Moving to a 2.9
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 12-03-06
Location: Dayton/Cincinnati
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moving to a 2.9
After seeing a bunch of people on here running a 2.9 in pulley it has really caught my interest. I have a gm stage 2. Is it really worth using a 2.9in pulley?]
I guess the big question is, is there a big benefit from running a 2.9 on a stage 2 setup? With the 42lb injectors, stage 2 belt and tune?
I guess the big question is, is there a big benefit from running a 2.9 on a stage 2 setup? With the 42lb injectors, stage 2 belt and tune?
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-17-07
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think most of the pulley makers make pulleys for the GM hub. Do a search for Nate's pulley. I have the 2.9 on GM stage 2 tune and no issues. 16 psi and runs good.
#9
Yeah, GM stage tune is rich and pretty much has the injectors maxed as is. Throw on a 2.9 and it will just max them out more because it's tuned for a certain AFR. Though I had a Nates 2.9 on 42's for a while without a problem.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-25-07
Location: Kissimmee, Fl
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just wanna make sure I am understanding this right. Because I used to be under the assumption that with or without a tune, 42's were going to be way past injector duty cycle.
#12
I'm too JDM for you
iTrader: (7)
Question, making sure I do understand all of this correctly....I'm running the same thing he wants. GM Stage 2 plus 2.9. Now, with the GM stage 2, my injectors are at ~100 duty cycle. But that is because the GM Stage 2 tune runs rich, right? If so, that means I can go out and lean the car up a bit with HP tuners which will drop my injector duty cycle to, we'll say as an example 90 percent. Make sense?
I just wanna make sure I am understanding this right. Because I used to be under the assumption that with or without a tune, 42's were going to be way past injector duty cycle.
I just wanna make sure I am understanding this right. Because I used to be under the assumption that with or without a tune, 42's were going to be way past injector duty cycle.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-25-07
Location: Kissimmee, Fl
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea....Well, after all my cooling mods I was contemplating going up to 60's and maybe a 2.8. Not really sure if there will be a noticeable difference between a 2.9 or 2.8 with 60's and a tune. I would also like to somewhat prolong the life of my supercharger....lol
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-13-08
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#16
i don't think small mods are really noticeable on the 2.0. anyone that can put on an intake, exhaust, one size smaller pully, etc. that thinks they can feel the difference between 240 whp and 244 whp has one hell of an acurate butt dyno.
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-13-08
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when i went from a 3.0 to a 2.8 i checked my logs and it was almost identical the increase.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-25-07
Location: Kissimmee, Fl
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, when I get to that point I'll let you know and we can drive down to Miami for a tune day or something. Meet half way cause I have had 0 luck finding someone here....lol
#20
i just put on my 2.9 from nate and i like it a lot, but im hitting like 15 psi? which i think its because i have a larger throttle body i ported my inlet side of the supercharger, and i have a catback. because before the 2.9 i was only seeing like 12.5. we will see this week when i get my interceptor. and if you swap pulleys good luck with those blue screws mine were rediculous!!!!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DANRICKARD
Problems/Service/Maintenance
8
10-01-2015 12:08 AM