KB Cost/Benefit [Archive] - MX-5 Miata Forum (2024)

Chris92

30th November 2002, 01:27

OK I just got some info from Kennedy. They say the 1500 KB is worth 75hp with 6 lb pulley and 100hp with 8#... and their custom cam is good for about 30hp on top of that vs a stock roller cam.

Tax time is not that far away, and my refund may just get me a KB 1500 (for use with a stock lower) ... or at least pay a lot of it.

I'm really wondering what how my setup would react to the KB, with the Edel 6037 heads, stock cam, 70mm TB/EGR and a bigger MAF with 24# injectors.

With any luck I wont need to get a custom chip, which costs $600. Hoping I can do it all with the AFPR, which I am well familiar with from the Greddy days of the 4 cyl turbo project.

Also wondering the difference between the stock lower and the GT40 lower which cannot afford, when running with the KB.

For sure this should get the MPG back up from the consistent 14.5 now getting...

Chris

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

30th November 2002, 11:43

...The stock lower is more restricive. The Gt 40 flows in the same area as your heads...220/230 cfm. The stocker is less...say 175 ish. the stocker can be improved to close to the gt 40 numbers...but the cost is getting close to the cost of the gt 40 lower.

....see if you can find one ..either a ported stocker...or a used gt 40 on one of the nets? The blowe hids some of the intakes flow problems...bur I remeber some ancient dyno test that showed 15-20 hp difference compareing two lowers...both were stock.
JohnB

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

30th November 2002, 11:46

...I may be a little high on the flow numbers...I think they are closer to 2200-210 sory bout that

...mine was ported...and it is in the 220-230 area...for what it is worth
JohnB

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

30th November 2002, 11:48

Chris92

30th November 2002, 12:17

John now I am totally confused. Is this right?

1) Flow of heads (intake?)
220?

2) Flow of stock Intake runner?
175?

3) Flow of GT40 Runner?
200?

Does it matter that the blower is forcing the air through? I guess I'm looking at 20hp more with GT40?

Maybe I'll golooking for one, I will have the Edelbrock to sell...

Also John, u have the stock lower, no?

Chris

[ 30. November 2002, 11:59: Message edited by: 91Miata ]

Steveamnmn

30th November 2002, 13:44

Chris, I think that the 5.0L V8 Explorer has a lower manifold virtually identical to the lower used for the Cobra/GT-40, at least in terms of flow characteristics. You might find one of those at a salvage yard worth the money. I'd ask the KB people if it's a bolt-on match.

I've never worked with a KB unit, so a (probably dumb) quick thought: Why wouldn't you use the Edelbrock lower? Wrong bolt pattern, port mismatch, etc? The flow would be great if it could be adapted.

You are correct that the blower helps to compensate for induction restrictions such as the stock lower, etc. The problem is, it does so at the expense of efficiency. More "back pressure" or resistance to flow through the induction system means the cylinders actually receive less mixture for a given boost level. The rest of the energy (boost pressure) created by the blower in the lower efficiency set-up is converted to heat energy...which lowers mixture density (and thus horsepower), as well as allows the onset of destructive detonation at a lower threshold.

Whatever you can do with your combo to maximize blower efficiency (minimize heat) will result in more power, better drivability, and higher tolerance to high cylinder pressures (compression, timing, fuel octane, etc). No downside to higher blower efficiency; no upside to lower efficiency.

I believe that both John's and Peter's cars have the "Flowzilla" manifold...the ideal match for the KB blower for efficiency. I believe the dyno tests show around 30+ HP gains with that manifold.

Steve A.

Chris92

30th November 2002, 17:26

Steve, as always thanks for the info. Yes there are only two choices for lower, GT40 or stock. They dont cast a KB to mate with my Performer lower.

As far as flowzilla inlet side upgrade, there wont be any cash for that. As it is we are talking $3000+ just for the KB ($2700) and a GT40 lower.. couple hundred? I will ask about the explorer though. I also will have a J&S safeguard with boost=retard, so I can get away with 8# boost safely. Thats another couple hundred used and $495 new. But its great insurance, I loved my J&S with the 4cyl turbo.

AS always its about the economics. Right now it looks like the KB1500, GT40 lower, stock cam, 70mm TB/EGR and at least 73mm MAF with 24# injectors, which I already found as well as I found a Crane ignition 6al setup to boot the spark and have multispark as well. Thats another $400! Damn!

Anyway, at 8psi and with all the above I'm sure 400whp is a dream, but 350 would probably happen, maybe 375? We'll see...

Chris

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

30th November 2002, 18:41

...I have the gt 40 on mine.The stock intake flows about 175 cfm...or less. A stock explorer is near the same as the Gt 40. it flows 200-210 cfm. If you port either one ...expect 25-30 cfm increase per runner.

...your heads flow about 225 cfm out of the box.

...so, even with the blower the better the flow...more power !

sorry I "cornfused Ya"..

JohnB

Steveamnmn

30th November 2002, 21:55

Chris, I feel that your 24# injectors will be inadequate if you're really going to make 350 - 375 HP with the blower. If you stretched both the duty cycle and the fuel pressure, they would just about do the job on a 350 HP naturally aspirated combo, no more...but you'll need a richer A/F mixture to complement the blower.

For example, while a BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption...a measure of horsepower produced per lb. of fuel burned by the engine) is typically figured at .45-.50 for a N/A engine, you're looking at .55-.60 for a blown application. That's quite a difference in terms of injector size required at any given horsepower level.

If you use one of the on-line fuel injector calculators, such as this one from RC Engineering:
http://www.rceng.com/technical.htm
I think you'll see that you really need 30-36 lb. injectors for that level of supercharged power.

You can easily use the calculator to try some "what if" combos. A "best-case" scenario for using small injectors would be if you produced the very lowest end of your HP estimate (350 HP), and the engine just happened to require the leanest end of the expected mixture range (.55 BSFC), you cranked the fuel pressure up to 58 lb. (50 lb. nominal + 8 lb. to cover the boost...AND your fuel pump was capable of maintaining that at maximum flow rate), using the industry standard 80% duty cycle you'd need at least a 28 lb. injector. So, 30# indicated.

In this scenario, the only way you could use your 24 lb. injectors would be to push the duty cycle to 90% (not a great idea), and the fuel pressure to 62 lb. (54 lb. nominal + 8 lb. boost pressure... also not a terrific idea), as that calculates out to exactly 24 lb. injectors. And hope that you DON'T make 365 instead of 350 HP, that the injectors can withstand the 90% duty cycle under high pressure, your AFPR doesn't hiccup, you engine doesn't require the .60 BSFC under heavy load, etc. etc., lest you lean her out on the top end and your pistons that have been dancing like Cinderella suddenly turn into pumpkins at midnight. Party over.

On the other hand, suppose you indeed managed 375 HP with your combo, required the slightly richer .60 BSFC, used the industry-standard 80% duty cycle, and a reasonable service range maximum fuel pressure of 53 lb. (45 lb. nominal + 8 lb. to cover boost); suddenly you have a MINIMUM requirement of 34.6 lb. injectors. So, 36 lb. indicated.

Bottom line is that you don't want to lean out a supercharged engine under load, so injector size merits careful consideration.

Steve A.

Chris92

30th November 2002, 23:30

Steve, OK just looked up the 400 HP street motor in 5.0 L Ford Dyno tests book, and the setup includes 24# Ford Injectors... C&L 73 MAF, Crane 2020 cam .530" 262/270 adv duration, mildly ported *stock* heads, 65mm TB, 10:1 FMU (which does not make sense to me), Powerdyne 7.5 lbs boost blower. 45lbs base pressure, 10 degrees timing. And get this: STOCK INTAKE! Take a look:

www.wickfordri.com/v8.htm (http://www.wickfordri.com/v8.htm)

Why can't I get the same reults with better heads but less cam?

Thoughts?

As far as duty cycle vs fuel pressure etc... I can relate to that. On my first turbo project, was running the 1.8 liter engine's injectors on my 1.6 (the biggest that the stock computer would idle with), and had the AFPR set to 6:1, base 48 lbs... so at 11.5 lbs of boost I was running 118 lbs rail pressure! (would lock injectors at 120) But the J&S was there to save my a$$, and yes it would pull timing on every pull... which I ignored. The car had MAJOR SNAP and PULL, after 3800 it just ran away with it right to about 6700.

In the case of the 5.0, I will also be running the J&S, 5.0 version, so I can play around the envelopes edge with safety, and avoid the (perhaps unneccessary) cost of custom chip burn or other tuning methods. A fully programmable computer such as I later had on the 4 cyl, would be the hot ticket but I just don't know yet whats out there and the EEC4 has such a great reputation for handling lots of mods and power.

Chris

Chris92

2nd December 2002, 01:28

John I just found that issue of MM&FF with the blower combos and dyno tests. The closest to my setup is a Eaton M90 on an engine almost exactly like mine, E303, Performer Heads and Intake, and at 8psi boost it made 340whp! That is with an Eaton and yes the E303 I'm sure was blowing through some boost at lower revs.

ALSO JUST MADE A SAD DISCOVERY i THINK... the 404hp engine is ENGINE DYNO hp not at the wheels... while the book did not make this clear in the text, your reference to the MM&FF article helped me find that 340whp and then things did not add up... I went back and looked at the dyno book, found an illustration picture that refers to the Powerdyne and sure enough, I do not see a car bolted around that engine!

I am truly dumb. The true "Village Idiot of the Miata Forum" too bad that title is already taken.

Well, my Gosh! It sure is hard to make power with these 5.o motors then isn't it!

I had at LEAST 225 whp with my turbo 1.6liter, an many guys were at 240 with stock internals etc. Some of the more radical 1.8 setups are well well into the 300 - 400 WHEEL hp range.. with the top 2.0liter+ guys like Danny and Ric chasing 600whp IIRC

I guess its too bad we love that inefficient, pushrod, obsolescent, rumbling and shaking big V8 over here...

:p :p :p

[ 02. December 2002, 00:30: Message edited by: 91Miata ]

cmos9

2nd December 2002, 12:13

Chris92

2nd December 2002, 12:25

cmos9

2nd December 2002, 14:48

You may also be able to find one used (or at a junkyard) There is also a web site (search for it) that details the flow differences and other differences between a stock lower, true GT-40 and explorer Gt-40 style lower if you are interested.

-peter

Chris92

2nd December 2002, 15:24

Thanks Pete I went and found it...

Stock 87-93 Intakes: 136cfm
Unported Explorer Intakes: 189cfm
Unported Cobra Intakes: 199cfm
Unported GT-40 Intakes: 200cfm

SVOno5oh

2nd December 2002, 17:16

No, I'm just the Village Idiot of the Miata Power Mod forum.... The overall Village Idiot position is yours for the taking if you really want it ;) .

404 hp to the crank, 340 hp to the tires... It all sounds like a whole heck of a lot to me in a Miata chassis.

My goal one day when I have the cash is to build a 5.0 that'll put 300 to the tires N/A.... I might try to squeeze a 317 or 331 stroker in to help but I'm afraid the rods might hit the pan (3.1" stroke and 3.25" stroke).

Steveamnmn

2nd December 2002, 17:43

Originally posted by 91Miata:
Thanks Pete I went and found it...

Stock 87-93 Intakes: 136cfm
Unported Explorer Intakes: 189cfm
Unported Cobra Intakes: 199cfm
Unported GT-40 Intakes: 200cfmIf anyone's interested, the streetable aftermarket EFI manifolds typically flow from 10% - 40% more than the Cobra/GT-40 intakes (most would be included in a +15%-35% range).

One can see how these various manifolds match up with the combos for which they are intended. The flow capability of the Ford factory hi-po heads matches up well with the Cobra/GT-40 manifolds, both flowing ~200 cfm.

The Edelbrock Performer 5.0/RPM at ~220-230 cfm matches up well with the Edelbrock heads.

My Holley Systemax II (slightly >power band; 2500-6500 rpm), with only the casting flash cleaned out, matches well with out-of-the-box AFR 185 heads...with both ~270 cfm.

So, with the quality pieces generally available today, it's not about "good" manifolds or "bad" ones, but rather a matter of finding a match with your heads and other induction/exhaust components (which hopefully are already working well together).

Steve A.

Chris92

2nd December 2002, 18:35

Steve this a matter of stock vs GT40 for the planned Kenne Bell blower. The only two choices.

I found a GT40 lowe for $100 if its not sold, should be a wise investment... when you buy the KB, have to choose which style at purchase time.

Chris

cmos9

2nd December 2002, 19:03

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

3rd December 2002, 09:34

Hello all..

One more thing...DO NOT GET CAUGHT UP WITH...the total horsepower thing...

The real thing is the shape of the power curve. The torque is the real sleeper. It is big time flat with the KB at any boost level. And that my friends makes for the fun factor. The max power is important...but if you had two different motors...say one N/A version making 400 hp at 6200 rpm...and another Blower version, low boost and mking 400 hp at 5600 rpm. The blower version is going to feel as if it has double the power. As most of its grunt, compared to the other engine , is under the curve. On a street motor...that is where it is at. If I pay attention to mine...most of my driving is under 3500 rpm... But the torque thing, even in the light body , is a big part of the "grin factor". The total power number is important...but rowing through the gears, I kinda always liked to be pinned back in the seat...torque is good too !

JohnB

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

3rd December 2002, 10:40

Wow !

I forgot how bad those stock intake runners were ! I had on that was extrude honed...and I think it was improved to an average of 190 cfm per runner. But the Gt-40 lower and or the Explorer are the way to go. Mine is ported ...but I guess every little bit helps.

Chris...as far as tuning...that 404 HP motor had stovk heads...and on a blower motor I have seen head changes that made as much a 50-60 HP...on a NA motor 30-40. So...do not get depressed...350 to 400 HP to the rear wheels is tire smoke anyway...at least on one of these little beast's !Build it to ne reliable...and drive well....that is the ticket !

JohnB

Steveamnmn

3rd December 2002, 12:29

Chris92

3rd December 2002, 15:34

John yes thats why I am glad to have the KB only choice for 5.0 Miata!For the broad low-mid power. Otherwise might be tempted by the approx $1600 Novi 1000!

I want the big-block feel and will not stop until I get it... and unlike the 1.6 which used to whistle a happy tune while bouncing off the rev-limiter at 7200, the 302 seems to (somewhat) thrash like a bulldozer engine at anything above mid...

:D

Chris

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

3rd December 2002, 18:52

....do not get me wrong. The centrifical's will give you decent grunt...and a ton more up top. But the KB is almost a true bolt on...the others are not...at least yet !

Power is good....yes..I am an "excessive-compulsive" too !

JohnB

Chris92

3rd December 2002, 19:15

Right now, on the highway at 2000rpm, the car has ANEMIC passing power, must use at least 4th to go. The centrifugals are really a turbocharger with a belt, and I would never want, in daily street driving, to have to downshift for passing power. I mean whats the big point of the V8, its suppose to be torque, but the little Mazda engine was revving higher in 5th, and the T5 has such a steep overdrive that the KB really is the one for a big kick without going through shifting and all that. Even around town, looking at thetach, its like 1800, 2000, 2500... well with the KB the difference is right where you putt around at...

And in my case, I won't lose any top andyway because the motor is really (with the stock maf) all mid-rpm torque and snap anyway. 3500 - 5000 power band.

Can't wait for the KB but just cannot do anything until tax time due to existing credit card bills that we are cleaning up... but then if they send me a 2.99% for life of balance "spend-it-on-anything-u-want" visa check... then maybe.... ;)

Steveamnmn

4th December 2002, 01:45

Originally posted by 91Miata:
I want the big-block feel and will not stop until I get it... and unlike the 1.6 which used to whistle a happy tune while bouncing off the rev-limiter at 7200, the 302 seems to (somewhat) thrash like a bulldozer engine at anything above mid... There might be some valve train issues yet to sort out if your motor seems to thrash above mid-range. I drove a kit Cobra with a mildly-built 5.0L (probably 250 WHP) about a year ago and it seemed tight as a drum. It practically begged for the revs, at least up to ~5500...it wasn't mine, so I didn't push it further. But it was very happy singing along at it's torque peak, probably around 4000-4500 rpm.

The last small block Ford I built myself was twenty plus years ago for my '79 302 Merc Capri which I bought new. With some '70 351 DOOE heads home ported, Chevy valves (I've already admitted to being a long-time Chevy guy), a pretty warm hydraulic flat tappet cam, roller rockers, 4 bbl, headers, etc., all it wanted to do was rev. With a balanced rotating assembly and the valve train carefully set up, it was smooth as silk well into the 5500-5700 rpm range. You could row it around town in the 4000 rpm range all day, and it didn't feel or sound strained at all.

I'd do some snooping in the valve train geometry, etc., if yours is complaining past mid range.

Steve A.

Chris92

4th December 2002, 08:53

Well to be fair, I have run my heater hoses through the firwall, and not grommetted themn yet. Also have a hole for the (isolated, stainless) fuel pressure gauge line, also not grommeted. I learned in my days at an accoustical ceiling company that even the tiniest opening can leak sound like a speaker. In fact I have an "ultraquiet" dishwasher with a very thin rubber door gasket. One time the tip of a butter knife got closed flat in the gasket. Made it TWICE as loud, I was shocked that those tiny little pinholes where the gasket was lifted by teh very edge of the knife could leak that much sound!

Also remmber I'm running ALL the stock accessories as well.

I'll seal the firewall though and want to get heavier insulation under the entire rug, mostly to hold out the heat from the cats and exhaust next summer, but it should make the passenger compartment quieter. I may also insulate some of the hood as well.

But one thing is I have a lifter slightly ticking, which I have to check into somehow... maybe I'll cut the top off my old valve covers so can stethescope each one without too much mess. (?)

The motor is also "factory balanced" which means its NOT. So between the insulation and sealing action, and finding/fixing that lifter, and eventually will have a balanced engine from that extra in my garage, the thing should be silky smooth... maybe.

Don't get me wrong, its already nice and I am being picky.

No to figure out how to find a noisy lifter.

Chris

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

5th December 2002, 16:24

Chris..

keep in mind that you will not have to down shift with the KB...at least not much. And the 60 to 100 mph times aew wild. but in the lower gears...it almost has too muvh low end...spelt tire spin ! So ? The middle ground may be the KB with 6-7 psi...or a centrif with 9-10...choose your weapon !

JohnB

Chris92

5th December 2002, 17:54

i choose 8psi kb, will deal with the tire spin ;)

and next short block gets 8 or 8.5:1 pistons then i can run 10 psi, maybe 11 on pump gas

the kb site had some nice stats on hp lost to cr drop, and ign timing drop etc, it was not bad at all 8:1 or so is very liveable even not in boost...
and of course then u can run much more psi of boost than with 9.5:1 or whatever it is now.

chris

7000 RPM

6th December 2002, 02:08

If you want to get the most of out of Kenne Bell Whipplecharger than save your pennies for a customized chip that can then be calibrated/tuned on a dyno.

Whipples don't respond well to the traditional mechanical FMU/boost retard method. You need the chip to make good power throughout, without detonation. You don't need an FMU or the J&S boost retard, etc, etc..with the chip. That stuff is all band-aids for a proper tune.

In the end a chip will be cost effective. IMO, if you are going to spend thousands of dollars for a blower, intake, heads, etc, etc and then not TUNE the car properly you have your priorities out of whack. It would be like dropping a coilover suspension package in your car and not aligning it. You wouldn't think of doing that, would you? How is not getting a custom chip for your blower set up any different?

You will need at least 30# injectors..along with a properly sized fuel pump. 24# injectors are TOO small. I also ran an MSD 6-AL with my set up.

Get the GT-40 lower because you will want to step up to the Flowzilla in the future. I would also invest in a 75 mm throttle body..unlike a centrifigal blower, a positive displacement Whipple will respond nicely to opening up the intake side of the blower.

Be careful about camming your KB engine. Beware of cams with too much overlap..stay away from cams that have too much duration and especially narrow lobe separation angles. You want a cam that has a 114 LSA..definitely don't touch a 110 LSA..even a 112 is tricky. Believe it or not, the stock cam is better than some of the aftermarket cams out there. Be very, very careful with camming. I made the mistake of putting the wrong cam (E303) in my KB engine and lost boost and torque..which is hard to do with a Whipple. What works in a centrifigal blower won't necessarily work with a Whipple so don't compare a Powerdyne's set up with a Kenne Bell.

I spent over 6 months researching cams for my Whipple. If you are interested in talking to the guru of 5.0 cams go to www.flowtechinduction.com. (http://www.flowtechinduction.com.) Ed Curtis is "The Man" when it comes to custom camming a 5.0.

I made 370 rwhp/410 ft.lbs torque on my 5.0 engine outfitted with the Kenne Bell Whipplecharger 1500...it made 9-10 lbs boost with the 8lb pulley..This was with a very conservative tune because I road raced the car. There was more in the engine. I'm sure I could've gotten closer to 400 rwhp. Do you think this will be enough for a Miata? :D

My 5.0 engine had the Flowzilla set up, a ported STOCK lower (it was a prototype Flowzilla that worked with the stock lower..you'd make more power with the GT-40), Edelbrock 6037 heads (1.90/1.60 valves) ported on the exhaust. 75 mm throttle body, 75 mm Pro M Bullet MAF, shorty 1 5/8" headers, 1.6 roller rockers and an Isky custom cam..210/218 @ .050, .500" lift and a 114 LSA...advanced 3 degrees. I had 36lb injectors and a 255 lph fuel pump.

But the key was the chip. When I first dropped my Whipple in it ran horribly..very rich, with surging, poor gas mileage and it barely made 300 rwhp. Nothing I did with the FMU/boost retard worked. Finally I got the Autologic chip and we ran it on the dyno and calibrated the EEC with Chipmaster software. We got 30 rwhp/50 ft.lbs torque at the wheels by doing nothing but tuning it. This was with 8 degrees of initial timing. But the engine ran incredibly better. No more surging, gas mileage went from 14 mpg to 18 mpg..and there was no sign of detonation at all.

A year later I added the Flowzilla, went from 30lb injectors to 36lb and went from a 70 mm TB to 75 mm throttle body and made another 40 rwhp/40 ft.lbs of torque. Driveability was outstanding....it would pull right to 6000 rpm on the dyno and it was incredible on the street and road course. It also got almost 20 mpg on the highway. ;)

Save your pennies and do it right the first time. I was one of the very first to buy a Whipple back in 1994. For 3 years I went nuts trying to get it to run correctly. Finally I got the custom chip and all was right in my world. You don't have to go thru this hell. Get the chip. Trust me on this one.

BTW..don't get a pre calibrated chip..especially from Kenne Bell. They way to do it is to go to dyno, have the car hooked up with an Air/Fuel meter and TUNE the car while it's being calibrated..then the chip is burned and installed in your EEC. Pre-calibrated chips don't do it. You will need to find someone who specializes in this. It shouldn't be a problem...there are probably dozens of posts on www.corral.net (http://www.corral.net) about this subject. If you go to their Auction Block you will find tons of used parts for the 5.0 engine.

Just remember the old adage when it comes to building a high horsepower engine..or any mod for that matter..You can pay now or pay later, but in the end you will pay.

Voice of Experience here.. ;)

[ 06. December 2002, 02:03: Message edited by: redline7000 ]

cmos9

6th December 2002, 13:00

I agree with virtually everything redline7000 has said.

If you search on corral.net you will see tons of guys complaining about blown head gaskets, poor drivability, low power etc... with the Kenne Bell blowers. Almost all of these guys are running FMU's and do not have a chip. The guys who are happy and making good power all seem to have chips (custom or mail order)

As for mail order vs custom dyno tune. custom dyno tune is the way to go if you can find someone to do it. I could not find anyone near me so I went the mail order route from Kenne Bell. I had the car dynoed on a wideband just to be sure with the chip to make sure I had a safe A/F ratio (I did at 10:1). I general the mailorder chips should be safe as the last thing they want to do it destory your motor. (safe A/F and conservative timing) The custom dyno lets you get more optimal timing and fueling (read more power) for your exact setup on the dyno.

Most of the good chips are autologic ones, so if you end up mail ordering a chip you can always have you current chip dyno tuned later on.

Bottom line get a chip over the FMU (mailorder or custom) You will be happy you did.

-peter

Chris92

6th December 2002, 16:05

Well that is interesting... but Kennedy quoted me $600 for a custom chip. This, to me coming from a fully programmable ECU before, seems a real lot for something that I could basically throw away if I make any mods after that. Its also getting close to the price of a PMS and more than halfway to a TwEECer set, which is cool because you have FOUR chips to tune, plus the stock one and can switch between them with twist of a knob.

But I can BARELY afford the KB, and J&S...

By the way.. as far as the J&S, yes its not a substitute for not tuning, but it WILL protect WHILE tuning and from load of BAD GAS / LOW OCTANE GAS.

Anyway, how much is the KB chip? Do they customize it in anyway for my setup or do they just have defaults maps in them that are far better than stock EEC?

Chris

7000 RPM

7th December 2002, 02:21

I agree with virtually everything redline7000 has said.

If you search on corral.net you will see tons of guys complaining about blown head gaskets, poor drivability, low power etc... with the Kenne Bell blowers. Almost all of these guys are running FMU's and do not have a chip. The guys who are happy and making good power all seem to have chips (custom or mail order) Thank you. :cool: Unfortunately my lessons were learned the hard and expensive way.

I bought a Whipple back when they first came out. The first articles came out in Muscle Mustangs & Fast Ford magazine in 1994 and I had mine by April, 1995. Very few people even knew what the Whipplecharger was. When I installed it along with a set of Edelbrock 6037 heads (one of the first sets sold as well..I guess I like being a guinea pig :rolleyes: ), bigger TB, MAF, exhaust, etc, etc..I ran a whopping 14.4 ET. People were rolling on the ground laughing because their STOCK coupes were going faster than my blown convertible! I had run 14.6 almost completely stock myself! :ohno: The car ran horribly. It belched black smoke, got horrible gas mileage, surged and was basically awful.

I then made the mistake of dropping in an E303 cam and thus losing boost and torque. :ohno: For two years I went completely nuts. About the only thing I didn't do was blow a head gasket. I think I was running an 8:1 A/F ratio so I was plenty safe.. :rolleyes:

I was desperate and calling anyone and everyone that had anything to do with the Whipplecharger. Jim Bell sent me his Switch Chip and it made absolutely no difference. John Mihovetz at Accufab (who made all the castings for the Whipplecharger and ran one on his 5.0 engine) Accufab makes the best throttle body in the business BTW..told me to call Mike Wesley. Wesley was famous for making his Whipplecharged '89 LX run 11s and finding over 100 horsepower thru tuning alone because he could custom calibrate a chip by unlocking the Ford codes..something which Ford later sued him for.

Wesley hooked me up with a dealer in Massachussetts and the result was amazing. It was like someone had given me a new car! Putting in the proper cam helped too. Once I put the Flowzilla with the bypass set up it was an animal.

So yes, I'm a big proponent of using the chip to tune any Whipplecharged 5.0. With a Vortech or centrifigal blower you have a lot more latitude, mainly because boost is produced in a very narrow part of the powerband. With the Whipple you have boost at any rpm, in any gear..Which is a blessing when it comes to driving the car on the street but a curse when it comes to tuning. You can't apply the same standards to a Whipple that you do for a centrifigal.

By the time I was done I'd gained more than 70 rwhp/90 ft.lbs of torque at the wheels over what I had originally..and all I did was add the chip, Flowzilla and a bigger throttle body. IMO that's a HUGE return on very little investment. People spend a lot more to get 100 horsepower.

Like I said, you can stick all the parts on but if you don't set things up properly it just useless metal.

I wrote a lot about where to get the chips in the other thread but for mail order the man to deal with is Chris Johnson at JMS. http://www.jmschip.com/ He's a stand up guy who has the best reputation out there.

The J&S is probably a good safety valve to have but I would definitely wait and save up your pennies for the chip before plunging in. Better to wait and do it right then flatten the side of your head in a vain effort to apply bandaids or make shortcuts.

Like I said, not investing in the proper tuning is like spending thousands of dollars on a coilover suspension, swaybars, chassis bracing and then saying.."I can't afford an alignment".

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

8th December 2002, 11:55

Ditto...same era...but a kenne bell switch chip on a "PAXTON" car...ran lean...too much ignition ...detonation ! The chip was discarded soon after. The learing curve was full of mis spent dollars....

JohnB

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

8th December 2002, 12:17

...Hey Chris .

I ran into a gent that is selling a KB chip, and 80mm ford mas air. The chip is calibrated for #30 injectors, alum heads etc. Asking price is $300.00....I think he will take less.

It was posed on the KB forum...ever bin there?

JohnB

7000 RPM

8th December 2002, 12:49

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

8th December 2002, 13:41

...you be right !

I have the same mas air that I purchased from Bell way back...

Except, after I unloaded the chip, I sent it out to pro-m to recalibrated...and while they had it, they cut out the bridge. Now it is a true 80mm mas air.

If I had my choice( Chris)...I would pass on the KB chip...Contack Mike wesley. If nothing elese...he has done countless KB tunes. The power that Chris is after, can be had with a 70 mm tb,73mm mas air...and not a whole lot of cam either. The combo if matched...tuned to the right fuel air should be close to his expectations...but get enough injector ! 36-42 min.

I remeber talking to Mike years ago. He was , at that time doing legal battle with ford. They had him so tied up ...he could't sell his tuner. That is why I went with the PMS. I just could not wait for his. As it turned out...he got his to the market some two three years later !But...he sure knows his stuff. I have spoken to people that he has dealt with...and he found some pretty impressive "aditional" power on their motors...I mean like 50-60 hp ! Just tuning ! He was at the time the go to guy for the KB motors.

JohnB

Chris92

8th December 2002, 15:51

Thats all good info guys... John you really think a 73mm (C&L?) MAF would get me 350+whp?

I am almost tempted at this stage to drop the stock cam back in (unless a good deal on a ~$150 blower cam turns up), and run the 6-8lbs boost with a AFPR (remeber I have good experience with an AFPR). I'll have the J&S for detonation safety and can use my air/fuel and fuel prssure gauges for general guidance.

Maybe it will only be 300whp, or so, but the curve will be fat.

I looked at the sample map for EEC Tuner, downloaded the software from their web site, and its a bit hard to relate to. The Link ECU i was using had MAP tables, so at a given boost (or vacuum) you could go up the rpms and set the timing and fuel each 500prm all the way up. The ford data seems to lack this, but it does have MAF which is, in a way, the same thing.

I'll get my current setup dynoed, then install a Kenne Bell with AFPR, stock cam, and the J&S, and dyno it again after getting the air fuel looking ok.

This also should negate the need for injectors and a MAF at least initially. The 19# injectors will move a LOT more gas with proper AFPR setting.

Also, to reiterate more conflicting info, I have a friend who wants to sell me a bigger MAF and 24# injectors from a Vortech car that is already pushing some serious power and good track times (I forgotvthe numbers, will get them). If the price is REALLY cheap, I may try that as a step stone, can always sell them on corral and get the money back.

So no conclusions reached on MAF/Inj, Chip, EEC Tuners, and in fact there is still even the flowzilla vs cruise intake temps question! (is it POSSIBLE to make a DIY recirc? I have a turbo BOV around...hmmmm). Also no consensus on a good cam...

No concensus but much learning has happened.. so thank you guys about that...

Chris

7000 RPM

8th December 2002, 20:49

19lb injectors? On a blown motor? THAT will give new meaning to the term "blown". :rolleyes: Are you looking to run 90 psi of pressure thru those injectors? They'll shut down on you and that will be that..then you'll learn why so many people curse the 4 bolt head gasket set up.

24lbs is too small as well..Unless you are thinking of running 5lbs of boost. Perhaps that is what you should do until you can invest in a proper set up.

I'm not recommending the chip because of the power..I'm recommending it because there's a good chance your car will run like crap without it. Do you want a car that surges, runs rich, gets 8 mpg and doesn't feel much faster than what you've got? Spending $3000 on a blower and having the car run badly seems like a waste. You don't think you'll mind but trust me, it'll bother you.

The chip is about driveablilty as well as power. I had 300 rwhp but it felt like sh*t. After it was tuned with the chip it was a different car..and it wasn't due to the 30 rwhp, it was that the car ran so much better.

As far as cams go..try the Isky Stage 1 cam..210/218 @ .050", .500" lift but have it ground on a 114 LSA. I ran that cam on my Whipplecharged set up and made almost 400 rwhp with it. Driveability was excellent, it passed emissions and I don't recall it costing all that much. You can get it directly from Isky..but make sure you have it custom ground on a 114 LSA.

If you can spring for $325 consider getting a cam from Ed Curtis at www.flowtechinduction.com (http://www.flowtechinduction.com)

I would stay away from the C&L meters. They don't have the greatest reputation. Go with the Pro M Bullet for the money.

I sent it out to pro-m to recalibrated...and while they had it, they cut out the bridge. Now it is a true 80mm mas air.That's a very good way to go..especially if you can have it recalibrated after cutting out the bridge.

If you can contact Mike Wesley, that's the man to talk to. He's the one who set me up. His Calibrator is out on the market? Supposedly that was supposed to set a new standard as far as tuning devices went.

[ 08. December 2002, 23:46: Message edited by: redline7000 ]

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

9th December 2002, 13:10

Chris.
Yep..yep...as long as everything is up to snuuf...the 73mm mas air...70-75 mm Tb can put you there.

Another thought...I always wanted to try thr stock cam...but retard it 4m degress to grab some additional top end. I would think the bottom end would still be plenty healthy with the KB....another thread beater !

Johnb

7000 RPM

9th December 2002, 19:25

JohnB./CRUZ-MSL

10th December 2002, 09:45