• Welcome to SVTPerformance!

Anyone gone to a TVS 2.3 to a Whipple 3.4 lately?

Discussion in 'Terminator Talk' started by Wings65288, Sep 12, 2019.

  1. Wings65288

    Wings65288 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    4,531
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Fortuna, CA
    ***messed up on title, should read "gone FROM a 2.3 TO a 3.4"***

    Not really finding much on this. I searched multiple forums, it's hard when I type 3.4 on here nothing comes up because it's 3 characters I believe.

    Anyway, current setup is E85 Teksid with main/head studs, about 22 #'s of boost, SRA C/O's w/double-adjustables front/rear, 9.5:1 Gibtecs, tuned by Malcolm. I've had it out 2 runs only, first was 10.85 @ 138, 2nd time 10.68 @ 136 (1.49 60'). Trunk mounted ice tank is definitely padding those times a little but hey it's doing its job.

    I'm after 9's and wanna do it in the T56. (T56 has been upgraded and it's on a 26 spline setup).

    I recently bought a Whipple 3.4 off a buddy and am looking to run about 26#'s I think. I'm putting on a 3.75 to 4# upper with a 4# caged lower with locking hub. I'd really like at least 25#'s.

    What I'm getting at has anyone actually went to the 3.4 and been in a similar situation I'm in? I see a lotta guys going to a 2.9. Just trying to make sure this is really what I want to do. Car runs flawlessly currently (knock on wood). Who knows, I may just stay on my current setup, I just want to be sure about this before I actually go through with it.

    I know about the 1/2 K-member spacers, I'm upgrading the feed fuel line, and gonna put this caged lower back on to try and help with that the best I can.

    Any insight would be awesome. Again sorry for somewhat of a repetitive thread, I just haven't seen much on this topic in the past few years. Now watch someone come in and post a bunch of links lol.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2019
  2. GodStang

    GodStang Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,144
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    Aiken, SC
    Most people found that if you are not going balls to the walls the 2.8L Mammoth or 2.9L Crusher is a better all around blower (Street/strip) than a 3.4L on our 4.6L. Remember the TVS is not a twin screw and it is not as efficient as a twin screw. Can you make power out of it? Sure! Is it right for some people? Sure! Does it compare to a Mammoth/Crusher? Not even close. Is the 3.4L you bought a Crusher? That is where a lot of your gains will be at 25/26 psi.

    Just remember Broke7 will soon be in the 8s with a 2.9L Crusher blower only and rowing gears.
     
  3. apex svt

    apex svt MEAN STREAK Established Member

    Messages:
    1,468
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    USA
    I thought broke ran a 2.8 bell with the strictly performance “crusher” intake?
     
  4. GodStang

    GodStang Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,144
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    Aiken, SC

    He did and got down to like 9.3s then swap some stuff up. He went Corn and 2.9L Crusher Gen IV and hit 9.00 @ 156. He has 8s in it.
     
  5. BlckBox04

    BlckBox04 I am the liquor Established Member

    Messages:
    4,821
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Location:
    NJ
    I haven't seen any posts or videos from him in a while
     
  6. Wings65288

    Wings65288 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    4,531
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Fortuna, CA
    Lmao 156 that's FLYING. No crusher currently but do have my eye open to that in the market.

    Has anyone been in both cars? I want to know if the seat of the pants feeling is MUCH different in a well built 3.4
     
  7. slo984now

    slo984now AKA 01yellerCobra Established Member

    Messages:
    15,083
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    Closest I have to that is I drove my buddies 04 when it had a gen 1 Whipple 2.3 and was in the low 600 range. I went home and told the wife it scared me and I'll never have a car that fast. Even she saw through that. He went to a 3.4 after needing some engine work done. I think it was around 800rwhp at that point and it was nuts.
     
  8. Wings65288

    Wings65288 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    4,531
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Fortuna, CA
    Yes 800 rwhp is what I'm gonna shoot for. I've rode in my buddies 3.4 and it was definitely a whole new world on the top end. Wish I would have driven it before he tore it down (he's going auto / turbo).

    I am wondering has ANYONE regretted the switch?
     
  9. GodStang

    GodStang Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,144
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    Aiken, SC

    I have done 2.2L, 2.8L, 2.8L Behemoth, and 3.6L Mammoth. All have different pros and cons. The 2.8L and 3.6L are power levels way beyond what the 2.2L could ever dream of doing.
     
  10. 94slowbra1

    94slowbra1 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,150
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Location:
    new orleans
    Not exactly what you want to know but I went from a gen 2 tvs to a gen 4 2.9 crusher. From what I can tell the 2.9 shines up top but also has the initial hit like the tvs. So I'd say best of both worlds.
     
  11. cj428mach

    cj428mach Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    6,863
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Location:
    Kansas
    Interesting, I know Malcolm went from a Gen 2 Crusher 2.9 at around 30psi to a gen 2 TVS around 24psi and said the 2.3 was night and day difference in the low to midrange.
     
  12. Wings65288

    Wings65288 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    4,531
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Location:
    Fortuna, CA
    Yeah he told me that too and that was ANOTHER reason I wanted some feedback from others
     
  13. slo984now

    slo984now AKA 01yellerCobra Established Member

    Messages:
    15,083
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    Maybe it's a difference in the rotor packs. Since Malcolm had a gen 2 and 94slowbra1 has a gen 4.
     
    c6zhombre likes this.
  14. 94slowbra1

    94slowbra1 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,150
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Location:
    new orleans
    this is the only thing i can think of, rotor design. my gen 4 is peaking at 25lbs, a little more than i want, but feels the same if not more aggressive on the hit than the 2.3 tvs. i hardly have any time with the gen 4 so far but this is my initial impression so far. this is all on 3k rpm hit and just regular street driving. i dont feel like ive lost anything down low but up top it just wants to keep pulling. i will get it on a dyno and then we can see where the power comes on and what its doing up top. both set ups were on pump e70
    ill also ad that the gen 4 has only been driven in 90+ degree temps so far too, i expect when it cools down it will want to eat a little more
     
    Wings65288 and c6zhombre like this.
  15. c6zhombre

    c6zhombre E85 NutSwinger Established Member

    Messages:
    4,999
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Location:
    League City, TX
    Whatever happened years ago with a gen2 2.9 is irrelevant to what's happening today with the gen4. It's the new king of the hill until something else comes along that knocks it off.
     
  16. 94slowbra1

    94slowbra1 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,150
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Location:
    new orleans
    i agree with ^^^, todays blowers are much different than stuff from years ago.
     
  17. BlckBox04

    BlckBox04 I am the liquor Established Member

    Messages:
    4,821
    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Location:
    NJ
    I only have limited track time with my gen4 2.9 and I can't give a comparison to the TVS or a 3.4 as I went from a kb 2.2 to this, but I will tell you that I 100% notice my car pulls like a freight train all the way to red line without feeling like it's falling off at any point.
     
    Wings65288 likes this.
  18. GodStang

    GodStang Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,144
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    Aiken, SC
    running 30psi on a 2.9L on our cars is a big big mistake. Yes running a blower in the correct "operation range" will net a better end result then running one way outside of it's range. It's nothing against either blower it is the fact that these are devices that were engineered to run at certain criteria on an engine at a certain criteria and going beyond that will result in less than favorable results.
     

Share This Page