LMAO. You think KB's are hand built from scratch? Dude.. Youre dreaming!

 

Johnny, I'll be doing that today. You can count on that. And I have no problem letting him know that some of his tactics, and responses (or lack there of), and even turning down this test are making him even more dis-credited (on top of his *bad service record*)

Steve asked some REALLY good questions:

Who did the testing?'
If it was a barebone 140, what makes that fair comapred to the *NEW* KB?
Who gave you this info?

And just to let you know Johnny, "why you over SO Many others are more Qualified and have the Righ facility and Equipment to Conduct The Right Test for the KB & 140," because, I'm not out to get a free blower, and I'm not out to make you/kb, or Sal/works look bad. I am out to get truth. And not only has it taken time to write KB, and try calling him, and getting in contact with WORKS, and arranging a place for testing to be done. Sure, SO many others could be calling KB, but I'm sitting on a 140 waiting for KB to step to the plate. Not only has WORKS said they'd supply one. But even Calightnin just mentioned he'd let me use his, off his own truck!

The KB rep can bring all his testing equipment, and so can WORKS, the a/f will be read and recorded. Like I said, Same everything. No variables. Hell, it doesn't have to be me. I've said this before, but when you have *real* world testing that just pops up and shows how much better *your* blower is than the others, I won't believe, and that's if it comes from you, Sal, WORKS, or KB . <--No side choosing, new concept for F150online.com!

 

To quote Jim Belle

"Unfortunately, the twin-screw was designed to be fed from the rear. The requirement of top feeding reduced the efficiency of the twin-screw design by as much as 10 percent according to tests run by Autorotor" Source can be found here... http://www.timskelton.com/lightning/...wed/page_9.htm

Info obtained on Tim Skeltons website.. And.. this article found there as well...



This is the same blower jim took pics of calling it a 166. Ford, Roush and the rest of the gang at Eaton realized it just wouldnt fit, therefore they scrapped it in favor of a top entry design. However.. It later re-appeared in Ala La 03 Cobra

and btw, the article says "the twin screw was designed for rear inlet". It has nothing to do with rotor profiles

 

I'm looking through the thread to see who said the KB's are built from scratch and can't find it? I think most of us know that KB, Works, Whipple, MagnaCharger, etc. all adapt blower.

 

LOL!! I think there is a new thread on blower drama every week LOL!!!!
Oh well I hope I can come up with my 500 bucks today for johnny..... I think I might put one of those KB's on hold...... or maybe the 140........ Or maybe even a 166... arnt they supposed to be out pretty soon??? LMAO!!!

 

WOW... 10% loss from a top entry quoted by Jim Belle? All this time we only thought it was 3-5%....

10% is alot IMO....

Thats like going from a 6lber back to a 2lber!!!

 

To quote you

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 99svtlightning
Works may only have two 140's...do you not think there are other barebone blowers out there that haven't been adapted yet? Works is only taking a blower and adapting it, they don't build them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


With that comment.. you have mine. Thats how quoting works. You imply that Works are the only hand adapted blowers. Youre misleading people with KB marketing.

 

If the test was done on a supercharger test bench that not only test MAF and inlet/outlet temps but has the ability to record power consumption, I don't know why it is so unbelievable.

A test like this would show the differences between the top entry and rear entry as plain as day. The next big test would be with intake manifolds installed. And then after that a real world test on a truck.....one truck. I don't think you will see a test like that until the blowers are actually on the streets and then it will probably be done be one of the independent clubs like HALO, they are large and well organized and believable.

I dont think Johnny is trying to do a Vulcan Mind Meld on anybody when he says the blower is "NEW". I think that just means what it says. Bringing up the fact that Jim Bell claims a 10% reduction in efficiency for a top entry is bringin up old facts, and Jim for once in his life "may have" over stated his case.

They have a new blower and it might not be that bad IMHO.

Sorry.....just calls'em like I sees'em

Dale

 

I guess you can take it two different ways...what I meant was:
Don't you think that there are other blowers produced, exactly like the one that Works is adapting, elsewhere in the world. Sorry if it wasn't clear. Actually, I would rather imply that KB doesn't handcraft the blowers. They are mass produced industrial strength and quality blowers.

 

Although I have gotten a few good responses, I'm not sure I'm explaining myself right,so I'll try it again.

Take a twin screw blower and cut it off at the rear of the rotor packs. Now add a plenum on the back side of it. This should cause the blower to be rear fed. Now cut a hole in any side of the plenum and add your intake to feed it. I know this is a stupid way to explain it, but would there still be a difference (without going in to bends and such)? I look at it that they are still rear fed this way,correct??

Thanks Mike

 

I get you now Mike. If the sides of the rotors were not exposed to the stream of incoming air and completely encased, then you would be correct.

 

Hmm, well Mike i can ask Chris and see what he says. He is a full blown engineer and is a master at moving air. If your interested, ill ask him for you.

But you also have VERY little room to work with back there and there is a specific amount of incoming aiflow required to feed the blower. I myself dont know this # but i know there is one that exist. The more even and straight the airflow is, the better. You dont want to choke the intake whatsoever.. If you had more room, something like this could be made and tested to see if there were any gains. I was able to figure out what you were talking about.

 

Mike
The issue with the top feed is that a small amount of the rotor pack is in the airway path or another way to say it is if you look down into the the intake portion of the KB blower you can see the rotors exposed. It looks exactly the same on the 112 Eaton on our trucks. This exposed section of rotor is supposed to raise hell with incoming air, sort of like air being flung off of the tips of a fan blade in a radial fashen.
The rear entry has its rotor pack enclosed by the case so there is no radial flinging of the entry air.

This is all bench racing in my opinion and I would suspect the theory as being slightly blown out of proportion.

Somebody mentioned that the top entry eaton m112 maxes out at around 18 lb of boost on a Lightning but that the rear entry m112 on the cobra will go to 22 lbs of boost. I would just like to point out that there is also a 50 cubic inch difference between the engine sizes.

I just want to see a level playing field guys.

Dale

 

Glad I was able to explain myself finally. Yes I would be interested in knowing the answer if you can find out. I wish I could've drawn what I was trying to say.

Thanks Mike

 

As for which of the 2 blowers is better, really the only people that should care about that is those who want the absolute best times for racing.

No matter how you look at it, either of these blowers will be a great upgrade for anyone thats want alot more power/potential. It all depends on your needs.