My Gen 2 Whipple versus Gen 3 Results

[Whitedevil95]

Hello All,
I have spent a large amount of time looking to see if there were some worthwhile gains from switching a Gen 2 Whipple to a Gen 3(my gen 2 was used and has about 10,000miles on it, while the gen 3 was brand new, not sure if that effects it). I really could not find anyone who did ONLY a head unit swap. Lots of them switched tunes, or fuel systems, or exhaust, or something. I had no issues with my Gen 2 but I always said if I had a chance to scoop up a Gen 3/4 head unit I would grab it. Recently I was able to do that. My combo is all down in the sig. I ONLY swapped the head units nothing else. Same dyno(similar conditions about 70 degrees ambient), same Fuel, same pulley, same exhaust, same everything. It was actually surprised by how much it gained. But I figured I would post it up for future searchers and see if anyone else had made this swap. Let me know what you think guys.
Edit: I also forgot to mention this is a DYNOmite dyno at a local shop that is a major heartbreaker loaded type dyno. Based on my friends who have been dynoed here and at other shops my new numbers would be close to 780-800rwhp on a standard dyno jet.

Sponsored

 

[80FoxCoupe]

Nice work and great info!!!

 

[gimmie11s]

Good info. Get it to Fontana and see how she traps (if it ever opens).

 

[Whitedevil95]

Good info. Get it to Fontana and see how she traps (if it ever opens).

If they ever open back up ill get there!

 

[Excelerater]

Yes,I have a Gen2 with Whipple tune and thought about this upgrade,I wont use Whipples tune though as there are much better ones out there but the big question
IS IT FASTER

 

[OniVita]

Thanks for the post, you've answered my question

 

[Whitedevil95]

Yes,I have a Gen2 with Whipple tune and thought about this upgrade,I wont use Whipples tune though as there are much better ones out there but the big question
IS IT FASTER

I definitely think it feels faster in my opinion. But I am putting on longtubes shortly so I wont get a direct track comparison.

 

[Andrew@Lethal]

Hello All,
I have spent a large amount of time looking to see if there were some worthwhile gains from switching a Gen 2 Whipple to a Gen 3(my gen 2 was used and has about 10,000miles on it, while the gen 3 was brand new, not sure if that effects it). I really could not find anyone who did ONLY a head unit swap. Lots of them switched tunes, or fuel systems, or exhaust, or something. I had no issues with my Gen 2 but I always said if I had a chance to scoop up a Gen 3/4 head unit I would grab it. Recently I was able to do that. My combo is all down in the sig. I ONLY swapped the head units nothing else. Same dyno(similar conditions about 70 degrees ambient), same Fuel, same pulley, same exhaust, same everything. It was actually surprised by how much it gained. But I figured I would post it up for future searchers and see if anyone else had made this swap. Let me know what you think guys.
Edit: I also forgot to mention this is a DYNOmite dyno at a local shop that is a major heartbreaker loaded type dyno. Based on my friends who have been dynoed here and at other shops my new numbers would be close to 780-800rwhp on a standard dyno jet.

Awesome info, this is amazing for anyone who is thinking of doing the switch!

 

[sigintel]

Cool test!

I am wondering if this really compares?
Data looks normalized to engine rpm, not the pressure and volume of air comoressed or efficiency. You mmmight need to compare intake runner pressures measured exactly the same sensor/runner grometry and same sensor and ADC.
Then normalize the graphs per psig intake?

Otherwise, are we observing dynamic volute/impeller/compressor displacement and different gearing between intake prop shaft/jackshaft and compressor volutes?
If you turn jack shaft one rev and compare compressor rotating ratios between gen 2 and 3, you may find they are different.

Alternatively, keep in mind the total parasitic may be likely only 70 bhp, soooo if you gain 70rwhp, that be like 82bhp? So SC efficiency went from 70% up to an impossible 200%?

Sanity check: Lets say its 120hp parasitic (way high but whatever).
lets say efficiency went from 60% to 90% (better than fighter jet but whatever).
200 x 0.6 = 120
133 x 0.9 = 120
200 - 133 = 67bhp
67 x 0.85 = 57 rwhp

So if the gen 2 was a total POS, and the gen 3 rivals multibillion dollar turbine efficiency and sets a world record for all compressor architectures; then I could see maybe 57 rwhp gain.
More than likely, I would expect an improvement from 74 to 77% (huge improvement!) at total parasitic of roughly 80bhp.
108 x 0.74 = 80
103 x 0.77 = 80
108 - 103 = 5hp crank
5 x 0.85 = 4.25 rwhp

yup
70rwhp >>>>> 4.25rwhp

I Could be ttttooootally full of bullshit, but Id guess 2-10hp gain MAX for same parasitic load.
maybe 10-20 gain if gen 2 design had major design flaw (doubtful, cause Whipples really good to start).

 

[Whitedevil95]

Cool test!

I am wondering if this really compares?
Data looks normalized to engine rpm, not the pressure and volume of air comoressed or efficiency. You mmmight need to compare intake runner pressures measured exactly the same sensor/runner grometry and same sensor and ADC.
Then normalize the graphs per psig intake?

Otherwise, are we observing dynamic volute/impeller/compressor displacement and different gearing between intake prop shaft/jackshaft and compressor volutes?
If you turn jack shaft one rev and compare compressor rotating ratios between gen 2 and 3, you may find they are different.

Alternatively, keep in mind the total parasitic may be likely only 70 bhp, soooo if you gain 70rwhp, that be like 82bhp? So SC efficiency went from 70% up to an impossible 200%?

Sanity check: Lets say its 120hp parasitic (way high but whatever).
lets say efficiency went from 60% to 90% (better than fighter jet but whatever).
200 x 0.6 = 120
133 x 0.9 = 120
200 - 133 = 67bhp
67 x 0.85 = 57 rwhp

So if the gen 2 was a total POS, and the gen 3 rivals multibillion dollar turbine efficiency and sets a world record for all compressor architectures; then I could see maybe 57 rwhp gain.
More than likely, I would expect an improvement from 74 to 77% (huge improvement!) at total parasitic of roughly 80bhp.
108 x 0.74 = 80
103 x 0.77 = 80
108 - 103 = 5hp crank
5 x 0.85 = 4.25 rwhp

yup
70rwhp >>>>> 4.25rwhp

I Could be ttttooootally full of bullshit, but Id guess 2-10hp gain MAX for same parasitic load.
maybe 10-20 gain if gen 2 design had major design flaw (doubtful, cause Whipples really good to start).

Solid mathematic there. I couldn't tell you exactly what the deal was. I changed nothing but the head unit. Whipple advertised 30-150rwhp depending on how aggressive the set up was, since they are the experts I would defer to them. I will say the difference was higher than I expected. It did pick up almost 1 psi on the same pulley. Completely difference rotorpack in the Gen 3 vs the Gen 2. Your guess is a good as mine. I'm just happy I saw a gain with very little out of pocket in the end.

 

[sigintel]

Well there ya go.

I believe Whipple numbers, but the extra power is not coming for free magically or something, the gen3 is just geared or physically setup to load the crank more at the same rpm on the jack shaft. More load = more torque = more hp used to compress air. There are likely efficiency advantages as well, typically any new design is building on technology development. Whipple didn't get where it is by not innovating.

It would be tricky to measure the performance using the exact same input to SC.

 

[Burkey]

Cool test!

I am wondering if this really compares?
Data looks normalized to engine rpm, not the pressure and volume of air comoressed or efficiency. You mmmight need to compare intake runner pressures measured exactly the same sensor/runner grometry and same sensor and ADC.
Then normalize the graphs per psig intake?

Otherwise, are we observing dynamic volute/impeller/compressor displacement and different gearing between intake prop shaft/jackshaft and compressor volutes?
If you turn jack shaft one rev and compare compressor rotating ratios between gen 2 and 3, you may find they are different.

Alternatively, keep in mind the total parasitic may be likely only 70 bhp, soooo if you gain 70rwhp, that be like 82bhp? So SC efficiency went from 70% up to an impossible 200%?

Sanity check: Lets say its 120hp parasitic (way high but whatever).
lets say efficiency went from 60% to 90% (better than fighter jet but whatever).
200 x 0.6 = 120
133 x 0.9 = 120
200 - 133 = 67bhp
67 x 0.85 = 57 rwhp

So if the gen 2 was a total POS, and the gen 3 rivals multibillion dollar turbine efficiency and sets a world record for all compressor architectures; then I could see maybe 57 rwhp gain.
More than likely, I would expect an improvement from 74 to 77% (huge improvement!) at total parasitic of roughly 80bhp.
108 x 0.74 = 80
103 x 0.77 = 80
108 - 103 = 5hp crank
5 x 0.85 = 4.25 rwhp

yup
70rwhp >>>>> 4.25rwhp

I Could be ttttooootally full of bullshit, but Id guess 2-10hp gain MAX for same parasitic load.
maybe 10-20 gain if gen 2 design had major design flaw (doubtful, cause Whipples really good to start).

I like your analysis. The one thing that seems abundantly clear is that if the efficiency AND sealing of the rotor pack has improved (as it should), we are comparing two different boost pressures, if absolutely nothing else.
Agree that the numbers seem exceptionally high, especially when compared to the original claims being made by Whipple themselves (from memory something in the order of 25-35 hp on 93, more with increased boost pressure obviously).

 

[Whitedevil95]

I like your analysis. The one thing that seems abundantly clear is that if the efficiency AND sealing of the rotor pack has improved (as it should), we are comparing two different boost pressures, if absolutely nothing else.
Agree that the numbers seem exceptionally high, especially when compared to the original claims being made by Whipple themselves (from memory something in the order of 25-35 hp on 93, more with increased boost pressure obviously).

From Whipple: During extensive testing on multiple applications, both Whipple and 3rd party testing found gains from 30RWHP up to 150RWHP depending on blower speed and engine specifications. Standard pump gas applications can easily make another 30RWHP with no other changes. Because boost maintains, tuning is not required. Just bolt on and unleash the power of your stock application.

I have a smaller pulley and E85.

 

[Excelerater]

I definitely think it feels faster in my opinion. But I am putting on longtubes shortly so I wont get a direct track comparison.

I would never have a SC motor without LTs and a larger exhaust ..good luck

 

[Whitedevil95]

I would never have a SC motor without LTs and a larger exhaust ..good luck

Will be fixed asap.

Sponsored