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


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-12-2011, 11:15 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, 11:42 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: 10,876
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, 11:51 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, 11:58 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, 12:08 PM   #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, 12:37 PM   #40
JANNETTYRACING
PRESIDENT CALIBRATOR JRE

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 10,876
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, 12:57 PM   #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, 09:53 PM   #42
M6HuggerSS
 
M6HuggerSS's Avatar
 
Drives: Crane Truck
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 334
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, 01:03 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, 05:06 AM   #44
sting808

 
Drives: 2010 SS RS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 915
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, 06:40 AM   #45
Rcfiddy1

 
Rcfiddy1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Rally Yellow 2SS/RS #37115
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Manalapan, New Jersey
Posts: 2,020
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 Novi 1500 Supercharged, LS3 conversion, Small blower cam, Alky Meth injection, 3:45 rear, BMR Suspension parts, 1LE Sways, Billy Boat ZL1 dual mode exhaust.
Rcfiddy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 07:48 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, 10:52 AM   #47
Revolution
Owner of RRW
 
Drives: 12 ZL1 A6 white and 64 nova ss
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 70
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, 10:52 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, 11:08 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: 10,876
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, 12:10 PM   #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 12:40 PM.
Sam88gta1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 01:27 PM   #51
Rcfiddy1

 
Rcfiddy1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Rally Yellow 2SS/RS #37115
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Manalapan, New Jersey
Posts: 2,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam88gta1 View Post
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.

agree, same situation here. They show the maf plug zip tied to coil bracet but then it wont reach the maf bung.
__________________
Build Thread
ECS Novi 1500 Supercharged, LS3 conversion, Small blower cam, Alky Meth injection, 3:45 rear, BMR Suspension parts, 1LE Sways, Billy Boat ZL1 dual mode exhaust.
Rcfiddy1 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 09:33 PM
10.54@134 Kenne Bell SC'd Adam@ST USA - California 15 08-01-2010 04:14 PM
L99 Kenne Bell 2.8L Installed + Pics SonnyakaPig Forced Induction - V8 38 05-17-2010 04:20 PM
Kenne Bell Supercharger Release Special (FREE INSTALL) Total_Perf_Eng Forced Induction 33 04-16-2010 12:00 PM
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 03:11 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.