Kenne Bell 2010 camaro kits 2.8, 3.6, 4.2 available

[Whipple Charged]

Originally Posted by thalilbear02

I'll tell you what Whipple Charged, if you can prove to me ( and don't worry you wont be proving just to me ), that your supercharger is better in comparison to Kenne Bell, please, present the facts. I would like to see what you say, as well as if there really are any benefits to your kit compared to the KB.

It's a hard task especially when considering that the KB makes 579RWHP as stated on their website, and from your website, it looks like you're about 40RWHP or so off. BUT, if you can show me, and others, that you have a better product, without complaining about patent pending issues and that, I would be highly interested.

We made 580RWHP with an automatic trans, so you'll need to flip those numbers around. Have not tested a manual trans yet, but will soon. And we'll be doing complete comparison once both are released.

[thalilbear02]

Originally Posted by Whipple Charged

We made 580RWHP with an automatic trans, so you'll need to flip those numbers around. Have not tested a manual trans yet, but will soon. And we'll be doing complete comparison once both are released.

Interesting... Well if you've got any dyno sheets, please post them up, as well as what kind of boost you're pushing through, and if you have it available (just because I'm interested), what AFR you're running as well

[Whipple Charged]

Originally Posted by thalilbear02

Wow looks like someone wants to get into a c**k measuring fight

Regardless of the situation though, some of your claims even despite their being correct or not really turns me off. The fact that you're whining on the forum turns off a lot of potential customers such as myself.

Unfortunately your annoying whining about how someones claims might be slightly incorrect as far as a patent MIGHT be pending or not just sounds like a 5 year old trying to tell their parent that they're incorrect about something.

I wish you luck with your kit, but so far, it's not looking good at least from my perspective

Nobody is whining. Just bringing some facts to the table. The "facts" posted and supplied by KB are false and misleading, and directed towards our system as well as Maggie's. Claiming something is patented when its not is actually illegal. One could apply for a patent and can be awarded or denied. One can also be awarded but it can be protested when evidence is brought forward to show it's not new or unique technology/idea's.

[GTAHVIT]

leave the sarcasm out of this thread.

Seriously. Be very careful how you post here. Just cus there is a debate does not mean it's a free for all.

[Total_Perf_Eng]

Well, I just called Jim Bell on is cell about 2 minutes ago, and read him all of the threads. He was quite humored.

I gave him the link so he could follow along. Im sure if necessary, he'll post.

Why dont you just tell the mods your intentions? You came over from the other site, for one reason, and one reason only. To try to bash us. You have openly stated it on the other site. Unfortunately, you wont stop until a mod puts a stop to it.

Originally Posted by Geneus

I wonder if KB is even aware of what is being posted on here by one of their OEM clients? They might not be too happy with some of what is being claimed.

[Total_Perf_Eng]

Totally agreed..

Thank you

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

leave the sarcasm out of this thread.

Seriously. Be very careful how you post here. Just cus there is a debate does not mean it's a free for all.

[Geneus]

Originally Posted by Total_Perf_Eng

This is a camaro site. There is no reason to post multiple Corvettes. I didnt even know if these 3 were appropriate. But its meant as a representation that WE (TPE) have been doing it for 18 months now. But the C6 has been having a KB installed for almost 2 1/2 years. The FACT of the matter, is that your claiming it hasnt been done, when in reality it has. You can feel free to call LPE. They too have done them.

HTH

I'm not disputing that they have not been done...just wanting people to know what the results have been and what has been the "satisfaction" level of those who have gone with that application. I think it's only fair for those who are considering investing their hard earned money to know what they are getting by talking to those who have been users of that said product. I merely pointed out that the Camaro is a new platform for supercharger based applications and as such the "N" is still small as to those cars which have been supercharged. Therefore, why not go to another platform (in this case, a Corvette which shares the same motor with the Camaro) to get peoples impressions on their satisfaction level with that particular S/C application. I think it's always better to hear from the horses mouth rather than from the mouth of the one trying to feed the horse.

[Geneus]

Originally Posted by Total_Perf_Eng

Well, I just called Jim Bell on is cell about 2 minutes ago, and read him all of the threads. He was quite humored.

I gave him the link so he could follow along. Im sure if necessary, he'll post.

Why dont you just tell the mods your intentions? You came over from the other site, for one reason, and one reason only. To try to bash us. You have openly stated it on the other site. Unfortunately, you wont stop until a mod puts a stop to it.

There's no bash here...and besides, if what you are posting is honest and forthright then you have nothing to fear...people on this site will make their decision based on what they hear/read about others who are satisfied/dissatisfied with a particular application/and or provider of a service...as it should be.

Money is tight these days and you can't blame anyone from trying to get the best/most for their money...especially when they don't have a large database to work off of.

[Whipple Charged]

Originally Posted by thalilbear02

Interesting... Well if you've got any dyno sheets, please post them up, as well as what kind of boost you're pushing through, and if you have it available (just because I'm interested), what AFR you're running as well

I really don't want to hijack this thread, just do a search and you'll find a 538rwhp run with the "rear-entry" prototype which was on a 100% stock vehicle, auto, 6100rpm, 12:1 af, 8psi (@ 6100rpm vs others at 6750), auto trans, 91-octane. We picked up a significant gain on the front entry on the same engine. We also worked on the cal and found significant gains. 538 was 8 hours before SEMA. With the new setup, were at 580rwhp at 9psi but were backing it down for production kits, as its just too much for stock vehicles.

[thalilbear02]

Originally Posted by Whipple Charged

I really don't want to hijack this thread, just do a search and you'll find a 538rwhp run with the "rear-entry" prototype which was on a 100% stock vehicle, auto, 6100rpm, 12:1 af, 8psi (@ 6100rpm), auto trans, 91-octane. We picked up a significant gain on the front entry on the same engine. We also worked on the cal and found significant gains. 538 was 8 hours before SEMA.

Well to be honest I think you already did hijack the thread, but I appreciate the numbers. I'll do a quick search as well just to see those threads

As far as this thread goes though, I'm sure another Dustin Vs. Jim fight will be coming shortly, just make sure to play nice you two :seesaw:

[Whipple Charged]

Originally Posted by thalilbear02

How come that's not stated on their website? Obviously a confirmation of this would be good. An actual video would be good (actually from both companies would be awesome).



On the money here. A good reliable system would really be in order for the Camaro.

That is correct, we have not tested on a manual, but will very soon.

[Total_Perf_Eng]

Agreed.. If the members want a few of the C6 customers references, they can feel free to contact us. The 2 customers cars that were posted are members Flash99, and Blue02ss on the CF. they can feel free to inquire.
If they want more people, just let me know, and Ill give their username.

Being as the Camaro/C6 kit is a total re-design, it is much better than the C5 kit could have ever been. The C5 inlet had serious flow issues. Even then, we were able to produce over 800rwhp, and 850rwtq. Fortunately, the new inlet is nterchangeable with the C5, so that will be addressed as soon as the kit is released.

Originally Posted by Geneus

There's no bash here...and besides, if what you are posting is honest and forthright then you have nothing to fear...people on this site will make their decision based on what they hear/read about others who are satisfied/dissatisfied with a particular application/and or provider of a service...as it should be.

Money is tight these days and you can't blame anyone from trying to get the best/most for their money...especially when they don't have a large database to work off of.

[Whipple Charged]

Originally Posted by thalilbear02

Well to be honest I think you already did hijack the thread, but I appreciate the numbers. I'll do a quick search as well just to see those threads

As far as this thread goes though, I'm sure another Dustin Vs. Jim fight will be coming shortly, just make sure to play nice you two :seesaw:

Intentions were to only keep this on the level. I've got no problem going toe to toe with KB.

[Total_Perf_Eng]

Will Whipple be offering a complete CARB approved kit, with a manufacturers tune?

Originally Posted by Whipple Charged

I really don't want to hijack this thread, just do a search and you'll find a 538rwhp run with the "rear-entry" prototype which was on a 100% stock vehicle, auto, 6100rpm, 12:1 af, 8psi (@ 6100rpm), auto trans, 91-octane. We picked up a significant gain on the front entry on the same engine. We also worked on the cal and found significant gains. 538 was 8 hours before SEMA. With the new setup, were at 580rwhp at 9psi but were backing it down for production kits, as its just too much for stock vehicles.