3.6 KB vs VMP Gen3R test

2011 gtcs

GT500 poster
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
8,441
Location
Arizona
After owning both a 3.6KB and the Gen3 TVS I felt the KB was a little lazy down low but was a monster on the topend, but that was with a stock 5.8 at about 20psi so I'm sure that played a big factor.

The 2.65 TVS feels great down low and pulls hard all the way to 6,500 at 18 to 19psi. I've felt that the 2.65 was just a better supercharger for a stock 5.4/5.8. Again just my opinion. A 3.2 KB or a Gen5 3.0 whipple is great choice also.

For a built engine idk maybe a 4.2 KB is the way to go. I know Lund Sr's 14 GT500 makes almost 1300whp with a 2.65, maybe it would make more with a whipple or KB.
 

Justin@VMP

Authorized Vendor
Authorized Vendor
Joined
Jun 16, 2004
Messages
1,133
Location
Orlando, FL
We actually got a call at VMP back in May asking for VMP Gen3 2650 replacement parts, we later found out it was Kenne Bell calling. No one knew at the time but we were developing a Gen3R head unit in conjunction with Magnuson superchargers. The VMP Gen3 is older tech at this point, nearly 2 years old. Our Gen3R combined with Magnuson's patent-pending flow technology is much more efficient than our old Gen3, it makes less heat, takes less power to drive, and it shows with dyno numbers 75-150RWHP higher than our old blower. I actually ran a Gen3 on the car in the video, and it was nowhere near as strong as the 3R. With all of that being said...the 2.65L rotors are only one part of the equation when it comes to making power with a TVS, the housing design is what determines the power band. I would hope that KB has at least read the Magnuson patent and flowed all five stages on their in-house test stand. KB makes an impressive blower, different compressors for different people one could say.
 

CD07GT500

Klaus's Bitch
Established Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
2,564
Location
MS
Justin, I believe you are confusing the undersized 2.65 you use in your kits with the KB Liquid Cooled Patented 3.2, 3.6, 4.2, 4.7 and 4.9 displacement superchargers. If you are going to continue to hype without data, you should know that:

1). KB superchargers do not need to be kept under 30 psi and preferably in the 20's

2). KB superchargers can run 30-40 psi

We run 35-38 psi on Mark Meiering's 1652RWHP Record Holding 6 second Shelby GT500 and 32 psi on JLP's 1500HP 5.0. Have you ever measured the temps on our 3L and 4L superchargers?

3). Too much rotor deflection? You can measure this? I own the company and am not aware of any "rotor deflection" that causes any issues.

Now to your comments about the 2.65. "No RPM limit on the 2650?" Really? Enough of this B.S. When tested, the 2.65R on our supercharger dyno (at a much lower 23,000 RPM and 22 psi), we were forced to lower the oil level 50%. And even then it burned the paint off the front cover and destroyed the drive. The 2.65 Shelby kit supercharger completely melted and dissolved the front plastic coupler at the same 22 psi. The remnants destroyed all the bearing and scuffed the abradable rotors and internal case. Air charge temps were 380 degrees or a big 55 degrees hotter than the 3.6 at the same boost.

This is data from our own dedicated supercharger dyno. You may want to consider purchasing a supercharger dyno as testing on a chassis dyno does not in any way provide all the necessary data for supercharger development.

View attachment 1615157 View attachment 1615158 View attachment 1615159

I have a 2.65 and 268 is hard to believe honestly considering what mine made on 25#. Has the 3.6/3.2/2.8 made 1200+ SAE on a DJ in a ~10.5:1 street car with all the accessories?
 

Kenne Bell

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
1,024
Location
Southern California
There is an abundance of hype, HP quotes, opinions and theories on superchargers. As a supercharger manufacturer, one can only offer credible test data, our reputation and our satisfied customers as proof of KB product performance. Our design engineers refer to the Kenne Bell supercharger dyno as the "Industry Lie Detector." We simply mount the superchargers on the dyno with an unrestricted open inlet, adjust the boost/cfm and then measure the engine power required to drive it, and all the various temps, including the case - and RPM of course. There is no better way. Now to Justin's remarks.

2.65 Gen 3 "The Rattler" - A year ago, a customer purchased and paid good money to VMP for what he was told was the latest greatest 2.65 Gen 3 kit we affectionately call "The Rattler." He decided he wanted the larger KB 3.6. To eliminate any and all dyno, cooling, heating, weather, inlet system, boost, tuning, etc. variables, we than tested and compared the Gen 3 2.65 to the KB 3.6 on our supercharger dyno at the same boost. See dyno graphs. While running the Gen 3 at 23,000 RPM (6000 RPM or 28% less RPM than you claim 2.65 rotors are safe for). At the end of the tests, rattling revealed the front plastic coupler had melted and dissolved into the oil supply and ruined all the bearings. The "Rattler" was then retired until we could replace the coupler. And yes, Rick called VMP, Magnuson and every Eaton Dealer we could locate in the U.S. Even the Eaton factory. Rick spent months on this. No one told Rick the 2.65 was obsolete already. Feel free to call Rick and verify. Not one could locate a coupler for us. We still need the part to this day. Looking at the Eaton literature, it appears to be a common problem.

But in the post you now say this VMP Gen 3 the customer purchased in 2019 is already obsolete as the new 2.65 Gen 3R is "much more efficient than the old Gen 3, makes less heat, takes less power to drive and shows with dyno 75-150RWHP higher than our old blower is." That is B.S. Efficiency? IMO, that is hype. 150 more RWHP. Maybe you forgot 8 psi boost. Gotta find out just how good - if at all - it is. So we get new 2.65 Gen 3R to test. Our supercharger dyno tests of the Gen 3 and Gen 3R don't indicate anything close to 150HP - unless you changed the boost which is not the way to compare supercharger efficiency.

2.65 Gen 3R "Ol' Smokey" - At only 23,000 and 22 psi, it was very hot at the recommended oil level, so the level was lowered 50%. Try again. Didn't want to burn another 2.65 up. Even then it ended poorly by burning paint off the 2.65 and smoking our engineers out of the dyno room at 444° (see heat gun laser temp at 444°. The drive then failed knocking the bearing out. We disassembled "Ol Smokey" Gen 3R and discovered the plastic coupler was not melted as in the 2.65 Gen 3. Some good news. Apparently that issue is cured. However, there was coating missing off the rotors and the case bore (see photos). Fortunately, it blew out of the supercharger into the dyno air vent. It would have ended up in an engine. Yet another advantage of testing on the supercharger dyno. Frankly, we have seen too much of these rotor coatings peeling, chipping and scraping off Eatons coated rotors over the years. Not good for any engine or supercharger efficiency. And expensive to R&R and recoat (approx. $400). So, we stick to testing these 2.65's on the Supercharger Dyno only.

First, it was the "ultimate" supercharger, the undersized 2.3 Gen 2. Admittedly I get confused on Gen 1, 2, 3, 4 and SS's, since every new model is hyped as the latest in technology with 3x3, 4x4, 4x4 twisted and finaly 4x4 twisted 2.65. All little 2L's. What we do know is that Kenne Bell has been replacing/upgrading Ford Eatons since the '99 Lightning. That's why we test them all. That aside Justin, the supposedly latest VMP 2.65 Gen 3 was purchased in 2019 as you now claim.

As always, there was no damage whatsoever to the 3.2 or 3.6 at the same 22 psi and CFM . . . which used 50 less engine HP and was 55° cooler. And the cooler running 3.2 and 3.6 came through with flying colors.

If there's a newer new version, send it and we would be more than happy to test it for you.

P.S. Our Rick would like to know if you would warranty the customers 1 year old Gen3 with the melted coupler, contaminated bearings and resurface the rotors and case?

P.S.S. Also, can we get a warranty on the Gen 3R drive? Neither was turned anywhere near the 29,000 you recommend. Only 23,ooo max. The boost was only 22 psi - nowhere near the 28 psi.


3.2vs2.65r.jpg
 

Islandcat

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
235
Location
Grand Isle
Not gonna lie. I have a trinity 2.3 I am happy with and if I didn’t buy that I would be sporting a 2.3r or 2.65r cause I think they are better suited to street cars. I just have a hard time believing they out perform a larger whipple or kenne bell when they are maxed out themselves. I mean 18 pounds to 18 pounds yes they probably can. But maxed out I don’t think the TVs can hang.

But I still ain’t giving up my 2.3 to upgrade. Too much money and I already probably make too much power lol
 

CD07GT500

Klaus's Bitch
Established Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
2,564
Location
MS
The true test is a non bias same day dyno test with each blower maxed out pulley wise (screw boost numbers). Keep afr the same and adjust timing accordingly between the 2.65/3.2/3.6/3.0/3.4 etc...and see which one makes more power. That’s how a true blower vs blower test should be conducted. My other question what is max blower RPM for the KB? Also still looking for dynojet graphs of the 3.2/3.6 maxed out or at least close to its potential. Do you have any available?
 

Weather Man

Persistance Is A Bitch
Established Member
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
25,764
Location
MN
The true test is a non bias same day dyno test with each blower maxed out pulley wise (screw boost numbers). Keep afr the same and adjust timing accordingly between the 2.65/3.2/3.6/3.0/3.4 etc...and see which one makes more power. That’s how a true blower vs blower test should be conducted. My other question what is max blower RPM for the KB? Also still looking for dynojet graphs of the 3.2/3.6 maxed out or at least close to its potential. Do you have any available?

As a point of fact, you're wrong. The blower test stand eliminates variables. The blower cares not one bit if it is turning 18,000 rpm on the test stand or engine, it puts out what it puts out and melts shit or doesn't.
 

manny231988

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Roswell NM
Lol a dyno session they put both blowers on a blower dyno idk how much more into it you gotta go. KB is in here defending their product with actual data. And correct me if I’m wrong but I think max recommended on 3.6 is 28 psi
 

CD07GT500

Klaus's Bitch
Established Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
2,564
Location
MS
As a point of fact, you're wrong. The blower test stand eliminates variables. The blower cares not one bit if it is turning 18,000 rpm on the test stand or engine, it puts out what it puts out and melts shit or doesn't.

Sure you stick with blower test stand results completed by one blower company to make your blower choice. That is the equivalent of going VMP 2.65 over the 3.6 KB based on the VMP dyno vid alone.

I will stick with the one that when maxed out generates more average power in a none bias dyno test using the same engine combo and keeping all the other variables the same.
 

CD07GT500

Klaus's Bitch
Established Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
2,564
Location
MS
Lol a dyno session they put both blowers on a blower dyno idk how much more into it you gotta go. KB is in here defending their product with actual data. And correct me if I’m wrong but I think max recommended on 3.6 is 28 psi

Read my comment above.
PSI would not be the limit as that would differ from combo to combo. Blower RPM is the limit.
 

CD07GT500

Klaus's Bitch
Established Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
2,564
Location
MS
Here is why i think it is hard to believe the little 2.65 is eating up 268hp lol

5.8 car with a 4.7 26lbs

KB 4.7.JPG



5.8 car with a 2.65R 25lbs

2.65r dyno.JPG
 

Klaus

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
13,539
Location
minnesota
I guess the joke is on anyone that got a gen 3 instead of waiting for the gen 3r.
 

jazz

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
330
Location
Bay Area
Wow
I made 1096rwhp 980rwtq @24lbs with a 3.6kb and 3.25 upper pulley 10% lower. Have a 3” pulley still to
Use. Wonder what it’ll make 15%lower and 3 upper.
IMG_7800.jpg


Heres another 3.6 making 1000 only @14lbs





Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top