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
SVT Shelby GT500
Considering Whipple 2.9
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="Catmonkey" data-source="post: 16262101" data-attributes="member: 124025"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1591380[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Catmonkey, post: 16262101, member: 124025"] 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. [ATTACH=full]1591380[/ATTACH] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
SVT Shelby GT500
Considering Whipple 2.9
Top