Screamin Cobra said:
here is another quote from you on the link to the KB 2.6 vs. whipple 140ax thread
link to thread: http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...d.php?t=321256
__________________Screamin Cobra said:
Last edited:
kb 2.4 or whipple 2.3
- Thread starter 1BadKB03
- Start date
here is another quote from you on the link to the KB 2.6 vs. whipple 140ax thread
link to thread: http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...d.php?t=321256
go with the whipple 3.3, thats what im waiting for . . .
2.8 is a waste of $$ unless you're cammed and ported ect.nocontrol03svt said:
Has to be a heavy breather or race car.
CPViolation said:
How do you figure? The 2.8L has thrown down great numbers on stock displacement cars and even 2V engines. Seems to have more top-end pull than the 2.6L blower. Not saying it is necessary, but I don't really think it is a waste.
I like my 2.4, but I have seen some whipples run very good #'s as well. If I were to buy new and the 2.8L wasnt on the market I would go with a whipple 2.3
I got my 2.4 used for a steal, otherwise I would still be 2.7/4 Ported Eaton & 100 shot laying out twin screw cars all day long like I used to
I got my 2.4 used for a steal, otherwise I would still be 2.7/4 Ported Eaton & 100 shot laying out twin screw cars all day long like I used to
TieBreaker said:with that procharger your talking about or the tubro either one. that damn car would not a daily driver you would need to **** with it all the time.oke:
Procharger and ALL Cent Blowers make too much noise for me. I chose the Whipple because they were MUCH easier to deal with than KB. BTW, with a properly tuned turbo kit you NEVER have to F*&K with it. :thumbsup:
I've got a KB 2.2 with cams, and make 670+ to the tires. I've never had a single problem with my KB at all. I've never owned a Whipple, but I would highly recommend a KB any day of the week. ESPECIALLY OVER A PROCHARGER........dont even get me started on this piece of engineering marvel. lol
back on the original topic, i just found these on modularfords. check these out:
and heres the link;
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/...twin-screw-compressor-map-analysis-24016.html
and heres the link;
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/...twin-screw-compressor-map-analysis-24016.html
well i just got a whipple 2.3 on my car and it dynoed at 590 to the wheels on 15 psi. havent driven it yet but ill let everyone know
ok correction to my last post they dynoed it again this morning with a little cooler air and some new tuning got it to 603 rwhp and 577 rwtq on 15 psi:-D
MoToCoBrA said:
How is your hook up? What other mods have you done to get 603rwhp? Did you do the injectors, boost a pump etc..? I am looking to get the Whipple myself in a month time. Where did you buy yours from?
Thanks
im still not sure why people insist on saying KB is much better i know of a dozen whipple and Kb cars that put up right around the same numbers. If your running over 650 at 18lbs of boost even with a conservative(perfect) tune your asking for a short life. Either way both are terrific and are capable of producing the same hp and tq on a safe level. However I do believe if you like risk and a car over 21-23 psi of boost kb has a slight edge. But for safety and price whipples my choice.
I love my Whipple, made 625 on 17 psi. PLENTY of power for the street which is what my car is for. I'm sure you can't go wrong with either.:coolman:MoToCoBrA said:
get the 3.4l whipple when it comes out.....don't be a pussy
2.8L
Lower IAT's. More power with less boost and less power to move the rotors, they are spinning slower.
Plus you will have all the room in the world to grow later. They are keeping up with heavy modded turbo setups.
Always better to have to much than to little.
Lower IAT's. More power with less boost and less power to move the rotors, they are spinning slower.
Plus you will have all the room in the world to grow later. They are keeping up with heavy modded turbo setups.
Always better to have to much than to little.
Keeping up with heavily-modded turbo setups? Umm... do you have any specific examples of this? Stock-engine turbo setups have run into the 9s. The HPP car is probably the best example of that. Haven't seen any similar KB setups anywhere near that. Would certainly love to, as I plan to upgrade my blower next year!
WDW MKR said:
Here is two examples:
http://www.modularpowerhouse.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43357
JW's 2v will most likely be in the 9's. And go to post #16. Jim is @ 9.47 on all motor, no NOS.
http://www.modularpowerhouse.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43237
Not exactly stock internals but in all means a 2.8L KB can keep up to turbo monsters, and these are 2v cars. I would find it rediculous to build a 9sec TT to run 9's with stock internals. If one is going to play, build it right. A pos blower does put a MUCH bigger stress on the internals as Turbos.
Mach3
Banned
oneoff said:
This is a mute subject a properly setup turbo car will kill the similiarly setup blower car.
Mach3 said:
A full full nasty built turbo setup like something from Nopi, yes I agree. But your typical TT or T setup everyone is doing no. These KB 2.8's are seeing 800-900rwhp, oh and these are only 2v motors.
TT and 2.8L both have advantages and disadvantages. All im saying if you had like a HPP TT setup and you lined up to a properly built 2.8, I wouldn't bet your pink slip.
Again im not saying they are better then turbos, but they are running with them. The whp and ET's are on the sheets, this is not hear say.
Let's not ruin this thread on a debate of turbos against the 2.8.
But if I was about to spend the cash on a new KB, I wouldn't think twice and get the 2.8L. Just one mans opinion. I have been down the road of wanting bigger later, it sucks, especially for your wallet.
Users who are viewing this thread
