Tested a BA Performance Intercooler today

[V6 Beast]

>>>Sup Sully,
I understand your point. But comparing these coolers WAS & IS NOT what we are doing. The BA I/C is thicker,Bigger & not TSM legal. I DO NOT WANT THIS TO TAKE A LEFT TURN.
I hope that everyone gets that. I also hope that anyone that knows me, knows my character & I do not lie to better myself or have a "AGENDA" I tell it like it is & will admit when I'm wrong. I may bust balls & make light of things but thats it.

I hope that all understand that.

Jim

I understand Jim, but it is obvious that not everyone feels the same way which is why I bowed out of it. On the bright side it looks like you are just a converter away from a 9. Question, did it seem like one IC spooled faster than the other? It looks like it may have from the data. (Those things are hard to tell exactly)

 

[Otto J]

lets ask the hard questions now.
If i dont pick up a tenth will they buy it back?
Dave b is so far ahead of the class we need
all the buy backs we can get.

This is something you need to take up with them.
But i dont of know of any vendor that will guarntee your money back if you dont pick up a 1/10,But this intercooler from what i am told will sell for less then i paid for my last cooler,And if give me temps that i consider to be better for my motor,Paying less would be a no brainer.

 

[S2V6RACER]

I personal agenda. :biggrin:

Sully

As usual, you have to pull out your wildcard and paint a picture that is not true. Please start another thread if you want to take this issue up with me, as I have said in the past, I have no agenda with Jack and am getting fed up with your attacks stating so. Please keep this thread on topic.

 

[cdsttype]

Thanks cal
I think i will try to improve my car in other ways.
My hats off to the guys at ba otto and jim rome
anything to tighten the tsm class is good by me.

 

[Otto J]

I understand Jim, but it is obvious that not everyone feels the same way which is why I bowed out of it. On the bright side it looks like you are just a converter away from a 9. Question, did it seem like one IC spooled faster than the other? It looks like it may have from the data. (Those things are hard to tell exactly)

The other cooler does show faster spoolup,which has to do with the general size of the core.Another reason i mentioned i feel that this particular core may be overkill on a 10.00 car.They have a 4" thick one available that will be tested before its sold also.

 

[V6 Beast]

As usual, you have to pull out your wildcard and paint a picture that is not true. Please start another thread if you want to take this issue up with me, as I have said in the past, I have no agenda with Jack and am getting fed up with your attacks stating so. Please keep this thread on topic.

Ted I am not even sure I was refering to you even though I quoted your text. It was really Dave's post that had the agenda so I apologize. I guess what I should have said is "If you want to buy your parts based on a partial picture or one contributing factor then have it. I prefer to look at the big picture"

S.

 

[Otto J]

why
didn't the
car getting any leaner with this ice cold air coming in? It
actually got
richer. So if you want me to post partial data I can't do that.

Obviously, you're FAST vendor/tuner has never explained how a Speed Density
system calculates the amount of fuel needed. The engine won't go lean just
because the air temps drop down. The FAST sees the cooler temps and adds the
appropriate amount of fuel. This along with VE, MAP, RPM and target A/F all
are used to calculate the pulsewidth of the injector. If you were to record
the actual p/w you would see an increase in p/w with a cooler air charge and
no other change.again for proof go unplug you're MAT sensor and tell me what
happens to the A/F ratio.

The questions I would have are why didn't the car go any faster
with 50 degree lower temps?

There comes a point where inlet temps can become too cold and the fuel won't
atomize properly. The liquid intercooler guys have already found this out.But it also gives room to add more boost and timing safely,Also if both cooler where to show the same increases on a 80-90* day,which would be better?

Why didn't it get leaner? Why didn't o2
correction go
down? Why wasn't there any noticeable change in tune at all? All
of those
should have happened if colder, denser air was getting to the
engine, unless
there is not as much of this cold dense air getting through the IC.

Not necessarily. Call somone who is familiar with tuning and they can
explain it better.

I think you have proven 1 of 2 things. Either MAT temps have
little to no
affect on ET, HP, or Tune-up

Then perhaps you should remove that big heavy intercooler from your car
completly

or you can not measure an IC by MAT
alone.There are obviously other factors involved

I agree

 

[Otto J]

"If you want to buy your parts based on a partial picture or one contributing factor then have it. I prefer to look at the big picture"

S.

Not to start **** but ive already been there buying parts under that pretense,I prefer not to go back,You complain we dont share info,Here i share it with you and all of it,not just some,And all you do is chop it down????

 

[V6 Beast]

Damn Otto why are you dragging my email to you into this? If I wanted that posted I would have posted it. My respose to almost every one of your points is "wouldn't that increase in pulsewidth show up as an increase in Duty Cycle for the same RPM???" We do have that recorded

Obviously, you're FAST vendor/tuner has never explained how a Speed Density
system calculates the amount of fuel needed. The engine won't go lean just
because the air temps drop down. The FAST sees the cooler temps and adds the
appropriate amount of fuel. This along with VE, MAP, RPM and target A/F all
are used to calculate the pulsewidth of the injector. If you were to record
the actual p/w you would see an increase in p/w with a cooler air charge and
no other change.again for proof go unplug you're MAT sensor and tell me what
happens to the A/F ratio.

There comes a point where inlet temps can become too cold and the fuel won't
atomize properly. The liquid intercooler guys have already found this out.But it also gives room to add more boost and timing safely


Not necessarily. Call somone who is familiar with tuning and they can
explain it better.


Then perhaps you should remove that big heavy intercooler from your car
completly

I agree

 

[V6 Beast]

Not to start **** but ive already been there buying parts under that pretense,I prefer not to go back,You complain we dont share info,Here i share it with you and all of it,not just some,And all you do is chop it down????

I am not trying to chop it down. Trying to understand why the car didn't go faster or MPH more with these much lower MATs. Also trying to figure out why it spooled turbo slower and if that is related to why the car didn't go faster. I don't want to look at one data point like ya'll do. Plain and simple.

 

[Otto J]

I am not trying to chop it down. Trying to udnerstand why the car didn't go faster or MPH more with these much lower MATs. Also trying to figure out why it spooled turbo slower and if that is related to why the car didn't go faster. I don't want to look at one data point like ya'll do. Plain and simple.

Again,you see the rpm,I could have added 100more hp to the car,with that convertor it would not have gone any faster imo.60 ft times were about the only thing that may have gave a faster et.I ran into this same problem with my original convertor 2 years ago.My first 3 passes on my car were all 11.00 at 120( i was dissapointed) but after seeing the same thing we saw here,Ichanged teh convertor and only the convter and hte car ran 10.00 at 139 with absolutly no other changes.Thats a 20mph gain with a convertor change( I dont think well see that much here) but my convertor slipped to 6700 and stayed there.i still have both coolers and will do the same test again once the convertor has been worked out.I am not only looking at one data point like you say.But with the car we used this is what we found.This cooler is installed on a TSO that will be tested shortly.

 

[V6 Beast]

on a brighter note it looks like the car is launching great.

www.v6racing.com/videos/jimrome10.62.wmv

S.

 

[V6 Beast]

Obviously, you're FAST vendor/tuner has never explained how a Speed Density
system calculates the amount of fuel needed. The engine won't go lean just
because the air temps drop down. The FAST sees the cooler temps and adds the
appropriate amount of fuel. This along with VE, MAP, RPM and target A/F all
are used to calculate the pulsewidth of the injector. If you were to record
the actual p/w you would see an increase in p/w with a cooler air charge and
no other change.again for proof go unplug you're MAT sensor and tell me what
happens to the A/F ratio.

Just for the record, my tuner taught me very well and I do understand the factors that go into determinng fuel. When I said leaner in an EMAIL I was really just using that term to point out that no more fuel was commanded and it some cases a little less fuel was called for. If I was to post on a board I would have been more exact but since that was a hastily typed email to 1 person I didn't think it was really necessary. In future emails to you I will be sure to make my points EXACTLY. :biggrin:

 

[S2V6RACER]

I am not trying to chop it down. Trying to understand why the car didn't go faster or MPH more with these much lower MATs. Also trying to figure out why it spooled turbo slower and if that is related to why the car didn't go faster. I don't want to look at one data point like ya'll do. Plain and simple.

I am glad you finally see that there is a big improvement that has been made in the intercooler department over the competition, which is what I have been saying for a while now. I'm sure the volume of the BA cooler played the roll in spooling, which I'm sure you understand. Hopefully we don't turn this into a spoolup battle between I/C's and a battle on torque convertors. I'm sure you know that all the componets on a car must work together to bring out BIG power in the whole big picture and starting out by eliminating parts that are not the best for the application is what is neccesary to stay ahead of the pack and competitive.

Again, thanks to BA for taking the time to produce a quality I/C for the Buick Community.

 

[V6 Beast]

I am glad you finally see that there is a big improvement that has been made in the intercooler department over the competition, which is what I have been saying for a while now. I'm sure the volume of the BA cooler played the roll in spooling, which I'm sure you understand. Hopefully we don't turn this into a spoolup battle between I/C's and a battle on torque convertors. I'm sure you know that all the componets on a car must work together to bring out BIG power in the whole big picture and starting out by eliminating parts that are not the best for the application is what is neccesary to stay ahead of the pack and competitive.

Again, thanks to BA for taking the time to produce a quality I/C for the Buick Community.

Sorry but I didn't say that there is a big improvement in the IC department. Nice try at twisting my words. I said that the MATs were lower with this one, but it looks like to me that cooler temps come at the price of something else. Most likely airflow which is why no more fuel was commanded and turbo spooled slower. If that is the case then I would say no improvement has been made. It would be more like trading boost for compression. The end result is nothing which is all I see here.

 

[S2V6RACER]

Sorry but I didn't say that there is a big improvement in the IC department. Nice try at twisting my words. I said that the MATs were lower with this one, but it looks like to me that cooler temps come at the price of something else. Most likely airflow which is why no more fuel was commanded and turbo spooled slower. If that is the case then I would say no improvement has been made. It would be more like trading boost for compression. The end result is nothing which is all I see here.

Well you have the results in your posession. I guess you are overlooking the BIG difference in the MAT graph. Funny that you can be used for a reference as somebody that has picked up performance from a I/C as well as a few others, with, as you have said here, not enough data behind it, the small picture, ect, but in this case Jim picked up some performance from the BA in 1 track outing same day same car, different intercoolers, and you let the world know your skeptisism on the subject but let it "slide" on other posts made by different people. I know for fact, you made many passes on your car with the competitors I/C and finally got your 9 second pass at Reynolds, so it is beyond making the statment that the I/C itself was resposible for the 9 second pass as Phils 9 second pass at Morocco, when he ran 10.0x at BPG in 90+ heat and a track that has ran over a tenth slower than Morocco in my records and other testomony. Maybe you can take your frustration(s) out on the guy that made this statement below and leave Otto and BA alone to post thier results on the I/C performance itself, or heaven forbid do you own tests and prove otherwise.

This post for reference.

Just goes to show how much an IC may affect performance, if you want to look at it from that perspective. I look at a guy like Phil M, and see a low 10 second car run a 9 with an IC upgrade to one of mine. I see Steve S. do exactly the same, I'll go on to say, **** K 9.40's, Disco S 9.60's, Roy and Laz 9.40's, Dave R 9.60's and I'm sure many more.

 

[S2V6RACER]

Most likely

If we made statements like these this would be the worst thing on the face of the planet in your eyes, another example of the double standard you accept.

 

[top gun]

Obviously, you're FAST vendor/tuner has never explained how a Speed Density
system calculates the amount of fuel needed. The engine won't go lean just
because the air temps drop down. The FAST sees the cooler temps and adds the
appropriate amount of fuel. This along with VE, MAP, RPM and target A/F all
are used to calculate the pulsewidth of the injector. If you were to record
the actual p/w you would see an increase in p/w with a cooler air charge and
no other change.again for proof go unplug you're MAT sensor and tell me what
happens to the A/F ratio.

Otto, it appears you confused Sully, he must be consulting his guru for a response.

 

[Otto J]

Sully asked me to post this even after sharing all info with him.

You want to post emails. Post this one. You're a ****ing Dickhead!

 

[Cheeseburger]

Well then send them to me I got big balls, this is what we need ----INFO ,not games

What do "big balls" have to do with anything?
What's it to you anyway if i prefer not to post info to start up more intercooler bull****?