Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Fabberge
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction - V8

Forced Induction - V8 V8 Supercharger, turbo, nitrous discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-11-2011, 01:21 PM   #26
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
Not assuming, its what you have told customers in the past maybe not in this thread but it has been said before. Some of your customer have called us to ask if its necessary after speaking with Janetty Racing. Why would this thread be started in the first place if someone didn't tell one of these customers it was necessary?
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 01:26 PM   #27
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 9,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
Not assuming, its what you have told customers in the past maybe not in this thread but it has been said before. Some of your customer have called us to ask if its necessary after speaking with Janetty Racing. Why would this thread be started in the first place if someone didn't tell one of these customers it was necessary?
Because when you hear something second hand it can easily be taken out of context.

And it is 1 Customer, Whom I explained the Resolution issue to and it was his words not mine.

Unless I called you and told you personally or put it in writing on this site it may not be reliable or translated Properly.

Ted.
__________________
Technical information, Parts Sales, Professional Installation, and Custom Dyno Tuning.
Please vist our web sites for all your performance needs!
Ted Jannetty
Jannetty Racing Ent Inc.
2984 East Main St.
Waterbury Ct. 06705
203-753-7223
tedj@jannettyracing.com
www.jannettyracing.com
www.turboaddictionparts.com
Performance Parts
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 01:52 PM   #28
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
But you admit saying it then to one customer? And you back it up in this thread. So i would say that makes it pretty reliable. Maybe not 100% correct on what came out of your mouth but you do admit to telling a customer the only way to fix it is to change the tube to the 4". All we are saying is that it does NOT need to be changed to fix the issue which has been proven by the shops that can tune it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
Because when you hear something second hand it can easily be taken out of context.

And it is 1 Customer, Whom I explained the Resolution issue to and it was his words not mine.

Unless I called you and told you personally or put it in writing on this site it may not be reliable or translated Properly.

Ted.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:11 PM   #29
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 9,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
But you admit saying it then to one customer? And you back it up in this thread. So i would say that makes it pretty reliable. Maybe not 100% correct on what came out of your mouth but you do admit to telling a customer the only way to fix it is to change the tube to the 4". All we are saying is that it does NOT need to be changed to fix the issue which has been proven by the shops that can tune it.
This is Getting Stupid Now.

I didn't tell that customer I could not tune it, SO WRONG AGAIN!

I said it would be Easier with better resolution, Again your Getting Second Hand Information and Putting words in my mouth.

He gave up on me before I could finish the tune, I did not give up on him.

I had one Here Last Friday with a Pretty Big Cam in it and It Runs Really Good, LS3, Customer is Totally Satisfied, but I still would like to have better resolution.

I can't help it if I am in the Pursuit of Perfection.

So Please Stop Dancing Around the FACTUAL DATA.

Ted.
__________________
Technical information, Parts Sales, Professional Installation, and Custom Dyno Tuning.
Please vist our web sites for all your performance needs!
Ted Jannetty
Jannetty Racing Ent Inc.
2984 East Main St.
Waterbury Ct. 06705
203-753-7223
tedj@jannettyracing.com
www.jannettyracing.com
www.turboaddictionparts.com
Performance Parts
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:27 PM   #30
Rcfiddy1

 
Rcfiddy1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Rally Yellow 2SS/RS #37115
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Manalapan, New Jersey
Posts: 1,814
I don't see a problem. I asked a question and was just looking to see if my tuner was correct with his remarks about the maf and intake tube. Which turns out to be on par with what TJ was saying. The fact that it takes a few days to get a response from KB and my car was sitting in my tuners lot, I needed answers. Now I know my options.
__________________
Build Thread
ECS Paxton Novi 1500 Blower Black, Alky Control Meth Injection, LS3 conversion, ECS Blower cam, Trunion upgrade, Vigilante 2800 stall, BMR suspension parts, 3.45 rear, Stainless Works LT headers, BnB fusion ZL1 exhaust, Ridetech Coilovers.
Rcfiddy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:45 PM   #31
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
Not putting words in your mouth just saying what was said and what we see from your post. Seems to all add up. We hear from a customer you recommend this and then you back it up here so put the two together. If you can tune that LS3 with a pretty big cam and the 4.5" tube, why would you tell another customer to change his tube to a 4". No dancing around Ted just going by what has been told to our customer, which was that you recommended a smaller tube to get the car to run right when it was all in your tune. Again something you STILL BACK ON HERE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
This is Getting Stupid Now.

I didn't tell that customer I could not tune it, SO WRONG AGAIN!

I said it would be Easier with better resolution, Again your Getting Second Hand Information and Putting words in my mouth.

He gave up on me before I could finish the tune, I did not give up on him.

I had one Here Last Friday with a Pretty Big Cam in it and It Runs Really Good, LS3, Customer is Totally Satisfied, but I still would like to have better resolution.

I can't help it if I am in the Pursuit of Perfection.

So Please Stop Dancing Around the FACTUAL DATA.

Ted.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:47 PM   #32
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
The problem is misinformation given out by shops. You don't need to change your tube you just need a good tuner that knows his/her stuff. You got to ask yourself why all the KB kit owners can run there kit with the tube but only a few can't? Its in the tune.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rcfiddy1 View Post
I don't see a problem. I asked a question and was just looking to see if my tuner was correct with his remarks about the maf and intake tube. Which turns out to be on par with what TJ was saying. The fact that it takes a few days to get a response from KB and my car was sitting in my tuners lot, I needed answers. Now I know my options.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 09:45 AM   #33
East Coast Supercharging

 
East Coast Supercharging's Avatar
 
Drives: 8 second C5 Drag Car, C6 Road racer
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cream Ridge, NJ 609-752-0321
Posts: 777
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
Here is My Take on the Intake tube, No Flaming Please.

Although it is GREAT for the BIG Peak HP number Driveability suffers due to lost resolution.

The Gen5 MAF has a Range of 16000 Hz, Even some of our KILLER builds only Reach 14500 Hz so we have Plenty of MAF in a 4 in pipe.

Stock Cars with no Supercharger will go to 9000 Hz

With the 4.5 inch KB pipe at 10 psi boost we Rarely see more than 9000 Hz

Going to a 4 inch intake tube restores resolution, and torque calculations done by the TCM, so this is especially important on the L99 Cars.

Also a Stock Car will Idle around 2500 Hz the KB with 4.5 in Pipe will Idle around 1500 Hz, so Again Lost Resolution.

Ted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
The problem is misinformation given out by shops. You don't need to change your tube you just need a good tuner that knows his/her stuff. You got to ask yourself why all the KB kit owners can run there kit with the tube but only a few can't? Its in the tune.


Matt, I am not here to argue with you by any means, and I respect your position on the boards here, along with purchasing products from you. However, I have to agree with Ted here, and your approach towards him seems a little less then professional IMHO.

Ted is providing factual data that is absolutely true. Can the set up be tuned as it sits? Yes, is it less then perfect in my personal opinion? Yes, not all tuners are ok with less then perfect.

Not only does it cause less resolution of the MAF, but it also messes with trans tables on the auto's because of that.

So by what you have posted here, myself and Ted basically do not know what we are doing as tuners, and the customers should go elsewhere? Ted seems to have a pretty good reputation here, and I hope the same for myself. I do not personally know Ted's tuning back ground, but I have literally tuned 1000's of LS powered vehicles, Many of them being record holding cars like fastest stock bottom end LS1-LS6-LS2, LS3, and fastest supercharged Vette. With a quick look at my EFI live V2 box, I have made over 8000 down loads since mid 09, and thats not including the cars we tune with HP tuners or SCT. I do not consider myself the smartest guy in the world, but after tuning all day, everyday for the last ten years, even I picked up a few things along the way. Proper sized charge tubes with a card style MAF, and MAF placement, is one of them.

I'm also curious why you would cancel someones warranty if they change the intake tube? The throttle body is 4", so it necks down anyway, changing the intake tube would not effect your product in the least? This is going to cost the customer a fair amount of money and time, my additional time added to the tuning process, and now the warranty will be null and viod?

If we can proceed with this thread in a professional manor, I'll be happy to provide data logs etc to back up what Ted and I are saying, along with new data logs after we replace the intake tube today. If not, then this is my first and last post in this thread.



Thanks, take care.

Doug @ ECS
East Coast Supercharging is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:13 AM   #34
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
I can see where your coming from but not once have I questioned who Ted is as a person. What I questioned is the need to change the 4.5" tube. I have been nothing but nice and respectful to Ted before he made contradicting comments and made it seem as we if didn't take his information seriously before I even chimed in. We know Ted has a great reputation on here that is why we want it to be known that the 4.5" tube doesn't have to be changed to get the car to run right. Someone with such influence in the Camaro community making claims like that would cause serious problems and concern for customers, especially since it is NOT necessary. So to get KB customers to changes their kits for something that is not needed is what were trying to stop. What doesn't make sense is that many shops are tuning for the 4.5" tube with no issues. He even said himself he can tune with the 4.5" tube, even on a car with a built engine and big cam. I just ask why can you only tune for the 4.5" tube on some not all? Warranty will be void due to the altering of the kit, why wouldn't it be? The 4.5" tube is a major portion of the kit. Ted said it himself he can tune the 4.5" tube so you should have no problems as well. Again, no reason to change the 4.5" tube.
Quote:
Originally Posted by East Coast Supercharging View Post
Matt, I am not here to argue with you by any means, and I respect your position on the boards here, along with purchasing products from you. However, I have to agree with Ted here, and your approach towards him seems a little less then professional IMHO.

Ted is providing factual data that is absolutely true. Can the set up be tuned as it sits? Yes, is it less then perfect in my personal opinion? Yes, not all tuners are ok with less then perfect.

Not only does it cause less resolution of the MAF, but it also messes with trans tables on the auto's because of that.

So by what you have posted here, myself and Ted basically do not know what we are doing as tuners, and the customers should go elsewhere? Ted seems to have a pretty good reputation here, and I hope the same for myself. I do not personally know Ted's tuning back ground, but I have literally tuned 1000's of LS powered vehicles, Many of them being record holding cars like fastest stock bottom end LS1-LS6-LS2, LS3, and fastest supercharged Vette. With a quick look at my EFI live V2 box, I have made over 8000 down loads since mid 09, and thats not including the cars we tune with HP tuners or SCT. I do not consider myself the smartest guy in the world, but after tuning all day, everyday for the last ten years, even I picked up a few things along the way. Proper sized charge tubes with a card style MAF, and MAF placement, is one of them.

I'm also curious why you would cancel someones warranty if they change the intake tube? The throttle body is 4", so it necks down anyway, changing the intake tube would not effect your product in the least? This is going to cost the customer a fair amount of money and time, my additional time added to the tuning process, and now the warranty will be null and viod?

If we can proceed with this thread in a professional manor, I'll be happy to provide data logs etc to back up what Ted and I are saying, along with new data logs after we replace the intake tube today. If not, then this is my first and last post in this thread.



Thanks, take care.

Doug @ ECS
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
LOL, yeah you caught me Doing What I love to do, MAKE HP!

I have, but they don't feel my Opinion is Valid.

Same with the IAT issues.

It is best to keep the pipe size consistent and smooth to avoid Turbulence, 4 inch is the Correct Size.

Ted.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:15 AM   #35
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
I apologize Ted for coming on a bit too strong we do value your input here in the Camaro world.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:42 AM   #36
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 9,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
I apologize Ted for coming on a bit too strong we do value your input here in the Camaro world.
Apology accepted!

I am not here to Hurt anyone's Sales, and your response to ECS seems geared toward that, rather than a solution.

My Opinion Stands you should offer the kit with a 4 inch Maf Tube with Warranty.

I Guarantee you will have Better Results with the Tuning.

I would also be willing to Share one of my L99 4 inch MAF tube tunes with you for review so you can offer a Better Kit, The same Reason I chimed on the the IAT issues I want you to offer a Better Kit.

There is NO benefit to a 4.5 inch Maf pipe on the 2.9 kit when we have a 3.5 inch Throttle body.

The 4.5 tube is better suited for your 3.6 kit where you would run a 102mm/ 4 inch or larger TB, IMO

This is a New world with the internet, and if there are any flaws in a Kit word gets out faster than ever, so how you respond makes all the difference in how potential customers will view this situation.

My Ultimate goal is To help you Not Hurt you.


Ted.
__________________
Technical information, Parts Sales, Professional Installation, and Custom Dyno Tuning.
Please vist our web sites for all your performance needs!
Ted Jannetty
Jannetty Racing Ent Inc.
2984 East Main St.
Waterbury Ct. 06705
203-753-7223
tedj@jannettyracing.com
www.jannettyracing.com
www.turboaddictionparts.com
Performance Parts
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:51 AM   #37
DarricSS

 
DarricSS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 Camaro SS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 1,047
Matt what is your position at KB? Internet Blowhard? You sound allot like that guy from that Vegas shop KB supports.

You are attacking a very respected Site contributer on a Daily basis becasue you don't agree or refuse to agree that he is right.

IMO, KB sounds allot like the Borg, resistance is futile...

Each day my respect for Whipple grows, they stay out of the bickering and just let their product do the talking...
__________________
2010, SIM, 2SS/RS, LS3, CGM Stripes
DarricSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:58 AM   #38
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
Thanks Ted we appreciate that, its not sales that we are concerned about with this, it is the customer we are worried about. It is the fact that the 4.5" tube can be tuned properly as you said. It may not be as easy as a smaller 4" tube but it can be done and done well. We are concerned for our customers because they do not have to change anything with the kit to get the car running right for their enjoyment. Thanks again Ted I'm sure Jim will look into it like we are for the IAT's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
Apology accepted!

I am not here to Hurt anyone's Sales, and your response to ECS seems geared toward that, rather than a solution.

My Opinion Stands you should offer the kit with a 4 inch Maf Tube with Warranty.

I Guarantee you will have Better Results with the Tuning.

I would also be willing to Share one of my L99 4 inch MAF tube tunes with you for review so you can offer a Better Kit, The same Reason I chimed on the the IAT issues I want you to offer a Better Kit.

There is NO benefit to a 4.5 inch Maf pipe on the 2.9 kit when we have a 3.5 inch Throttle body.

The 4.5 tube is better suited for your 3.6 kit where you would run a 102mm/ 4 inch or larger TB, IMO

This is a New world with the internet, and if there are any flaws in a Kit word gets out faster than ever, so how you respond makes all the difference in how potential customers will view this situation.

My Ultimate goal is To help you Not Hurt you.


Ted.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 11:08 AM   #39
MRGOODWRENCH3
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Park City, Utah
Posts: 670
I had a L99 Camaro towed into my shop from another local shop that was not able to tune it with the KB. This particular car had the large intake tube with half of the stock air box in the lower fender. In order to get a proper and consistent MAF reading I had to plug the hole in the KB tube and use the factory mounting position. This made a huge difference in the tuning and overall running of the engine.

Every supercharged engine that we build at 2 Edge Performance is tuned on a Dyno Jet Dyno. We do not use any box/can tunes.
MRGOODWRENCH3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 11:37 AM   #40
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 9,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
Thanks Ted we appreciate that, its not sales that we are concerned about with this, it is the customer we are worried about. It is the fact that the 4.5" tube can be tuned properly as you said. It may not be as easy as a smaller 4" tube but it can be done and done well. We are concerned for our customers because they do not have to change anything with the kit to get the car running right for their enjoyment. Thanks again Ted I'm sure Jim will look into it like we are for the IAT's.
If it is the Customer your concerned about, Why not Give them the Best Kit Money can buy.

The Fact Remains, a larger tube reduces Resolution.

WHY, reduce resolution when the Stock Maf has enough range for 1K HP.

WHY Screw up the Trans Torque Calculations?

We spend most of our time driving our cars in the 2000 to 8000 Hz range on a Stock MAF This is where Resolution is Important and this is what makes a nice car a Great Car from a driveability standpoint.

Your tube only goes from 1500 to 6000 Hz range in the same driveability areas, Reduced resolution reduces Driveability.

The ONLY Reason I see for the Larger tube on This Car is a Guy thing, Mines bigger than yours.

If you won't make the Tubes I will.

Ted.
__________________
Technical information, Parts Sales, Professional Installation, and Custom Dyno Tuning.
Please vist our web sites for all your performance needs!
Ted Jannetty
Jannetty Racing Ent Inc.
2984 East Main St.
Waterbury Ct. 06705
203-753-7223
tedj@jannettyracing.com
www.jannettyracing.com
www.turboaddictionparts.com
Performance Parts
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 11:57 AM   #41
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
We already do offer the BEST kit money can buy in our opinion and our customer's opinion. It can be tuned with great driveability, as you said yourself it can be done. Not saying the tube doesn't do what you say but it works and can be tuned just fine. We will just have to agree to disagree. If we put a smaller tube in the kit this thread would be "who makes a bigger cold air tube for the KB?" guaranteed, its a catch 22.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 08:53 PM   #42
M6HuggerSS
 
M6HuggerSS's Avatar
 
Drives: Crane Truck
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 330
Matt, with all due respect... does Jim know you are on this site doing a piss poor job representing his brand?

You have done a horrible job answering questions on several threads about your company's products... answering questions with questions is silly.

The question still remains... WHY ARE YOU USING A 4.5" TUBE WHEN THE CAR WILL RUN BETTER AND MAKE THE SAME POWER with a 4" tube? that is the question...
and a technical answer would be best.

The several issues i have been reading about with the KB product sounds similar to the story of how A&A corvettes started building their custom kits using ProCharger head units.

i would think doing your CUSTOMER a service would be to improve your product when issues or opportunities arise... not just stop listening and defend your product like it is UNCHANGEABLE.

Matt, i can tell you right know with a 100% confidence.
you are not helping people’s perception of your brand.
you may want to start changing your approach to constructive criticisms.
ESPESALLY when they come from respected individuals.

Im not trying to bash you or KB... honestly just trying to help.

TED, if KB wont open your eyes to thier mistakes, you should offer a 4" tube.
What might the cost on that be anyway?
Oh, and why your at it... how about adding an additional HE to help lower the IAT's.?
Just a thought... i love the KB product, but also agree that it needs some important changes made to stay on the cutting edge.
__________________
1998 Z28 M6 SOLD :(
315rwhp (3500lbs)

1999 HUGGER SS SOLD :(
400rwhp (3375lbs)

2002 YELLOW Z06 SOLD :(
360rwhp (3040lbs)

2013 CAMARO ZL1 COMMING SOON
M6HuggerSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 12:03 AM   #43
Sam88gta1
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS / 2006 CC Duramax
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rowlett
Posts: 381
Ted which one of the two mounting flanges in the tube are you using for the maf? The one closer to the filter or the one up by the PS pump? The newer kits come with two places. One comes blocked with a plate from KB. The new instructions say to mount it closer to the filter.

The 4.5 tube is nice for making power but it does cause a problem.

Btw Matt. Kb does have a problem with high IAT.
Sam88gta1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 04:06 AM   #44
sting808

 
Drives: 4 wheels
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam88gta1 View Post
Ted which one of the two mounting flanges in the tube are you using for the maf? The one closer to the filter or the one up by the PS pump? The newer kits come with two places. One comes blocked with a plate from KB. The new instructions say to mount it closer to the filter.

The 4.5 tube is nice for making power but it does cause a problem.

Btw Matt. Kb does have a problem with high IAT.
Interesting... In another thread, someone got an intake as you described. It was said to be a experimental design that was shipped out by accident. Is there a new intake design or was it misinformation? Has the bracket been tweaked for better fitment? Why two MAF locations? Generic intake for 2.8 and 3.6? Matt, please clarify.
sting808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 05:40 AM   #45
Rcfiddy1

 
Rcfiddy1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Rally Yellow 2SS/RS #37115
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Manalapan, New Jersey
Posts: 1,814
I was told that the 2 maf bungs were for r&d and should not have been in the kit. As for the question of who has the bigger intake tube? I would want the one that works the best for my application with no headaches. Thats just my opinion and it means nothing.
__________________
Build Thread
ECS Paxton Novi 1500 Blower Black, Alky Control Meth Injection, LS3 conversion, ECS Blower cam, Trunion upgrade, Vigilante 2800 stall, BMR suspension parts, 3.45 rear, Stainless Works LT headers, BnB fusion ZL1 exhaust, Ridetech Coilovers.
Rcfiddy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 06:48 AM   #46
charged
 
Drives: 2011
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: mw
Posts: 37
I agree if it is easyer to tune and is better for the L99 cars lets get a 4" tube for us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rcfiddy1 View Post
I was told that the 2 maf bungs were for r&d and should not have been in the kit. As for the question of who has the bigger intake tube? I would want the one that works the best for my application with no headaches. Thats just my opinion and it means nothing.
charged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 09:52 AM   #47
Revolution
Owner of RRW
 
Drives: 12 ZL1 A6 white and 64 nova ss
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 71
Due to my own personal background with airflow engineering. Basically my former career choice before I re opened my shop, Has anyone done independent testing against the maf in a 4" tube and a 4.5" or 5" to show the changes in resolution as well as how the "turbulence" which the proper term is static pressure changes internally to the effect reading across the maf? I am with Ted on the tubing size to some extent however I ask if anyone has done independent testing to see what the differences in flow are versus the ability of the maf to translate it into a usable number.

I know the Maf has come leaps and bounds from where they were 10 years ago and I am fully capable of calibrating one properly but my concerns are the accuracy of the reading versus what known flow is. Just like steady state tuning it helps to develop a more accurate number. I know exactly why the placement in the previous pictures of that tube they used for R&D is sensor placement versus the amount of straight feeding for the reading. Basically the larger the diameter of the pipe the longer straight is needed to get a more accurate reading. A rule of thumb for static's you need 3-4 times the diameter in straight before the sensor or input device to obtain a true reading of laminar airflow. I am confident that is what they were trying to test in R&D. I am really interested in what the outcome is with this without flaming anyone. Simply with my track record with prochargers and turbo's I have been able to make the maf work well for part throttle and dump into a speed density tune for higher boost applications. I know it can be done and obviously Ted is doing it.

However I would really love to see data versus the threads back and forth back when we were testing the prochargers with the larger inlet's versus the smaller inlet versus no inlet at all.. it came down to at the end of the day when we exceeded the diameter of the inlet any more than 1/4" it started to roll and tumble at the blower inlet and cause a negative pressure pocket at the inlet and being that the blower was before the maf in my installations I saw some pressure differences. That's the whole reason I am curious as to the testing or outcome if you are seeing surging it will effect the blowers ability to compress the air.

Sorry for the long winded post but I woke up checked out the threads and this one just jumped out at me.
__________________
12 ZL1 shop car going to twist up a little big bone stock but big plans from RRW
Revolution is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 09:52 AM   #48
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
It was a tube we had used for testing, it made its way into our stock pile of chrome tubes and was packed into this kit by accident. At the time of testing we had tried different MAF locations in quest to find the best location and to see what kind of tuning results we would see. Both the 3.6 and 2.8 use the same tube.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sting808 View Post
Interesting... In another thread, someone got an intake as you described. It was said to be a experimental design that was shipped out by accident. Is there a new intake design or was it misinformation? Has the bracket been tweaked for better fitment? Why two MAF locations? Generic intake for 2.8 and 3.6? Matt, please clarify.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 10:08 AM   #49
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 9,233
I did build One 4 inch MAF Tube for an L99, Cam, Headers, KB car, I started with the Factory MAF curve and only had to tweak it a little to get everything in line.

Everything fell in to place Load values, Timing selection, Idle quality, Transmission shifts etc, and the Car Runs and Drives Absolutely Perfect.

It made 600 RWHP with an Auto on a conservative tune.

I am getting a KB car for next week for Building and testing of a MAF intake Pipe.

Ted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revolution View Post
Due to my own personal background with airflow engineering. Basically my former career choice before I re opened my shop, Has anyone done independent testing against the maf in a 4" tube and a 4.5" or 5" to show the changes in resolution as well as how the "turbulence" which the proper term is static pressure changes internally to the effect reading across the maf? I am with Ted on the tubing size to some extent however I ask if anyone has done independent testing to see what the differences in flow are versus the ability of the maf to translate it into a usable number.

I know the Maf has come leaps and bounds from where they were 10 years ago and I am fully capable of calibrating one properly but my concerns are the accuracy of the reading versus what known flow is. Just like steady state tuning it helps to develop a more accurate number. I know exactly why the placement in the previous pictures of that tube they used for R&D is sensor placement versus the amount of straight feeding for the reading. Basically the larger the diameter of the pipe the longer straight is needed to get a more accurate reading. A rule of thumb for static's you need 3-4 times the diameter in straight before the sensor or input device to obtain a true reading of laminar airflow. I am confident that is what they were trying to test in R&D. I am really interested in what the outcome is with this without flaming anyone. Simply with my track record with prochargers and turbo's I have been able to make the maf work well for part throttle and dump into a speed density tune for higher boost applications. I know it can be done and obviously Ted is doing it.

However I would really love to see data versus the threads back and forth back when we were testing the prochargers with the larger inlet's versus the smaller inlet versus no inlet at all.. it came down to at the end of the day when we exceeded the diameter of the inlet any more than 1/4" it started to roll and tumble at the blower inlet and cause a negative pressure pocket at the inlet and being that the blower was before the maf in my installations I saw some pressure differences. That's the whole reason I am curious as to the testing or outcome if you are seeing surging it will effect the blowers ability to compress the air.

Sorry for the long winded post but I woke up checked out the threads and this one just jumped out at me.
__________________
Technical information, Parts Sales, Professional Installation, and Custom Dyno Tuning.
Please vist our web sites for all your performance needs!
Ted Jannetty
Jannetty Racing Ent Inc.
2984 East Main St.
Waterbury Ct. 06705
203-753-7223
tedj@jannettyracing.com
www.jannettyracing.com
www.turboaddictionparts.com
Performance Parts
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 11:10 AM   #50
Sam88gta1
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS / 2006 CC Duramax
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rowlett
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt@KB View Post
It was a tube we had used for testing, it made its way into our stock pile of chrome tubes and was packed into this kit by accident. At the time of testing we had tried different MAF locations in quest to find the best location and to see what kind of tuning results we would see. Both the 3.6 and 2.8 use the same tube.
I have seen two of the tubes out in public.
Are these being sent out now due the supply issues you had with the tubes?

If the new placement of the maf is the one closest to the filter you need to extend the maf harness another 3-4 inches. When it's stretched the wires want to pull out of it.

Last edited by Sam88gta1; 07-13-2011 at 11:40 AM.
Sam88gta1 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hot air Intakes -By Kenne bell ADM PERFORMANCE Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 66 02-08-2011 08:33 PM
10.54@134 Kenne Bell SC'd Adam@ST USA - California 15 08-01-2010 03:14 PM
L99 Kenne Bell 2.8L Installed + Pics SonnyakaPig Forced Induction - V8 38 05-17-2010 03:20 PM
Kenne Bell Supercharger Release Special (FREE INSTALL) Total_Perf_Eng Forced Induction 33 04-16-2010 11:00 AM
List of Intakes that will work with the TVS-2300 MagnaCharger JJ2010 Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 26 03-19-2010 02:11 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.