kenne bell or turbo???.....

jstreet0204 · May 12, 2006

Stang|ess said:
B. They're actually more low to midrange with their sequential turbos.

+1 The twin sequential turbos on the supras and rx7's are not the same thing as true twin turbos.

a97mustang · May 12, 2006

Turbofreek,and as far as stupidcharger i hope that is not to say people with blowers are dumb cuz that could get nasty.and NO i dont plan to loose and if i do oh well it took you that much more money to beat me.and if i blow it up oh well ill be back BIGGER and BADDER.trust me.not to say turbos aint guick.but,anyway lets just stick with supercharger not stupidcharger.PEACE

turbofreek · May 12, 2006

a97mustang said:
Turbofreek,and as far as stupidcharger i hope that is not to say people with blowers are dumb cuz that could get nasty.and NO i dont plan to loose and if i do oh well it took you that much more money to beat me.and if i blow it up oh well ill be back BIGGER and BADDER.trust me.not to say turbos aint guick.but,anyway lets just stick with supercharger not stupidcharger.PEACE

nope didnt say they was dumb. just that superchargers are an easy way of getting boost(nofab required). and im saying to those same sc guys that just cuz you have boost imediately doesnt meen jack. an sc gets full boost at redline(except twin screw) compared to a turbos full boost from 2600 up to redline. and a kb will run out of steam up top unlike a centrifigal and turbo. and if your racing from stop light to stop light? whats full boost going to help you at 2k rpms compared to upper rpm range? nada thats where. i hope your not racing at 2k rpm?
and this post is for insight not a call out. ive got nothin to prove just trying to help explain the pros and cons. and with the argument/complaints it helps to see both sides. you have to choose whats better for you. not what others are trying to deligate is best.

EDGE Motorsport · May 12, 2006

if iwas building

a race car.. turbos are the way ahead, they dont use any engine power to make boost.. and you can get really stupid power from a good set up.. but you will get some lag, and if you get 25psi at 3500rpm its gonna break loose and cause issues !!

a street car... supercharger, bolt it on in you garage or driveway, if you get the KB it'll be quiker on the road in the RPM range youre likely to drive it. It will also make boost right down at low rpms, making it feel like a bigger torquier engine, theres a lot to be siad for instant torque....

so, TT for the strip KB for the street...

but again, this is just someones opinion, you're just gonna have to make your choice, pay your money and take your chance dude.... if my car didnt have the paxton on it already, id be looking at a KB2.2...

hope that helps you out a bit,,

EDGE

billfisher · May 12, 2006

forget kenne bell. get pro charger or turbo. single turbo works fine for most apps. a little lag, but who cares. use an auto with stall and the boost is maxxed off the line.

billfisher · May 12, 2006

sgarlic said:
A twin kit for 99-04 is $6300 direct from HP Performance. Full boosted, they push 1000+rwhp. They also include the suspension related pieces. They aren't tuner kits, they include injectors, MAF, chip, etc. Again, that's $6300. I priced them out locally, and found them for under 6.

A 9# KB costs what, 5 grand? And that's for 400ish rwhp. So bump it up to a 14psi and max out timing, then you're now pushing the limits of the supercharger, and still making not even 3/4 the power of a twin turbo kit that costs only a grand more.

This is how I reasoned myself in to picking the HP kit. If anything, its more appealing to me because not many people do it.

now THAT's the proper attitude. anyone can go fast with a kit or bolt-on. be different. turbos rule.

02LaserRed2V · May 12, 2006

I chose KB. I have no complaints.

I really don't need "1000hp" anyways. And how many ppl actually have the $$ for that?

tontot77 · May 13, 2006

stupidchargers are slow... sorry, I had to.

MarcoCapone · May 13, 2006

the only "stupid" here are those who think that they can throw a twin turbo kit and get 1200 rwhp.... God damn they are saying that the turbos can handle (or provide depending how you want to see it) up to 1200 rwhp they never said that your engine will support it...Anyways at this point (1000 rwhp++) we're talking about fully build race engine. And by the ways you can get 1000 rwhp++ with a supercharger too, so please stop with a$$ comment like stupidcharger and just says the advantage of what you think is the best instead of bashing on what other people think is the best 'cause this is really a ricer mind...

billfisher · May 13, 2006

MarcoCapone said:
the only "stupid" here are those who think that they can throw a twin turbo kit and get 1200 rwhp.... God damn they are saying that the turbos can handle (or provide depending how you want to see it) up to 1200 rwhp they never said that your engine will support it...Anyways at this point (1000 rwhp++) we're talking about fully build race engine. And by the ways you can get 1000 rwhp++ with a supercharger too, so please stop with a$$ comment like stupidcharger and just says the advantage of what you think is the best instead of bashing on what other people think is the best 'cause this is really a ricer mind...

first, there is no need to get personal.

second ever heard of dial a boost? common sense dictates a long block capable of handling the power. build it capable of 1200whp and dial the boost down for daily driving... once again only with turbos.

third... there are plenty here that like 1000+ whp. that's why we build them.

DropTopPony · May 13, 2006

turbofreek said:
nope didnt say they was dumb. just that superchargers are an easy way of getting boost(nofab required). and im saying to those same sc guys that just cuz you have boost imediately doesnt meen jack. an sc gets full boost at redline(except twin screw) compared to a turbos full boost from 2600 up to redline. and a kb will run out of steam up top unlike a centrifigal and turbo. and if your racing from stop light to stop light? whats full boost going to help you at 2k rpms compared to upper rpm range? nada thats where. i hope your not racing at 2k rpm?
and this post is for insight not a call out. ive got nothin to prove just trying to help explain the pros and cons. and with the argument/complaints it helps to see both sides. you have to choose whats better for you. not what others are trying to deligate is best.

The KB 2.2/2.4 has been proven to provide full boost and be quite efficient all the way up to redline. The older versions and 1.7 may tail off in the upper RPM's but the newer larger versions are more race oriented. I've seen some dyno's of cars out of MPH and those babies pull hard straight through. Just take a look at Jim Fitz's car. I'm sure he'll chime in eventually.
Now i'm not saying a KB is better then Turbo....just that the argument of them running out of steam compared to turbos and centi's doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

mogs01gt · May 13, 2006

Stang|ess said:
B. They're actually more low to midrange with their sequential turbos.

because a single setup on those cars have no low end and twins arent efficient on those engines.

C. How can you generalize and say "they mostly street race". What an ignorant thing to say mang. There are quite a few drag racing Supras, and one that I know of on the island running 10s.

well time to get into the real world and not the internet world. Single setups are for dyno queens and street racing. Anyone that wants to make real power on a V style engine will go twins. If most racing classes allowed for dual power adders, you would see a lot of twin setups.

I'm saying go single since we have a fairly large engine and have the low end power already.

What are you smoking? We have a large engines and produce low end power??? IF we produce low end power than why are gears some of the first mods people install?

jstreet0204 · May 13, 2006

mogs01gt said:
because a single setup on those cars have no low end and twins arent efficient on those engines.

You guys are comparing apples to oranges on those cars. Those cars are twin SEQUINTIAL. One small turbo that spools up quick then a larger turbo to take over in the higher rpms.

The twin turbos on a v engine is a completely different animal.

billfisher · May 13, 2006

this thread is going no where.

01Steeda · May 13, 2006

your right bill.

I prefer turbo's (if I had the money) but the KB is a beast of it's own right. Like I said if it were my money I would go twin turbo.

EDGE Motorsport · May 14, 2006

i guess it just depends what you want, you either want loads of low end torque from a KB or a shed load ot top end power from a turbo...

decisions decisions....

I have a centrifugal blower on mine and the car is fast, dont get me wrong, but i think id prefer a KB for that insatant toque at low rpms.. its just a shame the KB2.2 wont clear a stock hood...

EDGE

billfisher · May 14, 2006

auto with turbo = low end everything.

Gearbanger 101 · May 14, 2006

four.six said:
what do you all think about this turbo system?...

http://www.proturbokits.com/store/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=126

or should i just go with a kenne bell 1.7??

thanks for the input guys!!!!

Take into consideration the year of your car. The basic bones 1.7L kit for a '99-'01 Cobra is going to run you $4,500. Tack on another $300 if you want the upgrades. What's that get ya......5psi.....350rwhp if you're lucky!?!? That's a lot of cheese for that little performance. So...you pony up to the $6,800 for the intercooled version to finally make a little power.....and even still the 1.7L runs out of breath before 500rwhp on street gas.

There's always the 2.2L, but don't expect to do it for the $6,400 they advertise. You're now going to need to swap out to a complete 8-rib belt drive, upgrade your fuel system and change your hood....so expect to tack on another $2,000 minimum. And that's without the cost of forged internals.

For any purpose, either the single or twin turbo system is going to perform light years ahead of the Kenne Bell kit for this particular car, for any amount of money!

billfisher · May 14, 2006

what he said /\ /\ /\

hotmustang331 · May 14, 2006

You guys do realize that the guy has a 4V cobra right? The HP kit on that (and forged motor) would really make too much power...more than he needs (re 700+ with like 15psi) .
KB actually sells a 2.2KB kit for his car now for around 6K. It can produce WELL over 600RWHP on a forged engine, and just pully it for its minimum 9PSI and your stock motor will be fine. (around 450 @ 9PSI)

For a street car (M5), that 2.2KB kit will provide him PLENTY of power on his stock engine, AND his built one. I mean jeeze is 650RWHP not enough?

I vote for the 2.2KB kit for the 99-01 cobras.

Here is the deal, you go the turbo route when you want to make more power than the adverage supercharger can handle. If you want OVER 700 DUDE, then TURBO ALL THE WAY! If -700 then get the KB. Cheaper, no sudden spike of crazy power...safer for street use. Not to mention a turbo GT feels just like a stock/bolton (N/A) GT durring normal driving, where as a KB GT feels like a 500 CI muscle car durring part throttle with precise control over all the power.

kenne bell or turbo???.....

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

Do I look like a :taco: in this picture?

Member

Active Member

Noob Slayer

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

Member

Active Member

Straight Outta Locash

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency