Considering Whipple 2.9

GT Premi

Well known member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
8,140
Location
NC
... The efficiency of the 2.3 used the full benefit of that blower, while the KB unit was just getting into the efficiency range on the top of the rpm range. But that's the characteristics of big blower/little blower. ...

Wouldn't that be an argument for running a smaller pulley on the bigger blower, though? To put it into its efficiency range quicker? You can run a 2.8" pulley on the Whipple 2.9 on pump gas. For the '11/'12 GT500, you can run up to 21psi of boost on pump gas. I'm sure running a 2.8" pulley would nearly eliminate any advantage the smaller TVS has. I still stand behind my statement that a 2.4" - 2.6" pulley on the Whipple 2.9 would destroy a TVS running the same size pulley. Only problem with the Whipple there, though, is that you'd have to convert to E85 or race gas full time with a pulley that small.
 

Catmonkey

I Void Warranties!
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
3,854
Location
Louisiana
Wouldn't that be an argument for running a smaller pulley on the bigger blower, though? To put it into its efficiency range quicker? You can run a 2.8" pulley on the Whipple 2.9 on pump gas. For the '11/'12 GT500, you can run up to 21psi of boost on pump gas.
That's my point. To get the larger supercharger to operate more efficiently, you need to spin it harder to get to it's adiabatic efficiency range. Adiabatic efficiency has more to do with how efficiently the blower is compressing the air, as opposed to just how much air it moves. The problem with running 21 psi on pump gas is how much ignition timing you're going to have to back out to keep the engine from detonating. Boost adds power, decreased timing takes it away. You can do it, I just think most people believe it's safer to run 17-18 psi on pump gas and time it accordingly.

Let's look at it this way. Take that graph I posted, 2.3 and 2.8 are the number of liters of air the supercharger moves with one revolution of the drive rotor. I know the TVS has a 2.4" upper pulley. Given that, the TVS should theoretically be moving something like 1,441 cfm of air at 6,000 engine rpm. I'm going to assume the KB had a 3" upper pulley, since that is what KB sells for 93 pump gas applications. They sell them in 1/4" increments, so it's a safe bet. Given that upper pulley size, the KB would be moving 1,403 cfm of theoretical airflow at the same 6,000 rpm range. Granted the TVS has a ~2% edge on theoretical airflow, but they're closely matched in terms of how much air they theoretically move at similar rpm. Now look at the boost each makes throughout the rpm ranges. The reason the TVS is making more boost at all rpm ranges below 6,500 is it has better adiabatic efficiency than the KB in that range. 4 psi more boost is pretty significant from 3,000 to 4,000 rpm and it clearly shows the KB is outside of its efficiency range. Either it's not effectively compressogn air and/or using too much power to drive the supercharger. After 6,000 rpm, the TVS has fallen out of its adiabatic efficiency and the KB is just getting into its effective range. If you didn't have an engine limitation at 6,500 rpm, you'd see that gap get further apart.

I can assure you a 2.9 Whipple isn't going to act a whole lot different. The results just get more bizarre, the bigger the blower. If anyone is following the dynos on the 2.65 Gen 3 TVS on pump, you'll notice a drop in boost in the lower rpm range for that blower over the 2.3. There's a reason the bigger blower manufacturers only focus on "peak" horsepower. The KB made 29 more hp at the peak than the TVS, but the TVS made 26 more average horsepower between 4,000 and 6,500 rpm. The TVS made over 60 more hp at 3,000 to 4,500 rpm than the KB. Now, that's power you're going to notice on the street. So if you only focus on peak, the KB would seem to be the better blower for an otherwise stock application on pump gas. Now let me emphasize that these were different dynos on different days. All I can guaranty is that they both occurred in Florida, so the altitudes weren't that different.

Now if you want to throw more octane into the mix and/or more cam timing to increase the engine's ability to utilize greater quantities of airflow, you will need to spin both blowers higher to push the limits of boost and/or octane, which will leave the little 2.3 further behind and that adiabatic efficiency will occur much lower in the power band. By the same token, it will push the KB further into the territory where it's using more of its adiabatic efficiency. If you follow @biminiLX's engine build with his ported 2.3 blower, you'll really see what happens to the little 2.3 when you step up the engine's power and airflow capabilities.
 

weider1717

Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2014
Messages
532
Location
sc
I agree with the above I know they can be made to whine but you have to run such a high boost it puts you in the BMC club I believe it's call on here, lol.

Anyone up on the Whipple gens? I get confused when I visit their site they have several for the GT500 what is the latest Gen that is out for these cars? Also I watched a video where it was said they're releasing or already realeased a ten 5 and plan to release ten 6 soon not sure if that is for our cars or not though.
 

tvspower

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
741
Location
canada
Bigger is always better, right? That TVS has to spin faster to match the airflow of the bigger supercharger. All superchargers have a range of efficiency. Obviously the larger 2.9 occurs at higher engine speeds and the 2.2 at lower engine speeds, as evidenced by the torque curve. What's the point of your comparison, if it pushes the engine past the octane you can effectively use on the street? No one is saying the Whipple is not a good supercharger, it's just might not be the right tool for OPs objectives.

Torque = horsepower / rpm * 5,252. If the TVS makes more torque, it's making more horsepower at lower rpm. It's efficiency map might be a better match for the power band on a stock cammed 5.4 running pump gas. Start turning up the wick and that might no longer be the case. The 2.9 should make more horsepower, but if it does it at the sake of getting it's ass kicked below the peak, what is the net gain? You'll only find that out at the track. Most cars designated to street duty don't spend a lot of time at 6,500 rpm. I think you get a lot more enjoyment out of the street ride if your parts compliment the rpm you drive your car. Sometimes the "hit" on the smaller blower can be quite violent too, so sometimes a trade off in peak power vs torque better compliments some applications/driving styles.

Here's an analysis I did several years back to help me decide on a blower. These were fairly evenly matched 5.8s, but the TVS car did have a set of headers and the KB car did not. If these two cars were running E85, I think the results might have been different in terms of the averages. I have no idea which car would have beat the other on a drag strip, but would probably boil down to driver skills anyway. Look at the differences in boost. The efficiency of the 2.3 used the full benefit of that blower, while the KB unit was just getting into the efficiency range on the top of the rpm range. But that's the characteristics of big blower/little blower.

View attachment 1591380

Now, if OP is running E85, cams or a combination of both, the tables are turned. But there's a TVS for that too. Now that playing field would a lot tighter. Bottom line is match the supercharger to how you intend to use the car and consider mods and octane in that analysis. If you look hard enough, there are tons of dyno charts in this forum to help you make a wise decision.
Thanks. Very interesting
 

tvspower

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
741
Location
canada
Cat monkey give me your op on my setup, please
Built 5.4 ,BPS cams ,ported vmp gen1 n elbow, etc
Psi 15lbs....upper 2.5. lower 15%.
Very conservative 91 tune......
Built is good for 1200 hp I'm told,
Which new blower for street/highways
Now 682whp. 727wtq
 

Catmonkey

I Void Warranties!
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
3,854
Location
Louisiana
Do you know your cam specs? I've seen them in the past, and I don't know if BPS has changed their grind or not. With a built bottom end and only pushing 15 psi with a near maxed out Gen 1, I'd look at either the 2.65 TVS or the latest 2.9 Whipple. Either one of those should put you around 1,000 on race gas with a pulley change. While the newer versions of the 2.3 would pick up some power, I don't think you'd pick up much more boost and you're one pulley size from the most you'd be able to spin that combination. At 6,000 rpm, that TVS is almost spinning 20,000 rpm with your pulley combination. It's likely generating a lot of heat at that level. You're not going to need that 15% lower with a bigger blower, but if you keep it, consider a larger upper to compensate for it.
 

tvspower

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
741
Location
canada
Builder sent cams for specs n built from there....
i stayed away from high hp, cause the drivetrain is a PIA...rearend,, clutch, axles, ....etc
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread



Top