Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Engine/Tuning
Any one have the remanufactured Cobra motor???
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Juiced46" data-source="post: 15606885" data-attributes="member: 11519"><p>The cold hard sad truth is, yes, 490rwtq is correct. The short answer here is, it is completely normal for this combo to make that.</p><p></p><p>The longer answer......</p><p></p><p>I have installed hundreds of different combos. The KB 2.8 and KB 2.6 blowers have been the least impressive. They make HP, but the TQ and the "feel" on the initial hit is very very soft. Ported Eatons feel stronger. If I were choosing a blower for 600-700ish rwhp and this gets debated all day..... I am taking the 2.3 TVS, all day, every day. Why? Because it is just a more violent blower down low. It feels better and is more fun to drive. Does it make as much power as a 2.8 Mammoth on full tilt? No. But on pump gas with limitations, it makes more TQ, TQ faster and harder and makes the same amount of HP on 17-19psi and pump gas (not E85)</p><p></p><p>With that being said. All of the 2.8s I have ever installed at this type of boost made somewhere in the 490-510ish RWTQ range. It is what it is. Just because the blower is bigger, does not mean its better. People need to realize what they are buying..</p><p></p><p>Next, Banshee is claiming he is down 60rwhp. Well, come to find out, he is not. His comparison is being based off of what KB is stating it "should" make on that pulley combo. We all know KB. Heck they claim you can make 1000rwhp on stock rails. Can it be done? Yes, with perfect conditions and luck. But it is not recommended.</p><p></p><p>Next, going off Banshees assumptions, sorry man, I am not bashing you but just telling cold hard facts. He says hes running 18.5#s of boost. Based off of what though? KBs pulley chart? Or was this logged on the dyno? Going off the rest of this thread, there is a huge lack of critical data to help diagnose this issue if there is anything at all. We are all just guessing. People can assume all day. Some people say the #s are low, well that is because they are used to seeing glory #s on loose dynos put up big #s. It doesnt mean anything. Like I said over and over, there are too many variables to compare someone elses dyno that made 20rwtq more then someone across the country. Way too much can change that. We dont have all the data. We have general info here, no specifics on conditions, timing AF, actual logged boost etc etc.</p><p></p><p>All I know is, for 18psi on a 2.8 through cats on a stock engine, this is what you get.</p><p></p><p>Lets talk about what I mean about the KBs "laziness" in the 2.8 and 2.6. In this example, I feel its a perfect comparison. In the dyno chart below, we have a KB 2.6 and a Whipple 2.3 both pullied for 18psi.</p><p></p><p>The whipple hits 18 psi @ roughly 4,000 RPMS. The KB is 2 PSI behind it the whole way. The KB finally ramps up to 18 PSI @ 5700 RPMS. Where is the TQ? Well when the Whipple is making 20rwtq more, its also making about 2 PSI more at that point....... This is what I mean about its lazy TQ curve.</p><p></p><p>If we are comparing 2 KBs together, like I said, different dynos and different tuning techniques can swing a 20-30rwtq difference.</p><p></p><p>There is nothing wrong with this engine at all. If anything and this is a huge guess if there is anything wrong at all. Could be a belt slip issue since we do not see what boost is going other then being told it is 18.5#s. Not using a Snub idler is silly. KB likes to give claims like that, just like their BAP is all you need to make 800rwhp. No timing info. Possible cats causing a restriction. I have seen Kooks cats fall apart and clog before. Anything is possible. But with the lack of data I am standing by my statement. From what I have experienced with these blowers, the #s are right inline where it should be. There may be 20rwtq or so down low if timing is more agressive etc. But we dont have that info, how much meth is being put into it etc etc.</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]90524[/ATTACH]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Juiced46, post: 15606885, member: 11519"] The cold hard sad truth is, yes, 490rwtq is correct. The short answer here is, it is completely normal for this combo to make that. The longer answer...... I have installed hundreds of different combos. The KB 2.8 and KB 2.6 blowers have been the least impressive. They make HP, but the TQ and the "feel" on the initial hit is very very soft. Ported Eatons feel stronger. If I were choosing a blower for 600-700ish rwhp and this gets debated all day..... I am taking the 2.3 TVS, all day, every day. Why? Because it is just a more violent blower down low. It feels better and is more fun to drive. Does it make as much power as a 2.8 Mammoth on full tilt? No. But on pump gas with limitations, it makes more TQ, TQ faster and harder and makes the same amount of HP on 17-19psi and pump gas (not E85) With that being said. All of the 2.8s I have ever installed at this type of boost made somewhere in the 490-510ish RWTQ range. It is what it is. Just because the blower is bigger, does not mean its better. People need to realize what they are buying.. Next, Banshee is claiming he is down 60rwhp. Well, come to find out, he is not. His comparison is being based off of what KB is stating it "should" make on that pulley combo. We all know KB. Heck they claim you can make 1000rwhp on stock rails. Can it be done? Yes, with perfect conditions and luck. But it is not recommended. Next, going off Banshees assumptions, sorry man, I am not bashing you but just telling cold hard facts. He says hes running 18.5#s of boost. Based off of what though? KBs pulley chart? Or was this logged on the dyno? Going off the rest of this thread, there is a huge lack of critical data to help diagnose this issue if there is anything at all. We are all just guessing. People can assume all day. Some people say the #s are low, well that is because they are used to seeing glory #s on loose dynos put up big #s. It doesnt mean anything. Like I said over and over, there are too many variables to compare someone elses dyno that made 20rwtq more then someone across the country. Way too much can change that. We dont have all the data. We have general info here, no specifics on conditions, timing AF, actual logged boost etc etc. All I know is, for 18psi on a 2.8 through cats on a stock engine, this is what you get. Lets talk about what I mean about the KBs "laziness" in the 2.8 and 2.6. In this example, I feel its a perfect comparison. In the dyno chart below, we have a KB 2.6 and a Whipple 2.3 both pullied for 18psi. The whipple hits 18 psi @ roughly 4,000 RPMS. The KB is 2 PSI behind it the whole way. The KB finally ramps up to 18 PSI @ 5700 RPMS. Where is the TQ? Well when the Whipple is making 20rwtq more, its also making about 2 PSI more at that point....... This is what I mean about its lazy TQ curve. If we are comparing 2 KBs together, like I said, different dynos and different tuning techniques can swing a 20-30rwtq difference. There is nothing wrong with this engine at all. If anything and this is a huge guess if there is anything wrong at all. Could be a belt slip issue since we do not see what boost is going other then being told it is 18.5#s. Not using a Snub idler is silly. KB likes to give claims like that, just like their BAP is all you need to make 800rwhp. No timing info. Possible cats causing a restriction. I have seen Kooks cats fall apart and clog before. Anything is possible. But with the lack of data I am standing by my statement. From what I have experienced with these blowers, the #s are right inline where it should be. There may be 20rwtq or so down low if timing is more agressive etc. But we dont have that info, how much meth is being put into it etc etc. [ATTACH=full]90524[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
The Terminator
Engine/Tuning
Any one have the remanufactured Cobra motor???
Top