Vibration

Additionally here are the results of EATON's own analysis of the torsion spring in the coupler.

Eaton Analysis results on the Contact, Stress and Life of a Supercharger Spring

and an excerpt from EATON's patent on the torsion damper...

Torsion damping mechanism for a supercharger
US 8042526 B2
During non-supercharging, low engine speed or idle speed operation, the meshed teeth of the blower timing gears may be substantially unloaded and may bounce or clash back and forth against each other through the backlash therebetween. The bounce or clash may produce an objectionable noise known as gear rattle and is believed to be caused by torsionals in the supercharger drive torque provided by periodic combustion engines such as engine 10. The resilient drive provided by torsion damping assembly 52 may reduce the rattle noise below the audible range.

I am whole heartedly in "FACT" mode in this discussion. Other participants, have admitted they are whole heartedly in "TROLL" mode because they don't want to or can't provide facts.

To be clear, "FACT" is determined by scientific method and not by "general concensus". Just because intelligent people "believe" in something, does not make it true, data put forth as the result of "REAL" testing establishes fact.

But apparently contributing fact and trying to keep this thread on track while being "Trolled" makes me "Mr. Uppity" to those who "believe" in general consensus without the ability to provide factual basis. This has been the problem with this thread since the very first post.

[joes407]

Originally Posted by djnice

There is more then one kind of rattle. In that thread you will notice that Joe said his had a squaking noise. The ZR1 guys described it as a screech noise, but those started happening at very low miles. Not sure what Joe had going on that he got relatively high miles before it occured.

to clarify I pulled my invoice for exact miles. mine was replaced at 14387 miles, the squawk noise was definitely metal on metal sounding and in the service bay when they asked whats wrong and had me start the car they immediately said turn it off. it was loud and didn't sound like it would go away with time. I believe they tested the noise in decibals and then decided to replace whole supercharger. I think somewhere there was a bulletin not to replace the unit unless it reached xxx decibals. I now have 25k miles and im starting to hear the start of that noise again on occasion but not nearly as loud as it was and im holding off on solid coupler until I know if im going to need another warranty supercharger.

[Modern07]

Originally Posted by silverds

I have contributed data. These concepts are universal and as such, may confuse some people. However they absolutely apply.

Torsional Vibration overview

Torsional Vibration in Reciprocating and Rotating Machines

Torsional output of Piston Engines

Practical Design against Torsional Vibration

Smoothing the Stresses of Torsional Vibration

Additionally here are the results of EATON's own analysis of the torsion spring in the coupler.

Eaton Analysis results on the Contact, Stress and Life of a Supercharger Spring

and an excerpt from EATON's patent on the torsion damper...



I am whole heartedly in "FACT" mode in this discussion. Other participants, have admitted they are whole heartedly in "TROLL" mode because they don't want to or can't provide facts.

To be clear, "FACT" is determined by scientific method and not by "general concensus". Just because intelligent people "believe" in something, does not make it true, data put forth as the result of "REAL" testing establishes fact.

But apparently contributing fact and trying to keep this thread on track while being "Trolled" makes me "Mr. Uppity" to those who "believe" in general consensus without the ability to provide factual basis. This has been the problem with this thread since the very first post.

Silver - since you persist on going round and round and round and round in circles here - All I want you to do is to provide ONE measly example of an LSA supercharger that has failed prematurely as a direct result of changing to the solid coupler, out of the HUNDREDS of people that have been using it for the past 4 years.

It is "FACT" that switching to the solid version solves the noise problem that irritiates so many, and that is why people switch to it.

If there were documented cases of this ACTUALLY causing problems down the line then of course people wouldn't switch to it, but THERE ISN"T - and that's why I have an issue with what you are saying here.

Actually the main reason I'm in here at all is because of your insinuation about Labor rates which was 100% incorrect, but I digress...

Listen, all you have is theory on the general principles and I'm not even disagreeing with them

But until you have ACTUAL DATA on the LSA application, I'm not going to be convinced there is a serious issue with using the solid coupler that I need to be worried about.

[joes407]

I think it would be safe to say since 2009 that there should be someone who has reached the 100k mile mark in one of them caddies by now. maybe a post on the caddy forum something like who has the highest mileage solid isolator. as for me I am going to not mess with it until they have to warranty another supercharger. if I go through 2 superchargers in such a short time I would surely try something else for #3 supercharger.

[BaylorCamaro]

I completely understand the concept behind Torsional Vibration, I work for a specialty engineering firm that specializes in failure analysis so this is nothing new, we see it all around the oil and gas industry. If the spring in the OEM coupler is working the way it is supposed to, then I can see the life of the super charger being extended. IMHO the design isn't very good when looking at the wear on the shaft. However I'd like to go back to the point I made earlier this morning and that is what is the actual decrease in life of the super charger? Where's the proof of a 30% decrease? It is possible it could be MORE than 30% or it could be small like 5%

I just have to be skeptical, when our company deals with failure analysis on a daily basis you have to question A LOT when someone throws out a % decrease in mechanical life due to wear, etc. I'm more curious than anything at this point..

[Al C.]

Originally Posted by joes407

to clarify I pulled my invoice for exact miles. mine was replaced at 14387 miles, the squawk noise was definitely metal on metal sounding and in the service bay when they asked whats wrong and had me start the car they immediately said turn it off. it was loud and didn't sound like it would go away with time. I believe they tested the noise in decibals and then decided to replace whole supercharger. I think somewhere there was a bulletin not to replace the unit unless it reached xxx decibals. I now have 25k miles and im starting to hear the start of that noise again on occasion but not nearly as loud as it was and im holding off on solid coupler until I know if im going to need another warranty supercharger.

+75 decibals.. That's the only way the dealership will rr the sc

[silverds]

Originally Posted by Modern07

Silver - since you persist on going round and round and round and round in circles here

The discussion appears to be linear to everyone else but you. Go back through the thread, read everyones else's comments, other than mine, which you have admitted to disputing solely for the sake of your own entertainment.

There is no question or dispute by anyone else including me, that installing the solid coupler will stop noise from the coupler.

The question by everyone else but you is..."at what cost?" and "for how long?"

You defend your choice fervently because you believe in the reasons why you've already made it, . The rest of us need the scales tipped a little more before making ours.

If all you have to offer is faith in the knowledge of those who've preceded you, we appreciate that, but faith in marketers, regardless of their claims or experience is unwise. Caveat emptor.

Warmest regards,
Mr. Uppity

[ZL1-V]

I have to ask do either of you have significant others in a relationship?