What intercooler are you running and for what reasons have you made this selection?

[turbobitt]

I realized your thinking when I saw that you chose a 3.5" core. If you would have chosen a 4.5" core it would have flowed more with diminishing amounts of extra cooling with unnecessary weight. This is a project of compromises and I like the ones you've made. Good job.

The 3.5 core was chosen for a few reasons.
1 - There were cast tanks readily available to keep the cost down. Although cost wasn't our immediate concern we still need to be conscious of this if we are to produce these for others in the future. The more shelf parts the cheaper it will be.
2 - Even with this 25x12x3.5 core will still manage to take advantage of the 1500 CFM flow capacity that the vertical design has to offer and will probably outflow all commercially available horizontal flow designs. So if we were to consider this as a baseline size, we could consider bigger or maybe even small light weight designs in the future. Think about this, we could conceivably make a 1000 CFM design and would probably have no pressure drop and would be lightweight and compact and possible still have enough cooling capacity to handle most bolt-on mods. Only time and data will tell. The only drawback is that fabrication cost would still be the same and may not make sense to produce it.
3 - We do have a 4.5" and 6" max effort(3000CFM) design that require fabricated tanks. As you could imagine the weight goes up significantly. The 6" core and tanks will be about 60-64 pounds total weight compared to about 30-34 pounds for the 3.5 core.
AG.

 

[SpeedRacerX]

Apparently my post was invisible [emoji23]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[turbobitt]

Is this something we will be able to buy at some point and is there a target "mod range, hp range, quarter range" that this IC is intended for??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Anything can be bought but at this point we need to have the car and the pipes will need to be custom fit to your car. I would not recommend this to just anyone looking for cheap bolt-on parts as this is not the target audience. Those who are racing with turbo limited classes would benefit since there would be a gain in boost due to lower pressure drop.
AG.

 

[turbobitt]

There is a noteworthy comment about this intercooler support. This was not part of my original design and actually happy the fabricator took this path.
If you notice the top and bottom tanks are tied together so if something goes south with one of the tanks you wouldn't be driving over it.
AG.

 

[turbobitt]

Some updated pics of mine since its been mounted and plumbed.
AG.

 

[SpeedRacerX]

Anything can be bought but at this point we need to have the car and the pipes will need to be custom fit to your car. I would not recommend this to just anyone looking for cheap bolt-on parts as this is not the target audience. Those who are racing with turbo limited classes would benefit since there would be a gain in boost due to lower pressure drop.
AG.

"Cheap bolt-on parts?" Not sure how to take that considering the amount of money I have into my car or can put into my car if I want.

I think I understand what you were trying to say. This is more for hardcore racers. Is that right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[turbobitt]

"Cheap bolt-on parts?" Not sure how to take that considering the amount of money I have into my car or can put into my car if I want.

I think I understand what you were trying to say. This is more for hardcore racers. Is that right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

I'll make it clear, we are not in the business to compete with offshore parts. If you are price shopping than move along. BTW - this is not meant to be offensive towards you or anyone else. The goal is to make something that we think is the best out there and specifically tailered to our needs and not simply the biggest and baddest out there. At this point we are not making that claim just yet but just simply gathering data........
AG

 

[SpeedRacerX]

I often buy the best in life. So I'll keep watching this thread. Thanks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[bison]

I often buy the best in life. So I'll keep watching this thread. Thanks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

This Intercooler with the new EFR turbo should be a bad ass combo. 1000+hp


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SAMBALLS1]

Subscribed... I need a bad ass intercooler that will help me... I'm in for a design like allan has on his car... I will tell you I have had the opportunity to test a couple on my ride... it's a 8sec 109.. and I will tell you that what some of the "retailers" that have been around here for a while sell SUCK ASS.. I picked up almost 8-10mph switching from one style to another... I will say that allans new design is way more desireable than the one I'm currently using and I am trapping 150+mph in the 1/4...

 

[Ttype6]

it was more of a little joke comment and I took no offense.. I have a little thicker skin than that.
AG

You do,however deserve praise.

 

[Ttype6]

I forgot about the Spearco universal that Turbonetics sells. It is similar to my Kenne-Bell but is .5" thicker and has 9" long tubes instead of the 6" long tubes that the Kenne-Bell intercooler has. This will flow about 1,150 cfm which makes it another alternative that will outflow almost all horizontal tubed intercooleers for our cars.

https://turboneticsinc.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&manufacturer_id=12&product_id=104

 

[czimpel]

Some updated pics of mine since its been mounted and plumbed.
AG.
View attachment 301614 View attachment 301615 View attachment 301616 View attachment 301617 View attachment 301618 View attachment 301619

I'm a little confused on this design. How is this one better than a horizontal flow? It still has a long path of tubes to run through compared to the one you are working on that Bison had posted. I know that this core is much thicker, but is there a benefit to running 2 sections of shorter tubes vs the single run of longer tubes?

 

[bison]

I'm a little confused on this design. How is this one better than a horizontal flow? It still has a long path of tubes to run through compared to the one you are working on that Bison had posted. I know that this core is much thicker, but is there a benefit to running 2 sections of shorter tubes vs the single run of longer tubes?

It's 6" thick. Where it loses flow with the long pass it gains it back with the thick core. His old 3" v1? was a killer. Over 6psi pressure drop and the engine wasn't even close to all in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[deezdad]

Not that one would, but for the sake of discussion how would an ace intercooler like this affect the performance of a 49/44/60 car? Would it allow it to be all that it could be or would It promote surge, lag or other problems?

 

[bison]

Not that one would, but for the sake of discussion how would an ace intercooler like this affect the performance of a 49/44/60 car? Would it allow it to be all that it could be or would It promote surge, lag or other problems?

It would empty your wallet and probably add 25lbs of unnecessary weight to the front of the car. Alcohol fuel and no Intercooler is probably the fastest with those turbos. No one has really built an engine around any of those little guys


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ttype6]

I'm a little confused on this design. How is this one better than a horizontal flow? It still has a long path of tubes to run through compared to the one you are working on that Bison had posted. I know that this core is much thicker, but is there a benefit to running 2 sections of shorter tubes vs the single run of longer tubes?

It does allow for the greatest number of tubes and the car doesn't have to be cut up because the inlet and outlet tubes are both on the bottom. Would it flow more with an inlet on top and an outlet on the bottom making one pass through short tubes? Yes. Will it work a lot better than what he had? Yes. It'll be fun to see the data start coming in.

 

[turbobitt]

I'm a little confused on this design. How is this one better than a horizontal flow? It still has a long path of tubes to run through compared to the one you are working on that Bison had posted. I know that this core is much thicker, but is there a benefit to running 2 sections of shorter tubes vs the single run of longer tubes?

Yes it has two paths but the total length is 24"x 6" and is still greater flow capacity than say a 27"x3" or even 4.5" thk. This is my own experiment to get the best flow and cooling capacity and will see what will happen once we collect the data. As a single pass design this core would flow 3000 CFM so cut is half as a dual pass I'm sure its still over 1200+ cfm considering that there are probably some losses due to turns and flow change directions. So in reality Bison's version may possibly flow better but also may not cool as well at my power level.
AG.

 

[gunzandgearz]

Yes it has two paths but the total length is 24"x 6" and is still greater flow capacity than say a 27"x3" or even 4.5" thk. This is my own experiment to get the best flow and cooling capacity and will see what will happen once we collect the data. As a single pass design this core would flow 3000 CFM so cut is half as a dual pass I'm sure its still over 1200+ cfm considering that there are probably some losses due to turns and flow change directions. So in reality Bison's version may possibly flow better but also may not cool as well at my power level.
AG.

Agree with that,better to give up flow with a denser charge than to have more flow with a less dense charge.curious to know what the delta p's are after some testing,please post

 

[czimpel]

Anything new with the intercooler testing?