2.3L TVS vs 2.9L Whipple

[Sinner]

Well guys like to focus on hp, tq is what we feel and love so with that in mind I like the tvs. The tq on the whipple really sucks and with proper fuel system both blower will make stupid power.

IMO torque is where it's at.


Side note... I'm putting DOB kit on my truck and I was first thinking of the 2.9 but will go with 2.3 tvs from gt500 most likely. If I don't get the 2.3 I'll but the 2.0 from earlier gt500 before I buy the whipple.

Both the 2.0 and 2.3 will last longer then the whipple before needed a rebuild as well.

 

[JG-1]

How does the DOB oem gt500 roots blower compare with the stage 3 vmp kit?

 

[Department Of Boost]

How does the DOB oem gt500 roots blower compare with the stage 3 vmp kit?

That's not an easy question to answer. It's not as simple as HP/$$$$. And the answer is directly related to your goals.

-What sort of power do you want to make?

-What fuel will you be running on? 93? e85?

-Will you be putting it on a car with stock exhaust or does it have LT's/off road/catback system on it?

-Is it a daily driver?

-Is it a street/strip car?

-Is it a pure drag car?

-Will you be going to the road course?

I can help you answer the question, but it's a complex one to answer.

 

[Pentalab]

Well guys like to focus on hp, tq is what we feel and love so with that in mind I like the tvs. The tq on the whipple really sucks and with proper fuel system both blower will make stupid power.

IMO torque is where it's at.


Side note... I'm putting DOB kit on my truck and I was first thinking of the 2.9 but will go with 2.3 tvs from gt500 most likely. If I don't get the 2.3 I'll but the 2.0 from earlier gt500 before I buy the whipple.

Both the 2.0 and 2.3 will last longer then the whipple before needed a rebuild as well.

If the tq is greater at low to mid rpms, then the hp at low to mid rpms will also be greater. If you increase the tq at say 3krpm by 20%, the hp will also increase by 20%....at the same 3krpm. If you know the hp vs entire rpm curve, you can derive the tq curve end to end...and vice versa. On some of these dyno graphs, you will see the hp barely increasing at the top end. The rpm is rising at a faster rate than the tq is falling off. Some curves depict loads of top end hp, but lack in low to midrange tq. Some will depict max hp that is numerically higher than the max tq..and by quite a margin. Some will depict max tq numbers that are slightly higher than the max hp numbers... typ on some 3v engines. On either the hp or tq curve, its the area beneath the curve that counts. Then we have the sales folks that like to cherry pick, and quote max tq at XXX rpm, then quote max hp at YYY rpm.

Your typ PD blower has almost a flat boost curve..vs a centri blower /turbo. If you want the instant tq hit, the pd is hard to beat..great for the street /dd. If you are a hardcore drag racer, max hp is what's plugged into the online calculator's...since they typ do 5k clutch dumps..or 5k stall converters etc..then redline it in every gear.

As far as the rebuild goes, the story I got was the screw blowers like the whipple require a rebuild a lot sooner than the roots /tvs blowers do. Ford used the 2.3 TVS in the 13/14 GT-500 cuz the tvs is ISO certified..ditto with the M122 on the 07-12 cars. The tvs /roots blowers are supposed to be good for at least 100K miles before the self contained oil is even changed out.

 

[Pentalab]

Well guys like to focus on hp, tq is what we feel and love so with that in mind I like the tvs. The tq on the whipple really sucks and with proper fuel system both blower will make stupid power.

IMO torque is where it's at.


Side note... I'm putting DOB kit on my truck and I was first thinking of the 2.9 but will go with 2.3 tvs from gt500 most likely. If I don't get the 2.3 I'll but the 2.0 from earlier gt500 before I buy the whipple.

Both the 2.0 and 2.3 will last longer then the whipple before needed a rebuild as well.

If the tq is greater at low to mid rpms, then the hp at low to mid rpms will also be greater. If you increase the tq at say 3krpm by 20%, the hp will also increase by 20%....at the same 3krpm. If you know the hp vs entire rpm curve, you can derive the tq curve end to end...and vice versa. On some of these dyno graphs, you will see the hp barely increasing at the top end. The rpm is rising at a faster rate than the tq is falling off. Some curves depict loads of top end hp, but lack in low to midrange tq. Some will depict max hp that is numerically higher than the max tq..and by quite a margin. Some will depict max tq numbers that are slightly higher than the max hp numbers... typ on some 3v engines. On either the hp or tq curve, its the area beneath the curve that counts. Then we have the sales folks that like to cherry pick, and quote max tq at XXX rpm, then quote max hp at YYY rpm.

Your typ PD blower has almost a flat boost curve..vs a centri blower. If you want the instant tq hit, the pd is hard to beat..great for the street /dd.

As far as the rebuild goes, the story I got was the screw blowers like the whipple require a rebuild a lot sooner than the roots /tvs blowers do. Ford used the 2.3 TVS in the 13/14 GT-500 cuz the tvs is ISO certified..ditto with the M122 on the 07-12 cars. The tvs /roots blowers are supposed to be good for at least 100K miles before the self contained oil is even changed out.

 

[BruceH]

Both the 2.0 and 2.3 will last longer then the whipple before needed a rebuild as well.

What is this statement based on? What was your experience?

 

[Department Of Boost]

What is this statement based on? What was your experience?

He's going off what I told him.

The TS blowers need more frequent rebuilds than the Eaton blowers do. I know Whipple, KB, etc claim that they have long service intervals. When TS blowers are run hard/often or spun real fast they need rebuilds fairly frequently. 10-20K miles.

Is seen a lot of people say thing s like "I run my car hard and I haven't had any problems". The thing is I have yet to see where one of those people has pulled the blower to inspect it. Or maybe they don't run it as hard as they think they do.

This is one of the reasons you don't see TS blowers in all but one OEM application.

For most hit rodders it's a non issue. The cars don't see the miles. But if I were knocking down 1000+mi/mo and was going to drive the car for 3+yrs I would much rather has a TVS screw.

 

[Sinner]

If the tq is greater at low to mid rpms, then the hp at low to mid rpms will also be greater. If you increase the tq at say 3krpm by 20%, the hp will also increase by 20%....at the same 3krpm. If you know the hp vs entire rpm curve, you can derive the tq curve end to end...and vice versa. On some of these dyno graphs, you will see the hp barely increasing at the top end. The rpm is rising at a faster rate than the tq is falling off. Some curves depict loads of top end hp, but lack in low to midrange tq. Some will depict max hp that is numerically higher than the max tq..and by quite a margin. Some will depict max tq numbers that are slightly higher than the max hp numbers... typ on some 3v engines. On either the hp or tq curve, its the area beneath the curve that counts. Then we have the sales folks that like to cherry pick, and quote max tq at XXX rpm, then quote max hp at YYY rpm.

Your typ PD blower has almost a flat boost curve..vs a centri blower. If you want the instant tq hit, the pd is hard to beat..great for the street /dd.

As far as the rebuild goes, the story I got was the screw blowers like the whipple require a rebuild a lot sooner than the roots /tvs blowers do. Ford used the 2.3 TVS in the 13/14 GT-500 cuz the tvs is ISO certified..ditto with the M122 on the 07-12 cars. The tvs /roots blowers are supposed to be good for at least 100K miles before the self contained oil is even changed out.

I agree

I'm simply stating on coyotes whipple is shitty for torque but makes big hp. The smaller tvs and eaton has much better torque numbers. If I remember correctly a loose example would a whipple at 600hp might be 450tq but tvs at 600hp would he 550tq.... These aren't exact numbers but are rough estimates.

 

[Department Of Boost]

I agree

I'm simply stating on coyotes whipple is shitty for torque but makes big hp. The smaller tvs and eaton has much better torque numbers. If I remember correctly a loose example would a whipple at 600hp might be 450tq but tvs at 600hp would he 550tq.... These aren't exact numbers but are rough estimates.

Some of this will be in how much the tuners blow boost off in the midrange to prevent detonation. But you're correct. I have seen a ton of examples where a 600rwhp Yote with a 2.9 is way out torqued by a 600rwhp Yote with a 2.3L TVS. I've seen these examples on the F-150's and GT500's. IDK if I have seen a back to back on a Mustang 5.0.

The 2.3 will have to spin faster to hit 600rwhp than the 2.9 will. That means the 2.3 spins faster sooner which = torque.

 

[Pentalab]

Some of this will be in how much the tuners blow boost off in the midrange to prevent detonation. But you're correct. I have seen a ton of examples where a 600rwhp Yote with a 2.9 is way out torqued by a 600rwhp Yote with a 2.3L TVS. I've seen these examples on the F-150's and GT500's. IDK if I have seen a back to back on a Mustang 5.0.

The 2.3 will have to spin faster to hit 600rwhp than the 2.9 will. That means the 2.3 spins faster sooner which = torque.

I keep hearing about tuners blowing off midrange boost....do they do it via tweaking valve overlap ? I have yet to see a dyno graph, where some boost is dumped in the midrange. Most boost vs rpm graphs are pretty flat, then a slight rise at the top end.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the...."spins faster sooner = torque" concept. Sure the TVS will have to spin faster, but the TVS also has less displacement ( 2.3 L per rev vs 2.9 L per rev). If the boost vs rpm graph is identical on both blowers, why would the TVS make more tq ?

 

[Pentalab]

He's going off what I told him.

The TS blowers need more frequent rebuilds than the Eaton blowers do. I know Whipple, KB, etc claim that they have long service intervals. When TS blowers are run hard/often or spun real fast they need rebuilds fairly frequently. 10-20K miles.

Is seen a lot of people say thing s like "I run my car hard and I haven't had any problems". The thing is I have yet to see where one of those people has pulled the blower to inspect it. Or maybe they don't run it as hard as they think they do.

This is one of the reasons you don't see TS blowers in all but one OEM application.

For most hit rodders it's a non issue. The cars don't see the miles. But if I were knocking down 1000+mi/mo and was going to drive the car for 3+yrs I would much rather has a TVS screw.

Having to rebuild a TS every 10-20 K miles is nuts. How do you know the TS requires rebuilding? Are the bearings shot at both ends ?

I see the latest version whipple 2.9 uses a front entry air intake...no more rear elbow. But it also uses a jack shaft running down the left side of the blower. Fead drives front blower pulley...that drives front end of jackshaft... and rear end of jackshaft drives the geartrain at rear of TS. The front air entry is a good idea, but adding the jackshaft to the mix may well be a few steps backwards. Edelbrock uses a front entry cai, but no jackshaft on their e force blowers.

 

[Boone]

If the boost vs rpm graph is identical on both blowers, why would the TVS make more tq ?

Compressors are designed with a "sweet spot." I'm not sure I snagged the correct charts for the blowers considered here, but in the two shown, you can see the TVS sweet spot comes in at lower RPMs than the Whipple TS. Efficiency is lost on the TVS at higher RPMs when the Whipple comes into its sweet spot.

You can also see on the charts where the optimal boost levels are for each compressor. My experience with this comes from facilities management and specification / purchasing of plant air compressors. Not the exact same, but similar concepts.

 

[Pentalab]

View attachment 57072

View attachment 57073

Compressors are designed with a "sweet spot." I'm not sure I snagged the correct charts for the blowers considered here, but in the two shown, you can see the TVS sweet spot comes in at lower RPMs than the Whipple TS. Efficiency is lost on the TVS at higher RPMs when the Whipple comes into its sweet spot.

You can also see on the charts where the optimal boost levels are for each compressor. My experience with this comes from facilities management and specification / purchasing of plant air compressors. Not the exact same, but similar concepts.

The whipple chart u posted is only a 1.6L unit. If you take the TVS's 'M3 per hr'... and divide by 60, you will get M3 per minute. The TVS will go to 40 when maxed out, the depicted whipple only goes to 22.
But I get your point. That TVS plot is using eatons blower housing. When the same 2.3 rotor pack is installed in a more eff casing like the VMP gen2 housing, the eff increases a bunch, way less rpm for a given boost level, and performance map looks different.

For a 600 crank hp eng, (aprx 528 rwhp) the aprx required airflow is 900 cfm = 11,000 rpm rotor pack speed. That puts the 2300 blower right smack in the middle of it's eff range..and with not a lot of boost required.

Between 6-14.7 psi boost, the TVS-2300 is very eff. If you ever see a TVS-1900 performance map, the dark blue islands are even bigger, it's quite a bit more eff over most of it's range... and suited for the 6-12 psi range, depending on volume required. The 2300 is just a lengthened 1900.

Too bad the TVS-3300 never went into production, it would have been just the ticket for the 20 psi crowd.

 

[santi_bh88]

The whipple chart u posted is only a 1.6L unit. If you take the TVS's 'M3 per hr'... and divide by 60, you will get M3 per minute. The TVS will go to 40 when maxed out, the depicted whipple only goes to 22.
But I get your point. That TVS plot is using eatons blower housing. When the same 2.3 rotor pack is installed in a more eff casing like the VMP gen2 housing, the eff increases a bunch, way less rpm for a given boost level, and performance map looks different.

For a 600 crank hp eng, (aprx 528 rwhp) the aprx required airflow is 900 cfm = 11,000 rpm rotor pack speed. That puts the 2300 blower right smack in the middle of it's eff range..and with not a lot of boost required.

Between 6-14.7 psi boost, the TVS-2300 is very eff. If you ever see a TVS-1900 performance map, the dark blue islands are even bigger, it's quite a bit more eff over most of it's range... and suited for the 6-12 psi range, depending on volume required. The 2300 is just a lengthened 1900.

Too bad the TVS-3300 never went into production, it would have been just the ticket for the 20 psi crowd.

Your taking about the supercharger but what about the Intercooler? The Intercooler from the m90 its really small compare than the 2300 tvs. Im rebuliding my engine With lower compresion With the New 1900tvs. The iats are always crazy

 

[Pentalab]

I'm talking about the generic TVS-1900... not the 1900 used in the VMP- M90 retrofit.
A smallish IC will still work, provided you stuff enough coolant through it fast enough, so it will extract more heat..... and also have a huge supply of cooler water. If the HE isn't big enough, the IC size and flow rate will be a moot point. The IC's job is to extract heat...and the HE's job is to dump the heat.
The IC in the M90 is identical to the IC in the 02/03 cobra..which used a M-112 blower.

Use a bigger pump, and a bigger HE, and your IAT's will drop a bit.

 

[Department Of Boost]

Your taking about the supercharger but what about the Intercooler? The Intercooler from the m90 its really small compare than the 2300 tvs. Im rebuliding my engine With lower compresion With the New 1900tvs. The iats are always crazy

IC size is a "thing" of course. Bigger being better. But in the grand scheme of things it's more about water getting in/out though. The IC doesn't remove the heat from the air charge, the water in the IC does. The IC simply transfers that heat to the water.

I can't remember the exact numbers off the top of my head, but these are close. I just helped a drift team out with their cars. They have big LS's with 4.5L Whipples. They run 20psi and make about 1350hp.

The Whipple LS manifold has a less than ideal IC core/brick. Not really that "small" but it's only a couple inches thick so the air charge has a very short "soak time". About half what most of the Mustang IC's have. It also has .625" fittings. It was running .75" lines.

We blew the IC fittings out to 1" and switched over to 1" lines. This increased water flow from 5.2gpm to 13.5gpm. Nothing else was changed.

IAT's went from 220-225deg to 140-145deg.

Water flow, Water flow, Water flow, Water flow, Water flow.........Water flow.

 

[santi_bh88]

IC size is a "thing" of course. Bigger being better. But in the grand scheme of things it's more about water getting in/out though. The IC doesn't remove the heat from the air charge, the water in the IC does. The IC simply transfers that heat to the water.

I can't remember the exact numbers off the top of my head, but these are close. I just helped a drift team out with their cars. They have big LS's with 4.5L Whipples. They run 20psi and make about 1350hp.

The Whipple LS manifold has a less than ideal IC core/brick. Not really that "small" but it's only a couple inches thick so the air charge has a very short "soak time". About half what most of the Mustang IC's have. It also has .625" fittings. It was running .75" lines.

We blew the IC fittings out to 1" and switched over to 1" lines. This increased water flow from 5.2gpm to 13.5gpm. Nothing else was changed.

IAT's went from 220-225deg to 140-145deg.

Water flow, Water flow, Water flow, Water flow, Water flow.........Water flow.

Thats why im wating for your New HE hehe. For when?????

 

[Department Of Boost]

Thats why im wating for your New HE hehe. For when?????

Fall

 

[santi_bh88]

Fall

Sweet!

 

[JG-1]

For those running the VMP stage 3 with E85, did you stay with a 82mm pulley? VMP said would have to upgrade to a return fuel system if wanting to run a 79mm pulley. Would it make sense to run the 79 while using E85 to take advantage of more boost?