LME built LSX "440" , 6 Bolt heads and a Kenne Bell 2.8 !!!
09-08-2007, 01:09 AM
#21
FormerVendor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: "Sin City" Las Vegas
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With my AFR 225's and 16psi (about 16000rpm compressor speed) we got a little over 800rwhp on pump gas. But we were pressing the limits of the tune pretty hard..
We were running a Nick Williams 90mm TB. But we also had him custom make us a 100mm one as well, and we only saw about 1/2" less vacuum.
Yes the measurement was taken in between theTB and the rotors.
The reason I'm fairly confident its the intake and NOT the S/C is because it happened on both the 2.6 AND 2.8 I tested. The boost loss was the same.
We were running a Nick Williams 90mm TB. But we also had him custom make us a 100mm one as well, and we only saw about 1/2" less vacuum.
Yes the measurement was taken in between theTB and the rotors.
The reason I'm fairly confident its the intake and NOT the S/C is because it happened on both the 2.6 AND 2.8 I tested. The boost loss was the same.
Originally Posted by HOWQUICK
we went to 800rwhp with ETP 245cc Cathederals @14psi with 3.3 Whipple at 14.5krpm compressor speed on 402".
ditto.
Typically we see boost fall where the engine has best volume efficiency, as to be expected with PD, and then increase as the engine stops wanting to move air unless the compressor is too small and boost continues to fall.
On the 511" Top Alky engines with 4.9L PSI driven at 108% over crank speed we see the engine stop moving air at 9000+ rpm and the boost increase exponentially from this point.
Valcuum at the TB before the rotor? What size TB did you have?
ditto.
Typically we see boost fall where the engine has best volume efficiency, as to be expected with PD, and then increase as the engine stops wanting to move air unless the compressor is too small and boost continues to fall.
On the 511" Top Alky engines with 4.9L PSI driven at 108% over crank speed we see the engine stop moving air at 9000+ rpm and the boost increase exponentially from this point.
Valcuum at the TB before the rotor? What size TB did you have?
09-08-2007, 01:21 AM
#22
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia.
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AMERICAN_HP
With my AFR 225's and 16psi (about 16000rpm compressor speed) we got a little over 800rwhp on pump gas. But we were pressing the limits of the tune pretty hard..
We were running a Nick Williams 90mm TB. But we also had him custom make us a 100mm one as well, and we only saw about 1/2" less vacuum.
Yes the measurement was taken in between theTB and the rotors.
The reason I'm fairly confident its the intake and NOT the S/C is because it happened on both the 2.6 AND 2.8 I tested. The boost loss was the same.
We were running a Nick Williams 90mm TB. But we also had him custom make us a 100mm one as well, and we only saw about 1/2" less vacuum.
Yes the measurement was taken in between theTB and the rotors.
The reason I'm fairly confident its the intake and NOT the S/C is because it happened on both the 2.6 AND 2.8 I tested. The boost loss was the same.
Regardless 440" is going to need a lot more SC than 2.8L regardless of who made the rotors. If they want to see some real boost in the thing. From what I have seen it will just start making super heated air. Would be a happy dyno to show 1000rwhp from what we see here.
Can't understand why anyone would want 6 gears behind 440" of PD boosted LS unless they are going to run it on the Salt Lakes or something using them as overdrives.
09-08-2007, 02:01 PM
#23
FormerVendor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: "Sin City" Las Vegas
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats EXACTLY what i'm saying. You want to see as little vacuum as possible in the intake track. Had we been able to re-configure the intake itself, we would have been able to pull more power with the same setup. But due to the intake restriction, the more boost we pulled through the blower, the higher the vacuum in the intake track. 
I think the 2.8H will be able to hold up with the 440. I've seen the the data between the 2 blowers, and although 3.3 is bigger than 2.8, the efficiency of the blower and manifold design is whats important. (plus obviously the S/C itself)
Will it have a tough time?? Oh Yea.. Will it be maxxed out?? Hell yes it will.
But I have a feeling that if boost is kept at a respectable level, and the manifold is as efficient as I think it will be, it should be a monster..
IMHO..
I think the 2.8H will be able to hold up with the 440. I've seen the the data between the 2 blowers, and although 3.3 is bigger than 2.8, the efficiency of the blower and manifold design is whats important. (plus obviously the S/C itself)
Will it have a tough time?? Oh Yea.. Will it be maxxed out?? Hell yes it will.
But I have a feeling that if boost is kept at a respectable level, and the manifold is as efficient as I think it will be, it should be a monster..
IMHO..
Originally Posted by HOWQUICK
vacuum before the SC is never going to lead to compressor efficency. I have seen in increase in boost of 3psi by removing a restriction less than yours. Pump gas and road tune here.
09-10-2007, 01:48 AM
#27
FormerVendor
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: "Sin City" Las Vegas
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No arguing here....Just a gentlemanly conversation...
Please PM me some pics when you get it done. And although I am sure you have some very compitant builders, if you need any advice on some prior experience with this S/C, please dont hesitate to give me a shout..
I literaly have hundreds upon hundreds of hours worth of R&D time into the KB 2.8/LS motor configuration..
More time than I care to admit.
Please PM me some pics when you get it done. And although I am sure you have some very compitant builders, if you need any advice on some prior experience with this S/C, please dont hesitate to give me a shout..
I literaly have hundreds upon hundreds of hours worth of R&D time into the KB 2.8/LS motor configuration..
More time than I care to admit.
Originally Posted by datsbad
I am going to just sit back and take in everyones info and let you guys argue it out , When it is being assembled I will show a few pics. Thanks
09-10-2007, 02:59 AM
#28
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia.
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by beardWS6
Thats why I like my Beck intake. Can`t wait to I put a blower on my set-up one day! 
Originally Posted by AMERICAN_HP
No arguing here....Just a gentlemanly conversation...
just passing on some experience.
I don't reckon you need 6 gears with the steam a big inch PD car will have.....
09-10-2007, 08:01 AM
#29
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you guys talked to KB? That CFM produced on motor by that displacement and head flow sounds AWFULLY high for that little compressor.
I bet you are compressor limited with that setup. Pulley the thing to max impeller speed and see where the boost shakes out...
I bet you are compressor limited with that setup. Pulley the thing to max impeller speed and see where the boost shakes out...
