JBPs got a lightened 2.0L Crankshaft pulley already in manufacturing for the HHR-SS! Should be here in End of Feb/Early March.

http://www.chevyhhr.net/gallery/files/1/7/8/8/crankshaftpulley8.jpg

http://www.chevyhhr.net/gallery/files/1/7/8/8/crankshaftpulley82.jpg

Please let us know when you are ready to go to market with this so we can get you set up to become a Supporting Vendor to be able to promote your products here at ChevyHHR.net!

Please let us know when you are ready to go to market with this so we can get you set up to become a Supporting Vendor to be able to promote your products here at ChevyHHR.net!

we sent our cheque off to JonyyB last week! :cool:

we sent our cheque off to JonyyB last week! :cool:

Cool :thumb: :thumb:

In the meantime, contrary to JBP policy, please provide creditable documentation that this is a worthwhile upgrade.

Note folks: JBP has NEVER provided anyone with anything creditable to document their questionable claims!! :eek: :confused:

FWIW: As an engineer with a Masters in ME with many years of auto experience, to put it simply....

The miniscule change in rotational enertia in comparison with the whole drive train, any change in just a pulley is paramount to TOTAL BS and marketing propaganda to empty your wallet!! :eek:

But, if you want to believe the hype, the only thing that will be faster is your dwindling bank account!! :roll:

The miniscule change in rotational enertia in comparison with the whole drive train, any change in just a pulley is paramount to TOTAL BS and marketing propaganda to empty your wallet!!

Yeah thanks for that.. :nuts:

Anyhoo.. We are going to be looking for testers when we receive our first two prototypes near end of Feb.. If any customers who will be in possession of an HHR-SS would like to participate as a tester and is local to us OR remotely situated, drop us a line. There's a free crankshaft pulley in it for your troubles!

Local testers will be required to perform free dyno testing and receive free installation of the pulley. Remote testers will require to do dyno testing (at your cost) since we don't have control as to how/who is performing the dyno testing and will also receive a free crankshaft pulley..

Free Pulley anyone? :cool:

...FWIW: As an engineer with a Masters in ME with many years of auto experience, to put it simply....

The miniscule change in rotational enertia in comparison with the whole drive train, any change in just a pulley is paramount to TOTAL BS and marketing propaganda to empty your wallet!! :eek:...:

well to continue the discussion, here's part of the wikipedia explanation regarding aftermarket pulleys...

...(aftermarket) pulleys are marketed as performance enhancers that actually net additional engine torque and horsepower by reducing parasitic drag caused by belt-driven accessories but more importantly by being lighter and reducing rotational mass. Horsepower gains from underdriving alone are usually minimal, 2-3 wheel horsepower depending on the engine. HP gains from being lighter can be significant, from 4-14 HP for normally aspirated engines to 12-25 HP for forced induction engines. These are some of the best HP improvements enthusiasts can find for their money. Be careful if your car is driven on the street to not have more than 15-20% underdrive.

Im not taking sides but Im very interested to hear some of the results once they start to come in...
BTW, what percent is the underdrive of the JBP unit? And why do FI engines benefit so much?

Here's the whole article BTW:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdrive_pulleys

Also not taking sides, but when they talk about forced induction benefitting most, they imply supercharged (not turbo) because you are turning the supercharger faster for a given engine rpm, and therefore getting more boost (this is a very common hop-up). If you drive your alternator slower (for example) you MAY not get sufficient charging.

yeah there are a lot of pulleys available for my car (98 Z28) but I never put one on since it might not be the best for the electrical accessories. It hauls booty well enough with just the intake and exhaust mods I did. The Borla ss catback really opened it up. But id like to see the results of the guinea pigs. :D

well to continue the discussion, here's part of the wikipedia explanation regarding aftermarket pulleys...

That wiki excert is a good example of how aftermarket pulleys contribute to horsepower gains. Our LSJ pulley that is already out on the market increase 5.5HP on the dyno from a stock cobalt. We're still waiting on testing of a modified cobalt to see what results we'll net.


BTW, what percent is the underdrive of the JBP unit?


By 0%. We've asked around and the majorityof the customer base does NOT want an underdrive pulley.


And why do FI engines benefit so much?


c2vette replied about supercharged vehicles benefiting from underdriven pulleys more so... This is true because the circumference of the crankshaft pulley has changed, such that the rpm of the supercharger pulley will increase, like a gear ratio.

yeah there are a lot of pulleys available for my car (98 Z28) but I never put one on since it might not be the best for the electrical accessories. It hauls booty well enough with just the intake and exhaust mods I did. The Borla ss catback really opened it up. But id like to see the results of the guinea pigs.


All we're waiting for is an HHR-SS or a Cobalt SS/TC customer who wants a free pulley... :)

On your site which vehicle is this pulley for ?
Part Details JP0706

On your site which vehicle is this pulley for ?
Part Details JP0706

LSJ 2.0L

Let us know when the cranks are ready for the 2.4's

I have the strange suspicion that the 2.2L L61 pulleys will fit the 2.4L LE5. Same rib count, same spacing, I'm just unsure about the mating with the crankside.. anyone care to add insight?

Send me one, and I'll fit check it ....

we dont manufacture a L61 nor an LE5 pulley

By 0%. We've asked around and the majorityof the customer base does NOT want an underdrive pulley.

hmmm, i thought all aftermarket pulleys were underdrive pulleys. Shows you how much research ive done on teh subject. So your pulley's benefits are derived only by the fact that they're lighter?

Could depend on the area the weight is removed from. The belt dia may be the same.:bow:

hmmm, i thought all aftermarket pulleys were underdrive pulleys. Shows you how much research ive done on teh subject. So your pulley's benefits are derived only by the fact that they're lighter?

Yes, they are lighter (and for many agree, nicer to look at). They typically weigh 1/3 of the stock units. Most are underdriven, which also means that you need to purchase a replacement belt. The customers base did not want the LNF accessories to change speed.

any status on the trial procedures?

any status on the trial procedures?

Still looking for a car to test it on... :confused:

Product Released! Details are here: http://www.jbodyperformance.com/new/PartDetails.php?partId=710&catId=710&catName=JP0710

I have the strange suspicion that the 2.2L L61 pulleys will fit the 2.4L LE5. Same rib count, same spacing, I'm just unsure about the mating with the crankside.. anyone care to add insight?
I beleive the L61 and LE5 are the same....I have been developing a crank for awhile now. I should have a working prototype soon...month or so.

Good luck with your endeavor. :thumb:

I'm interested to see the impact that a lightened (and not underdriven) pulley has on engine performance.

As JoeR mentioned, the difference in rotational inertia of this pulley vs. the stock one, as compared to the entire drivetrain... is pretty much inconsequential.

So, expecting any increase in power due to the mass savings alone is not a safe bet.

The power increases you see with most performance pulley changes is due largely to the underdrive aspect of the pulley. The smaller crank pulley diameter requires less torque to drive the accesories with the caveat that the accessories also turn at a slower speed. In some cases the reduction in accessory speed can be done a small amount, with no adverse affects, and nets a small increase in the amount of the engine's available power to the wheels. The pulley size is the key...

So, if this new pulley is just lighter... I doubt it's going to have any noticeable performance impact.

Regardless, I'm looking forward to the results.

D

I'm interested to see the impact that a lightened (and not underdriven) pulley has on engine performance.

As JoeR mentioned, the difference in rotational inertia of this pulley vs. the stock one, as compared to the entire drivetrain... is pretty much inconsequential.

So, expecting any increase in power due to the mass savings alone is not a safe bet.

The power increases you see with most performance pulley changes is due largely to the underdrive aspect of the pulley. The smaller crank pulley diameter requires less torque to drive the accesories with the caveat that the accessories also turn at a slower speed. In some cases the reduction in accessory speed can be done a small amount, with no adverse affects, and nets a small increase in the amount of the engine's available power to the wheels. The pulley size is the key...

So, if this new pulley is just lighter... I doubt it's going to have any noticeable performance impact.

Regardless, I'm looking forward to the results.

D
I only make lighter stock diameter pulleys no under driven here.
Does it require more force to move a 20 or 25 lb wieght? The 25 of coarse, than why wouldn't a lighter pulley require less force to move it.

The pulley cuts down on the rotational mass on the engine, and are not "Inconsequential," you will tell a difference in the revs. The engine will rev faster, easier, and free up HP.
This is my before and after dynos from my LD9 2.4l cav with lightweight stock diameter crank and alternator pulley. The only thing changed was the alternator and crank pulley. This was done for my Bachelors in mechanical engineering degree at Cleveland State. No idea why the pics are poopy.
I made 7-8 more HP across the whole RPM range.
http://a107.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/110/l_716266c5d514cee47157b19f7b3a73ca.jpg
http://a553.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/62/l_14f7b651d679c61872f51b4a9bf56cd0.jpg

I agree, it does require more power to accelerate the additional mass of a heavier pulley as compared to a lighter one. Obviously, the location of the mass reduced from the pulley also matters significantly.

The best candidate components for improving engine performance in this manner are those with large diameters since the rotational inertia increases exponentially with radius. This is why lightweight flywheels are such good candidates for this type of improvement.

The point that both Joe R and myself were making was that the relative difference in rotational inertia of the two pulleys is very small as compared to the total rotational inertia of the entire drivetrain:
- engine reciprocating assembly
- flywheel
- transmission components
- halfshafts
- wheels, tires etc.

Note that most lightweight flywheels don't even result in double-digit increases in power... and their geometry is much better suited to having a sizable impact than a crank pulley.



I have a matlab script that I wrote for a master's course in vehicle dynamics at Purdue... it would be very well-suited to this question. The script computes the theoretical acceleration performance of a given vehicle and, among other things, takes into consideration the rotational inertia of the drivetrain. It would be quite easy to compare the relative performance difference between two theoretical vehicles, making a slight reduction in the drivetrain rotational inertia (equivalent to the savings that would result from this particular crank pulley) and to compare performance results. I'll go dig up the script and see what it churns out.


Regardless of all the discussion presented here, it will be neat to see the actual results of this particular performance modification. There's no doubt it will make some kind of difference... the only question is whether it will be measurable enough to be a realistic improvement.

D

I have all the stock and after market weights if you like. You being a mechanical engineer should understand how rotational mass effects acceleration. After everything reaches a constant RPM, well that is another story.:D

I just realized something about the CAD model shown on pg1.

The CAD model shown looks like the pulley used on the Solstice/Sky LNF, which has an integrated smaller pulley for the Power Steering Pump. I believe the GM p/n for this particular crank balancer/pulley asm is: 12585233


However, the HHR SS does not have power steering and, therefore, does not need a pulley with the integrated smaller pulley to drive the corresponding pump.

Based on this, the LNF in the HHR SS application should use something more like the stock crank balancer/pulley (LE5, L61), without the integrated smaller pulley for the p/s pump. So, correct GM p/n should be: 90537704


For the JBP guys:
Is the picture you have shown just one you already had for the Solstice/Sky LNF's? If it is just the Solstice/Sky-specific picture, is the HHR SS version that you've created actually different than shown, without the smaller pulley? (like the LE5, L61)

The pulley is for the LNF in the solstice/sky, but the part number should cross to the delta platform as well in the future. The HHR-SS might have the pwr str pulley there, just w/o a belt if it uses the electronic assist steering.

The Solstice/Sky pulley likely also fits but the added mass of the integrated small p/s pump pulley (which woulldn't be used in the HHR's case) is a bit of a waste... especially when the entire point is to reduce the mass as much as possible.

Sorry, I'm not intending to be a pain... just investigating the details :smile:

JBP guys, how much does the new JBP pulley weigh?

-md- HHR, how much did your stock pulley weigh?

absolutely, the point is to reduce the weight as much as structurally sound. I'd like to see a pic of an HHR-SS crankshaft pulley just for verification that it indeed has the pwr str. pulley negated.

Ours weight half the weight of the stock one. I'll post exact numbers.

-md- HHR, how much did your stock pulley weigh?

Stock crank 64 oz
My crank 23 oz
Stock alternator 6.4 oz
My alternator 3.0 oz

So now that I have read this forum what was the final outcome? I'm game to try the pulley on my HHR/SS i should be dynoing it Thurs. the 13th of March i can do a before dyno pull and a after. Send me the pulley

That wiki excert is a good example of how aftermarket pulleys contribute to horsepower gains. Our LSJ pulley that is already out on the market increase 5.5HP on the dyno from a stock cobalt. We're still waiting on testing of a modified cobalt to see what results we'll net.


A pully that doesn't change the drive ratio can't effect HP unless you measure it on an inertia dyno and neglect to take the weight into consideration. I always found it amusing when people put aluminium or carbon fiber drive shafts on their F-Body and claimed it gave them 10 HP. It might have made them faster at the drags due to the decreased rotational mass, but more HP or torque, not a chance. It's the flawed testing the high performace industry does. Bring it to Oxnard and I'll put it on our eddy current dyno at a constant RPM and we'll see what it really does to the engines power.

Ira

A pully that doesn't change the drive ratio can't effect HP unless you measure it on an inertia dyno and neglect to take the weight into consideration. I always found it amusing when people put aluminium or carbon fiber drive shafts on their F-Body and claimed it gave them 10 HP. It might have made them faster at the drags due to the decreased rotational mass, but more HP or torque, not a chance. It's the flawed testing the high performance industry does. Bring it to Oxnard and I'll put it on our eddy current dyno at a constant RPM and we'll see what it really does to the engines power.
Ira
At a constant load and RPM, yes there will be little power gain, but just the less rotational mass will free up a few horsepower.

But on a dyno while accelerating you will see the added benefit of the lighted material. The lighter rotational mass can and will help with acceleration, and you will see a gain in HP will accelerating across the whole RPM range.

At a constant load and RPM, yes there will be little power gain, but just the less rotational mass will free up a few horsepower.

Horsepower is a measure of work, changing the pulley has no effect on the output of the engine, it may allow the work to be used more efficently or it may chage the feel of that work, but it doesn't change the HP of the engine.

And FWIW, the ony real way to get an accurate HP number on a typical automotive dyno is at a steady RPM, otherwise it's up to the software how it figures the inertia in it's calculation of the current torque output.

And for those only interested in drag racing, if you have traction, a lighter pulley should make you slower, if you don't have traction a lighter pulley will make you faster. Same as changing the flywheel weight. In a drag race heavier is better, on a road coarse, lighter is better.

It should be noted that reducing mass at the pulley also effects crankshaft vibration damping. Crank harmonics shift all over the place. The small HP gain that only will appear during acceleration must be considered against possibly decreased crankshaft and main bearing life.

Horsepower is a measure of work, changing the pulley has no effect on the output of the engine, it may allow the work to be used more efficently or it may chage the feel of that work, but it doesn't change the HP of the engine.

And FWIW, the ony real way to get an accurate HP number on a typical automotive dyno is at a steady RPM, otherwise it's up to the software how it figures the inertia in it's calculation of the current torque output.

You are making the engine more efficent. You going to tell me that it takes the same amount of work to lift a 5lb weight and a 10lb weight. It requires LESS WORK TO lift the 5lb weight, than the 10lb weight.
YOUR DOING THE SAME ACTION...Period.
In a drag race heavier is better
Lighter pulleys should make you slower...are you serious. :confused: Your making the engine more efficent. How that is slowing you down is FAR beyond me. You must have never put lighter wheels on a drag car. "IT GOES FASTER, not slower, in the 1/4 mile."

Tell all those people with lightweight flywheels they wasted their money. Tell all the pulley distributors, and lightweight clutch and flywheel manufactures that their products are crap, and slow you down in the 1/4 mile. Call one. They will laugh in your face if you told them that.

It should be noted that reducing mass at the pulley also effects crankshaft vibration damping. Crank harmonics shift all over the place. The small HP gain that only will appear during acceleration must be considered against possibly decreased crankshaft and main bearing life.
All ecotecs have internal balance shafts. I'm sure you never seen how "out of balance" a stock crank pulley is, and how "close to 100% balanced" a CNC machined billet aluminum pulley is. You could always balance it if your that anal about it, but there is no need since MOST CNC pulleys are far better balanced than stock pulleys. Hell they even have less run out than the stock pulleys.

All ecotecs have internal balance shafts. I'm sure you never seen how "out of balance" a stock crank pulley is, and how "close to 100% balanced" a CNC machined billet aluminum pulley is. You could always balance it if your that anal about it, but there is no need since MOST CNC pulleys are far better balanced than stock pulleys. Hell they even have less run out than the stock pulleys.

An important point about the stock pulley...
It has a center section (hub) that is isolated from the pulley itself, using an elastomeric damper. The elastometric damper is used to partially isolate any nasty resonance effects that may otherwise become apparent from directly coupling the accessories to the crank with a single piece pulley design.

Although the CNC machined aluminum pulley itself will very likely be better balanced, the loss of the elastomeric damper will result in other undesirable vibrational characteristics to become apparent. For most people interested in improved performance... they may not care about this.


As far as the horsepower debate goes... I think everyone is stuck on what constitutes the "engine" and what constitutes the accessories, drivetrain, other loads on the engine... etc.

From a thermodynamics standpoint, the engine will not make more power. However, reducing one of the loads on the engine will allow for more of the power (that the engine already makes) to be made available to the wheels.

I don't think anyone doubts that the lighter pulley will make an improvement to the available power to the wheels. This is no different than removing an accessory load altogether... like a power steering pump for example or an a/c compressor.

The only real question is how much of a noticeable difference it will make. That's the question that we'll keep debating until someone gets some real numbers to back it up :smile:

An important point about the stock pulley...
It has a center section (hub) that is isolated from the pulley itself, using an elastomeric damper. The elastometric damper is used to partially isolate any nasty resonance effects that may otherwise become apparent from directly coupling the accessories to the crank with a single piece pulley design.

Although the CNC machined aluminum pulley itself will very likely be better balanced, the loss of the elastomeric damper will result in other undesirable vibrational characteristics to become apparent. For most people interested in improved performance... they may not care about this.


As far as the horsepower debate goes... I think everyone is stuck on what constitutes the "engine" and what constitutes the accessories, drivetrain, other loads on the engine... etc.

From a thermodynamics standpoint, the engine will not make more power. However, reducing one of the loads on the engine will allow for more of the power (that the engine already makes) to be made available to the wheels.

I don't think anyone doubts that the lighter pulley will make an improvement to the available power to the wheels. This is no different than removing an accessory load altogether... like a power steering pump for example or an a/c compressor.

The only real question is how much of a noticeable difference it will make. That's the question that we'll keep debating until someone gets some real numbers to back it up :smile:

Now your talking...

An important point about the stock pulley...
It has a center section (hub) that is isolated from the pulley itself, using an elastomeric damper. The elastometric damper is used to partially isolate any nasty resonance effects that may otherwise become apparent from directly coupling the accessories to the crank with a single piece pulley design.

Although the CNC machined aluminum pulley itself will very likely be better balanced, the loss of the elastomeric damper will result in other undesirable vibrational characteristics to become apparent. For most people interested in improved performance... they may not care about this.


As far as the horsepower debate goes... I think everyone is stuck on what constitutes the "engine" and what constitutes the accessories, drivetrain, other loads on the engine... etc.

From a thermodynamics standpoint, the engine will not make more power. However, reducing one of the loads on the engine will allow for more of the power (that the engine already makes) to be made available to the wheels.

I don't think anyone doubts that the lighter pulley will make an improvement to the available power to the wheels. This is no different than removing an accessory load altogether... like a power steering pump for example or an a/c compressor.

The only real question is how much of a noticeable difference it will make. That's the question that we'll keep debating until someone gets some real numbers to back it up :smile:

~~Claps~~
In my personal opinion you do not need the elastic ring. The ecotec has internal balance shafts, and the small bit of vibration caused by a billet pulley can not be even noticed. poly engine mounts will cause 1000% times the vibrations that the crank might make.

~~Claps~~
In my personal opinion you do not need the elastic ring. The ecotec has internal balance shafts, and the small bit of vibration caused by a billet pulley can not be even noticed. poly engine mounts will cause 1000% times the vibrations that the crank might make.
The elastomer isn't a question of balance, either static or dynamic. It's the method of damping torsional resonant modes in the crankshafts themselves. There are scores of internally balanced crankshafts, but you will almost never see a production engine without a damper. Virtually every NHRA and NASCAR team out there uses ATI elastomeric dampers on their engines. These things cost several hundred dollars, and ATI doesn't give them out for free. Some crankshaft manufacturers will not even warranty their products if the dampers used are not on their approved list. The effect of these dampers isn't subjective. It's well studied and understood phenomenon that's been part of every engine designers training for the last 50 years, and unchecked torsional modes can wipe out main bearings and crankshafts in short order.

The elastomer isn't a question of balance, either static or dynamic. It's the method of damping torsional resonant modes in the crankshafts themselves. There are scores of internally balanced crankshafts, but you will almost never see a production engine without a damper. Virtually every NHRA and NASCAR team out there uses ATI elastomeric dampers on their engines. These things cost several hundred dollars, and ATI doesn't give them out for free. Some crankshaft manufacturers will not even warranty their products if the dampers used are not on their approved list. The effect of these dampers isn't subjective. It's well studied and understood phenomenon that's been part of every engine designers training for the last 50 years, and unchecked torsional modes can wipe out main bearings and crankshafts in short order.
I agree it is not a question of balance. The stock cranks balance SUCKS. Ecotecs are not spinning at 9-10,000 RPM's like Nascar motors do.
Also, GM Performance Ecotec Billet L61/LE5 Crankshaft Pulley p/n 88958631 does not include any elastomer...vibration damping ring.

As of a couple weeks ago, the current/stock crank pulley p/n used on the HHR LNF motor is: 90537704
This particular p/n does have an elastomeric ring, isolating the hub from the pulley itself.

I can't remember if the stock Solstice/Sky LNF has a pulley with the elastomeric ring... I will have to check tomorrow.

-md-HHR
Do you have a link to a picture of the GM Perf Parts pulley, for the L61/LE5? Would be neat to see what it looks like.

-md-HHR
Do you have a link to a picture of the GM Perf Parts pulley, for the L61/LE5? Would be neat to see what it looks like.

No worries, I found a link, here:
http://www.strippermotorsports.com/ecbicrpu88.html

The picture isn't the greatest... oh well.

I agree it is not a question of balance. The stock cranks balance SUCKS. Ecotecs are not spinning at 9-10,000 RPM's like Nascar motors do.
Also, GM Performance Ecotec Billet L61/LE5 Crankshaft Pulley p/n 88958631 does not include any elastomer...vibration damping ring.

Interesting on the GM piece. ATI makes an Ecotec model that has damping, and comes in regular or underdrive sizes AFAIK.

I can't remember if the stock Solstice/Sky LNF has a pulley with the elastomeric ring... I will have to check tomorrow.


P/N for the stock Slostice/Sky LNF Pulley is: 12585233

This one looks like the JBP CAD model on page one of the thread, with a secondary smaller pulley for the power steering pump.

The oem pulley is 3 pieces:
- hub
- elastomeric dampener
- outer pulleys

I contacted the individual with the understanding it was free he wanted feedback from a person with the vehicle... when i contacted him he wanted meto pay so i said i dont think so and never replied....

Horsepower is a measure of work, changing the pulley has no effect on the output of the engine, it may allow the work to be used more efficently or it may chage the feel of that work, but it doesn't change the HP of the engine.

And FWIW, the ony real way to get an accurate HP number on a typical automotive dyno is at a steady RPM, otherwise it's up to the software how it figures the inertia in it's calculation of the current torque output.

And for those only interested in drag racing, if you have traction, a lighter pulley should make you slower, if you don't have traction a lighter pulley will make you faster. Same as changing the flywheel weight. In a drag race heavier is better, on a road coarse, lighter is better.

First, while reducing rotational mass doesnt add HP like changing the cam or increasing the compression, what it does is reduce the wasted horsepower of driving the accessories. This is why racers experiment with different piston rings and types of oil. It is also why there is a difference between HP readings taken at the engine and at the drive wheels.

As far as lightened flywheels-I have direct experience having used them in the past. The car revs much, much faster. The only drawback is that it is more difficult to launch the car, since too little throttle and the car stalls due to the decrease in rotating mass of the flywheel. Once you master this, however, the car will rev quicker which means it will be faster. My Datsun 280Z had minimal engine mods, weight reduction from fiberglass body parts, and a lighter flywheel and it turned mid 15's. Traction was the biggest problem, both at the start, and shifting to second gear.

Guys, big sale on the LSJ crank pulley, which fits the L61 & LE5. CLICK HERE (http://www.jbodyperformance.com/new/PartDetails.php?partId=706&catId=706&catName=JP0706)

It looks like it would be a PITA to install:confused:

Guys, big sale on the LSJ crank pulley, which fits the L61 & LE5. CLICK HERE (http://www.jbodyperformance.com/new/PartDetails.php?partId=706&catId=706&catName=JP0706)

Says LSJ only

see post #6

http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12462&page=2

Says LSJ only

see post #6

http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12462&page=2

The LSJ, LE5, and L61 will all "bolt" and "fit" into each other motors.....but the L61 & LE5 are five ribbed pulleys, while the LSJ is 6 ribbed. Also the ribs on the LSJ are slightly over more than the LE5 & L61 pulley groove. I'm unsure if this would be enough to start eating belts or not. I have not tried running an LSJ in my L61 "yet."