2013 GT500 VMP Gen3 TVS results.
- Thread starter 2011 gtcs
- Start date
sorry, by lower meant short block
Oh oh. We did ARP main studs, ARP rod bolts, Manley rods, diamond pistons, total seal rings, king bearings with billet OPG and billet crank gear
Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
oh baby that looks like the exact thing I am going to be doing shortly actually I knew I could make close to 1000 on 93 with the gen3 and built lower.
Im happy being at 900rw tho
Car sounds badass
Im happy being at 900rw tho
Car sounds badass
My final update here....couldn't get a KB 168 or the VMP 160mm TB to run with this blower....very disappointing. VMP let me exchange for the twin 69 and it's been solid. Just wrapped up final data logs last night and man the Gen 3 pulls very hard where the 2.3 TVS lost steam. It was vicious up top, not as violent on the hit. Not a bad thing for the street, IMO.
I'm running a 3" upper with a 10% lower. Only seeing a max of 15.3 lbs boost around 4K RPMs, and it fell to 13.6 lbs at 7K. Alex would not let me drop another pulley size after looking at the logs. Said I'm right on the verge of maxing out the MAF on the JLT 123 and he would not tune for any more power regardless with my load being so high at 2.4. I can't complain, but I'm leaving so much power on the table because of octane limitations. I'll probably try another big monoblade next spring and tune for Mach 116, tired of messing around with them for now after having both a KB and VMP unit being complete busts. I'm just ready to enjoy the car again and will put some octane booster in for safety when I hit the strip this summer.
I also have to say Alex with LR was great to work with through all the TB issues and the entire tuning process in general. He's knowledgeable and always quick to respond. I know there are a lot of guys here that feel like they're getting shortchanged if Jr. isn't working the ticket, but I would not hesitate to work with Alex again at all. He's a good dude.
I'm running a 3" upper with a 10% lower. Only seeing a max of 15.3 lbs boost around 4K RPMs, and it fell to 13.6 lbs at 7K. Alex would not let me drop another pulley size after looking at the logs. Said I'm right on the verge of maxing out the MAF on the JLT 123 and he would not tune for any more power regardless with my load being so high at 2.4. I can't complain, but I'm leaving so much power on the table because of octane limitations. I'll probably try another big monoblade next spring and tune for Mach 116, tired of messing around with them for now after having both a KB and VMP unit being complete busts. I'm just ready to enjoy the car again and will put some octane booster in for safety when I hit the strip this summer.
I also have to say Alex with LR was great to work with through all the TB issues and the entire tuning process in general. He's knowledgeable and always quick to respond. I know there are a lot of guys here that feel like they're getting shortchanged if Jr. isn't working the ticket, but I would not hesitate to work with Alex again at all. He's a good dude.
Last edited:
Mental note, 2011 GT500 computers hate big TBs 
My car never has had issues with the KB168 or Whipple 170.
Glad to hear you got it running right.
Big street power, can turn up big time with small changes
-J
My car never has had issues with the KB168 or Whipple 170.
Glad to hear you got it running right.
Big street power, can turn up big time with small changes
-J
Exactly, I’m a little burned out on it for now though. I held on to my 149 intake so I’ll give a brand new KB168 a shot next spring.Mental note, 2011 GT500 computers hate big TBs
My car never has had issues with the KB168 or Whipple 170.
Glad to hear you got it running right.
Big street power, can turn up big time with small changes
-J
J, you got a new VMP 173 didn’t you? How did that go? Tuned yet? Lund could not get any of the “revised” 160s running.
I might be missing something, but none of this makes any sense to me. Why is your boost level dropping at higher rpms? All of the Gen3 boost graphs I have seen show boost increasing with rpm. My stock 2.3 TVS is flatter than that. What boost gauge were you using?
I have never heard of anyone maxing out a 123 mm MAF at 15 psi of boost. Also an engine load of 2.4 would equate closer to 20.58 psi not 15, 2.4 = (14.7 + Boost)/14.7, boost = 20.58. I'm using the definition for load below which calculates the ratio of measured air mass to the maximums at standard temperature and pressure.
Either something is wrong with my thinking or your numbers are wrong. Can you post the log file you sent to Alex?
As defined in SAE 1979:
LOAD_ABS = [air mass (g / intake stroke)] / [1.184 (g / litre) * cylinder displacement (litres / intake stroke)] NOTE At engine off and ignition on the LOAD_ABS = 0 %.
Derivation:
- air mass (g / intake stroke) = [total engine air mass (g/sec)] / [rpm (revs/min)* (1 min / 60 sec) * (1/2 # of cylinders (intake strokes / rev)];
- LOAD_ABS = [air mass (g)/intake stroke] / [maximum air mass (g)/intake stroke at WOT@STP at 100 % volumetric efficiency] * 100 %.
Where:
- STP = Standard Temperature and Pressure = 25 °C, 29.92 in Hg (101.3 kPa) BARO, WOT = wide open throttle.
- The quantity (maximum air mass (g)/intake stroke at WOT@STP at 100 % volumetric efficiency) is a constant for a given cylinder swept volume. The constant is 1.184 (g/litre) * cylinder displacement (litres/intake stroke) based on air density at STP.
Characteristics of LOAD_ABS:
- ranges from 0 % to approximately 95 % for naturally aspirated engines, 0 % to 400 % for boosted engines;
- linearly correlated with engine indicated and brake torque;
- often used to schedule spark and EGR rates;
- peak value of LOAD_ABS correlates with volumetric efficiency at WOT;
- indicates the pumping efficiency of the engine for diagnostic purposes.
Spark-ignition engine are required to support PID $43. Compression-ignition (diesel) engines are not required to support this PID.
I’ve got a lot of boost lowering mods....cams, ported lower intake, etc. The cams, in particular, bleed off a lot of boost up top.
For reference, I was running a stock Trinity blower, 2.4 upper/10% lower with this setup. Peak boost was about 20 lbs, fell to 16 at redline. I believe the Gen3 would be able to keep the boost constant if I could just spin it a little harder.
I'm not knocking your setup or anything. It sounds like a beast to me. I'm just trying to understand why you have such a high engine load and so little boost. I guess your engine 's volumetric efficiency is just that much better. I know when I had long tubes my boost dropped 2 psi until I added a 10% crank to it, but I never paid any attention to the load. Incidentally, your current pulley ratio is nearly equal to what the stock 2.3 came with, but you have a blower that is 15% bigger and an engine that breathes much better. So, 15 psi does make sense. I guess that equates to an engine load that is 20% bigger too somehow. Sorry, I'm just thinking out load and getting off topic.
Mental note, 2011 GT500 computers hate big TBs
My car never has had issues with the KB168 or Whipple 170.
Glad to hear you got it running right.
Big street power, can turn up big time with small changes
-J
Well, I just hope my 2011 GT500 will work well on my ported KB dual 75mm throttle body. Next week I should be able to fire up the engine after 2 years of down time.
Boost is nothing more than a measure of restriction, so my engine is just flowing that much better than a more stock-like configuration. Full list of what I have done that will lower boost - JDM SS cams, ported lower intake manifold/KB Bigun, ported heads, long tubes/no cats.I'm not knocking your setup or anything. It sounds like a beast to me. I'm just trying to understand why you have such a high engine load and so little boost. I guess your engine 's volumetric efficiency is just that much better. I know when I had long tubes my boost dropped 2 psi until I added a 10% crank to it, but I never paid any attention to the load. Incidentally, your current pulley ratio is nearly equal to what the stock 2.3 came with, but you have a blower that is 15% bigger and an engine that breathes much better. So, 15 psi does make sense. I guess that equates to an engine load that is 20% bigger too somehow. Sorry, I'm just thinking out load and getting off topic.
I never really paid much attention to load until now either, especially since boost is always thrown around on the forums as the be all end all for determining what pulley sizes to run. I actually just had this conversation with Alex the other day when he told me not to go to a smaller upper pulley. It made no sense to me since my psi was so low. If you think about it from a tuner's perspective, though, it would make more sense to monitor load since it directly impacts cylinder pressures and it's also consistent between every 5.8 regardless of mods. Any 5.8 with a load of 2.4 will have the same amount of air flowing into it. If we speak in terms of boost it doesn't really mean much. There are many variations to individual setups that can drastically change boost readings (cams, long tubes, no cats, etc). And then you get into blower size....18lbs of boost from a 2.3 is a whole different ballgame than 18lbs from a 4+ liter twin screw. There's much more air being forced into the engine. Load, however, is load regardless of any of that. As load increases cylinder pressures increase, thus requiring more octane. I'm not really sure what LR considers to be a safe load for 93 octane, Alex told me I was way past conservative....my logs looked good, though, knock sensors added .5 degrees timing for most of the run time.
I put it on the dyno one year ago when the engine build was complete for a remote tune. Same engine setup, but with a bone stock Trinity 2.3, 2.4" upper, 10% lower. Put down a best of 780 on the third run....Mustang dyno, hot day, 3 back to back runs and 10 minutes of cruising before the third one to mix some Octanium in the tank. Heat soak was a bit of a factor at that point, but still made a good number. This year moved to Gen3 and a twin 69 TB. Compared to the previous setup, the car pulls significantly harder so I would imagine it has to be well over 800 to the tire. I'd like to get it on the dyno again to get a #....maybe I'll do it later this summer if I have the free time. I have no doubt that load reading of 2.4 in the log is correct, as is the boost data due to the different boost curve of the Gen3.
On that boost curve. Where the 2.3 hit hard down low, the Gen3 really shines up top. Alex had me start my first couple of WOT logs around 2K and stop at 5K. Buddy of mine who owns a Shelby was with me as he's thinking of moving to a Gen3 as well and wanted to see what it was all about. Compared to the previous setup we were both left unimpressed with these runs. At 5K it was just getting going....I was questioning my decision of moving to this blower. He came back out with me on the redline runs, and as I stated before it pulled extremely hard up top. We were both very impressed, even more so after seeing such low boost numbers. I'd love to put a smaller pulley on it, but I'll listen to my tuner here. I can only imagine the pull on 24lbs and E85, I'm sure it's incredible.
Last edited:
Any chance you could post your log file in csv format? Thanks
How do you like the 170mm whipple TB as far as drivability?
Sent from my iPhone using the svtperformance.com mobile app
I had zero issues with the Whipple big 170, KB168, and current VMP 163R.
All have had excellent driveability, and no wrench light fail safe issues.
The VMP 173 was terrible.
I also had some issues with the BPS twin 73, but only once heat soaked.
VMP provided an RC style clip on heat sink with the new 163 and my tuner is now incorporating those on his big power, big TB builds.
I really want to try the BPS twin 73 I have with the heat sink installed as I’d bet that’d be the solution.
-J
All have had excellent driveability, and no wrench light fail safe issues.
The VMP 173 was terrible.
I also had some issues with the BPS twin 73, but only once heat soaked.
VMP provided an RC style clip on heat sink with the new 163 and my tuner is now incorporating those on his big power, big TB builds.
I really want to try the BPS twin 73 I have with the heat sink installed as I’d bet that’d be the solution.
-J
Where can i buy the heat sink and how are you attaching it? That looks like it would help alot.
Users who are viewing this thread
