Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Gen5DIY
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction - V8


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-10-2010, 06:55 PM   #18
JM10
Se habla español
 
JM10's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS/RS VR
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona/Sonora
Posts: 607
Can somebody explain the liquid cooler for this kit?
JM10 is offline  
Old 01-10-2010, 07:24 PM   #19
liquidfire350
 
Drives: 2010 Black SS/RS
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 295
compression causes heat, which in turn does 2 things: 1. heats up the air which everyone knows colder air results in more power, and 2. the back section of the screws (where the air exits the blower) is the hottest and the screws themselves increase in size, and bang into each other resulting in metal shaving entering the engine

"Just how hot is hot? At crazy high boost 100-degree incoming air becomes 350-degree outlet air-that's a huge heat gain for a twin-screw blower. Jim says he horsebacks a 10-degree gain per pound of boost. Thus, when boost arcs into the 25-pound stratosphere, the hot blower rotors have expanded enough to crash into each other, destroying themselves and sending gritty metal bits downstream into the engine. The rotors always touch first at the gear end (discharge end) of the blower because it is considerably hotter than the inlet end, which you can think of as air-cooled."
-again from the same mustang magazine, http://www.mustang50magazine.com/tec...ger/index.html

the last part really isnt an issue unless your running high amounts of boost
liquidfire350 is offline  
Old 01-10-2010, 08:05 PM   #20
JM10
Se habla español
 
JM10's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS/RS VR
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona/Sonora
Posts: 607
So, no intercooler under the radiator?
JM10 is offline  
Old 01-10-2010, 08:08 PM   #21
ZZcamaro


 
Drives: 2SS w/ ZZ427 Package!!
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,703
I am trying to work with KB to get setup as a vendor for their products. I am also hoping that I can swing a new deal where we can offer an exclusive deal to Camaro5.com members!!

I will update when I get more info...or you can PM me if you are interested.
ZZcamaro is offline  
Old 01-10-2010, 08:09 PM   #22
liquidfire350
 
Drives: 2010 Black SS/RS
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 295
i believe theres still the air to water intercooler under the blower with the heat exchanger mounted behind the radiator, and that the liquid cooling uses the water from the heat exchanger. i think its more of an over-kill thing, safety thing for expanding screws, lower the outlet temps before hitting the intercooler so it can get even colder air charge temps
liquidfire350 is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 12:08 AM   #23
salohi
 
salohi's Avatar
 
Drives: 90 Black Camaro, 02 Sable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: KSA
Posts: 127


any one installed it yet

we need to hear it run
__________________
2SS/RS
Black/Black
6Spd. Aut.
salohi is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 02:40 AM   #24
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,053
I have questions about the article referenced...
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 04:05 AM   #25
Speed74SS

 
Speed74SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 LPE 650+ CTS-V
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 1,640
The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.
__________________
'10 CTS-V : LPE 650+ Package 587hp / 582tq

2.55 Upper / 8.6 Lower / ID850's / Kooks Longtubes / New Era CAI
Speed74SS is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 06:15 AM   #26
Z_Rocks

 
Z_Rocks's Avatar
 
Drives: everyone crazy...
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 1,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed74SS View Post
The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.
Man, what are you doing up in SD at 4:05 AM reading car articles?
Yes, the article was a bit biased, but still KB and Whipple are excellent PD S/C. I wish I could have one of each (Maggie, KN and Whipple)
Z_Rocks is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 11:25 AM   #27
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed74SS View Post
The KB blower looks good and efficient but I believe you will get more power out of a bigger blower. I am not taking anything away from KB but it looks like they were the ones who did the test in the article and not a 3rd party. I think the tests will always be skewed towards a manufacturers product that is doing the test. I can't remember the comparison between the Hennessey 650 car and the 725 Super Snake - didn't they dyno close to the same?? It will be interesting to see these on the new camaros - can't wait.
The Hennessey and Super Snake were close, but the 650 had ported heads and a blower cam; it's just not the same. If they did testing of both blowers on a 6.2, or whatever, that'd be something I'd be interested in. Also, the 650 had IRS, and big ole' wheels and tires, and such. That Shelby only had a blower upgrade (and maybe intake - I can't remember); the 650 was gone through a lot more...

There's a good write-up on this blower in a recent MM&FF. Yeah - it read like KB was doing the test, not a third party, just as you noticed. The improvements make sense (to my simple mind), but it just seems to me that this article points out facts that just aren't apples-to-apples (like I've read from this company before...). They make a big deal about the 3.6 making A LOT more power with the same size pulley than their 2.8H, but the boost is SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER! Of course it should make more power, right? What am I missing?! Why does this matter? How is it relavent? What if they post numbers at the same boost levels? Will the benefit of this huge blower be a lot less, and maybe expose some inefficiency? I'm sure it's a lot more efficient at higher boost levels, and I think they showed that, but whenever I've ready about the screw compressors and comparisons among them, or to even a TVS, it just seems the comparisons are not under the same circumstances...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Z_Rocks View Post
Man, what are you doing up in SD at 4:05 AM reading car articles?
Yes, the article was a bit biased, but still KB and Whipple are excellent PD S/C. I wish I could have one of each (Maggie, KN and Whipple)
I don't want to make it sound like I don't believe this statement, because I do. Going back to my reference above, in another article, by the same magazine, if I remember correctly, they compared a 2.8H (on a GT500) to a 2.3 TVS. There were obvious differences in efficiency, in terms of heat and power consumption, but MM&FF like make it a point to say that they're using the same diameter pulleys in the comparison, but they're spinning the blowers at significantly different boost levels. Shoot - they even test the KB with their Mammoth intake and compare it to the TVS that doesn't even have a similar upgrade (at least that they show in the comparison). I don't care about pulley size as much as testing at the same boost levels. They also go to point out how hot the TVS gets with the same size pulley, but it seems to be out of it's design range compared to the KB; that goes to show the headroom of the KB - no problem there. It's one thing to say we're going to run these blowers, b@lls-out, and see who's king. It's another to TRY to make direct comparisons when they aren't close to being set-up similarly.

The bottom line is I think it's time for someone to see about getting these blowers together, test them under the same conditions, see where they peak, check their efficiency, etc. I work in a lab myself, and so many of these comparisons just don't much sense IMHO. Personally, with what I've read, I think the twin screws have the advantage, but I don't think it's as big as we're being led to believe
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 12:08 PM   #28
liquidfire350
 
Drives: 2010 Black SS/RS
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 295
i see what your saying about keeping it at equal boost for the test and that they didnt do that, just kept the same size pulley

but when they put them on a different motor to test for efficiency, they had both blowers set to put out 20psi. it may not be the exact results your looking for but you can piece together the puzzle. at equal boost the KB was more efficiency in all aspects, how much better would it be power wise at the same boost would have to left to that specific test. but its not like a KB cost $10K and a magancharger is $1.50, they are not that far off in price (generally speaking)
liquidfire350 is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 12:10 PM   #29
brandotron
I am the internets.
 
brandotron's Avatar
 
Drives: dangerously
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 12,568
Hot damn, look at that Tq curve!
__________________
brandotron is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 12:53 PM   #30
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by liquidfire350 View Post
i see what your saying about keeping it at equal boost for the test and that they didnt do that, just kept the same size pulley

but when they put them on a different motor to test for efficiency, they had both blowers set to put out 20psi. it may not be the exact results your looking for but you can piece together the puzzle. at equal boost the KB was more efficiency in all aspects, how much better would it be power wise at the same boost would have to left to that specific test. but its not like a KB cost $10K and a magancharger is $1.50, they are not that far off in price (generally speaking)
THANK YOU! I was starting to think I was the only one thinking about that I just really begin to question a company making claims when the testing seems skewed; of course, I could just be interperating it wrong...

As far as the 20 psi test, I didn't really have a problem with that test. The KB was clearly superior - no question. Where I questioned it a little bit, is whether-or-not the 2300 was designed to be running at the 18,000 or 20,000 RPMs I think it was running at, and it didn't even get to 20 psi if I remember correctly... I mean, if I don't have an intention on running at 20 psi (and it isn't even designed to be spun that high), I don't need a blower that goes that high, so I'll be less interested in it. However, if I'm running at 15 psi, I'm certainly going to be looking at it's efficiency and power consumption at that level and lower RPMs. I'm all for having enough headroom, but it's not like I need a Top Fuel dragster-sized blower - even I know that, lol. I just want to see conclusive testing, under the same conditions, apples-to-apples
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 03:31 PM   #31
Total_Perf_Eng
 
Total_Perf_Eng's Avatar
 
Drives: Corvette
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 509
Send a message via AIM to Total_Perf_Eng
Were Glad you guys like it..

Hey All,

Some of you may know our compay from other GM KB products, but some of you may not.

I have been working closely with Kenne Bell since 2004 designing the LS based twin screw kits. We became involved with them on the original C5 kit, and have continued to aid in design and R&D since then.

When it comes to this kit, and the system in general, we are probably the most knowledgeable in the industry. That being said, I will be more than happy to answer pretty much any question yu may have. Chances are, if you call KB, they will refer you to me anyways.

BUT, this kit is a COMPLETE redesign from the ground up. From the lower manifold, to the new patented head unit, to the anxiously awaited redesigned inlet manifold. It carrys nothing from the original C5 kit (For a few reasons.) Lets just say we learned ALOT from that system.

Although originally we had anticipated a final release on 1/1/10, we have had to push back the release until right around 2/1/10. This has nothing to do with the kit itself, we are just waiting on a few shipments of some gears, and 100 of the inlet manifolds. But the lkit is 100% complete, and the car is actually sitting on the dyno. The instructions are written, and final. We did have to make a few changes for the automatic at the last minute, but that has already been addressed.

I will be installing the very first production unit around the first week of Feb, as well as showing you guys the 3.xH on the dyno. We have a purpose built 416 stroker that was built to pop... What do I mean??? well, were gonna kep turning the wick up until she blows. .Were gonna start with the 2.8, then go to the 3 and 4L head units. we want to show the capabilities of each unit in a purpose built application.

I can tell you this though. In the production kit, in order to keep the bost low, we had to run a much larger pulley. We were seeing 600rwhp when properly tuned, on a STOCK setup. Well, the pulley was so freaking large, that it was hitting the hood, so we had to run a slightly smaller pulley. This upped our boost higher than we wanted for our "Manufacturers Tune" kit. So in order to make the kit completely safe, we had to detune the spark tables, and a few other areas. This allows us to run a safe street tune, and clear the stock hood.

What does this mean?? It means with a few keystrokes of a compitent tuner, you will have a much more powerfull car by doing NOTHING.

Although pricing has not been publicly released, it is slated to run very very close to the other kits (Challenger kit). So expect them to retail in the mid 6K range. You CAN upgrade to the 3.XH, for a small fee. It should run right around 400-500 plus polishing. The larger head units are currently not avail in black, so if you had a black 2.8H, and wanted the 3 or 4L head unit, then it would be the cost of the polish, plus the upgrade. Hope that clarifys a few things.

Be looking out for new dyno sheets very soon, along with videos.

Please feel free to ask any technical question you like. Also, if you are interested in having one installed, hit us up. Theres no better place in the country, then the place that helps design them.

Both my company and Kenne Bell are in the process of becoming supporting vendors of this site, so dont hesitate to let us know your opinions. We will do our best to help in any way possible.

Jeff
Total Performance Engineering
Total_Perf_Eng is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 03:39 PM   #32
Total_Perf_Eng
 
Total_Perf_Eng's Avatar
 
Drives: Corvette
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 509
Send a message via AIM to Total_Perf_Eng
The kit is completely done. If you called and ordered one from TPE right this second, it would ship the first few days of feb.

We will be installing the first production kit in the coming weeks. This is not one of those kits where its being released without being avail.

Due to the holidays, there was a delay on some gearsets from europe, as well as the rear inlets. We are expecting to have the inlets in the next few days, and the gearsets shortly after that. Then, they need to be assembled.

HTH
Quote:
Originally Posted by old motorhead View Post
Are these blowers actually "available"? As in, can you really buy one and bolt it on your Camaro?
Total_Perf_Eng is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 03:43 PM   #33
Total_Perf_Eng
 
Total_Perf_Eng's Avatar
 
Drives: Corvette
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 509
Send a message via AIM to Total_Perf_Eng
1) Yes, the TB is a major restriction. The inlet was designed to be modular, and accept a variety of different size TB's. Currently, we have TB's all the way to 110MM's. But the largest restriction of all, and the part that was given the most possible attention, was the inlet. Now, its a monster. It flows like no tomorrow.

2nd question) No..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Z_Rocks View Post
Thirdly, the throttle body and see how much bigger it is than the stock (even if you port the stock). This has a huge bottleneck on performance, if it's not large enough. In fact the new Mustange GT for 2011, has changed theirs to the shape and size of KB.

The big question is, do you have to cut the hood or drop the engine?
Total_Perf_Eng is offline  
Old 01-11-2010, 03:50 PM   #34
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,053
I know I'm interested in the results you find when you run a production unit. It'll be interesting to see how dissimilar/similar the results will be with other SCs out there. Can you tell me if it's going to also be run on a 100% stock SS?

Thanks and I look forward to the upcoming information
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline  
 
Closed Thread

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
Camaro Product Manager - interview Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 11 04-04-2012 07:10 PM
SEMA Camaro: Yellow Camaro Concept Tran Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery 45 09-01-2011 03:19 PM
An interesting Camaro (and GM) story! I just bought my 2010 Camaro! Camarodriver Camaro Price | Ordering | Tracking | Dealers Discussions 12 11-28-2010 04:52 PM
GM memo to dealers Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 41 02-04-2010 08:33 PM
Official Camaro Convertible CONCEPT Press Release Tran Camaro Convertible Forum 12 11-18-2009 08:05 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25 AM.


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