Homepage Garage Wiki Register Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Forced Induction Discussions


Gen5DIY


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-17-2019, 12:36 PM   #29
V8RWD
 
V8RWD's Avatar
 
Drives: 2017 Camaro SS 50th
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Canada
Posts: 118
So no intercooler.... that is interesting. Any heat issues?
V8RWD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 01:21 PM   #30
laynlo15
 
laynlo15's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 1ss A8, Npp
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: clark, mo
Posts: 5,338
Yes there are intercoolers, two large bricks on each side and heat exchanger (LTR) up front as the 2300 Heartbeat has.
__________________
2016 Camaro 6.2, Magnuson 2650 Heartbreaker, RotoFab, Manley, Livernois cam, stock heads trans/converter/diff. Kentshotrodgarage (M/T,Hoosier, Racestar Wheels), RPM RB, DSS, Gforce, Griptec Pulley Best 9.41@146 Best MPH 149 1/4, 5.99@119 Best MPH 120 Best 60' 1.35. RWHP? Just a little Magnuson Employee/Driver
laynlo15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 02:39 PM   #31
toohighpsi
 
Drives: 2015 C7 Z06 M7
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLT1 View Post
I just don't care for the torque that it gives up for a street car. Sure at WOT above 5k rpm it definitely makes more steam, but when you are part throttle torqueing the engine through the gears I don't see an advantage here. Midrange is very important imo for a street car. If only this unit was keeping the torque up around 570 avg while still pulling 600whp.

Sorry for my delay and not providing this plot initially, the 2650 make more torque everywhere on the base LT1 than the TVS2300 did, as you know, every dyno is different so here are all 3 runs on the same dyno plotted together.

Stock Camaro LT1 (417 RWHP)
TVS2300 Camaro LT1 with Magnuson CARB Cal (553 RWHP)
TVS2650 Camaro LT1 with CARB Proposed Cal (600 RWHP)

As you can see it gives a nice torque benefit across the range and then keeps pulling up top.

Name:  All Runs TVS Camaro.png
Views: 565
Size:  79.0 KB

Now there is no question that the 2300 is a great performer and lower cost solution than the 2650, but in this scenario (street driven pump gas car), the 2650 doesn't give up anything down low and still has a much higher peak power capability.
toohighpsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 02:56 PM   #32
laynlo15
 
laynlo15's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 1ss A8, Npp
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: clark, mo
Posts: 5,338
King and I are ok. Little bantering back and forth is ok and we always make up in the morning. Haha.
__________________
2016 Camaro 6.2, Magnuson 2650 Heartbreaker, RotoFab, Manley, Livernois cam, stock heads trans/converter/diff. Kentshotrodgarage (M/T,Hoosier, Racestar Wheels), RPM RB, DSS, Gforce, Griptec Pulley Best 9.41@146 Best MPH 149 1/4, 5.99@119 Best MPH 120 Best 60' 1.35. RWHP? Just a little Magnuson Employee/Driver
laynlo15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 02:58 PM   #33
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by laynlo15 View Post
King and I are ok. Little bantering back and forth is ok and we always make up in the morning. Haha.
Fair enough. I respectfully pull-back and let you guys do what you guys do, HAHAHA.
__________________

'20 ZL1 Black "Fury"
A10, PDR, Exposed CF Extractor
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 03:08 PM   #34
KingLT1


 
KingLT1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 1SS NFG A8
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: 46804
Posts: 2,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by toohighpsi View Post
Sorry for my delay and not providing this plot initially, the 2650 make more torque everywhere on the base LT1 than the TVS2300 did, as you know, every dyno is different so here are all 3 runs on the same dyno plotted together.

Stock Camaro LT1 (417 RWHP)
TVS2300 Camaro LT1 with Magnuson CARB Cal (553 RWHP)
TVS2650 Camaro LT1 with CARB Proposed Cal (600 RWHP)

As you can see it gives a nice torque benefit across the range and then keeps pulling up top.

Attachment 996315

Now there is no question that the 2300 is a great performer and lower cost solution than the 2650, but in this scenario (street driven pump gas car), the 2650 doesn't give up anything down low and still has a much higher peak power capability.


Mike, Thanks for posting that. Paints a much clearer picture. The torque looks low on both units. So I am not sure if that is Dyno or tuning related but none the less it at least shows the 2650 gives up nothing down low and nets a much stronger top end. In that case it's a win win.
Just curious if they both were dyno'd at the same boost level?



Quote:
Originally Posted by radz28 View Post
And you are also coming across argumentative and hostile. Some people have preferences others don't. The topic is the 2650 install. There was and is not a lot of information to compare to. Frankly - the way you came into this thread seemed more confrontational than anything. Maybe I'm wrong, but it looks like you and laynlo15 have history already, which is what let me to these possibilities. If that's what it is, stay closer to topic.


Not Hostile at all. Laynlo and I are cool... No issues at all. I have been a fan of the Magnuson stuff from day 1.
__________________
2016 NFG 1SS A8
Options-[2SS Leather/NPP]
Perf. mods-[Whipple 2.9/LPE LT5 TB/Rotofab Dry/LT4 Fueling/Flex Fuel/CA ORP/FM NPP Axle back]

Last edited by KingLT1; 07-17-2019 at 04:58 PM.
KingLT1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2019, 06:23 PM   #35
toohighpsi
 
Drives: 2015 C7 Z06 M7
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLT1 View Post
Mike, Thanks for posting that. Paints a much clearer picture. The torque looks low on both units. So I am not sure if that is Dyno or tuning related but none the less it at least shows the 2650 gives up nothing down low and nets a much stronger top end. In that case it's a win win.
Just curious if they both were dyno'd at the same boost level?
Its the dyno here, and has always been like that, its a mustang 250 piece with a Superflow controller that has fantastic repeatably and good power numbers up top, but never gives a high low speed torque like some of the other brands.

No, not the same boost level, both tunes are done to achieve the highest possible power on 91 octane pump fuel. The boost pressure that made the highest power level on the TVS2300 was about 7.2 psi. With the TVS2650 we are able to run about 8.5 psi and still hold close to 20 degrees of timing - which is the magic point on these engines.

If you're below about 16 degrees you're running too much boost, you'll make more power by lowering boost and increasing timing and vice versa, if you're getting up to 22 degrees, and you have enough fuel, power is yours by adding boost and lowering timing. While there's a bit more to it than just that to make big power on these DI engines, that's a good rule of
toohighpsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2019, 10:29 AM   #36
JANNETTYRACING

 
JANNETTYRACING's Avatar
 
Drives: YELLOW 2013 ZL1 AUTO
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ON THE DYNO WATERBURY CT.
Posts: 14,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by toohighpsi View Post
Its the dyno here, and has always been like that, its a mustang 250 piece with a Superflow controller that has fantastic repeatably and good power numbers up top, but never gives a high low speed torque like some of the other brands.

No, not the same boost level, both tunes are done to achieve the highest possible power on 91 octane pump fuel. The boost pressure that made the highest power level on the TVS2300 was about 7.2 psi. With the TVS2650 we are able to run about 8.5 psi and still hold close to 20 degrees of timing - which is the magic point on these engines.

If you're below about 16 degrees you're running too much boost, you'll make more power by lowering boost and increasing timing and vice versa, if you're getting up to 22 degrees, and you have enough fuel, power is yours by adding boost and lowering timing. While there's a bit more to it than just that to make big power on these DI engines, that's a good rule of
I was going to ask the same question then see this answer, Great Job Mike.

Looking forward to the differences we see from the LT4 Blower to this one.

Ted.
__________________
www.jannettyracing.com
Celebrating 34 years Performance parts, Installation, Fabrication, Dyno tuning, Remote custom tuning, and alignments. 203-753-7223 Waterbury CT. 06705
email tedj@jannettyracing.com
JANNETTYRACING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 01:39 AM   #37
16WhiteSS
 
Drives: 2016 Camaro 2SS 6spd
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Bradenton, FL
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by toohighpsi View Post
Sorry for my delay and not providing this plot initially, the 2650 make more torque everywhere on the base LT1 than the TVS2300 did, as you know, every dyno is different so here are all 3 runs on the same dyno plotted together.

Stock Camaro LT1 (417 RWHP)
TVS2300 Camaro LT1 with Magnuson CARB Cal (553 RWHP)
TVS2650 Camaro LT1 with CARB Proposed Cal (600 RWHP)

As you can see it gives a nice torque benefit across the range and then keeps pulling up top.

Attachment 996315

Now there is no question that the 2300 is a great performer and lower cost solution than the 2650, but in this scenario (street driven pump gas car), the 2650 doesn't give up anything down low and still has a much higher peak power capability.

Is the 2300 in this graph intercooled and otherwise the car is stock? Is Mike Jrs car an A8? I ask because I'm interested in just an intercooled supercharger on my otherwise stock car. I like the Magnuson, just trying to decide between TVS2300 and TVS2650.
16WhiteSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2019, 08:37 AM   #38
laynlo15
 
laynlo15's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 1ss A8, Npp
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: clark, mo
Posts: 5,338
Mike Jrs is an A8 and they are both very capable of making great hp. My 2300 made a best of 801 but we backed it down to about 770 because we were seeing a little knock because we were running lot of timing. My current 2650 makes around 837 on 14-15 lbs of boost and lots of room to grow plus the meth is almost turned down very low, just a little spray for additional fueling as my low side needs a little more work but we are still safe where we are. Iat's at the end of the track now are about 20 to 30 degrees cooler then we were with the 2300. We were on 16.5 lbs of boost with the 2300 and 14-15 with the 2650 and we've already run 9.65et and best mph is 145. We are still having launch issues but with my BRM suspension and going back to a drag radial we should solve that spinning the tires issue, plus we might pull a couple degrees of timing down low which will help some also. Either way your getting a great power adder and you'll love that instant boost it achieves.
__________________
2016 Camaro 6.2, Magnuson 2650 Heartbreaker, RotoFab, Manley, Livernois cam, stock heads trans/converter/diff. Kentshotrodgarage (M/T,Hoosier, Racestar Wheels), RPM RB, DSS, Gforce, Griptec Pulley Best 9.41@146 Best MPH 149 1/4, 5.99@119 Best MPH 120 Best 60' 1.35. RWHP? Just a little Magnuson Employee/Driver
laynlo15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2019, 05:38 PM   #39
toohighpsi
 
Drives: 2015 C7 Z06 M7
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: So-Cal
Posts: 502
Quote:
Originally Posted by 16WhiteSS View Post
Is the 2300 in this graph intercooled and otherwise the car is stock? Is Mike Jrs car an A8? I ask because I'm interested in just an intercooled supercharger on my otherwise stock car. I like the Magnuson, just trying to decide between TVS2300 and TVS2650.
That is correct.

Stock Camaro (91 octane)
Intercooled Heartbeat DI TVS2300 Camaro (all else stock, 91 octane)
Intercooled Magnum DI TVS2650R Camaro (all else stock, 91 octane)

The Camaro represented in the pulls above has an A8 transmission.
toohighpsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2019, 07:34 PM   #40
shinysun
 
Drives: 2016 Camaro SS
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Korea
Posts: 347
How did you install 2650 over the 2300?

I ordered 2650 and paid, but got informed Magnuson provides the headunit only at this point, means no harnesses, no hoses , even no the coil relocation kits. I have no idea how I can install on the car installed 2300.

Do I need to do all custom work?
shinysun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2019, 09:52 AM   #41
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by shinysun View Post
How did you install 2650 over the 2300?

I ordered 2650 and paid, but got informed Magnuson provides the headunit only at this point, means no harnesses, no hoses , even no the coil relocation kits. I have no idea how I can install on the car installed 2300.

Do I need to do all custom work?
It seems like much of the 2300-unit parts mostly swap over to a 2650. That is, if you had a 2300 on the car before, and simply swap to the 2650, it's pretty straight forward. It looks like you are starting from scratch, so were it me, I'd look at the 2300 installation manual (which is on Magnuson's website) for reference and go from there. It doesn't look too complicated. I think the tuning would be more complicated than the actual hard-parts, so far as I can see.
__________________

'20 ZL1 Black "Fury"
A10, PDR, Exposed CF Extractor
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.