| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Thu, 06 October 2005 23:27
 
|
 |
IMO there's no such thing as too big.
There are other factors to consider besides the overall dimensions though. Core type, end tank construction, direction of flow, condition of the fins etc.
I might add that I have a very fat cooler on my Supra (two JZA80 cores joined together) and I find it's had a detrimental effect on overall engine cooling. The cooler itself works really well, but it also prevents a lot of airflow getting to the radiator. I believe this is the major reason for my cooling problems, which is why I'm ditching the cooling-brick shortly in favour of a much smaller 600x300x76 eBay cooler.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
melbourne
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Thu, 06 October 2005 23:50
|
|
In line with what Norbie has said, you will get diminishing returns with increasing intercooler width/fatness.
read "maximum boost" if you want to learn about intercoolers, and plan on using one with inlet and outlet pipes on opposite corners of the core.
one of those hybrid knockoffs should be fine, and if it isn't good enough, they are cheap enough to turn in to a coffee table.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 00:11
|
|
Cheers dudes. Here's what the cooler looks like... i don't know any of the flow rates/pressure figures unfortunately.
|
|
|
Location:
Melbourne
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 00:36
|
|
|
PWR make a cooler similar to the size your after, which is what i am running now and for the mere sum of 430 dollars you get a sexcellent cooler. Core design allows proper flow and cooling of charge are whilst also allowing air to reach your radiator, they come under the name aero 2 and basically use a pre fab end tank which is the reason why the price is a lot lower than the usual run of the mill coolers available from pwr, though that said the end tank is the real restriction of the cooler and doesnt allow you to entirly use the whole core of the cooler.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 00:46
|
|
Looking at those shots the end tanks are welded straight onto open core, no sort of baffles or whatever. Intake charge is mostly gonna flow straight through it one side to the other. Most of the bottom of the core is effectively dead weight. That is why (as shinybluesteel said) you look for a corner to corner setup, which is the most efficient basic design.
Hey shiny - been looking for a copy of that book for ages ay. I borrowed it from the library ages ago but its gone now (any wonder). Who is the authour & where can i get it? 
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 02:49
|
|
|
If an I/C is bigger than it needs to be, you're adding lag.
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 02:52
|
|
BTW by 'corner to corner', do you mean like this? 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
melbourne
Registered:
June 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 02:59
|
|
absolutely not!
both of those corners are on the same side,
for it to be "opposite corners" the left end tank would look as it does (with pipe pointing down), but the end tank on the right would have the pipe pointing up.
Also, you are better off having more shorter tubes than less longer ones.
|
|
|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 03:16
|
|
|
...meh.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 04:08
|
|
| Stefan wrote on Fri, 07 October 2005 12:49 |
If an I/C is bigger than it needs to be, you're adding lag.
|
In theory this is true. In practice the effect is negligible.
Compare the flow rate of your turbo to the volume of a large intercooler and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 04:25
|
|
| Norbie wrote on Fri, 07 October 2005 14:08 |
| Stefan wrote on Fri, 07 October 2005 12:49 |
If an I/C is bigger than it needs to be, you're adding lag.
|
In theory this is true. In practice the effect is negligible.
Compare the flow rate of your turbo to the volume of a large intercooler and you'll see what I mean.
|
There are so many variables here, but its more to do with static drag than volume. If you had an IC with say a 10L volume it will cause more loss than a straight 100mm pipe with the same volume.
I havent done this but find a car with a way oversized IC & measure boost before vs boost after. You should measure a drop off, more than can be attributed to density changes.
Without going to any effort, corner to corner looks like this.
=----
----=
That should be clear enough.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 04:27
|
|
That didnt come out at all 
_________
=
_________=
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 04:28
|
|
piece of crap
if i type a space its for a bloody reason!
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
October 2003
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 04:45
|
|
|
IMHO all that thickness is useless. It is better to have a thinner cooler with more surface area and staggered inlet / outlet as suggested. That thing is just big and would be inefficient.
|
|
|
Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 05:52
|
|
|
also may well effect the cooling of the radiator or even how much you have to chop away from the bumper but at the end of the day its going to cool better than no i/c so aslong as you didnt pay the earth the who cares bump it on and see how it goes
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
July 2005
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 06:07
|
|
Yeah, just chop it down the middle (thickness) first, then turn one end tank 180deg. so air goes thru it, and go for it.
The whole concept of air to air intercooling is surface area to expose to wind chill. Making your intercooler thicker follows the same logic as installing it sideways or on your rear bumper or something.
|
|
|
Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 07:08
|
|
| mic* wrote on Fri, 07 October 2005 16:07 |
Yeah, just chop it down the middle (thickness) first, then turn one end tank 180deg. so air goes thru it, and go for it.
The whole concept of air to air intercooling is surface area to expose to wind chill. Making your intercooler thicker follows the same logic as installing it sideways or on your rear bumper or something.
|
ahhh well not exactly the i/c is effectively a heat sink so the more metal it has the more heat it can absorb from the charge air and the longer it will take to heatsoak plus the air will travel thru the core
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 08:23
|
|
|
Exactly. Most intercoolers act as a heatsink more than anything, which is why a lot of drag cars have small but very thick coolers.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2004
|
|
Re: Intercooler question
|
Fri, 07 October 2005 09:47
|
|
Thanks for all the replies. Looks like a dirty cheap ebay cooler's the way to go then 
That fatty IC isn't what i'd call "dirt cheap" so i'll let it go.
Eddie.
|
|
|
