I think the KB sounds cooler, just louder I guess, maybe even higher-pitched. Although, MM&FF's recent article showing the whipple @ 17#s with 17° total timing made like 603 rwhp. That doesn't suck. Unless I ride in a Whipple car, I would go toward a KB. The KB car I rode in is the fastest car I've ever rode in in my life! The pull never stops, it only pulls harder in each gear.
KB vs. Whipple superchargers.
- Thread starter S5Snake
- Start date
I can't wait to install it when it gets here. I love the sound of the KB, one of the reasons I chose it.
Where did u order the 2.4 from?
To everyone,
I would like to let everybody know what Kenne Bell advertises on their site has very little merit and has no engineering or testing to back up the false claims (compressor comparison). The Lysholm designed compressor was designed by the lead designer of the Autorotor, he left Autorotor and help start Lysholm and develop a new compressor that had new design features. The Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design was not only backed by Eaton (the most successful supercharger mfg. ever), but also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test. Something the Autorotor has never successfully done. Ford chose the Lysholm supercharger for the new GT. Mercury Racing (marine) also picked the same SC for their 1075 HP engine. Ford Racing has also chosen Whipple to be it's sole aftermarket SC provider.
Whipple had the rights to the Autorotor supercharger, Whipple brought the compressor to America and supplied Kenne Bell superchargers. There was a gentlemen’s agreement that Whipple would target GM vehicles while he targeted the Ford market. Whipple released the rights to go with what Whipple felt was a better future solution and Whipple ended our business relationship with Jim Bell. Whipple knows the entire history of Autorotor, we were the largest distributor for years.
When comparing superchargers, you also need to compare kits. Our Cobra inlet is far better designed, it offers almost 11" sq. inches throughout the casting. The Bell necks down to nearly 4.75". The Bell discharge plate has no radius and very little plenum area for the air charge to make a 180 deg. turn back to the intercooler core. Ours is taller that gives more plenum area; it also has a nice radius for a smooth transition. Our system comes with guarded aluminum SC pulleys and an optional belt idler setup that works.
Whipple have never gone after a "blower war" but I'm so sick of the false Bell propaganda. Jim Bell is a very intelligent person and has made some incredible products, he's a very likable character, but we need to keep the facts straight.
To make note, Bell mentioned that Opcon Autorotor purchased Lysholm but in fact, the owners of Lysholm took controlling shares of Opcon for the purchase. This was very clear in the press release.
The Autorotor is a very good supercharger, but calling it the "Rolex" of superchargers and trying to persuade consumers into thinking its far superior to the Lysholm compressor is not an accurate picture. I want consumers to have the ability to make accurate decisions that are based on facts. The Bell has proven to be a great, high HP making kit, our system is fairly new, but we have a great product thats up for the challenge.
Thanks for listening,
Dustin Whipple
Whipple Superchargers
I would like to let everybody know what Kenne Bell advertises on their site has very little merit and has no engineering or testing to back up the false claims (compressor comparison). The Lysholm designed compressor was designed by the lead designer of the Autorotor, he left Autorotor and help start Lysholm and develop a new compressor that had new design features. The Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design was not only backed by Eaton (the most successful supercharger mfg. ever), but also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test. Something the Autorotor has never successfully done. Ford chose the Lysholm supercharger for the new GT. Mercury Racing (marine) also picked the same SC for their 1075 HP engine. Ford Racing has also chosen Whipple to be it's sole aftermarket SC provider.
Whipple had the rights to the Autorotor supercharger, Whipple brought the compressor to America and supplied Kenne Bell superchargers. There was a gentlemen’s agreement that Whipple would target GM vehicles while he targeted the Ford market. Whipple released the rights to go with what Whipple felt was a better future solution and Whipple ended our business relationship with Jim Bell. Whipple knows the entire history of Autorotor, we were the largest distributor for years.
When comparing superchargers, you also need to compare kits. Our Cobra inlet is far better designed, it offers almost 11" sq. inches throughout the casting. The Bell necks down to nearly 4.75". The Bell discharge plate has no radius and very little plenum area for the air charge to make a 180 deg. turn back to the intercooler core. Ours is taller that gives more plenum area; it also has a nice radius for a smooth transition. Our system comes with guarded aluminum SC pulleys and an optional belt idler setup that works.
Whipple have never gone after a "blower war" but I'm so sick of the false Bell propaganda. Jim Bell is a very intelligent person and has made some incredible products, he's a very likable character, but we need to keep the facts straight.
To make note, Bell mentioned that Opcon Autorotor purchased Lysholm but in fact, the owners of Lysholm took controlling shares of Opcon for the purchase. This was very clear in the press release.
The Autorotor is a very good supercharger, but calling it the "Rolex" of superchargers and trying to persuade consumers into thinking its far superior to the Lysholm compressor is not an accurate picture. I want consumers to have the ability to make accurate decisions that are based on facts. The Bell has proven to be a great, high HP making kit, our system is fairly new, but we have a great product thats up for the challenge.
Thanks for listening,
Dustin Whipple
Whipple Superchargers
Good info, but now we need someone to post from Kennebell.
AND HERE IT IS
To quote Jim Bell.....
The last time I was bad-mouthed by Dustin Whipple, I clearly stated that he should refrain from doing so. We subsequently responded and that’s why there is an Autorotor vs. Lysholm comparison in the first place.
Now he’s at it again. I really tend to take it personally when someone openly states that they are “sick of the false Bell propaganda”. I am getting a little sick and tired of his allegations. At Kenne Bell, we do our very best to supply our customers with factual and accurate dyno tests, tech tips, etc. Our employees will all testify that we have “zero tolerance” for lying or making false statements.
Allow me to answer Dustin’s allegations point-by-point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: I would like to let everybody know what Kenne Bell advertises on their site has very little merit and has no engineering or testing to back up the false claims (compressor comparison).
JB: I respectfully disagree. The compressor comparison test at http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/f...ORvsLYSHOLM.pdf between Autorotor and Lysholm were conducted by Opcon / Autorotor engineers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: The Lysholm designed compressor was designed by the lead designer of the Autorotor, he left Autorotor and help start Lysholm and develop a new compressor that had new design features. The Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design was not only backed by Eaton (the most successful supercharger mfg. ever), but also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test. Something the Autorotor has never successfully done.
JB: I guess you are attempting to bolster your product’s image by implying that the lead designer of Autorotor left to do a better supercharger. Here again Dustin has his facts all dead wrong and is misinformed, confused, or ....? “Lead designer”, no, Dustin. No “lead designer” from Lysholm ever designed an Autorotor. That is simply not true. Benny Lindbrandt is the “designer” you are referring to that left Autorotor to help start Lysholm. However it was not Lysholm’s Benny Lindbrandt as you claim who designed the Autorotor. He wasn’t even there when the Autorotor superchargers were designed. The “lead designer”of the Autorotor supercharger was actually Johnny Osscarrson, father of another Autorotor engineer and designer; Jan-Erik Osscarrson, whom I worked closely with for over 12 years. You’ve got your lead designer’s mixed up. You may wish to call Opcon and get the “real facts”. They find your claims of Benny designing the Autorotor as very humorous.
Next you claim the new Lysholm had “new design features”? Surely, you are joking. Again Dustin, you must be living in a cave. The “new” Lysholm 1600 and 2000 were DIRECT COPIES of the EATON, except for the twin screws instead of roots style rotors. Lysholm was looking to “replace” Eatons with the OEMs. Lysholm basically copied all the lower cost Eaton features, bearings, shafts, seals, cast case, etc.. They told us exactly that. You may want to ask your father and Benny who actually tested these “new design” superchargers for them, and had to show them they were clearly not equal to the superior design of the Autorotor as they first claimed. I still have the test data. The biggest problem being that inadequate Lysholm inlet case opening. I won’t go into great detail on this, but once Kenne Bell made Lysholm aware of their shortcomings, they changed it. In fact, the machined notches on the inlet are there to match Kenne Bell manifolds as per our recommendations to use the Autorotor style case inlet design.
Kenne Bell was more than happy to help out with the Lysholm design - we all had a common goal at the time - help promote the Twin Screw concept. Kenne Bell was in fact offered the Lysholm exclusively for the Ford aftermarket. Here again, Dustin probably was not aware of this. We turned it down because we felt the Autorotor was proven and more reliable because of the larger bearings, shafts 4 x 6 rotor arrangement, billet case vs cast, etc...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Ford chose the Lysholm supercharger for the new GT. Mercury Racing (marine) also picked the same SC for their 1075 HP engine. Ford Racing has also chosen Whipple to be it's sole aftermarket SC provider.
JB: You keep harping about “Ford testing” and “OEM quality”. Do you really believe the Autorotor would not pass Ford’s tests? Anytime, Dustin, anytime. We are making 700 horsepower on countless Cobras with our 2.2 at 20 psi, and the Lysholm is making only 500 horsepower on the GT. I’d say we passed this test. Just because Ford never selected the Autorotor surely does not mean it is inferior to the Lysholm. There were price considerations and politics involved, not “passing tests”. We know better. We’ve been doing Ford supercharger kits for more than 13 years. Testing? I know for a fact Ford does not test like Kenne Bell and our customers. Let’s leave it at that and let time decide who’s product is superior and whether you brought a knife to a gunfight.
Next, you talk about Mercury Racing and Ford Racing choosing the Lysholm / Whipple. As I’m sure you know, Kenne Bell isn’t at all interested in selling to Ford Racing, WD’s, Dot-coms, or any other companies / dealers or any other “middlemen” who only serve to increase the price of our products to our customers. We sell only to Installing Dealers and to our customers direct. In other words the cost of the Kenne Bell kits is too high to allow profits for middlemen. Unlike the Whipple Mustang kits, we chose to provide kits with everything our customers need including the required tuning and fuel system requirements. We spent the added time and expense to develop our kits completely. Dustin, I don’t think you know the whole story or want to know it, and there’s much more in the works.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Whipple had the rights to the Autorotor supercharger, Whipple brought the compressor to America and supplied Kenne Bell superchargers. There was a gentlemen’’s agreement that Whipple would target GM vehicles while he targeted the Ford market. Whipple released the rights to go with what Whipple felt was a better future solution and Whipple ended our business relationship with Jim Bell. Whipple knows the entire history of Autorotor, we were the largest distributor for years.
JB: Believe me, Dustin, Kenne Bell is well aware of all the Autorotor / Whipple / Lysholm history. Whipple has experimented with and sold superchargers manufactured by three different companies over the years: Sprintex, Autorotor and Lysholm. Since 1991, Kenne Bell has only sold Autorotor. Again, Kenne Bell was offered the exclusive for the Ford aftermarket by Lysholm if we would dump Autorotor. We had already pioneered the twin screw technology with Ford, Dodge, Jeep, Chrysler, etc.. It worked great, so why switch to a lower price supercharger and risk redeveloping them all over again? “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. The end result was even better for Kenne Bell. We ended up with more powerful, reliable superchargers from Autorotor. Let’s set this record straight Dustin, Whipple never “released any rights” to any supercharger. I was present in all the meetings and negotiations. Whipple was “terminated” for a breach of contract with Autorotor, and the billet race proven Autorotor was given to Kenne Bell exclusively. Whipple wanted both, but got only one, the lower cost OEM grade Lysholm. I thought you knew all this. You make it sound like Whipple “left” voluntarily for a better, proven product.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: When comparing superchargers, you also need to compare kits. Our Cobra inlet is far better designed, it offers almost 11" sq. inches throughout the casting. The Bell necks down to nearly 4.75". The Bell discharge plate has no radius and very little plenum area for the air charge to make a 180 deg. turn back to the intercooler core. Ours is taller that gives more plenum area; it also has a nice radius for a smooth transition. Our system comes with guarded aluminum SC pulleys and an optional belt idler setup that works.
JB: “Bigger” and “Plenums” aren’t always better. We’ve already made over 700 rwhp with our inlet and discharge plate Dustin. You want comparisons? You’ll get them. Coming soon. Let’s just say Kenne Bell has a reason for everything we do and anything we design - including the fact we include a chip and Boost-A-Pump with every Cobra kit. There is no “ideal shape”or radius for all HP and airflow ranges.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Whipple have never gone after a "blower war" but I'm so sick of the false Bell propaganda. Jim Bell is a very intelligent person and has made some incredible products, he's a very likable character, but we need to keep the facts straight.
JB: One can’t leave allegations such as these unanswered, and we will continue to respond if need be to keep the facts straight. So, I’ll finish clearing up areas where his comments lead me to believe he is confused, misinformed and / or technically challenged.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: To make note, Bell mentioned that Opcon Autorotor purchased Lysholm but in fact, the owners of Lysholm took controlling shares of Opcon for the purchase. This was very clear in the press release.
JB: Here he goes again. I called Opcon’s Chairman of the Board and he too disagrees with Dustin’s “facts”. Opcon is the parent company and yes, Opcon did purchase Lysholm. What part of this don’t you understand? Opcon gave Lysholm shares in the buyout, but in no way did Lysholm “take controlling shares”, as you falsely state. You must be troubled, confused and belittled by the fact that your supercharger supplier (Lysholm) was bought out by ours (Opcon / Autorotor). Get over it and accept the fact our company bought yours; a lower cost OEM style supercharger. Dustin, you must know that the aftermarket is well known and respected for replacing OEM style engine components. Ever heard of heads, manifolds, cams, throttle bodies, blocks, cranks, rods, pistons, pins, etc, ect...? And wasn’t it Kenne Bell who first stepped up and replaced - and I quote you “...the most successful supercharger mfg. ever.” - the one that “[backed] the Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design” and “...also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test.”
Testing? Reliability? You better check around. You wouldn’t believe how durable, reliable and successful our Cobra kits have proven to be at boost levels 2 to 3 times as high as the stock Eatons you are so proud of.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: The Autorotor is a very good supercharger, but calling it the "Rolex" of superchargers and trying to persuade consumers into thinking its far superior to the Lysholm compressor is not an accurate picture. I want consumers to have the ability to make accurate decisions that are based on facts. The Bell has proven to be a great, high HP making kit, our system is fairly new, but we have a great product that’s up for the challenge.
JB: Our tests and engineering analysis along with the Autorotor engineers indicate the Autorotor is, in fact, a superior product. So, if it is the very best product of its kind, then perhaps the “Rolex” designation is applicable. This does not imply the Lysholm is not a good supercharger. We would never say that. On the contrary, it is an acceptable OEM grade supercharger, as is the Eaton. Call Opcon U.S. and see if they agree. The Lysholm and Eaton are virtually identical except for the rotor types. They even look alike.
In the final analysis, the customers will decide if the Kenne Bell supercharger’s 4 x 6 rotors, billet case and components, larger bearings and shafts, steel pulleys, gears, serviceability, product testing and tech support is for them. That is what is so great about this business. We all engineer superchargers and related components the way we see it, but ultimately, it’s the customer’s decision to pay a little more if they are convinced a particular product is superior and / or has a better image.
The sole purpose of this post is to, with the best of our ability, give our customers the real facts, while pointing out some untruths.
Sincerely,
Jim Bell
To quote Jim Bell.....
The last time I was bad-mouthed by Dustin Whipple, I clearly stated that he should refrain from doing so. We subsequently responded and that’s why there is an Autorotor vs. Lysholm comparison in the first place.
Now he’s at it again. I really tend to take it personally when someone openly states that they are “sick of the false Bell propaganda”. I am getting a little sick and tired of his allegations. At Kenne Bell, we do our very best to supply our customers with factual and accurate dyno tests, tech tips, etc. Our employees will all testify that we have “zero tolerance” for lying or making false statements.
Allow me to answer Dustin’s allegations point-by-point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: I would like to let everybody know what Kenne Bell advertises on their site has very little merit and has no engineering or testing to back up the false claims (compressor comparison).
JB: I respectfully disagree. The compressor comparison test at http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/f...ORvsLYSHOLM.pdf between Autorotor and Lysholm were conducted by Opcon / Autorotor engineers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: The Lysholm designed compressor was designed by the lead designer of the Autorotor, he left Autorotor and help start Lysholm and develop a new compressor that had new design features. The Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design was not only backed by Eaton (the most successful supercharger mfg. ever), but also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test. Something the Autorotor has never successfully done.
JB: I guess you are attempting to bolster your product’s image by implying that the lead designer of Autorotor left to do a better supercharger. Here again Dustin has his facts all dead wrong and is misinformed, confused, or ....? “Lead designer”, no, Dustin. No “lead designer” from Lysholm ever designed an Autorotor. That is simply not true. Benny Lindbrandt is the “designer” you are referring to that left Autorotor to help start Lysholm. However it was not Lysholm’s Benny Lindbrandt as you claim who designed the Autorotor. He wasn’t even there when the Autorotor superchargers were designed. The “lead designer”of the Autorotor supercharger was actually Johnny Osscarrson, father of another Autorotor engineer and designer; Jan-Erik Osscarrson, whom I worked closely with for over 12 years. You’ve got your lead designer’s mixed up. You may wish to call Opcon and get the “real facts”. They find your claims of Benny designing the Autorotor as very humorous.
Next you claim the new Lysholm had “new design features”? Surely, you are joking. Again Dustin, you must be living in a cave. The “new” Lysholm 1600 and 2000 were DIRECT COPIES of the EATON, except for the twin screws instead of roots style rotors. Lysholm was looking to “replace” Eatons with the OEMs. Lysholm basically copied all the lower cost Eaton features, bearings, shafts, seals, cast case, etc.. They told us exactly that. You may want to ask your father and Benny who actually tested these “new design” superchargers for them, and had to show them they were clearly not equal to the superior design of the Autorotor as they first claimed. I still have the test data. The biggest problem being that inadequate Lysholm inlet case opening. I won’t go into great detail on this, but once Kenne Bell made Lysholm aware of their shortcomings, they changed it. In fact, the machined notches on the inlet are there to match Kenne Bell manifolds as per our recommendations to use the Autorotor style case inlet design.
Kenne Bell was more than happy to help out with the Lysholm design - we all had a common goal at the time - help promote the Twin Screw concept. Kenne Bell was in fact offered the Lysholm exclusively for the Ford aftermarket. Here again, Dustin probably was not aware of this. We turned it down because we felt the Autorotor was proven and more reliable because of the larger bearings, shafts 4 x 6 rotor arrangement, billet case vs cast, etc...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Ford chose the Lysholm supercharger for the new GT. Mercury Racing (marine) also picked the same SC for their 1075 HP engine. Ford Racing has also chosen Whipple to be it's sole aftermarket SC provider.
JB: You keep harping about “Ford testing” and “OEM quality”. Do you really believe the Autorotor would not pass Ford’s tests? Anytime, Dustin, anytime. We are making 700 horsepower on countless Cobras with our 2.2 at 20 psi, and the Lysholm is making only 500 horsepower on the GT. I’d say we passed this test. Just because Ford never selected the Autorotor surely does not mean it is inferior to the Lysholm. There were price considerations and politics involved, not “passing tests”. We know better. We’ve been doing Ford supercharger kits for more than 13 years. Testing? I know for a fact Ford does not test like Kenne Bell and our customers. Let’s leave it at that and let time decide who’s product is superior and whether you brought a knife to a gunfight.
Next, you talk about Mercury Racing and Ford Racing choosing the Lysholm / Whipple. As I’m sure you know, Kenne Bell isn’t at all interested in selling to Ford Racing, WD’s, Dot-coms, or any other companies / dealers or any other “middlemen” who only serve to increase the price of our products to our customers. We sell only to Installing Dealers and to our customers direct. In other words the cost of the Kenne Bell kits is too high to allow profits for middlemen. Unlike the Whipple Mustang kits, we chose to provide kits with everything our customers need including the required tuning and fuel system requirements. We spent the added time and expense to develop our kits completely. Dustin, I don’t think you know the whole story or want to know it, and there’s much more in the works.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Whipple had the rights to the Autorotor supercharger, Whipple brought the compressor to America and supplied Kenne Bell superchargers. There was a gentlemen’’s agreement that Whipple would target GM vehicles while he targeted the Ford market. Whipple released the rights to go with what Whipple felt was a better future solution and Whipple ended our business relationship with Jim Bell. Whipple knows the entire history of Autorotor, we were the largest distributor for years.
JB: Believe me, Dustin, Kenne Bell is well aware of all the Autorotor / Whipple / Lysholm history. Whipple has experimented with and sold superchargers manufactured by three different companies over the years: Sprintex, Autorotor and Lysholm. Since 1991, Kenne Bell has only sold Autorotor. Again, Kenne Bell was offered the exclusive for the Ford aftermarket by Lysholm if we would dump Autorotor. We had already pioneered the twin screw technology with Ford, Dodge, Jeep, Chrysler, etc.. It worked great, so why switch to a lower price supercharger and risk redeveloping them all over again? “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. The end result was even better for Kenne Bell. We ended up with more powerful, reliable superchargers from Autorotor. Let’s set this record straight Dustin, Whipple never “released any rights” to any supercharger. I was present in all the meetings and negotiations. Whipple was “terminated” for a breach of contract with Autorotor, and the billet race proven Autorotor was given to Kenne Bell exclusively. Whipple wanted both, but got only one, the lower cost OEM grade Lysholm. I thought you knew all this. You make it sound like Whipple “left” voluntarily for a better, proven product.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: When comparing superchargers, you also need to compare kits. Our Cobra inlet is far better designed, it offers almost 11" sq. inches throughout the casting. The Bell necks down to nearly 4.75". The Bell discharge plate has no radius and very little plenum area for the air charge to make a 180 deg. turn back to the intercooler core. Ours is taller that gives more plenum area; it also has a nice radius for a smooth transition. Our system comes with guarded aluminum SC pulleys and an optional belt idler setup that works.
JB: “Bigger” and “Plenums” aren’t always better. We’ve already made over 700 rwhp with our inlet and discharge plate Dustin. You want comparisons? You’ll get them. Coming soon. Let’s just say Kenne Bell has a reason for everything we do and anything we design - including the fact we include a chip and Boost-A-Pump with every Cobra kit. There is no “ideal shape”or radius for all HP and airflow ranges.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: Whipple have never gone after a "blower war" but I'm so sick of the false Bell propaganda. Jim Bell is a very intelligent person and has made some incredible products, he's a very likable character, but we need to keep the facts straight.
JB: One can’t leave allegations such as these unanswered, and we will continue to respond if need be to keep the facts straight. So, I’ll finish clearing up areas where his comments lead me to believe he is confused, misinformed and / or technically challenged.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: To make note, Bell mentioned that Opcon Autorotor purchased Lysholm but in fact, the owners of Lysholm took controlling shares of Opcon for the purchase. This was very clear in the press release.
JB: Here he goes again. I called Opcon’s Chairman of the Board and he too disagrees with Dustin’s “facts”. Opcon is the parent company and yes, Opcon did purchase Lysholm. What part of this don’t you understand? Opcon gave Lysholm shares in the buyout, but in no way did Lysholm “take controlling shares”, as you falsely state. You must be troubled, confused and belittled by the fact that your supercharger supplier (Lysholm) was bought out by ours (Opcon / Autorotor). Get over it and accept the fact our company bought yours; a lower cost OEM style supercharger. Dustin, you must know that the aftermarket is well known and respected for replacing OEM style engine components. Ever heard of heads, manifolds, cams, throttle bodies, blocks, cranks, rods, pistons, pins, etc, ect...? And wasn’t it Kenne Bell who first stepped up and replaced - and I quote you “...the most successful supercharger mfg. ever.” - the one that “[backed] the Lysholm rotor, bearing, shaft and gear design” and “...also passed all of Eaton and Fords durability and endurance test.”
Testing? Reliability? You better check around. You wouldn’t believe how durable, reliable and successful our Cobra kits have proven to be at boost levels 2 to 3 times as high as the stock Eatons you are so proud of.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DW: The Autorotor is a very good supercharger, but calling it the "Rolex" of superchargers and trying to persuade consumers into thinking its far superior to the Lysholm compressor is not an accurate picture. I want consumers to have the ability to make accurate decisions that are based on facts. The Bell has proven to be a great, high HP making kit, our system is fairly new, but we have a great product that’s up for the challenge.
JB: Our tests and engineering analysis along with the Autorotor engineers indicate the Autorotor is, in fact, a superior product. So, if it is the very best product of its kind, then perhaps the “Rolex” designation is applicable. This does not imply the Lysholm is not a good supercharger. We would never say that. On the contrary, it is an acceptable OEM grade supercharger, as is the Eaton. Call Opcon U.S. and see if they agree. The Lysholm and Eaton are virtually identical except for the rotor types. They even look alike.
In the final analysis, the customers will decide if the Kenne Bell supercharger’s 4 x 6 rotors, billet case and components, larger bearings and shafts, steel pulleys, gears, serviceability, product testing and tech support is for them. That is what is so great about this business. We all engineer superchargers and related components the way we see it, but ultimately, it’s the customer’s decision to pay a little more if they are convinced a particular product is superior and / or has a better image.
The sole purpose of this post is to, with the best of our ability, give our customers the real facts, while pointing out some untruths.
Sincerely,
Jim Bell
WHOA! Now that was a post! :bowdown:
I'm behind KB all the way!
:beer:
I'm behind KB all the way!
:beer:
Jim, your post makes me very proud to have the KB on my Cobra. Very good information! Thanks
onerichrunner
Banned
Hey Jim
Looks like you need to clean off those boot tips again.
Shawn
Looks like you need to clean off those boot tips again.
Shawn
KB all the way.:rockon:
Well, that post by Mr Bell just about settles the KB vs Whipple debate in my mind WHen i get home from iraq, KB it is!
WHen i get home from iraq, KB it is!
Jim,
Wow, I should refrain from printing the truth? I’m misinformed, technically challenged? I won’t lower myself to the level of name calling or belittling you, I would like the consumers to know the truth, simple as that.
I’m not sure what your sick of, but I would be more than happy to explain these facts to you face to face. Maybe we can possibly meet at SEMA if you would like to clear these matters up?
Now, I don’t want to get in an argument, but you are simply making false claims and statements. Lets get the first fact straight. The last time I mentioned your name on any forum, I had every right too. Whipple and Bell had a good working relationship even though we went separate ways. After we decided to build the PT Cruiser kit, you purchased our 5.3L GM SC system from your friend, we know who that is. YOU bolted OUR rear inlet, OUR discharge and belt system to the Autorotor SC, pictured it and advertised it as yours. This was very simple since the SC's have the same bolt pattern. You can deny all you want, we know for a fact that you did this. Look at your rear inlet casting for your GM kit, looks incredibly similar to ours doesn't it? You outright lied then about doing it and said that I would see in the future that the kits are very different. The fact is, by the time you casted it yourself, you modified it. The original ad and press releases featured our parts.
Next fact, Art Whipple brought the screw compressor to the American market. You helped promote the screw compressor without a doubt, but Whipple was the pioneer. He built the first kit here in the US, began selling screw compressors to the aftermarket, passed 50 state certification, worked in partnership to build the revolutionary 980 and 3150/2.2 race compressors. Whipple had the Autorotor exclusive rights and we supplied you with compressors. Those are facts!
Next fact. Whipple started in 1988 with Sprintex, we gave them the first order to make production SC's. It was our order, our deposit that gave them the line of credit approval to begin production. Although it was an incredible compressor, the size and cost never reached it's potential. We then came in contact with Jan Wicen of Autorotor, which brought us a compressor to test from their newly formed company Autorotor. It was incredibly bad, a B&M 177 was more efficient at the time. We (Whipple) worked with the engineers and after some time, they came back with a far better compressor which was the 1.16L and 1.33L (1.50L came later). We then signed an exclusive agreement and gave them an order to get into production, just as we did with Sprintex. To state that we “experimented” is a joke, Art Whipple is an innovator and is never stuck to one solution, exploring new solutions and answers are one of the keys to being successful.
Next, as a business goal, Whipple always wanted to get quantity up so the retail prices could fall. You contacted Art Whipple, you said you wanted to build kits for the Fords, at the time, the 5.0 Mustang. Since we were so over burdened with work at that time, we decided that we could concentrate on the GM market and we would supply you the Autorotor compressors for Ford applications. You contracted Lee Hurley of HESCO to build your 5.0 kit, we continued with what we were doing. We were then up and running. Along the way, Whipple supplied you with compressors below cost for years to try and get qty. up for the future. Another fact.
Lets go set another fact straight, Benny Lindbrandt was the lead designer when the compressor came to America, I didn’t say anything about the original designer. Ironically, Autorotor is still using his patented extruded casing design. If you remember correctly, Opcon had severe financial troubles? The bank and some private investors took ownership of SRM (original owner owned both Opcon and SRM). This group went on to then form Lysholm Technologies; Benny was hired to be the lead designer. Their first contracts were Whipple and Garrett. You had given a verbal agreement to follow if you remember correctly.
Another fact, the compressors you tested were initial designs. We can’t compare the current Autorotors to the original can we? There is no question, no argument, the initial Lysholm axial/radial casing only offered performance equal to the radial casings. Later designs surpassed that efficiency level when we went to our true axial casings. You tested the original design, which are in no way a comparison to the compressors utilized today. You mentioned that the inlet is inadequate, what are you talking about? Measure the square area or flow test it. The 2300ax is a true axial entry compressor; rotors are enclosed 360deg’s, exactly the same as the Autorotor. That is by far one of your most inaccurate comments to date.
Next fact. You mentioned that the Lysholm “even looks like the Eaton,” better yet, “Ford does not test like Kenne Bell.” The original casings were designed very similar to the Eaton CASINGS so they could replace the Eaton roots type in future projects. I don’t see that as a bad thing, later designs changed that completely. Your talking like somehow you test more than the billion dollar Ford? You run endurance test for thousands and thousands of hours? You have countless engineers running studies, theories, measuring every single parameter including cylinder pressure? No you don’t, you test limits, push stock or modified motors but your not involved in endurance and durability testing of any comparison.
You want to talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight? Have you done your research on our 3.3 Liter compressor? Comparing 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 vs. the massive 3.3L should be your next challenge. Your comparison is that biggers better, bigger bearings, bigger shafts. Although we know that has very little to do with the actual reliability of a compressor, maybe we can use that same thought process. Your comparison has no engineering data to back it up other than “bigger” which is not an engineering term or SAE standard that I know of.
Next facts, another completely false claim. Whipple gave up their exclusive rights to Autorotor to pursue what we felt was a better SC solution. Insinuating that Autorotor somehow canceled the contract before we canceled it is ludicrous. Simply not true. Autorotor pursued us aggressively; we even signed another exclusive agreement, which you were going to purchase compressors from Whipple, again. We released the exclusive Autorotor right by sticking with the Lysholm compressor, that was our decision that ended the relationship. In your zeal to make yourself sound good, it was our choice, not Autorotors. You were also not their choice, you were what’s left. Lysholm was not going to give you exclusive Ford rights, Whipple was.
You claim you were at every meeting? Not quite, you were not at our meetings, I can’t even remember the last time you were here.
Your exclusive with Autorotor? No, try to be a bit clearer, others use the Autorotor in their own kits. You have an exclusive for the Ford, Dodge and Chrysler market.
Ford GT makes 500hp? No, it makes 550HP, check the latest figures. But you know how much testing Ford or Roush does, you know the endurance testing, heck, you can beat it right? Do you think the GT has made dyno passes at 700+hp? Do I think the Autorotor could pass Ford or Eaton’s testing? As it sits now, no.
Talk about your harping, you keep boasting the “billet” case and downplaying the cast case. What is that Lighting SC case you sale? Isn’t that a casting, isn’t that a radial entry? Is that “billet” or is that the Castzilla supercharger?
In reference to the Cobra and Lighting upgrade kits, there is no question you hit a market I didn’t think was there. We didn’t decide to enter until there became quite a demand. Our standard kit offers almost 90hp vs. stock with the 3.5” pulley and needs nothing else. This was tested and verified by our professional calibration staff. As you said (although contradicting), bigger is not always better, but our Cobra inlet offers far better flow levels. A much better fit with our 3.3L and power capacity, which far exceeds the 2.2 or 2.4. We welcome any honest comparisons you offer, it can only benefit the market more.
You’re not interested in selling to Ford Racing, ok. Who has better knowledge on the Ford products? Possibly Ford or some of their key engineers? You don’t think they know what will fail, what will survive, what it takes to live under certain circumstances, etc.? Because they don’t push the factory vehicles to their breaking points doesn’t mean they don’t have extensive knowledge in the areas needed. We are very excited to work with Ford, I don’t think we could ask for a better partner.
To note in regards to the ownership of the company, reference here:
http://www.opconab.com/index.asp?cID=10&langID=2&sPage=1
That 16.9% is Svenska Rotor (SRM), the largest share holder. Same owner owned SRM and Lysholm Technologies.
To quote the Opcon press release:
“The purchase price is 1,450,000 newly issued shares in Opcon AB and SEK 5 million in cash. There is also an additional purchase price that depends on the financial results for the past year. Opcon took possession on 31 December 2003. The companies had sales of around SEK 65 million and reported an operating profit of around SEK 5 million in 2002. Increased sales and profits are expected for 2003.”
This is not intended to say what is better or worse, it’s laying out the facts. It’s true that time will tell and were very confident in the future, whether it's our new 3.3L Lighting and Cobra kits or our intercooled 5.4 3V and 4.6 3V kits, either will prove it's worth. Were so confident in our new lighting kit that were offering a Kenne Bell rebate when the consumers replace there smaller 2.2L.
Thanks again.
Wow, I should refrain from printing the truth? I’m misinformed, technically challenged? I won’t lower myself to the level of name calling or belittling you, I would like the consumers to know the truth, simple as that.
I’m not sure what your sick of, but I would be more than happy to explain these facts to you face to face. Maybe we can possibly meet at SEMA if you would like to clear these matters up?
Now, I don’t want to get in an argument, but you are simply making false claims and statements. Lets get the first fact straight. The last time I mentioned your name on any forum, I had every right too. Whipple and Bell had a good working relationship even though we went separate ways. After we decided to build the PT Cruiser kit, you purchased our 5.3L GM SC system from your friend, we know who that is. YOU bolted OUR rear inlet, OUR discharge and belt system to the Autorotor SC, pictured it and advertised it as yours. This was very simple since the SC's have the same bolt pattern. You can deny all you want, we know for a fact that you did this. Look at your rear inlet casting for your GM kit, looks incredibly similar to ours doesn't it? You outright lied then about doing it and said that I would see in the future that the kits are very different. The fact is, by the time you casted it yourself, you modified it. The original ad and press releases featured our parts.
Next fact, Art Whipple brought the screw compressor to the American market. You helped promote the screw compressor without a doubt, but Whipple was the pioneer. He built the first kit here in the US, began selling screw compressors to the aftermarket, passed 50 state certification, worked in partnership to build the revolutionary 980 and 3150/2.2 race compressors. Whipple had the Autorotor exclusive rights and we supplied you with compressors. Those are facts!
Next fact. Whipple started in 1988 with Sprintex, we gave them the first order to make production SC's. It was our order, our deposit that gave them the line of credit approval to begin production. Although it was an incredible compressor, the size and cost never reached it's potential. We then came in contact with Jan Wicen of Autorotor, which brought us a compressor to test from their newly formed company Autorotor. It was incredibly bad, a B&M 177 was more efficient at the time. We (Whipple) worked with the engineers and after some time, they came back with a far better compressor which was the 1.16L and 1.33L (1.50L came later). We then signed an exclusive agreement and gave them an order to get into production, just as we did with Sprintex. To state that we “experimented” is a joke, Art Whipple is an innovator and is never stuck to one solution, exploring new solutions and answers are one of the keys to being successful.
Next, as a business goal, Whipple always wanted to get quantity up so the retail prices could fall. You contacted Art Whipple, you said you wanted to build kits for the Fords, at the time, the 5.0 Mustang. Since we were so over burdened with work at that time, we decided that we could concentrate on the GM market and we would supply you the Autorotor compressors for Ford applications. You contracted Lee Hurley of HESCO to build your 5.0 kit, we continued with what we were doing. We were then up and running. Along the way, Whipple supplied you with compressors below cost for years to try and get qty. up for the future. Another fact.
Lets go set another fact straight, Benny Lindbrandt was the lead designer when the compressor came to America, I didn’t say anything about the original designer. Ironically, Autorotor is still using his patented extruded casing design. If you remember correctly, Opcon had severe financial troubles? The bank and some private investors took ownership of SRM (original owner owned both Opcon and SRM). This group went on to then form Lysholm Technologies; Benny was hired to be the lead designer. Their first contracts were Whipple and Garrett. You had given a verbal agreement to follow if you remember correctly.
Another fact, the compressors you tested were initial designs. We can’t compare the current Autorotors to the original can we? There is no question, no argument, the initial Lysholm axial/radial casing only offered performance equal to the radial casings. Later designs surpassed that efficiency level when we went to our true axial casings. You tested the original design, which are in no way a comparison to the compressors utilized today. You mentioned that the inlet is inadequate, what are you talking about? Measure the square area or flow test it. The 2300ax is a true axial entry compressor; rotors are enclosed 360deg’s, exactly the same as the Autorotor. That is by far one of your most inaccurate comments to date.
Next fact. You mentioned that the Lysholm “even looks like the Eaton,” better yet, “Ford does not test like Kenne Bell.” The original casings were designed very similar to the Eaton CASINGS so they could replace the Eaton roots type in future projects. I don’t see that as a bad thing, later designs changed that completely. Your talking like somehow you test more than the billion dollar Ford? You run endurance test for thousands and thousands of hours? You have countless engineers running studies, theories, measuring every single parameter including cylinder pressure? No you don’t, you test limits, push stock or modified motors but your not involved in endurance and durability testing of any comparison.
You want to talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight? Have you done your research on our 3.3 Liter compressor? Comparing 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 vs. the massive 3.3L should be your next challenge. Your comparison is that biggers better, bigger bearings, bigger shafts. Although we know that has very little to do with the actual reliability of a compressor, maybe we can use that same thought process. Your comparison has no engineering data to back it up other than “bigger” which is not an engineering term or SAE standard that I know of.
Next facts, another completely false claim. Whipple gave up their exclusive rights to Autorotor to pursue what we felt was a better SC solution. Insinuating that Autorotor somehow canceled the contract before we canceled it is ludicrous. Simply not true. Autorotor pursued us aggressively; we even signed another exclusive agreement, which you were going to purchase compressors from Whipple, again. We released the exclusive Autorotor right by sticking with the Lysholm compressor, that was our decision that ended the relationship. In your zeal to make yourself sound good, it was our choice, not Autorotors. You were also not their choice, you were what’s left. Lysholm was not going to give you exclusive Ford rights, Whipple was.
You claim you were at every meeting? Not quite, you were not at our meetings, I can’t even remember the last time you were here.
Your exclusive with Autorotor? No, try to be a bit clearer, others use the Autorotor in their own kits. You have an exclusive for the Ford, Dodge and Chrysler market.
Ford GT makes 500hp? No, it makes 550HP, check the latest figures. But you know how much testing Ford or Roush does, you know the endurance testing, heck, you can beat it right? Do you think the GT has made dyno passes at 700+hp? Do I think the Autorotor could pass Ford or Eaton’s testing? As it sits now, no.
Talk about your harping, you keep boasting the “billet” case and downplaying the cast case. What is that Lighting SC case you sale? Isn’t that a casting, isn’t that a radial entry? Is that “billet” or is that the Castzilla supercharger?
In reference to the Cobra and Lighting upgrade kits, there is no question you hit a market I didn’t think was there. We didn’t decide to enter until there became quite a demand. Our standard kit offers almost 90hp vs. stock with the 3.5” pulley and needs nothing else. This was tested and verified by our professional calibration staff. As you said (although contradicting), bigger is not always better, but our Cobra inlet offers far better flow levels. A much better fit with our 3.3L and power capacity, which far exceeds the 2.2 or 2.4. We welcome any honest comparisons you offer, it can only benefit the market more.
You’re not interested in selling to Ford Racing, ok. Who has better knowledge on the Ford products? Possibly Ford or some of their key engineers? You don’t think they know what will fail, what will survive, what it takes to live under certain circumstances, etc.? Because they don’t push the factory vehicles to their breaking points doesn’t mean they don’t have extensive knowledge in the areas needed. We are very excited to work with Ford, I don’t think we could ask for a better partner.
To note in regards to the ownership of the company, reference here:
http://www.opconab.com/index.asp?cID=10&langID=2&sPage=1
That 16.9% is Svenska Rotor (SRM), the largest share holder. Same owner owned SRM and Lysholm Technologies.
To quote the Opcon press release:
“The purchase price is 1,450,000 newly issued shares in Opcon AB and SEK 5 million in cash. There is also an additional purchase price that depends on the financial results for the past year. Opcon took possession on 31 December 2003. The companies had sales of around SEK 65 million and reported an operating profit of around SEK 5 million in 2002. Increased sales and profits are expected for 2003.”
This is not intended to say what is better or worse, it’s laying out the facts. It’s true that time will tell and were very confident in the future, whether it's our new 3.3L Lighting and Cobra kits or our intercooled 5.4 3V and 4.6 3V kits, either will prove it's worth. Were so confident in our new lighting kit that were offering a Kenne Bell rebate when the consumers replace there smaller 2.2L.
Thanks again.
as a very very young person, i do not know much about this arguement...but lets be honest, both make outstanding applicants
Hmmm... this is getting very interesting here.
For the record... I would just like to ask this which is on the minds of many who purchased KB blowers. The original snouts on the KB 2.2L were fond of spewing oil at high boost levels. Kenne Bell said that "nothing was wrong" with the snout, yet not too long ago they redesigned the snout... that never had any problems to begin with but redesigned it anyway. Now if you have the old "oil spewing" snout and want the new one, you have to send your blower back (as it's too complex for the layman to do, or that's the way I read it over on modularfords) and have it done by KB. You have to pay for the new snout, along with the labor/other expenses to change it out. Why not just replace them free of charge to the owners that want it done as a generous jester?
Just wanting to know...
Shannon
For the record... I would just like to ask this which is on the minds of many who purchased KB blowers. The original snouts on the KB 2.2L were fond of spewing oil at high boost levels. Kenne Bell said that "nothing was wrong" with the snout, yet not too long ago they redesigned the snout... that never had any problems to begin with but redesigned it anyway. Now if you have the old "oil spewing" snout and want the new one, you have to send your blower back (as it's too complex for the layman to do, or that's the way I read it over on modularfords) and have it done by KB. You have to pay for the new snout, along with the labor/other expenses to change it out. Why not just replace them free of charge to the owners that want it done as a generous jester?
Just wanting to know...
Shannon
Last edited:
Don't know what the link below shows or tells, but is it a KB or a Whipple? hmmmm.... You be the judge....
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/e...em=7926532780&category=33741#ebayphotohosting
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/e...em=7926532780&category=33741#ebayphotohosting
Last edited:
If you guys are going to fight this out in person and argue up a storm at SEMA, let us know where. I want to spectate. haha
Yeah, that WAS a "Whipple" when we use to use and distribute the Autorotor.
Tickets for the meetings will be sold through ticketmaster
I'm sure we can get this handled, we just want to be clear and accurate, Jim's a great guy, we all take things personal since their family business's.
Make sure to check out the 05' Mustang kit at SEMA.
Thanks,
Dustin
Tickets for the meetings will be sold through ticketmaster
I'm sure we can get this handled, we just want to be clear and accurate, Jim's a great guy, we all take things personal since their family business's.
Make sure to check out the 05' Mustang kit at SEMA.
Thanks,
Dustin
Hey Dustin!
It seems the discussion of blower choices has gone the way of religion lately. No one can be right or better. For those of you who make a desicion soley based on a companies internet post or rebuttal aren't shopping wisely.
The best one can do is try to gather as much info as possible about the compressor via phone calls, testimonials, real life race results, etc.
While the Whipple is still young (as far as 03/04 cobra life is concerned) I think time will tell how really close these blowers perform. So far, dynographs I have seen up to the 600-650whp range have been similar between the two.
Time will tell. In the end we (consumers) win because competition drives down price and increases performance!
Thanks to both KB and Dustin for taking the time to chime in. This is good stuff as long as the personal attacks are left out .
PS- when can we get an inlet made for the 3.3l I'm telling you hood clearance WOULD NOT be an issue for many of us!
Roger
It seems the discussion of blower choices has gone the way of religion lately. No one can be right or better. For those of you who make a desicion soley based on a companies internet post or rebuttal aren't shopping wisely.
The best one can do is try to gather as much info as possible about the compressor via phone calls, testimonials, real life race results, etc.
While the Whipple is still young (as far as 03/04 cobra life is concerned) I think time will tell how really close these blowers perform. So far, dynographs I have seen up to the 600-650whp range have been similar between the two.
Time will tell. In the end we (consumers) win because competition drives down price and increases performance!
Thanks to both KB and Dustin for taking the time to chime in. This is good stuff as long as the personal attacks are left out
.PS- when can we get an inlet made for the 3.3l I'm telling you hood clearance WOULD NOT be an issue for many of us!
Roger
RYAN the GREAT
Banned
Buh Bye. oke:
oke:Users who are viewing this thread
