Max PSI on a TVS1900
Sep 7, 2014 | 10:03 AM
#31
PD blowers love nitrous.
I considered doing this with my Whipple but, it appeared more cost effective to switch it all over to a turbo.
The CTSV guys are building some pretty fast cars with their factory TVS1900.
I considered doing this with my Whipple but, it appeared more cost effective to switch it all over to a turbo.
The CTSV guys are building some pretty fast cars with their factory TVS1900.
Nov 10, 2020 | 09:41 PM
#34
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Pulley I need a smaller one now where can I find one anyone have one tvs1900
On my 6.0 I was able to make 10.5lbs with a 2.8 front pulley. When I switched to a 8 1/2" crank pulley it added a touch over 2psi. So that would put my results right in there with yours as I have less CI's. Even with a smaller cam I don't think I could have gotten 15psi out the 1900. But it ran great and made great power too.
The 1900 on a 5.3 is a great combo. Your cam choice will affect your max boost too.
Go for it
The 1900 on a 5.3 is a great combo. Your cam choice will affect your max boost too.
Go for it
I need a tvs1900 smaller pulley can’t find one
Nov 11, 2020 | 10:11 PM
#37
besides cost, i still have a hard time understanding why everybody wants "more boost pressure".
higher pressure comes from more restriction to the air trying to go through the engine... and more restriction means more heat
why not look for higher CFM at the same or lower boost? that's where real power gains happen.
case in point: i added about 150rw hp on my LS1 going from 11-13psi... which came from higher compression, a bigger cam, bigger valves, porting the blower, punching out the cats, and running a chiller - in addition to swapping pulleys.
now i don't deny i had to save for years to get to that point, but ain't no way on God's green earth would more boost have done the same!
higher pressure comes from more restriction to the air trying to go through the engine... and more restriction means more heat
why not look for higher CFM at the same or lower boost? that's where real power gains happen.
case in point: i added about 150rw hp on my LS1 going from 11-13psi... which came from higher compression, a bigger cam, bigger valves, porting the blower, punching out the cats, and running a chiller - in addition to swapping pulleys.
now i don't deny i had to save for years to get to that point, but ain't no way on God's green earth would more boost have done the same!
Nov 12, 2020 | 05:56 AM
#38
besides cost, i still have a hard time understanding why everybody wants "more boost pressure".
higher pressure comes from more restriction to the air trying to go through the engine... and more restriction means more heat
why not look for higher CFM at the same or lower boost? that's where real power gains happen.
case in point: i added about 150rw hp on my LS1 going from 11-13psi... which came from higher compression, a bigger cam, bigger valves, porting the blower, punching out the cats, and running a chiller - in addition to swapping pulleys.
now i don't deny i had to save for years to get to that point, but ain't no way on God's green earth would more boost have done the same!
higher pressure comes from more restriction to the air trying to go through the engine... and more restriction means more heat
why not look for higher CFM at the same or lower boost? that's where real power gains happen.
case in point: i added about 150rw hp on my LS1 going from 11-13psi... which came from higher compression, a bigger cam, bigger valves, porting the blower, punching out the cats, and running a chiller - in addition to swapping pulleys.
now i don't deny i had to save for years to get to that point, but ain't no way on God's green earth would more boost have done the same!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
moregrip
GM Engine & Exhaust Performance
7
May 6, 2004 06:04 AM
