Incon is a twin turbo (intercooled) kit. I forgot to edit out the data but
DAKsters are out of luck . If you have the tools and fabrication skills you
can probably adapt it for any vehicle or better yet, create your own "kit".
As far as bolt-ons we're limited to KB/vortech/Powerdyne/Paxton(?)
I think the KB compliments the power curve of a street driven 360. My
redline is at around 4800 and I don't plan on spinning it over 5k too often
unless I want parts banging around in my oil pan. For you dragsters the
Vortech might be a better choice.
Alan
'98 Dakota R/T (JBA shorties, Big K&N;TB & shiftkit soon)
'89 Mustang GT (347, Griggs GR-40 , Vortech S-trim...)
Ducati 996 (not while my wife is alive)
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Delgado [mailto:dadoctah@worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 1998 1:55 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: Re: DML: power/torque curver for
blowers/turbo
Err, Uhmm, Oh yeah, "Mok".
Did you look at the charts? I don't know what an incon is,
but whatever it is
it makes a GIANT SHIT-LOAD more HP and TQ than the KB. You
are right in that
the KB would do wonders for the Dak. But the incon would
blow it it off the
planet!
If they made that incon thingamagig for the dak, I'd sell a
kidney to get one.
BTW, that low rpm stuff only helps rock climbers and heavy
haulers; in street
and strip performance you won't see those revs once you take
off.
dadoctah@worldnet.att.net
----------
>From: "Mok, Alan (SPB)" <AMok@spbank.com>
>To: DML <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
>Subject: DML: power/torque curver for blowers/turbo
>Date: Wed, Dec 30, 1998, 9:51 PM
>
>Wonder which power adder is best for you?
>
>Here are some numbers off a dynojet for 3 similar
Moostangs. The major
>difference being the way it get pressurized air.
>
>I think the KB would do wonders for Daks considering the
torque/power curve.
>
>
>
>
>
>'98 Dakota R/T (JBA shorties, Big K&N;TB & shiftkit soon)
>'89 Mustang GT (347, Griggs GR-40 , Vortech S-trim...)
>Ducati 996 (not while my wife is alive)
>
> INCON KENNE BELL S-TRIM
> RPM TQ HP TQ HP TQ HP
RPM
>2500 325 155 400 209 280 133
2500
>2750 355 185 410 215 295 155
2750
>3000 420 240 420 240 310 177
3000
>3250 470 290 425 263 320 198
3250
>3500 525 350 430 286 340 227
3500
>3750 560 400 430 307 355 254
3750
>4000 575 438 430 328 370 282
4000
>4250 575 466 427 346 375 304
4250
>4500 570 489 425 364 385 330
4500
>4750 560 507 415 375 385 348
4750
>5000 555 528 400 381 375 357
5000
>5250 540 540 390 390 360 360
5250
>5500 520 545 380 398 351 368
5500
>5750 490 536 365 400 338 370
5750
>6000 470 537 350 400 325 371
6000
>
>
>All of these are approximations from reading the torque
values on the chart
>and then plugging them into the above formula. For a really
good discussion
>of HP vs TQ, see the web page:
>http://www.ns.net/~seang/resource/torquehp.html
><http://www.ns.net/~seang/resource/torquehp.html>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:11:35 EDT