Jump to content

Whipple or Magnusson supercharger for SierraDenali 6.2?

toro1966

By toro1966
in Engines & Drivetrain

Recommended Posts

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

AFM needs to be turned off. I've never heard of anyone with FI leaving it on.

Amen! Why would u.... Lol

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply
bigsapper Enthusiast

bigsapper

Posted
Posted

AFM needs to be turned off. I've never heard of anyone with FI leaving it on.

 

I'll elaborate (I was on my phone earlier) and say that all the manufacturers that supply a tune with the supercharger, disable AFM in the tune.

 

Strictly speaking, I don't know if it *has* to be turned off with this application. It might be worth contacting the manufacturer and asking if it's possible and/or advisable to leave AFM turned on.

ScreaminChevy Enthusiast

ScreaminChevy

Posted
Posted

I don't know for sure but can't see afm being a problem with a boosted engine. it only switches to v4 mode when under slight load anyways. Once it was under boost it would be in v8 mode.

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

holy cow it feels good to post from a computer, missed my mechanical keyboard so much!!! lol

 

Anyway.

 

I have no idea but this is my theory.....

 

AFM would cause a lot of problems with the cylinders that have de activated because they are all receiving boost evenly, as in the air from the intake manifold is distributing it to all 8 cyl.

 

 

Now ,...... to contradict my self...how that is different from everyday use under naturally aspirated conditions beats me.....

 

 

 

Maybe it has something to do with boost and other do dats ?

toro1966 Enthusiast

toro1966

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I went with the Magnuson for my 5.3. its utterly amazing

Where did you purchase your kit from and are you running the stock Magnusson tune?

 

holy cow it feels good to post from a computer, missed my mechanical keyboard so much!!! lol

 

Anyway.

 

I have no idea but this is my theory.....

 

AFM would cause a lot of problems with the cylinders that have de activated because they are all receiving boost evenly, as in the air from the intake manifold is distributing it to all 8 cyl.

 

 

Now ,...... to contradict my self...how that is different from everyday use under naturally aspirated conditions beats me.....

 

 

 

Maybe it has something to do with boost and other do dats ?

That's kind of my thought - I don't see a problem with leaving it on. You're right though, will probably,y have to contact tuner to get custom tune.

sailor9908 Enthusiast

sailor9908

Posted
Posted

Where did you purchase your kit from and are you running the stock Magnusson tune?

 

That's kind of my thought - I don't see a problem with leaving it on. You're right though, will probably,y have to contact tuner to get custom tune.

Bought my kit from summit racing and I'm running a Black Bear Tune, the Magnuson tune was too rough for me, felt like it was meant to go balls to the wall and nothing else

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sailor9908 Enthusiast

sailor9908

Posted
Posted

When I got me tune back from Magnuson they left AFM on and I hated it. The truck would constantly drop in/out of 4 cyl mode and with my exhaust set up it sounded and drove horribly. I would highly recommend turning it off once you get the blower.

  • 1 month later...
TREBISH New Member

TREBISH

Posted
Posted

I have a 2015 sierra denali with the 6.2 and had a Magnusson supercharger installed on it. Had it set at 8PSI and the truck ran GREAT. At 18k miles, the injector for cylinder 5 faulted, the piston melted and destroyed the cylinder wall. I put the truck back to stock with the stock files re-installed and all calibrations cleared. GM still denied my warranty due to 'suspicions of modifications'. Have you guys heard of any problems with the injectors on the 6.2's? I know they recently updated the part # so I'm assuming GM knows of a problem and had it fixed. I've since obtained legal counsel and am playing the waiting game. My local dealer tried charging me $15k for a new engine installed. Any feedback would be appreciated!

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

I hope you lose. That's my feedback.

Little harsh no??

 

Its going to be very difficult to prove that it was the injector failure that cause this and not the supercharger.

 

Sent from my Note 4 on Tapashit

foo.c Enthusiast

foo.c

Posted
Posted

Little harsh no??

 

Its going to be very difficult to prove that it was the injector failure that cause this and not the supercharger.

 

Sent from my Note 4 on Tapashit

 

 

He's ripping me off, how should I feel?

bigsapper Enthusiast

bigsapper

Posted
Posted

Yeah, a bad injector isn't going to melt a piston on a stock motor. And if you admit the supercharger that's a prima facie denial right there.

 

Sorry for your loss.

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

 

 

He's ripping me off, how should I feel?

I don't follow....??

 

Magnuson Moss or not a blower you will get NO help from the dealer. Unless its ordering parts /engines and you paing for it.

 

Sent from my Note 4 on Tapashit

07Softail Senior Enthusiast

07Softail

Posted
Posted

If the Injector caused the problem it's on GM not the Huffer. The auto makers use this as a way of getting around their cheap ass parts failing. IMO GM will have to prove that the aftermarket part caused the issue which they can't....the supercharger is their scapegoat at this point.

 

RT

foo.c Enthusiast

foo.c

Posted
Posted

I don't follow....??

 

 

Sent from my Note 4 on Tapashit

 

 

He's costing me money directly and indirectly. I don't want to get into the direct part, but poseurs like this guy are partly the reason GM is denying warranties and costs are going up and warranty coverage getting shorter.

 

Taking the blower off and trying to pass it off as stock was kind of shady in my book, but hey, no harm in trying. Getting lawyers involved because they won't pay for your play is BS that costs the rest of us money.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...