Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
ADM PERFORMANCE
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 07-22-2011, 04:18 PM   #71
Meister@Torq

 
Drives: 2001 Crown Vic
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 974
Send a message via AIM to Meister@Torq Send a message via MSN to Meister@Torq
Firstly, let me state that I am basing my responses on the following:

1. We have tuned MANY of these setup's - REAL WORLD DATA COUNT'S. STEP AWAY FROM THE FLOW BENCH
2. I am a smart person and use OEM calibration logic when tuning so I can come guns blazin to this topic :-)
3. Did I mention real world experience and tuning these setups :-)

Without question, the larger diameter pipe is going to reduce the resolution of the mass air meter and cause non-laminar air-flow (bad bad bad). The smaller the pipe the more laminar the airflow.

In all of the vehicles we have tuned we have had these similar and very small issues relating to the trailer hitching people are complaining about. If the car is tuned MAF only, which most seem to be doing on these blower cars (GM tunes from the factory use a blended MAF and VVE until 4000rpm) this problem becomes worse. If you tune the car using a blended VVE/MAF the problems become a lot less problematic. There is no need for such a large diameter pipe in this setup regardless of what all the flow bench data provides. If you want a quick easy fix, buy a HKS or similar "mushroom" filter, which will be half the size, outflow the large K&N filters and not drag on the ground and potentially sucking up water and small children like the KB setup :-)

KB admits to adding a Honeycomb "air stream straightener" to their kits because they were aware of this problem....end of discussion. Also, it does not make a lot of sense to run a 4.5" inlet pipe when going into a 3.5" throttle body in this specific application. 3.5"-4" is more than adequate for these setups.

We use all brands of superchargers including KB, which seem to make crazy power with smaller than 4.5" inlet's and have no issues....
Meister@Torq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 04:24 PM   #72
honeybucket99
 
Drives: 2SS/RS CGM CAMARO BEAST
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: carrollton, ga
Posts: 425
love my KB

Matt and Jim,

I have to tell you guys that I absolutely love my Kenne Bell. Now, mine is a manual so I can't speak to the issues others are discussing, but I have been following these threads and wanted the world to know how much I love my Kenne Bell. The only issue I have had (if you have a fix for it I would love you forever) is that my wallet keeps getting slimmer as I need additional speed. Anyway, you guys have a great product and a great dealer in Atlanta Performance and Fabrication
__________________
2010 CGM 2SS/RS; 418 stroker; JE Forged Pistons (offset wrist pin); Forged Crank; upgraded valvetrain; Custom Comp Cams Cam; Kenne Bell 2.8; ID 1000s; Aeromotive Fuel pump with return; ARH Long Tubes; Spec heavy duty clutch; 3" Magnaflow Cat Back; Nick Williams 102 mm Throttle Body; Tune fixed by Dave Steck; 815 HP and 14 mpg


Upcoming--
Disintegrated drivetrain;
Divorce if/when my wife catches on to
my addiction
honeybucket99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:17 PM   #73
honeybucket99
 
Drives: 2SS/RS CGM CAMARO BEAST
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: carrollton, ga
Posts: 425
McDoogle

There was another member on with the same problem you seem to have. He got John at APF to send him a tune, and I think it solved his issues. Get in touch with John he'll hook you up!
__________________
2010 CGM 2SS/RS; 418 stroker; JE Forged Pistons (offset wrist pin); Forged Crank; upgraded valvetrain; Custom Comp Cams Cam; Kenne Bell 2.8; ID 1000s; Aeromotive Fuel pump with return; ARH Long Tubes; Spec heavy duty clutch; 3" Magnaflow Cat Back; Nick Williams 102 mm Throttle Body; Tune fixed by Dave Steck; 815 HP and 14 mpg


Upcoming--
Disintegrated drivetrain;
Divorce if/when my wife catches on to
my addiction
honeybucket99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:25 PM   #74
mcdoogle6969

 
mcdoogle6969's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS, 2008 Heritage 300C
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybucket99 View Post
McDoogle

There was another member on with the same problem you seem to have. He got John at APF to send him a tune, and I think it solved his issues. Get in touch with John he'll hook you up!
I am not willing to pay out any more cash (for another tune, or anything else that would cost hundreds) to get something that should be already working properly, to work properly. I already spent 8 grand (that's not peanuts) on the kit plus cash to install and tune. There is a obvious problem, and it's clearly not in the tune itself. I am very confident in my tuner that he can get the job done, but I think that KB needs to step up to the plate because Ted, and others, prove that the 4.5in tube causes problems...and the problems so happen to be what I'm experiencing. The issue is, how to fix it? If we change out to a 4in tube I'm afraid of loosing the warranty with the kit and having to pay even more cash to get the car strapped down on the dyno again...Not only that but I wouldn't know where to get one, or if we would have to fab or own.

As I said though, Matt has sent me a message and wants to help us out. I am just hoping for a fix, soon. I thank him for taking the time to help us...Waiting to see if he contacted my tuner or not atm though.
__________________

Last edited by mcdoogle6969; 07-22-2011 at 05:39 PM.
mcdoogle6969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:41 PM   #75
HufferSS
I Wanna Go Faster!!
 
HufferSS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2SS Synergy Green M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SC
Posts: 3,328
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 just some unsolicited advice...but you really should consider not posting on here anymore or get someone else from KB to do it. You are doing your company no favors.
HufferSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:50 PM   #76
GMRULZ

 
GMRULZ's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS & 2008 C6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 1,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcdoogle6969 View Post
I am not willing to pay out any more cash (for another tune, or anything else that would cost hundreds) to get something that should be already working properly, to work properly. I already spent 8 grand (that's not peanuts) on the kit plus cash to install and tune. There is a obvious problem, and it's clearly not in the tune itself. I am very confident in my tuner that he can get the job done, but I think that KB needs to step up to the plate because Ted, and others, prove that the 4.5in tube causes problems...and the problems so happen to be what I'm experiencing. The issue is, how to fix it? If we change out to a 4in tube I'm afraid of loosing the warranty with the kit and having to pay even more cash to get the car strapped down on the dyno again...Not only that but I wouldn't know where to get one, or if we would have to fab or own.

As I said though, Matt has sent me a message and wants to help us out. I am just hoping for a fix, soon. I thank him for taking the time to help us out...Waiting to see if he contacted my tuner or not atm though.
Buddy, I understand your frustration, I`m very sorry this is going on w/ your car. There`s nothing worse than spending big bucks and then having your car not run right. I hope you get it fixed soon. It looks like some are working on a fix for the kit, and perhaps Matt would send you a check to pay for the fix or provide a fix himself. I hope so. Good luck.
__________________
2010 SS L99, 536rwhp 10.843@126.72. Whipple Supercharger stock pulley, ARH 1 7/8 longtubes w/ catted xpipe, magnaflow 3" mufflers, ADM Race CAI, 3:70 gears, lightweight wheels and nitto drag radials. Stock internal L99, stock converter.

Bolt on best before blower 12.22@113.29 w/ nothing but ARH headers, catted x-pipe, ADM CAI and a tune on stock Pzero`s!

Other car 2008 C6 Ls3, z51, A6, Npp Exhaust, best bonestock pass 11.80@118.82, Number 2 on the Corvette Forums Bonestock fastest list..
GMRULZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:52 PM   #77
mcdoogle6969

 
mcdoogle6969's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS, 2008 Heritage 300C
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,912
Thanks! the kind words are appreciated.

The KB kit looks awesome, and is my most favorite eye candy for the car. I really do like the kit, visually. It does put down good numbers too...I just want it to run properly.
__________________
mcdoogle6969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 05:56 PM   #78
GMRULZ

 
GMRULZ's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS & 2008 C6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 1,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcdoogle6969 View Post
Thanks! the kind words are appreciated.
No problem man, I`ve been in your shoes before w/ another car a few years ago. I definetly can relate. :(
__________________
2010 SS L99, 536rwhp 10.843@126.72. Whipple Supercharger stock pulley, ARH 1 7/8 longtubes w/ catted xpipe, magnaflow 3" mufflers, ADM Race CAI, 3:70 gears, lightweight wheels and nitto drag radials. Stock internal L99, stock converter.

Bolt on best before blower 12.22@113.29 w/ nothing but ARH headers, catted x-pipe, ADM CAI and a tune on stock Pzero`s!

Other car 2008 C6 Ls3, z51, A6, Npp Exhaust, best bonestock pass 11.80@118.82, Number 2 on the Corvette Forums Bonestock fastest list..
GMRULZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 06:02 PM   #79
mcdoogle6969

 
mcdoogle6969's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS, 2008 Heritage 300C
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,912
Here is what my tuner said: The problem with the surging and poor running is turbulent airflow in the intake pipe by the air sensor under light to moderate throttle. The fix would be to fabricate a straightening section before the sensor. The shifting problem is the computer adapting the pressure in the transmission when it shifts. The new beta program has the right parameters to change the trans adaptivity so the shifting can be corrected. Here is what needs to be done; correct the turbulent airflow, re-tune the MAF, then deal with the trans shifting.
__________________
mcdoogle6969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 06:26 PM   #80
mcdoogle6969

 
mcdoogle6969's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS, 2008 Heritage 300C
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,912
They are sending out their honeycomb straighter, which my tuner said we need, free of charge. Lets hope this works!
Thanks Matt@KB!
__________________

Last edited by mcdoogle6969; 07-22-2011 at 06:43 PM.
mcdoogle6969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 07:30 PM   #81
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
That’s what this discussion is about. A 9psi kit and 550RWHP. See the actual dyno test on our website www.kennebell.net

Our car is a 6 speed, but the auto drive-ability is also excellent. Findlay Customs in Henderson, NV has two 9 psi autos they’ve done with the Honeycomb and both are flawless. With the Honeycomb or WITHOUT re-tuning, we highly recommend these guys.

You may wish to check out the latest issue of Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords magazine (Sept ‘11). It’ll save a lot of explanation and discussion. We ran a series of dyno tests on inlet tracts that is both FACTUAL and informative. Took a lot of time and effort to do these tests but MM&FF’s goal was to help their readers to better understand the relationship between air flow and HP. When reading the feature, keep in mind that an inlet tract cannot differentiate between engines. The article is all about air flow and boost loss with varying inlet (pipe, throttle body, manifold etc.) components.

I disagree. The Honeycomb does not reduce the “cross section” (diameter) of the pipe. It’s function is to assist in laminar air flow by “dividing” our single 4.5" air column into approx 1000 air streams. Ford and GM use a smaller more restrictive 3", 3.25", 3.5" etc. SMALLER CROSS SECTION and a screen is more restrictive than a screen or honeycomb in a larger 4.5". The Honeycomb or screen reduces the effective flow AREA but by “straightening” the air flow you can actually see an increase in some cases.

Here’s the bottom line Ted. My air flow bench tests- it will flow 1200HP just like a 1200HP engine-says there is only a 5% flow loss in the KB Honeycomb at worst. And this 4.5" Mammoth inlet system can feed 1000HP. Again, why should I recommend you sell a more restrictive HP robbing 4" pipe to replace our 4.5" when it 1) OUT FLOWS THE 4" 2) Has great drive-ability (in spite of your opinions) and 3) doesn’t require an expensive and untested smaller 4" pipe, meter and filter.

We have some high HP application manifolds that use 2-4" pipes. This is all about eliminating all inlet restriction.

Your remarks about KB using multiple meter sensor locations deserves an explanation.

Again we use these locations to determine the best placement for 1) drive-ability and 2) efficiency (pressure loss and HP). This is standard practice on ALL Kenne Bell kits.

We never claimed we didn’t have a issue with the 2 kits on this site, we did. We’ve taken care of them as we will any KB customer.

550, 675, 775, 1075 HP is irrelevant to us unless there is 4.5" vs 4" test for each HP level. For example: NO HP LOSS WITH OUR 4.5" AND HONEYCOMB AT 550HP.

I’ve made 1000RWHP with a 3" pipe. What does this prove? Again, I suggest you read the new MM&FF feature and especially Mammoth System Tech on our site. http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Tech_...smtechinfo.htm This will help you to better understand the basics of air flow and the KB philosophy. We’ve learned long ago that the key to efficiency of any positive displacement supercharger is unrestricted air flow to the supercharger.

We believe our 4.5" Mammoth is a big cost saver as compared to our competition, doesn’t require re-tuning and leaves our customers plenty of ROOM TO GROW. They can rest assured that there is not a more efficient inlet system-and it ingests only cool outside air.

Yep, we now have all the Ford, GM and Chrysler muscle cars.
I agree. My logs don’t lie. I’ve re-tested and published our logs. Our customers can decide for themselves.

Thanks Ted. I accept the offer. Let’s part cordially. You are a Whipple dealer and I certainly respect your loyalty. But I don’t need your help. I have been doing this for 43 years. I know, I should retire, but I love Kenne Bell and what I do too much. Best of luck in the tuning business.

Jim Bell
Quote:
Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING View Post
Agreed but at What Power Level?

We are talking about a 9 PSI Kit here correct?

This one Below is at 775 Crank HP or 675 RWHP back to back testing has shown At this power level NOT to be the Case.




6 Speed or Auto?



Would you Not Agree that installing a Honey Comb reduces cross section of the pipe?

We know the Answer is Yes, so why not just build a 4 inch pipe that does not require a Honey Comb to straighten The Air ?

The Larger the Pipe the Bigger the Turbulence Problem.

Why so many locations, because it is so hard to find a clean signal at the low flow rates for this size Pipe, Folks have to drive these cars not just RACE them.



Again Screen Reduces Cross section, increases Velocity, to straighten the air.

So Is this a contradiction?



So if there is absolutely no problem with a 4.5 in tube on this application, Why go through the trouble and expense to design and then now add this to your existing Tube, as you stated there is no problem with the current design?




When does a 4 inch pipe become Restrictive?

We pulled 971 RWHP thorough a 4 inch pipe then removed it and no Performance advantage.

See below Dyno graph,

With the 4 in pipe, Both LS3 and L99 Cars drive Much Better and the Trans computer is Much Happier on the Auto Car.



It is Nice that you offer a Cold Air Kit included, Kudos



Congrats, did you get it?



Whether you agree with me or not is Irrelevant, LOGS DON'T LIE.

I have some new ones from yesterday if you want to see those as well.




My only Agenda was to Help you. If you don't want the Help that is fine, We will go our separate ways.

I will continue to work with Manufacturers that are interested in our Factual Findings.

Obviously you don't know who I am or what I am capable of.
I have a 25 Year Professional history in business Making aftermarket parts fit better work better and go faster, it is what I do.

I wish you Well.

Ted.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 07:33 PM   #82
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
I’m a little late getting back to you. Your issue with “blow through” centrifugals is considerably different than the positive displacement superchargers which are all “suck through”. The air dynamics in the centrifugals is, therefore, more sensitive than our PD’s. The air is both compressed and heated and subject to all those “air laws” I’m sure you are familiar with.

The centrifugals other problem is what you already referred to- short straight runs before and after a bend.

One more point to consider- the centrifugals air temperature.

Many centrifugals kits, because of their inherent design, have no choice but to mount the filter under the hood in the hot engine compartment, often over the headers.

As you know, in addition to the HP loss, there is a big difference in air volume and mass when the air is heated. This affects meter signal. So tune with the hood DOWN. You will make 30 less HP but it is what it is. Outside the engine compartment cool dense ambient air is easier to tune with whether it be PD or Centrifugal.

Never give up. There’s always a way. And sometimes just when you think your have it figured out, there’s a glitch.

You then fix it and move on.

Smaller pipes can be even MORE sensitive because of their higher velocity given identical airflow. Again, why OEM’s use screens.

At the end of the day, your can best solve air flow turbulence and velocity issues with a good flow bench and pitot tubes. That’s how KB and the OEM’s do it.

You never mentioned the type of meter (GM or Ford). The new Camaro is a very unique and sophisticated design. But once you learn how it responds to the various pipe sizes and can tune for it, the rest is easy.

At KB, our primary goal with any kit is to produce more HP than our competition. So we “max” out the inlet for 1000HP potential and then work on the drive-ability. We NEVER go back to a smaller pipe.

It can always be tuned. The trick is finding the right stream straightener ( we use a custom made Honeycomb) for the pipe you choose.

So forget the theories and opinions, get a flow bench and dyno along with someone very knowledgeable in tuning and you’ll get it.

Good luck.

Jim Bell
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.
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2011, 07:45 PM   #83
Matt@KB
 
Matt@KB's Avatar
 
Drives: 67 Camaro
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Posts: 83
I don’t agree with your comments about larger 4.5" pipes not working with 3.5" throttle bodies. They most certainly do and always better than 3", 3.25", 3.5" and 4". Any drive-ability issues were alleviated with the Honeycomb. There is never a problem with 4.5" on our other kits. Certainly you don’t believe the 4.5" is a RESTRICTION. An efficient inlet system is comprised of a filter, pipe, sensor, couplers, throttle body and manifold. Any SINGLE component can be a restriction. How they all work together must be first determined on a flow bench. At KB, we do it all the time on our Dodge (83mm TB), Mustang GT (80mm TB), Boss 302 (80mm TB) and Camaro (90mm TB)- and have for 8 years. NOT one complaint and plenty of HP with no expensive CAK and tune upgrades. We can PROVE it on our dyno and flow bench. It’s what we do at KB- Mammoth 4.5" inlet system on all our kits.

Finally, how can one personally “drag a filter on the ground” with our kits?

Water in the filter? Since 1990 and I haven’t heard a complaint.

I understand you are a Whipple dealer and not a KB dealer. However, if you ever have an issue with a KB kit, just give us a call. We will gladly send you the pipe, Honeycomb and tuner.

Jim Bell
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meister@Torq View Post
Firstly, let me state that I am basing my responses on the following:

1. We have tuned MANY of these setup's - REAL WORLD DATA COUNT'S. STEP AWAY FROM THE FLOW BENCH
2. I am a smart person and use OEM calibration logic when tuning so I can come guns blazin to this topic :-)
3. Did I mention real world experience and tuning these setups :-)

Without question, the larger diameter pipe is going to reduce the resolution of the mass air meter and cause non-laminar air-flow (bad bad bad). The smaller the pipe the more laminar the airflow.

In all of the vehicles we have tuned we have had these similar and very small issues relating to the trailer hitching people are complaining about. If the car is tuned MAF only, which most seem to be doing on these blower cars (GM tunes from the factory use a blended MAF and VVE until 4000rpm) this problem becomes worse. If you tune the car using a blended VVE/MAF the problems become a lot less problematic. There is no need for such a large diameter pipe in this setup regardless of what all the flow bench data provides. If you want a quick easy fix, buy a HKS or similar "mushroom" filter, which will be half the size, outflow the large K&N filters and not drag on the ground and potentially sucking up water and small children like the KB setup :-)

KB admits to adding a Honeycomb "air stream straightener" to their kits because they were aware of this problem....end of discussion. Also, it does not make a lot of sense to run a 4.5" inlet pipe when going into a 3.5" throttle body in this specific application. 3.5"-4" is more than adequate for these setups.

We use all brands of superchargers including KB, which seem to make crazy power with smaller than 4.5" inlet's and have no issues....
Matt@KB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2011, 09:30 AM   #84
DarricSS

 
DarricSS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 Camaro SS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 1,047
Wow! Jim Bell personally bashing professional and very well respected Tuners...

You know how many people you are personally pushing away from your product with your supposed “customer Service” ? There are many valid complaints with tuning issues, High IAT’s and factual data to back up these claims…

Take the advice from real world Tuners re-evaluate your product and make it right and the praise and sales will come pouring in…otherwise every other car will have a Whipple or Magnuson and you will be left in the cold for not being proactive…
__________________
2010, SIM, 2SS/RS, LS3, CGM Stripes
DarricSS 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 06:42 PM.


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