[jippii ensio]

Sam, quite impressive 240SX

[Roadracer4life]

Originally Posted by jippii ensio

Sam, quite impressive 240SX

thanks man.. i am putting a set of cams and springs in it tonight hopefully we will make 800whp with it soon..
-Sam

[A418t81]

Originally Posted by Former_Boosted_IS

Eric, I am sure you would agree if the claim of 43 rwhp at peak wasn't listed that this would not be an issue. I think you would also agree that 43 rwhp from velocity and flow doesn't add up over the stock intercooler. With efficieny, flow, and P drop as the main variables, I am just trying to eliminate as many open variables as possible.

As Eric and Sam have already stated, since I haven't had time to get back to this thread, the peak difference of 43 whp is due to the upgraded unit AND the test conditions.

On a dyno, regardless of the fans you have, you are pretty much testing the "heatsink-ability" of an IC. There's little flow across the ICs with regards to being out on a road running 60+ mph. The big difference like I said earlier is that the stock IC is simply out of thermal capacity by the time it reaches high rpm, while the AMS unit has quite a bit left.

Another thing to consider is the thickness of the AMS unit. It's quite thick,and to be efficient needs to have a shroud, which it does. The stock shroud fits tightly back up against the core and directs air through it, rather than allowing air to "scatter" around it. With the large thickness increase, there's a much smaller percentage of that low velocity air output from the fans actually making it through the upgraded core vs. the stock core....even more of a testiment to the much higher thermal load ceiling of the upgraded core.

Oh yeah...hey Sam

[Eric@AMS]

Great car Sam! Ivan here has a pretty wild S14.5...pretty quick too

http://amsperformance.com/ivan_240sx.php

Eric

[Roadracer4life]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

Great car Sam! Ivan here has a pretty wild S14.5...pretty quick too

http://amsperformance.com/ivan_240sx.php

Eric

thanks Eric

AMS knows how to build some sweet cars thats for sure..
ok enough of the nutt swingin back to the IC thread.

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

Ok take a look at the graph the gentleman from Alabama just posted....look at redline. That is showing a near 45 whp gain at redline comparing two cold passes. Even when cold the stock IC heat soaks so bad near redline on a cold pull that the AMS one just walks away with it. I am not really sure what you are trying to get at but you are missing a few key things. The stock core was designed to run 8 psi of boost and was constructed as thus. We are now throwing 14-16 psi at that nearly DOUBLING the input to that core and doing god knows what in way of heat. Seeing a gain like this is not that hard to believe.

You are adding a MUCH more efficient and higher volume core, Increasing the entry and exit ports of the end tanks substantially to 3". completely reworking the end tanks to optimize airflow. Adding in special tapered couplers to aid in flow and velocity. To top if all off you are switching from tube and fin to bar and plate on core construction. It's all right in front of you.

Again, please don;t take this the wrong way but this is not the first intercooler we have made. We have been doing this for a very long time so we know what works. Based on the vastly inferior stock core we are working with on this car these gains are not that out of line.

Again not quite sure what you are digging at but I have answered all of your questions as to where the power is coming from.

Eric

Eric, I am not in any way doubting your expertise or questioning your reputation as a fabricator or tuner. With that said, I can post log after log on the stock intercooler on the exact setup listed here. I can post pre-stock and post-stock intercooler logs as well. In fact, you can probably look them up as I have a ton of them on here. I have done extensive testing in 90F weather with IATs as high as 154F and as low as about 70F and I know what the JB3 on Map 7 will do to boost in these situations. In fact, A418t81 eludes to the fact that IAT boost decay probably played a major role in the difference on these dynos.

If you are saying that your intercooler flow and efficiency account for 43 rwhp at redline at 14-16 psi, then that is your choice. At the same time, I will bet money that under identical circumstances and identical boost curves that your intercooler will not produce 43 rwhp over stock period.

A418t81, I do want to say that you are a huge value to this forum and appreciate everything you add. I just saw the dyno and was looking for more information. If you prefer, I will just leave the thread as is and remove my posts out of respect.

[Eric@AMS]

I think this argument is going nowhere fast lol. You are stating the gain in power at redline is due to the stock FMIC causing heat soak, dropping boost and therefore creating a larger margin. My point is that the reason that problem no longer exists is because the FMIC IS NOW ADDED.... You see where I am coming from. Yes boost is clearly an issues as is colder denser air but that does not exist without this FMIC.

I mean based on your theory you could say its not a larger turbo that gets you more power but the increased volume of air...but without the turbo that would not exist.

If you could manage to keep boost stable on both pulls I do believe the numbers would be less dramatic but as far as real world tests go this is pretty accurate. I mean how many people out there have a JB3 and would be going through this exact circumstance. how many would have the boost dropping off near redline due to heatsoak. I think that would be a pretty common thing for those running a JB3 on the stock FMIC. My point is the intercooler is preventing that decay from happening so the test and claims are valid I feel.

I completely see where you are coming from but to me it seems like you are getting a little too semantic to prove a point. Please don't take that as an insult, just how I am interpreting it. Maybe I am wrong...the internet has a way of making that happen hahaha

In our experience in the field I do think this is on the high side of a HP gain but not out of the realm of possibility. I do believe that this can be possibly duplicated on other cars running the same setups. I respect you being so civil and having this conversation but I feel its best for the thread that we leave this one be.

Eric

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

I think this argument is going nowhere fast lol. You are stating the gain in power at redline is due to the stock FMIC causing heat soak, dropping boost and therefore creating a larger margin. My point is that the reason that problem no longer exists is because the FMIC IS NOW ADDED.... You see where I am coming from. Yes boost is clearly an issues as is colder denser air but that does not exist without this FMIC.

I mean based on your theory you could say its not a larger turbo that gets you more power but the increased volume of air...but without the turbo that would not exist.

If you could manage to keep boost stable on both pulls I do believe the numbers would be less dramatic but as far as real world tests go this is pretty accurate. I mean how many people out there have a JB3 and would be going through this exact circumstance. how many would have the boost dropping off near redline due to heatsoak. I think that would be a pretty common thing for those running a JB3 on the stock FMIC. My point is the intercooler is preventing that decay from happening so the test and claims are valid I feel.

I completely see where you are coming from but to me it seems like you are getting a little to semantic to prove a point. Please don't take that as an insult, just how I am interpreting it.

In our experience in the field I do think this is on the high side of a HP gain but not out of the realm of possibility. I do believe that this can be possibly duplicated on other cars running the same setups. I respect you being so civil and having this conversation but I feel its best for the thread that we leave this one be.

Eric

Eric, I fully respect that and will move along. I have no desire for mud slinging, but just a discussion of facts to benefit the community. Regardless, it seems you do make some quality parts and I am glad you are a part of the community.

[Eric@AMS]

sounds good man, and by all means please continue to ask questions. I love talking to people with a brain and a level head on their shoulders. Especially about tech talk

You made very valid points and you are not wrong by any means....just merely two different ways of looking at it. Thanks

Eric

[A418t81]

Originally Posted by Former_Boosted_IS

A418t81, I do want to say that you are a huge value to this forum and appreciate everything you add. I just saw the dyno and was looking for more information. If you prefer, I will just leave the thread as is and remove my posts out of respect.

Former, I have absolutely no problem with people discussing the results at hand, and having a technical debate about it. That's what discussion forums are for, and we all learn a little (or a lot ) when doing so. I appreciate counter points quite a bit as I'm usually the one who plays devils advocate myself.

That said, you are right in a sense about the IC. NO IC will add 40+ whp with no change in boost pressure. The reason that this addition did do such a thing is due to the fact that boost WAS added over the stock IC run. It's all part of the IAT decay routine intrinsic to the JB3. The whole purpose of this routine is to adapt for the increased cooling capacity of aftermarket units. The boost that has been "added" in this case is actually the boost that isn't trimmed off by the rocketing IATs.

I personaly was a little skeptical, but they have dynos of cars on stock boost pressure gaining 10+ whp. There's certainly plenty of evidence that at double the factory boost, and pushing the envelope of the turbos that another 10-12 whp can be realized with the much cooler IATs, and increased flow through the unit when talking about peak power. The extra gain above 6500 can be explained by my previous few posts.

Also, I was just looking at my stock boost runs. I gained 5-6 whp, but if you look, the dynos deviate in their power production in exactly the same manner as the high boost runs beginning in the low 4k region.

[GreenPlease]

FWIW 14psi doesn't necessarily equal 14psi when it comes to making power. 14psi at 150f is a lot less dense (and therefore contains less oxygen) than 14psi at 100f.

N=PV/RT where N=moles

Scenario 1
AIT:150f
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter (one of our cylinders)
Result: .0171

Scenario 2
AIT: 100F
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter
Result: .0186 moles

By lowering AITs in the second scenario (an aftermarket intercooler) the amount of oxygen available increases by 8.7%, thus power output should increase accordingly. If the car was making 300whp prior to the aftermarket IC, then post aftermarket IC it should make ~326whp. Additional gains may come from less restriction in the intercooler resulting in reduced pumping losses.

[GreenPlease]

Play with this calculator and you'll quickly realize why ICs have a much more dramatic effect on cars with the boost cranked up: http://www.ajdesigner.com/idealgas/i...e_equation.php

[Eric@AMS]

Originally Posted by GreenPlease

FWIW 14psi doesn't necessarily equal 14psi when it comes to making power. 14psi at 150f is a lot less dense (and therefore contains less oxygen) than 14psi at 100f.

N=PV/RT where N=moles

Scenario 1
AIT:150f
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter (one of our cylinders)
Result: .0171

Scenario 2
AIT: 100F
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter
Result: .0186 moles

By lowering AITs in the second scenario (an aftermarket intercooler) the amount of oxygen available increases by 8.7%, thus power output should increase accordingly. If the car was making 300whp prior to the aftermarket IC, then post aftermarket IC it should make ~326whp. Additional gains may come from less restriction in the intercooler resulting in reduced pumping losses.

Very very true. Which is why a car making the same boost on a cold day makes more power than a hot day. Denser air will yield more HP

Thanks Green!

Eric

[dr.roro]

I'm interested in seeing how this FMIC compares to the other ones on the market, particularly Helix and VK. Also, is the AMS FMIC a simple bolt-on like the other two, or does it require a bit of modification?

Also, my understanding of the most recent discussion of the gains is that all things equal, and IC really doesn't add as much power as the OP would suggest. However, in the real world, taking into consideration heatsoak and JB3 tuning adjustments, that the gains observed by the OP can be considered a 'best case scenario.' Does that sound about right?

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by GreenPlease

FWIW 14psi doesn't necessarily equal 14psi when it comes to making power. 14psi at 150f is a lot less dense (and therefore contains less oxygen) than 14psi at 100f.

N=PV/RT where N=moles

Scenario 1
AIT:150f
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter (one of our cylinders)
Result: .0171

Scenario 2
AIT: 100F
Pressure: 14psi
Volume: .5liter
Result: .0186 moles

By lowering AITs in the second scenario (an aftermarket intercooler) the amount of oxygen available increases by 8.7%, thus power output should increase accordingly. If the car was making 300whp prior to the aftermarket IC, then post aftermarket IC it should make ~326whp. Additional gains may come from less restriction in the intercooler resulting in reduced pumping losses.

Are we using the Ideal Gas Law for describing O2 density in a boosted situation? The Ideal Gas Law assumes an incompressible fluid and which is clearly not the case here. I am not arguing more O2 will enter the cylinders, but not anywhere near enough to justify 43 rwhp. Lastly, you cannot use percent increase in O2 to determine power increase. If you logic was indeed true, then doubling the CFMs from the turbo should double the power from 400 rwhp to 800 rwhp.

Take this for what you will, but run I am sure Eric will agree that if you run identical boost curves then you will know what is the AMS intercooler flow and what is common to any aftermarket intercooler. In an ideal world this is exactly what would be done, but in a world of forums and marketing this unfortunately doesn't exist. The only way to know anything is to bench flow the intercooler, log efficiency, log thermal heat capacity, etc. I haven't seen this data, so we have nothing really to go on. Look, I am just like the rest of you guys... I want the best and it seems that sometimes is nearly impossible to determine.

[A418t81]

Originally Posted by dr.roro

I'm interested in seeing how this FMIC compares to the other ones on the market, particularly Helix and VK. Also, is the AMS FMIC a simple bolt-on like the other two, or does it require a bit of modification?

Also, my understanding of the most recent discussion of the gains is that all things equal, and IC really doesn't add as much power as the OP would suggest. However, in the real world, taking into consideration heatsoak and JB3 tuning adjustments, that the gains observed by the OP can be considered a 'best case scenario.' Does that sound about right?

Nothing really "best case" about it. I put the car on the dyno and did a pull, then put on the FMIC, and did a pull. The results are what you see. Call it what you will, blame it on what you want, but the car made an extra 43 whp up top that it didn't before DUE to the FMIC and the effects that it caused. You can bet your pants this will show up on the street as well against other units that don't perform as well.

[jpsimon]

Deja vous! These results aren't surprising at all. I don't see why there is such confusion.

A418t81, the JB3 maps adapt right? It's the same as me going from procede stage 2 to stage 3... I had big gains with the addition of the FMIC and stage 3 map (along with repeatable results). My results weren't confusing or weird, and neither are these!

I plan on doing a new FMIC comparison shortly , so stay tuned!

[GreenPlease]

Are we using the Ideal Gas Law for describing O2 density in a boosted situation?

Yep. For basic back of the envelope math I can't think of anything better. Can you? BTW, my approximation correlates with real world observations.

Also, you are being very misleading when you say:

If you logic was indeed true, then doubling the CFMs from the turbo should double the power from 400 rwhp to 800 rwhp

Because CFM also has a relation to pressure. At the same temperature, 300 CFM at 14 PSI carries the same amount of oxygen as 600 CFM at 7 PSI. In your above example, if pressure were held constant and firctional losses were constant, then.... yes power would double. I think the tuners on the board will back me when I say that all that matters when it comes to making power is:

-how much oxygen is in the cylinder
-how much fuel is in the cylinder
-thermal efficiency (CR and timing)

[A418t81]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

Deja vous! These results aren't surprising at all. I don't see why there is such confusion.

A418t81, the JB3 maps adapt right? It's the same as me going from procede stage 2 to stage 3... I had big gains with the addition of the FMIC and stage 3 map (along with repeatable results). My results weren't confusing or weird, and neither are these!

I plan on doing a new FMIC comparison shortly , so stay tuned!

Yes, and the later 1.4 beta maps have a more aggressive IAT based boost attenuation routine than the earlier versions.

Sam just sent me a text and said that on STD correct, the dyno goes to ~375/404, IIRC. Hopefully I can get the stock and high boost runs in STD for a more even comparison, despite the fact that this DJ still reads a little off from the average one.

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

Deja vous! These results aren't surprising at all. I don't see why there is such confusion.

A418t81, the JB3 maps adapt right? It's the same as me going from procede stage 2 to stage 3... I had big gains with the addition of the FMIC and stage 3 map (along with repeatable results). My results weren't confusing or weird, and neither are these!

I plan on doing a new FMIC comparison shortly , so stay tuned!

So my question to you is what was due to the intercooler and what was due to the new map on the Procede? I know you will say... what's the difference? However, if you cannot seperate the two, then how do we know what intercooler is best?

Like any other testing at all, you must eliminate all outside variables to know what the intercooler is adding. In this case that can be done by running identical boost across the entire rpm range. This is a simple concept and it is the standard for testing any part... period. If you do it any other way, then this is nothing other than inferring results through a cloud of changes.

An example:

I run 7 psi with the stock intake and then 11 psi with DCI's and it gains 40 rwhp. Does that mean the DCI's gained 40 rwhp on my car or was it because of the increase in boost?

[TurboBimmer]

Very interesting discussion.

With tunes adapting themselves to mods, it gets very difficult to compare hardware. There may be some objective factors (size, density, flow) which can be compared, but pure hp-gain indications don't tell the whole truth.

[jippii ensio]

Upgraded intercooler results in more power by allowing 1. less pressure drop, 2. more boost and 3. lower intake temps. It does not make any sense to say that what would have been the power if one or two of the above would be excluded. For any normal person measuring the best power before and after the swap and calculating the difference is the gain that is attributable to the upgraded IC.

The DCI example is far off. DCI does not enable the boost to be 4psi more. So that example must include changing the map from stock to full tune.

Let's slap a huge turbo on with no other changes. What happens? The car sucks. You must tune for it. So do you say that the big turbo lost power, or do you say that it gained, since it surely gains power when properly tuned for.

Saying that let's keep all the other variables constant means that nothing increases power.

We cannot keep the three main effects constant, since upgrading IC is done to change those three factors. Pressure loss, boost and IATs.

If you have a stock IC and still try to keep the boost at the level that uis optimal for the upgraded IC, the system knocks, retards timing and loses power. So if you want to compare the results at that boost level, the gains are more than in the dyno graph.

For a true gain you must compare the best results that you can have with the stock IC to the best results you can have for the upgraded IC. This is what is done in the first post.