• Welcome to SVTPerformance!

3.6 KB vs VMP Gen3R test

Discussion in 'SVT Shelby GT500' started by 2011 gtcs, Dec 16, 2019.

  1. 2011 gtcs

    2011 gtcs GT500 poster Established Member

    Messages:
    6,745
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2011
    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.
     
  2. Oiljunkie

    Oiljunkie Adrenaline junkie Established Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    Mountain View
    Now we got a discussion.

    Hopefully this can stay civil and be very constructive.
     
  3. Justin@VMP

    [email protected] Authorized Vendor Authorized Vendor

    Messages:
    1,113
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    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.
     
    shelbygt500hoss likes this.
  4. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
    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?
     
  5. Kenne Bell

    Kenne Bell Active Member Established Member

    Messages:
    1,024
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    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
     
  6. Weather Man

    Weather Man Persistance Is A Bitch Premium Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,889
    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Location:
    MN
    Well now, I think Mike was pretty damn polite.
     
    PM-Performance and manny231988 like this.
  7. Islandcat

    Islandcat Active Member Established Member

    Messages:
    221
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    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
     
    manny231988 and shelbygt500hoss like this.
  8. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    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?
     
  9. Weather Man

    Weather Man Persistance Is A Bitch Premium Member Established Member

    Messages:
    14,889
    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Location:
    MN
    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.
     
  10. manny231988

    manny231988 Active Member Established Member

    Messages:
    583
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    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
     
  11. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
    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.
     
  12. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
    Read my comment above.
    PSI would not be the limit as that would differ from combo to combo. Blower RPM is the limit.
     
  13. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    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
     
    2011 gtcs likes this.
  14. manny231988

    manny231988 Active Member Established Member

    Messages:
    583
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Location:
    Roswell NM
    71303CE9-E70A-4501-BBDD-98AEEC43552E.jpeg
    Here’s a list 71303CE9-E70A-4501-BBDD-98AEEC43552E.jpeg
     
  15. Klaus

    Klaus Premium Member Premium Member Established Member

    Messages:
    3,043
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Location:
    minnesota
    I guess the joke is on anyone that got a gen 3 instead of waiting for the gen 3r.
     
  16. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
    My Gen 3 does fine ;)
     
  17. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
  18. Klaus

    Klaus Premium Member Premium Member Established Member

    Messages:
    3,043
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2018
    Location:
    minnesota
    I had a gen 3 too. Let me emphasize the past tense.
     
    gimmie11s likes this.
  19. CD07GT500

    CD07GT500 Well-Known Member Established Member

    Messages:
    2,550
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    MS
    Why did you get rid of it?
     
  20. jazz

    jazz Active Member Established Member

    Messages:
    329
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    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
     
    Kenne Bell likes this.

Share This Page