One reason I went with Whipple too
Quote:
:D |
Quote:
|
Quote:
We have installed them all, Whipple, Magnusson, Vortech, Kenne Bell etc and each one has it's benefits! We will be doing another Whipple next week and after that a 2.8L Liquid Cooled Kenne Bell with a cam is on the schedule! Thanks guys, we are also very happy with the outcome! /Erik |
Quote:
|
Great build guys. Very impressive.
|
Pictures Look great! I also like the rear black out panel. So what is the Peak boost you see with the Whipple? Curious how the long tubes and big 3 inch exhaust affected the boost. What power it put down with the Whipple tune?
|
Quote:
Why we did not go with a Centrifugal blower - Simple. A roots/twin screw is way more fun for a street car. |
Quote:
Torq Dyno Results with Whipple Tune: VEHICLE: 2010 6.2L Manual Boost PSI: 8.7psi Average AF: 11.9:1 RPM Limit: Stock Exhaust: Kooks 1 7/8" Long Tubes w/ Catted X and MBRP Catback Fuel: 93 octane Temperature: 76.31° F Barometric PSI: 29.98 In-Hg Humidity: 45% Hood: Open SC RW SAE HP: 531 SC RW SAE TRQ: 487 Stock RW SAE HP: 355 Stock RW SAE TRQ: 342 We test every product we sell and provide our honest feedback. After installing Whipple's 2.9L supercharger on our customers 2010 Camaro SS with Whipple's tune we picked up a fantastic 177RWHP and 145RWTQ but were concerned with the amount of Knock Retard we were seeing both on the street and in our controlled dyno room. We reset the ECM back to a factory stock calibration and began the calibration process. The final results with less timing and zero KR and a safer air fuel ratio were amazing. We picked up an additional 45RWHP and 23RWTQ! In addition to the WOT power and torque increases our tune provides additional throttle response and improved fuel economy and drive-ability. |
Quote:
For example to produce the numbers on this setup, they used almost 9psi., there are numerous setups using 6psi. with a ProCharger and getting same results. So, if we were talking $, I'd say 2.9, but we're talking SC's so 2.3 or 2.9 probably not making much of a difference unless you engine has been heavily modified, and in that case you'd probably want a ProCharger F-1 or higher. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks :) |
Quote:
1. Our Mustang Dyno reads lower than what most are showing, which is on a dynojet. We know 575rwhp on our machine is 610rwhp on a dynojet. 2. We just finished a Maggy at 8.5psi with our blower cam and it made 610rwhp/540rwtq. On a dynojet this would be about 630-640rwhp and like 570rwtq. 3. Stock fuel pump is good to about 560rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Fuel pressure will start to drop hard making AFR uncontrollable not allowing a tuner to hit target afr 4. A Maggy/Whipple will make way more power and torque under the curve so if there is traction that car will be faster. It is quite simple. A car that accelerates faster will be faster http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-..._7456199_n.jpg Look at the graph below 4500. Above 4500 the procharger fell on it's face because it was 130F in the shop and IAT's were through the roof on the procharger setup |
Quote:
The reason I mentioned do not look above 4500 is that the spark really started to drop off on the procharger car with the super high temps. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.