3.6 KB vs VMP Gen3R test

[Weather Man]

No facts were presented just bias blower stand results with no real word dyno results to back it up. I am not interested in losing races with a under spun 3.6. The Eaton rotor pack is known for its longevity and is one of the reasons it’s used on OEM stuff. I had the opportunity to get a 3.6 and declined actually. Pretty happy I did given the results of my 2.65 so far.

Common, no one saying the 2.65 isn't a good blower for the right application. But when people are blowing smoke about blowers 1 LITRE BIGGER, it's just nut huggery.

And when you say you need to ADD VARIABLES to get the right answer, you just sound foolish.

 

[Robert M]

This is failed logic 101. Why can’t you control the environment with a chassis dyno test exactly? Why can’t it test blower performance?

...............and then were are back to the many, many claims that some dyno's show higher numbers than others..........inconsistent?

R

 

[CD07GT500]

Common, no one saying the 2.65 isn't a good blower for the right application. But when people are blowing smoke about blowers 1 LITRE BIGGER, it's just nut huggery.

And when you say you need to ADD VARIABLES to get the right answer, you just sound foolish.

What smoke is being blown exactly? Has the 3.6 made more power than then 2.65? It’s not huggery if the 2.65 has made more power than any 3.6 and beats it in a same day dyno test lmao.

What variables are being added exactly that can’t be controlled?

 

[CD07GT500]

...............and then were are back to the many, many claims that some dyno's show higher numbers than others..........inconsistent?

R

Oh but the blower stand is consistent? And you know this how? Lol

I am talking back to back same day dyno testing with all variables controlled just like on the blower stand. That’s the true test of power potential.

 

[Robert M]

Oh but the blower stand is consistent? And you know this how? Lol

I am talking back to back same day dyno testing with all variables controlled just like on the blower stand. That’s the true test of power potential.

^^^^^But once again, those "numbers" can not be quoted as fact because you may take that same car to another brand chassis dyno the next day and do the same exact back to back tests and get different numbers, some wayyyyy different.

Chassis dyno's are great for testing and tuning and seeing losses and gains with changes, but quoting numbers is useless.

.............and yes, I have been around a good friend many times who has an engine dyno in Riverview Florida, some engines with blowers, some N/A and I have seen many back to back tests with only parts changes for comparison, some room, same temp. same day. <<<In this case the "engine alone is the standard", everything else changed is the variable.

Do chassis dyno's have inconsistent results from brand to brand? maybe? I have never seen or read any mentions of this like I see on chassis dyno's. "Usually" an engine dyno is quoted as gospel when it comes to numbers.

R

 

[gimmie11s]

Bring them both to the track and see who traps higher with same driver.

Dyno.. lol.

 

[CD07GT500]

Bring them both to the track and see who traps higher with same driver.

Dyno.. lol.

Yea lol at seeing which one makes more average power in the given rpm range. The track is another test that could be conducted same day but variables are harder to control at a track if they are close in power.

 

[gimmie11s]

Make sure theyre both auto-swapped haha

 

[CD07GT500]

^^^^^But once again, those "numbers" can not be quoted as fact because you may take that same car to another brand chassis dyno the next day and do the same exact back to back tests and get different numbers, some wayyyyy different.

Chassis dyno's are great for testing and tuning and seeing losses and gains with changes, but quoting numbers is useless.

.............and yes, I have been around a good friend many times who has an engine dyno in Riverview Florida, some engines with blowers, some N/A and I have seen many back to back tests with only parts changes for comparison, some room, same temp. same day. <<<In this case the "engine alone is the standard", everything else changed is the variable.

Do chassis dyno's have inconsistent results from brand to brand? maybe? I have never seen or read any mentions of this like I see on chassis dyno's. "Usually" an engine dyno is quoted as gospel when it comes to numbers.

R

So dyno numbers same day, same dyno are no longer fact because it might make more or less on a different dyno? Are you serious right now? Dynojets are the industry standard and are pretty consistent. You can reference the 2020 GT500 numbers for proof as they have all made ~685sae stock. It doesn’t matter if a MD would give lower or higher numbers than the numbers tested that day. That logic makes no sense. I feel like you might need to do a little more research before trying to lecture me or anybody else for that matter on the subject.

 

[Robert M]

So dyno numbers same day, same dyno are no longer fact because it might make more or less on a different dyno? Are you serious right now? Dynojets are the industry standard and are pretty consistent. You can reference the 2020 GT500 numbers for proof as they have all made ~685sae stock. It doesn’t matter if a MD would give lower or higher numbers than the numbers tested that day. That logic makes no sense. I feel like you might need to do a little more research before trying to lecture me or anybody else for that matter on the subject.

Ok, I will just leave it that you are right.

.........and I will have to leave it that KB is correct also, with no other evidence to counter KB's information when testing blowers back to back..

R

 

[CD07GT500]

Ok, I will just leave it that you are right.

.........and I will have to leave it that KB is correct also, with no other evidence to counter KB's information when testing blowers back to back..

R

Well VMP made more power with a 2.65 so there’s that.

 

[Robert M]

Well VMP made more power with a 2.65 so there’s that.

Yep, according to "their tests", you are right.

R

 

[CD07GT500]

Yep, according to "their tests", you are right.

R

Kind of like the KB test lol

 

[Robert M]

Kind of like the KB test lol

Yes, if a person minimizes one test, then the other test should also be minimized. If one is correct, then they both are correct...............Then start comparing the facts provided by each.........

R

 

[HillbillyHotRod]

Seems logical to me. Bigger blower, more power. Now if you could compare a 2.65 VMP to a 2.6 KB or Whipple then you could see which is better.

 

[4VandHemiKiller]

Seems logical to me. Bigger blower, more power. Now if you could compare a 2.65 VMP to a 2.6 KB or Whipple then you could see which is better.

Change my mind. The TVS 2650 has made more power than any rear feed, off-of-the-shelf, sub-3.6 liter twin screw.

 

[CD07GT500]

 

[jazz]

Kb>tvs
Bigger is always betterhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eMV_swg6b6g
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eMV_swg6b6g

lets see your tvs beat this time, full weight street car...

 

[CD07GT500]

Kb>tvs
Bigger is always better

lets see your tvs beat this time, full weight street car...

That’s a 4.7 car try again.

 

[Handlebar Moustache]

That’s a 4.7 car try again.

Ummm.. stupid question, but why don’t the cars from Post No. 90 of this thread count? Btw, My bad on quoting Quade’s as a 3.6. Acknowledged that it’s a 4.7. It’s a bad bitch either way.

Danny Thompson’s 1400 hp 3.6LC car and the others? They don’t count because you don’t want them to? What about Johnny Lightning’s 1500 hp 5.0 running a 3.6 LC? That blower moves enough air for 1500 hp in a max effort build. I’m not sure why you take issue with it. It’s not going to be common to see because most guys at that level will move up to a bigger blower... 4.7 or 4.9...unless they’re running in a competition with blower displacement restrictions.

The 2.65 is a bad bitch too. Nobody is denying that.