RJC's New Intercooler

JRSGN

A$$ deep
Joined
May 23, 2001
Just got this picture & I thought I would share.
 

Attachments

  • RJCvsCOMPETITOR.jpg
    RJCvsCOMPETITOR.jpg
    53 KB · Views: 733
Do they all come with the nice ding on the left hand endtank :biggrin:

Nice looking piece!
BW
 
Old News but Good News.
Thanks to Jason for another product.

Let's see the MATs!!! :eek:
 
John Wilde said:
Old News but Good News.
Thanks to Jason for another product.

Let's see the MATs!!! :eek:


>>> Well Why didn't post about it then ??? And yes thank you Jason.
 
That thing looks as big as the paxton IC I had on my cobra. Hell, maybe its bigger. On the paxton one, they're at the bottom, right in the middle of the IC, pointing up. Wouldnt those inlets be a really good location for a TR? You wouldnt need much ducting at all. Plus I only saw about a .5psi pressure drop with it. But that was only at 11.5psi. I wonder how it would stack up against this RJC monster.

1300001.gif


That RJC one looks really awesome. What is that, like 1 million fins? :eek: RJC makes great products all around.
 
JRSGN said:
>>> Well Why didn't post about it then ??? And yes thank you Jason.


I was not sure that it was to be public knowledge yet.
I can't wait to see a couple of these run especially the double core version.
 
John Wilde said:
I was not sure that it was to be public knowledge yet.
I can't wait to see a couple of these run especially the double core version.


>>>Well then I guess that wouldn't make it Old news to some then... Yes I can't wait either.
 
Looks.......the same with 2 more rows. I am not gonna form an alliance with in this a big 'ol intercooler stink since Race Jace and Cotton have both provided good service. I am just not sure how much 2 more rows behind the bumper are gonna do if the width, thickness and endtank design, and core are the same.

I am however planning to compare a Cottons and V1 back to back and see what happens. I won't be able to log pre temps, pressure etc, but at least I'll be able to see if the MATs and MAP change.
 
I like that fact that it's another great vendor making another great part. ;)

How much?
Dimensions?
Whats the core?

This must be the IC I saw in Race Jace's new combo list, RJC FMIC.

Looks like the new FMIC's this year are

Seturbo
BA Performance
RJC

Damn I thought these cars were losing peoples interest and parts not being available. :confused:
 
We are shooting for $895 intro price for the complete kit.

27x17x3.25 core

core is bar plate design or "wave tech." depending on who you talk to.
 
Race Jace said:
We are shooting for $895 intro price for the complete kit.

27x17x3.25 core

core is bar plate design or "wave tech." depending on who you talk to.


Jason,

Sounds like it shoud work for around 1500HP.
Cool deal, thanks for another product.
What about the double core version?
 
Is there such a thing as too much intercooler for a given turbo? How would this intercooler match up with a TE44? And, does an intercooler of this size and quality make sense with heads and a throttlebody that are NOT ported? I'm not suggesting anything; just trying to understand. You did a beautiful job Jason. It is a thing of beauty that we will all drool over.
 
In MY opinion, you can never have too much intercooler,The cooler you keep your inlet temps the more power you can produce from your combo and it will be done more safley at the same time,Cooler temps = less chance of detonation and if can keep them cooler you can run more timing safely which equates to more power,and detonation is also the number one cause of turbocharged engine failure
 
Intecoolers seem to have a “efficiency range” They need to be somewhat matched to the amount of HP and Turbo you are running. Once you exceed the “range” the efficiency seems to fall of.

For instance, about ten years ago we installed one of ATR’s big boy’s intercoolers on a car with a good exhaust system but with a stock turbo. We gained about 2 mph over a 100% stock intercooler. That did not seem like a very good gain for the money. We then installed a TE-44. We picked up an additional 5mph.
This led us to believe the stock intercooler was adequately cooling the all of the air the stock turbo could produce.

2nd car, We installed a TE-44 turbo on a car with a stock intercooler. We picked up 1mph over the stock turbo. Not too good of gain. We then installed a 17 row stretched intercooler. The car picked up 5 mph. This is what I meant by matching the intercooler.

Can you have too much intercooler? It never “hurts” performance to have a big intercooler but you do not see the full benefit unless the rest of the combo matches.
The downsides to having to big of intercooler are;
#1 weight. If you don’t need it you are just adding weight
#2 air blockage. Thick dense intercooler cores work pretty well as a heat sink but do not get much air through them. There is a surface area Vs core size comparison that should be considered. The best is to have as much surface area where the air can get to it as possible. This is why we made our intercooler only 3” thick but as large as could possibly fit in the front of a TR.

It also seems that Garret and a few others rate their intercoolers based on volume of the core based simply by multiplying the core dims and coming up with the sq" of the core. Looking at this and seeing the when the efficency falls of on an intercooler it looks like the best efficency is attained by multiplying the rated value by .63.

In other words for best results do not exceed 63% of the intercoolers rating.
 
Race Jace said:
In other words for best results do not exceed 63% of the intercoolers rating.

So Jason you are saying that a intercooler rated at 1000hp,
MOST LIKELY works its best at about 630hp and then starts to
fall off from there?
 
KLHAMMETT said:
So Jason you are saying that a intercooler rated at 1000hp,
MOST LIKELY works its best at about 630hp and then starts to
fall off from there?

yes that is what i am saying. but.. do not look at the seller's advertized HP rating, look at the measured volume of the intercooler multiply that number by .63 and you have the ideal efficency. This figure is also flywheel hp.
 
Race Jace said:
yes that is what i am saying. but.. do not look at the seller's advertized HP rating, look at the measured volume of the intercooler multiply that number by .63 and you have the ideal efficency. This figure is also flywheel hp.


So this number for your unit is 939HP if I am understanding your previous posts?
 
Top