• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-

Kenne Bell or Centrifugal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Boosted92LX
  • Start date Start date Jun 7, 2011
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
First Prev 5 of 5

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jun 13, 2011
#81
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #81
2000xp8 said:
When i'm tired of a topic or have no interest in debating or contributing anymore, i simply click "unsubscribe".

Not sure why people spend the time or energy multiple times in the same thread to let us know with corny animations or linked pictures that they aren't interested anymore.
By definition, not responding lets us know.
Click to expand...

Comic relief?
 

tannerc91gt

This last 25% is foreign territory at this point
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
4,392
2,967
234
Indiana
Jun 13, 2011
#82
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #82
Seems like a lot of money to wrap up in a 347 with a PD blower when a 351w based motor can make the same if not more power NA...

I'm all about being different and trying new things but at the same time theres no sense spending the money to make less power


PD = mod motors
Centri = pushrods
/thread
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jun 13, 2011
#83
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #83
2000xp8 said:
Let's be realistic, you can only spin a supercharger so fast, that's why companies make different models, unfortunately the 2.1 is the max for a pushrod engine for KB. I've seen 347 engines NA with race blocks at around 480rwhp, i doubt the kb is going to go too much further than that on a 363. Making the entire supercharger setup worthless. Naturally aspirated power for aspirated money isn't on my top ten list of things to do. A dart block 363 should really be good for almost 500rwhp by itself.

On the other hand, had his supercharger been a Ysi or D1, pretty much the sky is the limit, 650rwhp is no sweat for those superchargers.
Click to expand...

Yes, let’s be realistic.

Modular guys have made 450-500hp with Kenne Bell’s older, smaller 1.7L Autorotor with only 281ci of displacement and a hard spun demeanor. So it’s really not so hard to believe that 500hp+ is easily attainable with the larger 2.1L and another 60 cubic inches backing it.....and let’s not forget the astronomical amounts of torque that accompany it.

That’s BTW without excessive cam profiles, huge displacement heads/intakes and single digit fuel economy.
Of course heat is going to be an issue at those power levels….but so too will it be an issue with any of the aforementioned centrifugal superchargers as well. Owners have always got the option of water/meth injection in both cases. There’s no doubt that a properly sized centrifugal has the capability of reaching greater horsepower and even greater peak torque heights than the Kenne Bell. But the horsepower and torque levels under the curve aren’t going to be anywhere near as stout.

Different strokes, for different folks. I’m not out build dyno queens and win horsepower contests. I am however interested in the most fun you could have in a street car and the ability to blaze the tires at will. Nobody is running against the clocks every minute of every day while driving their cars, but they’re always looking for ways to improve drivability. Adding copious amounts of torque across the board is an excellent start.
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jun 13, 2011
#84
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #84
tannerc91gt said:
Seems like a lot of money to wrap up in a 347 with a PD blower when a 351w based motor can make the same if not more power NA...

I'm all about being different and trying new things but at the same time theres no sense spending the money to make less power
Click to expand...
There's no doubt that a big inch 351W based stroker has the greater power potential, but not everyone wants to add the extra 70-80lbs to the nose of their car, swap out their mounts exhaust, drivetrain components, sacrifice hood clearance, etc, etc in order to make up the torque deficency of the stock 302 HO.

tannerc91gt said:
PD = mod motors
Centri = pushrods
/thread
Click to expand...
By all means....hang tight to that narrow minded perspective.
 

wythors

Get off my lawn!!!
Founding Member
May 17, 2000
2,277
35
69
C Addle
Jun 13, 2011
#85
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #85
2000xp8 said:
When i'm tired of a topic or have no interest in debating or contributing anymore, i simply click "unsubscribe".

Not sure why people spend the time or energy multiple times in the same thread to let us know with corny animations or linked pictures that they aren't interested anymore.
By definition, not responding lets us know.
Click to expand...

Because "why don't you STFU already" is rude and I like corny animations.

You and a few other people are rehashing the same points over and over and over and over again, not convincing anybody of anything. Both types of product have their places and do what they say they'll do. Just because other people have a difference of opinion is not a valid reason to harp on and on. Some people like centrifugal blowers for their cars and others like twin screws for their cars. Like religion or politics, no amount of posting is going to change the other's opinion here, so what's the point? What are you accomplishing? The OP's original question was "which one would you buy", not "convince me which one sucks" or "tell everybody that responds why they're wrong". The OP's question was answered several pages ago. This is the internet. You'll never win the argument. Let it go.
 

FastDriver

I was uncomfortably high & wearing a helmet
SN Certified Technician
Sep 5, 2001
6,100
2,710
224
Vass, NC
Jun 13, 2011
#86
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #86
What?@!!! Someone is wrong....... ON THE INTERNET!?!?!

Everyone knows I love to argue, and I understand how hard it is to let things go sometimes. I have to agree with you, though, wythors.
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,029
1,620
194
NJ
Jun 13, 2011
#87
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #87
wythors said:
Because "why don't you STFU already" is rude and I like corny animations.

You and a few other people are rehashing the same points over and over and over and over again, not convincing anybody of anything. Both types of product have their places and do what they say they'll do. Just because other people have a difference of opinion is not a valid reason to harp on and on. Some people like centrifugal blowers for their cars and others like twin screws for their cars. Like religion or politics, no amount of posting is going to change the other's opinion here, so what's the point? What are you accomplishing? The OP's original question was "which one would you buy", not "convince me which one sucks" or "tell everybody that responds why they're wrong". The OP's question was answered several pages ago. This is the internet. You'll never win the argument. Let it go.
Click to expand...

If you feel that way, why do you keep reading this post? I don't get it.
Let us neanderthals rehash the same crap over and over and enjoy ourselves.
 

tannerc91gt

This last 25% is foreign territory at this point
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
4,392
2,967
234
Indiana
Jun 13, 2011
#88
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #88
It's called a generalization Brian. Obviously there's an exception to every rule. I just figured if I summed up the last 4 pages of arguing we could move on to more important things like "should I buy this gt40 intake" and "will this B cam get me into the 9s"





 

gt40_2003wes

I did sound a wee bit gay there.
Aug 14, 2005
461
2
48
ky
Jun 13, 2011
#89
  • Jun 13, 2011
  • #89
here i shall solve the problem NA>SC
 

bentley429isBAC

10 Year Member
Jul 23, 2009
922
188
84
CT
Jun 14, 2011
#90
  • Jun 14, 2011
  • #90
gt40_2003wes said:
here i shall solve the problem NA>SC
Click to expand...

Yea that is surely the answer....
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jun 14, 2011
#91
  • Jun 14, 2011
  • #91
Stumbled across this on "that other" website. It's an '84 4-door LTD with a junk 5.0 shortblock, some Trick Flow top end parts, and a used Eaton M112 supercharger at 10lbs boost. It ran low 11s before the shortblock came apart (ate a piston). The owner seems pretty confident that it has 10s in it with a fresh bottom end and a better tune, and I don't doubt it from what I've seen.

What say you?!



 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Jun 14, 2011
#92
  • Jun 14, 2011
  • #92
I say bad....ass!!!!!
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,029
1,620
194
NJ
Jun 14, 2011
#93
  • Jun 14, 2011
  • #93
NikwoaC said:
Stumbled across this on "that other" website. It's an '84 4-door LTD with a junk 5.0 shortblock, some Trick Flow top end parts, and a used Eaton M112 supercharger at 10lbs boost. It ran low 11s before the shortblock came apart (ate a piston). The owner seems pretty confident that it has 10s in it with a fresh bottom end and a better tune, and I don't doubt it from what I've seen.

What say you?!



Click to expand...

While i've seen the m112 adapted to a pushrod engine, it wasn't a pretty sight.
That one actually looks pretty good.
It's a shame nobody makes a kit, since cobra superchargers only have about a $300 value.
 

tannerc91gt

This last 25% is foreign territory at this point
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
4,392
2,967
234
Indiana
Jun 15, 2011
#94
  • Jun 15, 2011
  • #94
I watched that build a while back. Looks good, wonder how efficient it is that way. It's always cool to see something different though
 

NIKwoaC

中國製造
15 Year Member
Oct 31, 2006
5,525
943
214
Chengdu Province
Jun 15, 2011
#95
  • Jun 15, 2011
  • #95
It makes me wonder what you could do with a carb style EFI intake. You'd have a lot more room under the hood. I'd like to see that with an air/air intercooler.
 

N8Dogg98

15 Year Member
Apr 4, 2005
3,872
238
184
MN
Jun 15, 2011
#96
  • Jun 15, 2011
  • #96
2000xp8 said:
If you feel that way, why do you keep reading this post? I don't get it.
Let us neanderthals rehash the same crap over and over and enjoy ourselves.
Click to expand...









 

ViperPunk

Member
Jul 30, 2010
195
1
18
idaho
Jun 15, 2011
#97
  • Jun 15, 2011
  • #97
that is an awesome looking combo!
 

smokin joe

Founding Member
Sep 30, 2000
746
45
49
Dallas,TX
Jun 16, 2011
#98
  • Jun 16, 2011
  • #98
SSeater said:
NOT a drag car! Don't get me wrong, I love 'em. I just want a powerful road car. One I can drive to work on Friday, or on weekends, but would do well in say, an entry level (or higher) Silver State Classic class.

I've done drag cars, all carbed. This is the newest fox I've owned and I want to keep the air conditioning, turn corners, and haul it down the highway. With boost.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to come across like an @ss. Based On what you have described I would go with the centri.

I do have to say that LTD is an interesting hybrid though.
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
First Prev 5 of 5
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SN Mustang Magnum T56 swap
  • revhead347
  • May 24, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
15
Views
6K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2026
GearHeadGuy
B
03 GT Forged Internals info ect.
  • Borla2K3
  • Jan 24, 2019
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
1
Views
2K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jan 25, 2019
Dark04GT
M
Progress Thread Monkeybutt2000's 89 vert build thread- 408w build in progress
  • Monkeybutt2000
  • Apr 4, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 20 21 22
Replies
437
Views
68K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 20, 2026
2Blue2
Edelbrock Or Vmp Supercharger? Help Me Pick
  • ras50gt
  • Jul 20, 2017
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
2K
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- Jul 20, 2017
ras50gt
R
Kenne Belle Build
  • Redfire93
  • Oct 3, 2016
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
842
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Oct 3, 2016
Redfire93
R
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
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?