[jorgesvlog]

Originally Posted by toohighpsi

Tuning underway on my son's completely stock 2018 Camaro SS LT1 with Magnum DI TVS2650. Only mod on this car is the Magnum DI TVS2650 blower - running CA's (Chevron) 91 octane. Otherwise the car is stock right down to the factory paper air filter.

This is the best power pull so far, I doubt that there is any more this in stock setup, but it is a nice improvement over the TVS2300 (550 RWHP). Might try a bottle of Octane Booster to see what that will yield.

Have some work to finish in the mid-rpm range, but looking forward to some track testing!

Attachment 996170

Attachment 996171

How much boost?

[laynlo15]

I believe it was around 8 psi.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by laynlo15

That blower has at least a 105mm pulley and spinning the blower at a pretty low speed. I personally want less torque on the street and more torque at the track. Hard to not spin the tires if you had equal tq/hp. I will be on the dyno in the next week so we can see what mine makes but I'm thinking it will be respectable compared to most blowers out there. I ran 9.83@141 on a 68 degree day and DA of about 500 with my 2300 and I ran 9.77@142 on a 92 degree day and over 3000 DA on less boost, less timing, less meth, slick track so I don't think the 2300 will be comparable to the 2650 at the track with the same combination like mine. We had to pull timing out down low because of track conditions being over 130 degrees. So right now I'm the only one that just took off the 2300 and put on the 2650 and went to the track. Dyno's mean nothing compared to track times. I've been out run by many on the dyno but I've put up much better numbers at the track. Dyno's are for tuning and are a valuable asset but there is nothing like seeing that time slip to prove every dyno wrong. Mike was simply showing the numbers the Camaro made up to where the fuel system said, nope that's it, no shady numbers, no BS. So all the critics will eventually see what we have to offer with the new 2650 so be prepared to get rolled.

Lol...you clearly took my post the wrong way.

[laynlo15]

King, I always do but its all good.

[IneedAZ]

laynlo15

So, If you overdrive the 2650, you can pick up more TQ down low? All the blower stuff is a learning curve. I ran Nitrous for years in my different cars, this is a different animal.

[laynlo15]

Several factors for sure.

[radz28]

Those are some great numbers.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by laynlo15

King, I always do but its all good.

I was just saying on a stock car with a stock fuel system(which the thread is based on) the 2300 looks like a better suited charger. The 2650 has to spun too low and the power curve shows it. 2300 delivers a better power curve at low boost.

You are wrong if you would want to give up that much torque across the rpm range at the power levels being discussed here. You also have to think about time spent at X part of the rpm range and shift extension. Dropping 90whp on a shift isn't ideal.

It's the same principal as putting a F1a-94 on a stock car and only spinning it 8psi. It's going to make all peak power. There is a reason why there are different size Chargers for different applications. The 2650 is a unit that likes to be spun harder. Look at the curve Mike posted. Even making 15psi, it still produces slightly less power under 4k rpm compared to a 2300 @ 12 psi. That tells me this unit needs to spin 15psi minimum.

Nothing wrong with that. On a application like yours, the 2650 makes sense. On a stock internal car running 10psi or less, I think a 2300 is a better choice.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

I was just saying on a stock car with a stock fuel system(which the thread is based on) the 2300 looks like a better suited charger. The 2650 has to spun too low and the power curve shows it. 2300 delivers a better power curve at low boost.

You are wrong if you would want to give up that much torque across the rpm range at the power levels being discussed here. You also have to think about time spent at X part of the rpm range and shift extension. Dropping 90whp on a shift isn't ideal.

It's the same principal as putting a F1a-94 on a stock car and only spinning it 8psi. It's going to make all peak power. There is a reason why there are different size Chargers for different applications. The 2650 is a unit that likes to be spun harder. Look at the curve Mike posted. Even making 15psi, it still produces slightly less power under 4k rpm compared to a 2300 @ 12 psi. That tells me this unit needs to spin 15psi minimum.

Nothing wrong with that. On a application like yours, the 2650 makes sense. On a stock internal car running 10psi or less, I think a 2300 is a better choice.

I think Mike said there was still some tuning he could do in the mid-range, no? Also - converters and transmissions are different between cars these blowers are going to be on, so shift extension is going to be different anyways, isn't it? I believe the power/torque curves also effect extension if I recall. My point is, is that this isn't final and perhaps tuning might boost the low-end. If not, it is what it is. It's a big blower for an application like this anyways, isn't it? It gives a lot of room to grow, but if the car were going to stay in this configuration, it's probably better suited to a 2300 or the like. I can see the point that a little softer low-mid range might be slightly better for traction, but for those that like a top-end that doesn't stop pulling, that small sacrifice on the bottom to get the bigger hit on the top is better. Some people will give that up. Who cares? It's their money

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by IneedAZ

laynlo15

So, If you overdrive the 2650, you can pick up more TQ down low? All the blower stuff is a learning curve. I ran Nitrous for years in my different cars, this is a different animal.

It's about spinning the blower in it's efficiency range. There is a reason why a 1740 makes gobs of torque down low and that is because the blower speed is high at lower rpm. The 1740 efficiency range is right around 10psi. Once you crank it up, it starts loose efficiency and create more heat.

2650 is not really even doing much @ 8psi under 5k rpm because the rotor speed is so low. That is why you see the power ramp up so fast and there is +90whp gain from 5k-6500rpm on the stock SS.

The 2650 will make a lot more torque low mid rpm with a smaller pulley, but it will easily run above what the SBE LT1 can handle to get there.

On a build where its being spun to 18+ psi, you will see the torque come way up.

To keep it in perspective. On a street car a 550/550 or 580/600 power curve makes for a fun little street car. With a DR you can manage that power. However when you step up the build and start making big power, ideally you don't want the torque matching the horsepower and linear power increase becomes more ideal. This is where the 2650 will shine along with maintaining low air temps.


I think Laynlo is mixed up between threads. My comments were based all on the fact were discussing a stock SS. The other thread was discussing 2300 vs 2650. The 2650 is better suited for high HP builds. Moderate builds the 2300 is plenty just like I said before in your thread.

[radz28]

It'd be nice if we could compare stock to 2300 to 2650 (that's tuned to liking). Then we could all have some numbers to better think about and compare.

It's nice to have so many options.

[laynlo15]

Mixed up, always. Too many 2650 threads.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by radz28

I think Mike said there was still some tuning he could do in the mid-range, no? Also - converters and transmissions are different between cars these blowers are going to be on, so shift extension is going to be different anyways, isn't it? I believe the power/torque curves also effect extension if I recall. My point is, is that this isn't final and perhaps tuning might boost the low-end. If not, it is what it is. It's a big blower for an application like this anyways, isn't it? It gives a lot of room to grow, but if the car were going to stay in this configuration, it's probably better suited to a 2300 or the like. I can see the point that a little softer low-mid range might be slightly better for traction, but for those that like a top-end that doesn't stop pulling, that small sacrifice on the bottom to get the bigger hit on the top is better. Some people will give that up. Who cares? It's their money

He said there was a little more tuning he could do mid-range but it didn't read like it was much.

Gearing effects shift extension not Power.

Far as Transmission. Most PD stuff does not require a converter. Most folks that chooses to add one it's going to be a fairly small stall(<3000). So shift extension isn't going to change much on a PD equipped A8. With a 28" tire you are looking at 12-1300 rpm shift drops, except 3-4 which is like 600. M6 cars drop 1700+ unless they drop down to a 26" tire.

Far as traction. I am running a Whipple and with a 305/35/20 555r traction is not a issue. My initial dyno was 600whp/570wtq in 5th gear. It honestly looked a lot like the dyno curve in the OP but with more torque. The car felt no faster then bolt-on under 3k rpm because it had no timing down low. I added a bunch of timing back including a couple degrees up top and I am sure the Torque came way up. Still didn't cause any traction issues and the car is much faster. I can pull bottom 3's 0-60 on the street no problem. So no I wouldn't want to give up a bunch down low. It's much more fun to drive with the added midrange. Now it pulls from anywhere and doesn't stop. Big shit eating grin on my face after I dialed that in.

Room to grow is relative and It's all a balance...you don't want to sacrifice power under the curve for a big peak number. Hence why big cam cars never run like the power suggests on the street. It's all about the combo. Point is the new 2650 looks like the real deal for the right application. However most will not utilize it's potential with their build. The 2300 is plenty capable and has been mid 9's @ 145. Even the 1740 has been high 9's @ 140. So yes if you want to run 8's with a PD, then the 2650 is the right choice.

You are right it's other peoples money. I am simply offering my unbiased opinion based on my knowledge and experience. So I offered my two cents for those that would care to read an opinion from someone not trying to sell a product.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

He said there was a little more tuning he could do mid-range but it didn't read like it was much.

Gearing effects shift extension not Power.

Far as Transmission. Most PD stuff does not require a converter. Most folks that chooses to add one it's going to be a fairly small stall(<3000). So shift extension isn't going to change much on a PD equipped A8. With a 28" tire you are looking at 12-1300 rpm shift drops, except 3-4 which is like 600. M6 cars drop 1700+ unless they drop down to a 26" tire.

Far as traction. I am running a Whipple and with a 305/35/20 555r traction is not a issue. My initial dyno was 600whp/570wtq in 5th gear. It honestly looked a lot like the dyno curve in the OP but with more torque. The car felt no faster then bolt-on under 3k rpm because it had no timing down low. I added a bunch of timing back including a couple degrees up top and I am sure the Torque came way up. Still didn't cause any traction issues and the car is much faster. I can pull bottom 3's 0-60 on the street no problem. So no I wouldn't want to give up a bunch down low. It's much more fun to drive with the added midrange. Now it pulls from anywhere and doesn't stop. Big shit eating grin on my face after I dialed that in.

Room to grow is relative and It's all a balance...you don't want to sacrifice power under the curve for a big peak number. Hence why big cam cars never run like the power suggests on the street. It's all about the combo. Point is the new 2650 looks like the real deal for the right application. However most will not utilize it's potential with their build. The 2300 is plenty capable and has been mid 9's @ 145. Even the 1740 has been high 9's @ 140. So yes if you want to run 8's with a PD, then the 2650 is the right choice.

You are right it's other peoples money. I am simply offering my unbiased opinion based on my knowledge and experience. So I offered my two cents for those that would care to read an opinion from someone not trying to sell a product.

And you are also coming across argumentative and hostile. Some people have preferences others don't. The topic is the 2650 install. There was and is not a lot of information to compare to. Frankly - the way you came into this thread seemed more confrontational than anything. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like you and laynlo15 have history already, which is what let me to these possibilities. If that's what it is, stay closer to topic.