[Clap135]

See I don't agree LOL. Map out these turbos. Do you honestly believe a harder working g Turbo that's off the map will make more power with iats that's are 5-10 degrees colder? Cause I believe a Turbo that's more efficient will make more power with higher iats. Cooling the charge make the air denser and thus makes more power....however when the Turbo is more efficient the air that's comprossed is already cooler to begin with cause Turbo is closer to its range. 5-10 degrees wont count for crap. Just like my datalog shows. My iats with Meth are better on the stocker than of these intercoolers, say I added one of these intercoolers. My iats will drop maybe another 5-10 degrees at wot. Do you think the added power will come from the iat drop or flow increase due to a pressure drop. I'm going with flow increase.

[Overboost]

wareagle900 i agree with you 100%... I realize it doesnt make sense arguing with clap135 because he can't respect the the view point of others. As wareagle900 has said flow increase will only make u get to the boost target faster. Clap135 all i'm saying is that the charged air ends up in the intake manifold. At any given psi if the turbo is off the map or not the colder denser air will ALWAYS make more power. Volume is kept the constant within the intake manifold and since we have a boost target, so is pressure withing the intake manifold therefore using the equation PV=nRT the only other variable at this point affecting power is temperature. A better flowing intercooler will reach the target faster and have better boost recovery helping a 6mt so as wareagle900 has said the true test will be the quartermile for our argument. And ur point about flow may be more likely to come out on top in this sense especially if a 6mt is the test car since the auto's dont lose as much boost through shifts. If the cars were made without wastegates so the turbos were free to spin until pressure became a limiting factor to the amount of rpm, then ur argument of flow would win almost everytime.

[wareagle900]

Yes, I think we are on the same page as far as this argument goes. And luckily we are on the winning side!

I mean think about it, say The helix hypothetically had a 1psi pressure loss, which it doesn't but we will say for the sake of the argument that it does. And ait of 100 degrees at wot

Then we will say the ams hypothetically has a pressure loss of .5 psi and ait of 125 at wot.

I honestly think these numbers pretty well show the difference between the two however I think the pressure drop would be less for both.

Now, at wide open throttle at around 4k, how long do you think it will take to make .5 pounds of boost? A fraction of a second? We will say a quarter of a second although it's probably less then that. So the car with the ams has a .25 second advantage over the helix car right? Wrong.

The car with the helix is ingesting air that is 25 degrees cooler than the ams. I am not sure what that translates to in horsepower but I would guess around 10 to 15. Maybe more. I think that that extra 15 horsepower that the helix car has is going to match and surpass the .25 sec. Advantage the ams car had.

It does not matter if the turbo is opperating in peak efficiency or not. The temp that matters is the ait not the pre intercooler temp. Even if the helix car had pre intercooler temps 1 thousand degrees hotter than the ams it will still make more power because the ait are cooler!

[wareagle900]

Clap135, do you not agree with my post 222?

And another thing is that as far as efficiency goes, the turbo that makes more boost will always make more power. A .5 psi pressure drop is most definitely not going to cause the turbo to operate out of their efficiency range anyway.

The variables are ait boost pressure and the time it takes to reach boost target.

In our case, boost pressure is a constant set by the boost target. So either way, efficient or not, all cars with all intercoolers will hit their boost target. That basically makes turbo efficiency irrelevant.

The only way efficiency comes in to play at all is the possibility of a cooler pre-intercooler charge air temp, but since this is not the temp. That is going into the engine all that really matters is the temperature of the air being combusted and the helix has so far shown to consistently produce the coolest ait.

[valerun]

Originally Posted by Overboost

wareagle900 i agree with you 100%... I realize it doesnt make sense arguing with clap135 because he can't respect the the view point of others. As wareagle900 has said flow increase will only make u get to the boost target faster. Clap135 all i'm saying is that the charged air ends up in the intake manifold. At any given psi if the turbo is off the map or not the colder denser air will ALWAYS make more power. Volume is kept the constant within the intake manifold and since we have a boost target, so is pressure withing the intake manifold therefore using the equation PV=nRT the only other variable at this point affecting power is temperature. A better flowing intercooler will reach the target faster and have better boost recovery helping a 6mt so as wareagle900 has said the true test will be the quartermile for our argument. And ur point about flow may be more likely to come out on top in this sense especially if a 6mt is the test car since the auto's dont lose as much boost through shifts. If the cars were made without wastegates so the turbos were free to spin until pressure became a limiting factor to the amount of rpm, then ur argument of flow would win almost everytime.

+1

The only SECOND-ORDER effects for which the flow makes a difference isa slightly higher power loss to exhaust backpressure. A turbo working harder to get that additional 0.5psi of boost will take more of the exhaust energy and therefore add to backpressure. But this is likely a small effect (not sure what the typical power loss due to turbo load). Might be a bigger effect if you are at the extreme boost levels (& as a result, very low compressor efficiency). But the latter will probably hit you only well above 20psi boost...

[AJ335]

wut abt AA intercoolers ?

[az335iat]

Originally Posted by valerun

+1

The only SECOND-ORDER effects for which the flow makes a difference isa slightly higher power loss to exhaust backpressure. A turbo working harder to get that additional 0.5psi of boost will take more of the exhaust energy and therefore add to backpressure. But this is likely a small effect (not sure what the typical power loss due to turbo load). Might be a bigger effect if you are at the extreme boost levels (& as a result, very low compressor efficiency). But the latter will probably hit you only well above 20psi boost...

Added back pressure is not a small effect. Do you realize that a low pressure loss IC can be much more effective at lowering back pressure than going to the most expensive exhaust system made.
Did you ever see a 30FF code.... low boost pressure. It refers to the turbo's "low pressure side" or air out. The pressure drop across the exhaust turbine is related to the pressure ratio across the compressor side and turbo efficiency and is typically much larger that the compressor discharge pressure.
A 2 psi drop on the compressor discharge will translate roughly into a 2.5 psi drop on the exhaust pressure side..... even more if the snails are running out of steam.
This explains why a larger, more efficient turbo, running the same boost can generate more power than small turbos running off the edge of their chart even with the same IAT's.

[themyst]

After scouring this thread, I see that the ETS FMIC has the highest pressure drop of the bunch.

[Big Tom]

Originally Posted by themyst

After scouring this thread, I see that the ETS FMIC has the highest pressure drop of the bunch.

Definitely caused by ETS staggered internal fins.

[themyst]

Originally Posted by Big Tom

Definitely caused by ETS staggered internal fins.

What is the pressure drop of say the Big Tom FMIC?

[Big Tom]

Originally Posted by themyst

What is the pressure drop of say the Big Tom FMIC?

Probably one of the lowest out there due the big size of the in- and outlets, the huge core and the non staggered internal fins.

[Tiago@VRSF]

Originally Posted by Big Tom

Probably one of the lowest out there due the big size of the in- and outlets, the huge core and the non staggered internal fins.

You should hold off with the "probablys" until you have some facts to back up your assumptions.

[Big Tom]

Originally Posted by tvieira24

You should hold off with the "probablys" until you have some facts to back up your assumptions.

I'm not absolutely 100% shure about this, so that's why I used the word probably in this case.

But if I use a little logical thinking, some basic technical knowledge combined with the flow principles, I could make a rough conclusion based only on assumptions and call it a day.

[TurboBullett@Ambient Thermal Management]

Originally Posted by Big Tom

Definitely caused by ETS staggered internal fins.

There are many other things to consider when making a blanket statement like this...some other things that affect pressure drop(in the intercooler) are inlet outlet size and shape,endtank shape, core size and entry(flat or rounded entry) fin density and type(ie your single fin pack at 10fpi will have similar restriction to a staggered fin pack at 5fpi. On that subject an intercoolers job is to cool the air charge adequately with as little restriction as necessary to do the job AND be able to do this for multiple gear pulls. Its a balance in design when building the custom unit ie a larger core can have a higher density/staggered fin pack and still have low pressure drop, this higher density also increases the units thermal mass and allows it to thwart heatsoak for a longer period of time. when we were prototyping/designing the helix intercooler we tested several different cores in regards to fin density/type and charge and ambient tube height.

[themyst]

After re-reading the thread concerning the ETS FMIC, I see that the "average" pressure drop is 1psi in 4th gear according to their data, although I saw 1.5psi drop @ 16psi on the spreadsheet gathered information, which is not an improvement over stock. My question is what boost level was this 1psi pressure drop measured at?

I would imagine pressure drop is critical for us high boost guys pushing upwards of 20psi on stock turbos. That would mean there are still some gains to be realized with a lower pressure drop since the turbos are working that much less to attain the same performance. The saving grace of the ETS unit is the improved plumbing over stock, which is far more beneficial due to improved flow over a unit that recycles the stock plumbing.

I did realize a 10whp gain from 17.5psi to 18.5psi which is in line with expectations for bumping the boost 1psi with the ETS FMIC. My question is would I gain another 15whp if I maxed out the boost @ 20psi (PROcede limited)?

[kanecvl]

where is the hpf data/datalog?

[Proper Motion LLC]

Originally Posted by Big Tom

Probably one of the lowest out there due the big size of the in- and outlets, the huge core and the non staggered internal fins.

bigger does not equate to less pressure drop tho.

It would "flow" better (less pressure drop) without an intercooler and nothing but straight piping from turbo outlets to throttle body.

[Proper Motion LLC]

Originally Posted by themyst

Who cares honestly, add meth injection into the mix and your choice of FMIC becomes less relevant. What matters is the FMICs listed in this thread are all doing their job.

Add meth to the equation, and the FMIC's pressure drop just becomes that much more important than it's cooling capabilities.

[M3 Eater]

I am upgrading my stock fmic with the goal of reducing my WPM readings. Like clap said, meth brings temps to an optimal level so why not try to get all the cooling, all the hp with less load on the turbos. Here is where pressure drop and flow mean more to me than cooling. Even a cheap fmic that is clean with very low pressure drop when coupled with meth is a good decision, even when your temps, boost, and timing is right where you want them.
I chose the spearco knock off from godspeed. It hardly matches the quality of the rest of my mods but it should lower my wpm signifigantly at any boost level. The unit Requires no cutting, bolts up in like 30 min and even though cooling is not the very best, pressure drop and flow should beat the stocker as long as its not damaged in shipping.
Waste gate duty is something hardly mentioned in this thread. I expect for everyone to rag on my goodspeed set up but if the waste gate duty improves over stock, which shouldn't be hard to do, I can rest easy knowing that my turbos are going to hang in there just a bit longer.
Now all of these amazing intercoolers are capible of reducing waste gate duty and giving us an idea of pressure drop from a functional stand point. I'd love any of the units mentioned in this thread, but $800-$1000 for these units seems like a bit much.
Even the spearco unit retails for $1000+.
Even if I do end up with a chinese core with only 1/2 the cooling capacity of the Spearco, if they coppied the rest well enough to produce the pressure drop advertised, I am going to benefit signifigantly from changing out of the stocker. If i get everything the add states on the godspeed, it will be an increadible value. If I only get slightly improved flow and lower my pressure drop with no lag, I will let my meth take care of the rest.
All of that being said... most of the reports on this unit are poor. Poor welds, poor positioning for max air flow out of either of the bumper styles, and lots of folks trying to save a buck end up returning the unit and buying something better. I am willing to gamble that its better than the stock unit. My biggest concern is that the core will break apart and get sucked into the snails. Reports are that the cores from godspeed, although not the most efficient, appear durable. For $340 its worth a shot IMHO.
I should be installing it this weekend or maybe Monday next week.
I won't muddy up this high end FMIC comparison with logs of this unit but it was mentioned earlier (ebay intercooler) and might be apropriate for those like me that are 100% happy with iat, boost levels, and hp, but are concerned about their turbos sucking air through an oily old plastic unit.

[UncRoRo]

sorry I can't find this, anyone know what the pressure drop is for the AMS FMIC core?

[B3 BT]

Originally Posted by TTurboBullett

Cmon guys we STILL need INDEPENDANT 2-3-4 gear datalogs from the following manufacturers FMICS:
-HPF
-AA
-RPI
-VK
-Stett
-ETS
-forge


please make sure the tests are done between 58-85 degree ambient temps and at a boost level of 13.5-14.5 psi so we can standardize the testing!

log boost, ait and rpm and note ambient temperature at time of test!

Hi,
Here are the OEM IAT vs RPI IAT's. Ambient temperature was 46 and 48°F, pressure boost was 17 psi, my car is equiped with low compression pistons. (sorry for not respecting the standardization)

RPI FMIC IAT's are 20-25°F lower than OEM FMIC IAT's.
Both logs are 2-3-4 gear logs

OEM FMIC IAT at 205km/h (127mph): 113°F
RPI FMIC IAT at 205km/h (127mph): 90°F

[M3 Eater]

Anyone have logs with target and preboost both? How much pressure drop is expected at say 17 psi? My stock looks to have less drop then this xo2 but temps are much better with the xo2. Car feels sluggish off the line, at partial throttle but at wot I think the car feels strong. Thing is... I don't drive around wot often. I don't want to loose my low end torque in an attempt to find mid and top end. Pressure drop sucks... I did find a ton of oil in the core. I soaked it and may give it another try.