• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

KB versus Novi 2000 - which is better for cold weather, cold startups?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ghost001
  • Start date Start date Aug 3, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last

MT1083

New Member
Sep 16, 2003
1,033
0
0
Charlotte, NC
Aug 5, 2005
#21
  • Aug 5, 2005
  • #21
I have started mine in the teens with no problems.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 5, 2005
#22
  • Aug 5, 2005
  • #22
MT1083 said:
I have started mine in the teens with no problems.
Click to expand...

Good. Thanks MT!
 
2

2000BLKGT

Founding Member
May 24, 2001
361
0
0
Toronto
Aug 6, 2005
#23
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #23
Ghost001 said:
Does anyone else out there drive their centri or KB Stang in the winter?

Have you cold-started it in temps below 25 degrees Fahrenheit?
Click to expand...

We've got a guy up here in the Niagara region that runs his intercooled KB 24/7. Beats the ever-loving $h!t out of his ride...never heard him complain. She's a daily driver for him...and that's all.

My car won't leave the garage if there's a chance of rain...and she's stored from November through March/April generally.

I did take the car out in March of this year...around -3 celcius...we put her in a big indoor hot rod show...not that I drove the car much...out of the garage...into the race trailer...out of the trailer into the show...etc. No problem whatsoever.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#24
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #24
2000BLKGT said:
We've got a guy up here in the Niagara region that runs his intercooled KB 24/7. Beats the ever-loving $h!t out of his ride...never heard him complain. She's a daily driver for him...and that's all.

My car won't leave the garage if there's a chance of rain...and she's stored from November through March/April generally.

I did take the car out in March of this year...around -3 celcius...we put her in a big indoor hot rod show...not that I drove the car much...out of the garage...into the race trailer...out of the trailer into the show...etc. No problem whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Thanks, 2000!

Sounds like the KB doesn't mind cold weather.

I think I'm going to try to get a 2.2, somehow...

If not, then a 1.7 for sure.
 
2

2000BLKGT

Founding Member
May 24, 2001
361
0
0
Toronto
Aug 6, 2005
#25
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #25
Ghost001 said:
Thanks, 2000!

Sounds like the KB doesn't mind cold weather.

I think I'm going to try to get a 2.2, somehow...

If not, then a 1.7 for sure.
Click to expand...

If you're going with the 2.2...better get out the $$$ and do the internals at the same time....you'll need an aftermarket hood too.

Saw a 2.2 or a 2.4 on an '03/04 Cobra recently...it's a big mofo...makes my 1.7 look tiny
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#26
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #26
2000BLKGT said:
If you're going with the 2.2...better get out the $$$ and do the internals at the same time....you'll need an aftermarket hood too.

Saw a 2.2 or a 2.4 on an '03/04 Cobra recently...it's a big mofo...makes my 1.7 look tiny
Click to expand...

I've got the aftermarket hood.

What I hope to do, is to install the 2.2 with my stock engine. I'll use a large pulley, so that it puts out about 400 horsepower on pump gas.

Then, when my engine dies, which hopefully will be 10 years from now, I'll get a forged short block, and then crank up the boost!

In fact, here's someone with the same idea, except he's using 94 octane (I'm stuck with 91 in Cally), and his is not a daily driver:

http://www.modularfords.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33025
 

02LaserRed2V

New Member
Jul 30, 2004
379
1
0
Augusta, GA
Aug 6, 2005
#27
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #27
If you're planning on going that route, then suggest you buy from KB direct. KB won't allow their dealers to sell the 2.2s to ppl who don't have a built motor.

Also, keep in mind, KB 1.7L 6 PSI is not the same as 2.2L 6 PSI. Even low boost levels with the 2.2L may prove to be much on a stock block.
 

jstreet0204

Active Member
Jun 26, 2003
939
0
36
Winston Salem, NC
Aug 6, 2005
#28
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #28
02LaserRed2V said:
Also, keep in mind, KB 1.7L 6 PSI is not the same as 2.2L 6 PSI. Even low boost levels with the 2.2L may prove to be much on a stock block.
Click to expand...

Do they use a different lower intake with the 2.2? If so I would agree with that, but if they use the same lower intake, intercooler etc., I think the same boost levels would have about the same effect on the motor, other than the fact that the 2.2 will build it faster.
 

ADRENLN

Active Member
Apr 16, 2003
2,342
3
49
NJ
Aug 6, 2005
#29
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #29
geeez! i hear of kb having trouble in hot weather, now centri are having trouble in cold weather.......i dont know which is worse to deal with. i think im still going novi....jersey shouldnt get that cold
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Aug 6, 2005
#30
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #30
Do they use a different lower intake with the 2.2? If so I would agree with that, but if they use the same lower intake, intercooler etc., I think the same boost levels would have about the same effect on the motor, other than the fact that the 2.2 will build it faster.
Click to expand...
Actually, pullied for 6psi the 1.7 will walk all over the 2.2. The 2.2 wasn't mean to run in the 6psi range. Hell, even the 1.7 is running inefficiently below 9-10psi and the 2.2 is going to be exponentially worse, the 2.2 is actually far better running at 18psi than it is at 6psi. A 2.2 running at 6psi would be so inefficient and put out such high ACT’s it's not even funny. Don't bother buying it now, if you're not able to build the engine for this blower to run at it’s intended potential at the same time. You've got to rip it all out again to build the long block anyway to withstand the power, so why waste the time, effort and run around with sub-par performance in the mean time just to tell people you’ve got a 2.2 under the hood?

The 1.7 is more than enough blower for most people. If you want to make 400hp, then buy a blower than meant to make 400hp. Buying a blower that’s too big is every bit as bad as buying a blower that’s too small.
 

03trubluGT

New Member
Nov 19, 2002
1,067
0
0
Mansfield, TX
Aug 6, 2005
#31
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #31
Just think of this. I have NEVER heard of someone running a blown engine for 10 years.


You will be rebuilding it before the 10 years, hell, probably after 3-4...

Matt
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#32
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #32
Gearbanger 101 said:
Actually, pullied for 6psi the 1.7 will walk all over the 2.2. The 2.2 wasn't mean to run in the 6psi range. Hell, even the 1.7 is running inefficiently below 9-10psi and the 2.2 is going to be exponentially worse, the 2.2 is actually far better running at 18psi than it is at 6psi. A 2.2 running at 6psi would be so inefficient and put out such high ACT’s it's not even funny. Don't bother buying it now, if you're not able to build the engine for this blower to run at it’s intended potential at the same time. You've got to rip it all out again to build the long block anyway to withstand the power, so why waste the time, effort and run around with sub-par performance in the mean time just to tell people you’ve got a 2.2 under the hood?

The 1.7 is more than enough blower for most people. If you want to make 400hp, then buy a blower than meant to make 400hp. Buying a blower that’s too big is every bit as bad as buying a blower that’s too small.
Click to expand...

What's an "ACT"? After Cooler Temperature?

The reason I'd like the 2.2, is so that, when I finally do get a forged short block, I won't have to buy another supercharger.

Do you think that it would be difficult or impossible to pulley the 2.2 so that it gets 400-425 rwhp on 91 octane?
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Aug 6, 2005
#33
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #33
Ghost001 said:
What's an "ACT"? After Cooler Temperature?

The reason I'd like the 2.2, is so that, when I finally do get a forged short block, I won't have to buy another supercharger.

Do you think that it would be difficult or impossible to pulley the 2.2 so that it gets 400-425 rwhp on 91 octane?
Click to expand...
ACT stands for "Air Charge Temperature", which will skyrocket with a 2.2 pullied for only a measly 6psi of boost. That's like using a sledge-hammer to kill an ant. Yeah, it will get the job done, but it's still not the right tool for the job and it's gonna make more of a mess than anything!

No, it wouldn't be impossible to do, but a 1.7KB is able to do it just as easily and will cost you less and performe better in the lower ranges to boot. If you've already got all of the required intake and exhaust bolt-ons, you should easily see it with 9-10psi with a 1.7. Either way, you're gonna want to start looking for a forged short block for anything much more than 400rwhp.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#34
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #34
Gearbanger 101 said:
ACT stands for "Air Charge Temperature", which will skyrocket with a 2.2 pullied for only a measly 6psi of boost. That's like using a sledge-hammer to kill an ant. Yeah, it will get the job done, but it's still not the right tool for the job and it's gonna make more of a mess than anything!

No, it wouldn't be impossible to do, but a 1.7KB is able to do it just as easily and will cost you less and performe better in the lower ranges to boot. If you've already got all of the required intake and exhaust bolt-ons, you should easily see it with 9-10psi with a 1.7. Either way, you're gonna want to start looking for a forged short block for anything much more than 400rwhp.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm. You're making a good argument for the 1.7.

If the 1.7 would perform better at low rpm than the 2.2, then maybe I should get the 1.7.

And, of course, the 1.7 is Cally legal, and the 2.2 is not.

And, if the 2.2 would cost a lot more than the 1.7, even with the stock short block, then that is another point in favor of the 1.7.

It would be interesting to see what kind of torque curve someone gets with a 2.2 on a stock short block on 91 octane.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Aug 6, 2005
#35
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #35
Ghost001 said:
Hmmmm. You're making a good argument for the 1.7.

If the 1.7 would perform better at low rpm than the 2.2, then maybe I should get the 1.7.

And, of course, the 1.7 is Cally legal, and the 2.2 is not.

And, if the 2.2 would cost a lot more than the 1.7, even with the stock short block, then that is another point in favor of the 1.7.

It would be interesting to see what kind of torque curve someone gets with a 2.2 on a stock short block on 91 octane.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to imply that the 2.2 won't perform well at lower boost levels or engine RPM under any circumstances. Quite frankly, the 2.2 could be made to rock and roll passed the 1.7 all the way through until redline, but only if pullied for it.

I'll try to explain it......You can take a 2.2, pulley it for 18-20psi and have it make power like mad up past 6psi on it's way to peek blower RPM (in this case 18-20psi), since the step-up ratio for the 2.2 has now changed dramatically in it's favor with the smaller pulley and it spends nearly no time at the 6psi level, to spoil the charge.....but now you've got to contend with the rage and chaos it's gonna bring to the stock internals when it hits peek blower RPM. But, if they were both pullied to see 6psi, and were made to compare to one and other again, then the 2.2 wouldn't bode nearly as well, since the 2.2 is now forced to saturate itself at a level that it was never meant to run at for long periods of time in the first place and now causes it and the volume of air it produces to heat up dramatically as a result. The 1.7 will perform better at such a low pulley speed, because it creates less heat at this level. Do you kinda understand what I'm saying?

Any way you slice it, the Build is probably going to nearly triple between the two. A member of this board "GIJoe" has the 2.2KB on his GT and if memory serves, he sank a pretty substantial amount of money into it, to finally get it running. There are so many little considerations that aren't initially though of, it doesn't take long to break the bank. The 1.7 will suport in the 500rwhp range with 14psi and bolt ons, which is pretty substantial when you really think about it. That's enough power to see high-10's and way more than 95% of us on this board are seeing!
 

forpit2000gt

Founding Member
Jun 30, 2002
2,490
0
0
Columbia, SC
Aug 6, 2005
#36
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #36
I don't know how much you will race the car but even with 400 rwhp you will need some suspension mods that may make the car a little less fun to drive everyday if you are trying for 11s. 400 hp to the ground in a car you can drive anywhere that handles and feels like stock, except really fast is pretty sick. That can be a low 12 sec High 11 street car. I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun to have 600 one day or that the car won't be very streetable, just other parts that start needing upgraded too if you want it to hook and not tear up driveline. We all mant more but that is a lot of pwer.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#37
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #37
Gearbanger 101 said:
I'm not trying to imply that the 2.2 won't perform well at lower boost levels or engine RPM under any circumstances. Quite frankly, the 2.2 could be made to rock and roll passed the 1.7 all the way through until redline, but only if pullied for it.

I'll try to explain it......You can take a 2.2, pulley it for 18-20psi and have it make power like mad up past 6psi on it's way to peek blower RPM (in this case 18-20psi), since the step-up ratio for the 2.2 has now changed dramatically in it's favor with the smaller pulley and it spends nearly no time at the 6psi level, to spoil the charge.....but now you've got to contend with the rage and chaos it's gonna bring to the stock internals when it hits peek blower RPM. But, if they were both pullied to see 6psi, and were made to compare to one and other again, then the 2.2 wouldn't bode nearly as well, since the 2.2 is now forced to saturate itself at a level that it was never meant to run at for long periods of time in the first place and now causes it and the volume of air it produces to heat up dramatically as a result. The 1.7 will perform better at such a low pulley speed, because it creates less heat at this level. Do you kinda understand what I'm saying?

Any way you slice it, the Build is probably going to nearly triple between the two. A member of this board "GIJoe" has the 2.2KB on his GT and if memory serves, he sank a pretty substantial amount of money into it, to finally get it running. There are so many little considerations that aren't initially though of, it doesn't take long to break the bank. The 1.7 will suport in the 500rwhp range with 14psi and bolt ons, which is pretty substantial when you really think about it. That's enough power to see high-10's and way more than 95% of us on this board are seeing!
Click to expand...

I think I see the plausibility of your argument. If the 1.7 and 2.2 are both run at 9 psi and 91 octane, then the 1.7 might have more torque in the lower rpm ranges, because the 1.7 is optimized to run at 9 psi and 91 octane, while the 2.2 is optimized to run at 15 or 20 psi and 100 octane.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#38
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #38
forpit2000gt said:
I don't know how much you will race the car but even with 400 rwhp you will need some suspension mods that may make the car a little less fun to drive everyday if you are trying for 11s. 400 hp to the ground in a car you can drive anywhere that handles and feels like stock, except really fast is pretty sick. That can be a low 12 sec High 11 street car. I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun to have 600 one day or that the car won't be very streetable, just other parts that start needing upgraded too if you want it to hook and not tear up driveline. We all mant more but that is a lot of pwer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 400 rwph on 91 octane and 9 psi on the street, and 500 rwhp on 100 octane and 14 psi at the track, is a crazy amount of power.

I'm wondering if the 2.2 would get 400 rwhp on 91 octane and 9 psi on the street (with the same torque curve as the 1.7), and maybe 600 rwhp on 100 octane and 15-20 psi at the track, for roughly the same amount of money.

Assuming in both cases that you have a forged short block.
 
G

Ghost001

New Member
Dec 9, 2002
398
1
0
California
Aug 6, 2005
#39
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #39
ADRENLN said:
geeez! i hear of kb having trouble in hot weather, now centri are having trouble in cold weather.......i dont know which is worse to deal with. i think im still going novi....jersey shouldnt get that cold
Click to expand...

Really, the KB has trouble in hot weather?

What kind of trouble?
 

forpit2000gt

Founding Member
Jun 30, 2002
2,490
0
0
Columbia, SC
Aug 6, 2005
#40
  • Aug 6, 2005
  • #40
Example, 450 rwhp and sticky tires can get you to the high 11s, provided you get traction. To get traction you need front and rear suspension mods. At a point, with some of these mods you change the ride of your car to more track friendly than street friendly. Plus you are at a point where you need a roll cage. That alone makes the car a whole lot less friendly for a night on the town( with a female anyways) You will also need to start looking at the drivetrain. Stock will not take what you can do to it. really depends on what you expect out of the car. If you just want a dyno queen, forge the block and put a 2.2 on it and leave the comforts alone.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
'99 Novi 2000 Intercooled entire kit
  • DisposableHero
  • Nov 10, 2009
  • Engine and Power Adder Parts
Replies
0
Views
1K
Engine and Power Adder Parts Nov 10, 2009
DisposableHero
stangnet's 1/8 and 1/4 mile times
  • Winters98GT
  • Nov 8, 2007
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
40
Views
9K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Dec 22, 2007
Winters98GT
J
I'm Starting the Big Fat KB Thread.
  • johnnyvista
  • Sep 6, 2004
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
19
Views
1K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Sep 8, 2004
stallion98gt
if you put a non aftercooled blower on, respond!
  • Defleshed
  • Jun 13, 2004
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
12
Views
1K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jun 14, 2004
2002BLGT
2
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?