Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon banner

81 - 100 of 124 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
You would have to ask your favorite tuner supplier (HP Tuners, SCT, EFI Live, DiabloSport, etc), but If you could convince them that your application is for race only, then it would be possible to use the HPT RTD to load the Edelbrock tune, then use your race-only tuner to upload and modify.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
You would have to ask your favorite tuner supplier (HP Tuners, SCT, EFI Live, DiabloSport, etc), but If you could convince them that your application is for race only, then it would be possible to use the HPT RTD to load the Edelbrock tune, then use your race-only tuner to upload and modify.

Good to hear this is possible! I wasn't positive if we would be able to read the loaded Edelbrock tune with a regular MPVI2 and VCM suite.

If anyone on the forum is patient I can take one for the team and get the .hpt files as soon as possible so nobody else has to get the RTD device just for the tune if they intend to use it for race only purposes. You're going to need an MPVI2 and 4 credits though, just a better use of the $500 than an RTD device that's going to get used to flash once, then never get used again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
This 24% power increase is pretty low. Anyone know if there will be future options to increase this? (Pulley/tune/ etc). The Mallett with pulley upgrade was looking good aside from price.
This is something I've been thinking about.

First off the 24% is peak. There is a bit more under the curve. I attached the dyno from the sales brochure. Also note slightly more power on 93 (is it leaning on the knock sensor at 91 then?). Even the mallett kit is only about a 30% peak gain.

Second, let's talk about airflow. Air is power.

Let's use the Mallett base kit with the Eaton R1900 with the 4.25 pulley as our baseline. It will flow 1.900 liters of air per rotation.

Next the Edelbrock kit with the Eaton R1740 with the 3.75 pulley. It will rotate 1.133 times for every 1 time the Mallett base kit would have rotated. It would flow 1.971 liters at the same engine speed that caused the mallett base kit to flow 1.900 a whopping 3.75% more air, lol. Basically negligible - theoretically 6-10 more hp, all else being equal.

Based on some dirty HP to Airflow math and their compressor maps I think both of these superchargers will be averaging around 70-68% efficiency at WOT from 4k-7k rpms. Both drawing up to 30hp in parasitic drag at redline!

The mallett stage 2 pulley adds about 6.25% more airflow than the base kit and 3% more than the edelbrock kit. (if the numbers were bigger I'd also talk about diminishing returns due to decreasing volumetric efficiency)

As you can see we are talking pretty minor differences here.

So what gives? Why does the mallett base kit dyno 6% higher?

My thoughts:

1. It could just be variations in the dyno readings
2. Mallett could be testing with additional mods. In particular I think I read that they got the 365 hp dyno with a full exhaust (no cats - race pipe). Can anyone confirm? That would entirely explain it. With boost you are going to see some good numbers with a race pipe - either because you don't have to worry about melting the catalyst anymore or just out of sheer improvement in flow.
3. The edlebrock tune could be more conservative: less timing, more fuel. Higher reliability at the cost of a bit of power (exactly what I would do with my own tune (but can you run it pig rich and pass CARB (I doubt it))).


I do suspect the cats, integrated exhaust header, and the high compression ratio of these engines are the biggest obstacles to achieving the kind of gains you would expect. At 10 PSI of boost I expect 50% more power. As much as Mallett likes to taunt their 700hp Colorado, there's a reason they just threw an ATS-V engine in there instead of pounding the LGZ to the moon.

The good news is that the LGX camaro managed 365 whp on the edelbrock kit with a 3.5 pulley, and still on a fully stock exhaust, intake etc. And really what's the difference between an LGX and LGZ once you ditch the differing intake manifolds and tune it?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
I wonder if either Edelbrock or Mallett would be willing to share anything they learned while tuning the Colorado with the community?

Would Edelbrock consider sharing why they chose the 3.5 pulley for the Camaro and the 3.75 for the Colorado? That could be very deliberate from something they learned while tuning a Colorado or just out of an abundance of caution because people don't try to haul 7,000lb campers behind their Camaros...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Awesome...glad to see this moving forward, and at a nice price.

I don't know if I'd have the guts to throw one of these on a daily driver and give up the factory drivetrain warranty (yeah I know Edelbrock has a warranty too, but pretty sure I read it expires basically when the factory 3/36,000 expires, no matter if you installed the S/C early on, or when you have 30,000 miles on the truck). If this thing is designed to keep costs low, but also attempt to keep the engine more reliable (via lower boost and a rich-leaning tune) then that would make me feel better.

My rough estimate says this thing is making 400+ HP and around 380 TQ at the crank. Those numbers sound pretty good to me....not like the 455hp/455TQ in my Camaro, but still plenty of fun lol. If I were to ever sell my Camaro and my 2015 Colorado and get into a new Colorado or Canyon, this would be a good way to reclaim some of the fun back from selling the Camaro, but again, not sure if it would be worth the reduced engine life on a daily.

I look forward to seeing how your install goes and your thoughts!
 

·
Site Sponsor
Joined
·
316 Posts
Edelbrock will flow slightly more air than the base Mallett kit (and slightly less than the 4.00 stage 2 Mallett upgrade.)
Our lower pulley is larger. They use the stock 6-rib. See picture below. If they use a 3.75 upper, they're not spinning the rotors faster than our 4.25 base pulley. They'll run into thermal issues if they try to match the flow of the 1900.
Efficiency and parasitic drag will be basically identical, with the 1740 trivially favoring the high end of the LGZ and the 1900 slightly favoring the low end
The Eaton data puts the 1900 at 2-4% higher efficiency through a larger range. Our pressure ratio and RPM drive right through the upper side of the peak efficiency zone at WOT and, perhaps more important, are much more efficient at partial throttle (hence the improved mileage on our CARB testing). There's no point at which the 1740 surpasses the 1900 on paper. In the real world, the cooler charge air from a larger blower has a much bigger effect than the Eaton graphs suggest.
1740 is a newer model and designed to be faster spinning - used on the LT4 actually, which is pretty crazy when you think about it.
I wouldn't read too much into that. In our testing the stock 1740 LT4 entered limp mode in 2-3 laps due to intake temp. Our LT4 package using a 2300 adds 250 hp at the rear wheels and improves intake temps to the point where they never overheated. The trans overheated consistently at 10-12 laps, but iat was rock solid. Just goes to show how much of a difference a bigger blower can make. The new 2650 will be even more pronounced because of a slight rotor revision.
Why does the mallett base kit dyno 6% higher?
More air at lower temp. That's the name of the game.
1. It could just be variations in the dyno readings
2. Mallett could be testing with additional mods. In particular I think I read that they got the 365 hp dyno with a full exhaust
361 with stock everything except blower. DynoJet, 1.01 correction factor, on a heat-soaked car. We used the 15th consecutive pull for our advertised number. Intake temp increased less than 20F after 18 pulls so there wasn't a huge difference, but we definitely used a conservative pull.
3. The edlebrock tune could be more conservative: less timing, more fuel.
I don't know what their tune is but it's hard to be more conservative than we are. Their lower number makes perfect sense though when you consider their smaller blower and about equal speed.
I do suspect the cats, integrated exhaust header, and the high compression ratio of these engines are the biggest obstacles to achieving the kind of gains you would expect.
The LGZ doesn't always react the way you'd expect to timing and fuel changes, but it's definitely knock-limited. Temp is really important to keep it off the knock sensors. You won't be able to make the power we make with more temp in the charge air.
As much as Mallett likes to taunt their 700hp Colorado, there's a reason they just threw an ATS-V engine in there instead of pounding the LGZ to the moon.
Well we did cram about 30psi in there. You have to decrease compression to survive that. We practically TRIPLED horsepower at the rear wheels. It would've nuked every part of the stock drivetrain on the first pull. It's still a valid display of our blower's capability. It's still got cats and mufflers and the integral headers. It's still emissions legal. In fact, it's exactly the same blower kit we sell our customers with a different upper and lower pulley.
really what's the difference between an LGX and LGZ once you ditch the differing intake manifolds and tune it?
As you suggest, not much practical difference. The LGZ is definitely harder to tune because it's more sensitive to knock.
Would Edelbrock consider sharing why they chose the 3.5 pulley for the Camaro and the 3.75 for the Colorado? That could be very deliberate from something they learned while tuning a Colorado or just out of an abundance of caution because people don't try to haul 7,000lb campers behind their Camaros...
Exactly... You can run more boost in a Camaro but it takes really good cooling to be able to make long pulls safely.

BTW all this is just talking about flow and cooling of the rotor pack and doesn't consider the intercooler system. I can see what they have for charge cooler and reservoir but I'm curious to see what their front heat exchanger looks like because it's critical (and not just bigger=better). I also didn't mention the other components because I'm sure you guys don't want me to turn this into an ad for our stuff. Just thought I should point out some of the technical stuff because it's hard to come by that info.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
Our lower pulley is larger. They use the stock 6-rib. See picture below. If they use a 3.75 upper, they're not spinning the rotors faster than our 4.25 base pulley. They'll run into thermal issues if they try to match the flow of the 1900.

The Eaton data puts the 1900 at 2-4% higher efficiency through a larger range. Our pressure ratio and RPM drive right through the upper side of the peak efficiency zone at WOT and, perhaps more important, are much more efficient at partial throttle (hence the improved mileage on our CARB testing). There's no point at which the 1740 surpasses the 1900 on paper. In the real world, the cooler charge air from a larger blower has a much bigger effect than the Eaton graphs suggest.

I wouldn't read too much into that. In our testing the stock 1740 LT4 entered limp mode in 2-3 laps due to intake temp. Our LT4 package using a 2300 adds 250 hp at the rear wheels and improves intake temps to the point where they never overheated. The trans overheated consistently at 10-12 laps, but iat was rock solid. Just goes to show how much of a difference a bigger blower can make. The new 2650 will be even more pronounced because of a slight rotor revision.

More air at lower temp. That's the name of the game.

361 with stock everything except blower. DynoJet, 1.01 correction factor, on a heat-soaked car. We used the 15th consecutive pull for our advertised number. Intake temp increased less than 20F after 18 pulls so there wasn't a huge difference, but we definitely used a conservative pull.

I don't know what their tune is but it's hard to be more conservative than we are. Their lower number makes perfect sense though when you consider their smaller blower and about equal speed.

The LGZ doesn't always react the way you'd expect to timing and fuel changes, but it's definitely knock-limited. Temp is really important to keep it off the knock sensors. You won't be able to make the power we make with more temp in the charge air.

Well we did cram about 30psi in there. You have to decrease compression to survive that. We practically TRIPLED horsepower at the rear wheels. It would've nuked every part of the stock drivetrain on the first pull. It's still a valid display of our blower's capability. It's still got cats and mufflers and the integral headers. It's still emissions legal. In fact, it's exactly the same blower kit we sell our customers with a different upper and lower pulley.

As you suggest, not much practical difference. The LGZ is definitely harder to tune because it's more sensitive to knock.

Exactly... You can run more boost in a Camaro but it takes really good cooling to be able to make long pulls safely.

BTW all this is just talking about flow and cooling of the rotor pack and doesn't consider the intercooler system. I can see what they have for charge cooler and reservoir but I'm curious to see what their front heat exchanger looks like because it's critical (and not just bigger=better). I also didn't mention the other components because I'm sure you guys don't want me to turn this into an ad for our stuff. Just thought I should point out some of the technical stuff because it's hard to come by that info.

Thanks for the response! I did not realize you changed the diameter of the crank pulley. That absolutely explains the difference.

I double checked the compressor maps and sure enough the 1900 has a nice 74% region the 1740 does not. Honestly, if you compare the 1900 with the 1740, it's not clear why the 1740 exists because there is indeed no area with better efficiency in the 1740 (for some reason I was comparing colors and assuming they were on the same scale and completely ignored the actual labels on one of them) I'm really curious on why the 1740 was even created (am I missing something? I wouldn't expect Eaton to go out of their way to make an inferior product) At the end of the day this efficiency difference is pretty minor at these relatively low pressure ratios, but helps explain what we are seeing.

I attached the only picture of the heat exchanger from the Edelbrock install manual.
378810
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
145 Posts
Not sure if anyone posted this but there is a new Supercharger coming for the Colorado and Canyon.

340 HP at the rear wheel.


This is a Eaton Unit like GM uses and they are a full kit with all the bits like their other E kits.

Not sure when it will hit but they are coming.

Based on what SEMA had this year things are getting better for Mid Size GM trucks in the aftermarket.

I did my "due-diligent" search on the site and didn't see any posts on this.
Checking out the Edelbrock site and it looks like the Stage 1-Street System Supercharger Kit is available for Colorado (and Canyons too, I think), 2017-2020. Kit #1518 w/ tune @$4,999.87


Like I said before, I'm giving this about a year or so before I pull the trigger on another supercharger kit.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
145 Posts
I did my "due-diligent" search on the site and didn't see any posts on this.
Checking out the Edelbrock site and it looks like the Stage 1-Street System Supercharger Kit is available for Colorado (and Canyons too, I think), 2017-2020. Kit #1518 w/ tune @$4,999.87


Like I said before, I'm giving this about a year or so before I pull the trigger on another supercharger kit.
Oh crap, just saw the other posts. Never mind . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
Discussion Starter #90
I did my "due-diligent" search on the site and didn't see any posts on this.
Checking out the Edelbrock site and it looks like the Stage 1-Street System Supercharger Kit is available for Colorado (and Canyons too, I think), 2017-2020. Kit #1518 w/ tune @$4,999.87


Like I said before, I'm giving this about a year or so before I pull the trigger on another supercharger kit.
The 340 number was given by Edelbrock at SEMA last fall. It was in several SEMA stories.
 

·
Site Sponsor
Joined
·
316 Posts
I'm really curious on why the 1740 was even created (am I missing something? I wouldn't expect Eaton to go out of their way to make an inferior product) At the end of the day this efficiency difference is pretty minor at these relatively low pressure ratios, but helps explain what we are seeing.
The 1740 fills the gap between 1320 and 1900 and it takes up a lot less room than the 1900. It's also cheaper and sometimes cost and packaging is prioritized over airflow. In this case, the much shorter 1740 allows them to piggyback off the factory accessory drive with one additional idler and a longer 5-rib alternator belt. So they save even more money. We have a dedicated 8-rib blower drive with heavy-duty tensioner, idlers, and belt. That stuff costs a lot more.
At the end of the day this efficiency difference is pretty minor at these relatively low pressure ratios, but helps explain what we are seeing.
There's a much larger difference in airflow and temp than the Eaton data suggests. The 1740 and 2300 are both kind of funny aspect ratios. The 1900 and 2650 are punching above their weight in that regard.
I attached the only picture of the heat exchanger from the Edelbrock install manual.
Certainly not ideal but not as bad as other attempts I've seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
Got my heat exchanger and water pump installed. Waiting on the tune file before I finish the rest. While towing my (6000lb) camper with the heat exchanger in place I did notice trans temps 10-15 degrees higher than usual. Hit 190 for the first time ever and it's not even that hot out. Presumably this is because the heat exchanger is right in front of the trans cooler but it doesn't even have a load on it yet! Has me a bit nervous. Fortunately we can always add more trans cooler!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
The install was relatively straightforward except a bracket that blocked the supercharger from seating on the manifold, basically just had to remove the bolt holding it and move it over the mm it needed. Also there is an evil unreachable bolt that goes in the back passenger side of the supercharger. I lost two bolts into the unreachable abyss and needed a trip to ace to get more. All I can say is good luck, there's zero chance of using a torque wrench on it. You're going to be using vice grips on a socket extension that you can barely reach and applying 0.6565(repeating, of course) grunts of force.

I also have a wobbly idler pulley, we'll see how easy it is to get this replaced.

The result feels pretty good. 25% more peak HP seems spot on. The power is there. 1st gear needs traction (on the fortitude tires you kind of need to roll into the throttle to achieve warp acceleration at around 15mph), 2nd feels like 1st used to, 3rd feels like 2nd used to, etc.

The truck actually sounds smoother and more refined than stock. I wish the whine was louder.

Getting like 2 degrees of KR every time I tip in, burst knock maybe - need to pull in some more PIDs to confirm. Need to do more data logs.

The struggle is indeed going to be HEAT! I'm seeing 100 degrees IAT1s turn into as high as 150 degree IAT2s once everything is good and heat-soaked. Don't beat on it so much and it averages about 30-35degrees above the the IAT1 when you go WOT. Honestly this is pretty damn good cooling all things considered. I wonder if water/meth will pick up some power without tuning if it can get those IAT2s down, then you've got a built in fail safe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
The result feels pretty good. 25% more peak HP seems spot on. The power is there. 1st gear needs traction (on the fortitude tires you kind of need to roll into the throttle to achieve warp acceleration at around 15mph), 2nd feels like 1st used to, 3rd feels like 2nd used to, etc.

The truck actually sounds smoother and more refined than stock. I wish the whine was louder.
So it sounds like the Edelbrock supercharger is very good for a legal way to get much better power with OEM refinement, and a warranty!
  • Great power as advertised.
  • The only emissions legal supercharger kit for 2017-2020 Colorado's. (EO D-215-113 ).
  • More refined than stock - quiet even. (According to the quote above)
  • Warranty that shows confidence where it counts, in the pocket book (put thier money where thier mouth is, instead of just talk). Small companies that can get busted by EPA or CARB may not be around to honor a warranty even if they offer it, Edelbrock has been around since 1938!
  • Edelbrock even offers financing! - Edelbrock Colorado Supercharger page
Seems if you are not looking to race and want the power that the truck should have come with (towing or passing), with OEM level refinement and a warranty (read "proven durability"), without any smog check hassle, at a significantly lower cost, from a company that is going to be around (since 1938), this sounds like a winner!

If you truly want to go race-only there is room to grow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
Ran a best 1/4 mile of 13.6 and best mph of 102. Best 60' 2.05 on street tires! I'm not unhappy with this. Beat a couple g37s by a car length or more even though their 60' was .1 under mine. I'll spin this off into it's own thread eventually. DRs will easily grab another .2-.3
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Ran a best 1/4 mile of 13.6 and best mph of 102. Best 60' 2.05 on street tires! I'm not unhappy with this. Beat a couple g37s by a car length or more even though their 60' was .1 under mine. I'll spin this off into it's own thread eventually. DRs will easily grab another .2-.3
At first I thought this seemed a little slow... then I remembered it's a 4500lb vehicle not a 3400lb vehicle. That's actually really good. The biggest thing would be the 60' because otherwise you seem to be trapping about right on the big end. I think it's got a 13.2x in it and maybe on a really good (cooler) day a hail mary 13 flat perhaps... nice, sounds fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
How does the 8 speed feel with the newfound power? I know you kind of described that above (3rd feeling like 2nd and what not) but does it still seem to shift normally when just cruising around? Does the truck drive fine when you aren't getting on it? I think a kit like this that doesn't negatively affect the day to day driving, but provides power when you want it sounds pretty nice.

ACES above mentioned the warranty, but doesn't that actually expire when the truck hits 3 year or 36,000 miles, no matter what...NOT 3yrs/36,000 after it is installed. So anyone putting this on a truck with more miles would have no actual protection from Edelbrock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
How does the 8 speed feel with the newfound power? I know you kind of described that above (3rd feeling like 2nd and what not) but does it still seem to shift normally when just cruising around? Does the truck drive fine when you aren't getting on it? I think a kit like this that doesn't negatively affect the day to day driving, but provides power when you want it sounds pretty nice.

ACES above mentioned the warranty, but doesn't that actually expire when the truck hits 3 year or 36,000 miles, no matter what...NOT 3yrs/36,000 after it is installed. So anyone putting this on a truck with more miles would have no actual protection from Edelbrock.

Yep, Starts from 0 miles and the in-service date of the truck. Which is why I did not hesitate to take the speed limit out of the tune. (and you have to have it installed by someone else...)

I don't want to report on the 8 speed until I get my trans-flush. I will say it feels great at full and near full throttle.
 
81 - 100 of 124 Posts
About this Discussion
123 Replies
35 Participants
FunctionOverForm
Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon
ColoradoFans.com is the best forum for the Chevy Colorado community to discuss the truck’s reliability, diesel or transmissions problems and more.
Full Forum Listing
Top