Tested a BA Performance Intercooler today

[V6 Beast]

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.

Ok Mr. "I don't have an agenda and I'm not turning this into a pissing match", I don't consider .02 with no MPH change to be a gain and the fact that someone would post it like it was is freaking hilarious. I guess those runs had the exact same 60'? I mean same to thousandth. 2nd, I made a lot more passes with a CAS than I ever did with Jack's and never went as fast. The gain I believe Jack is refering to is the gain we got at the track on the day we swapped a CAS for his. A before and after similiar to this but that was a long time ago. Oh wait that would mean I have already done some testing. Who knows. Maybe I will be testing some more in the future.

In the mean time I would recommend you google Intercooler theories and maybe you would realize there is more to a really good intercooler than MATs. Here is a good link to get you started.
http://www.gnttype.org/techarea/turbo/intercooler.html

Here is a nice tidbit I picked up from it. A 40º drop in MAT results in ~ 7% more air density. If the intercooler is able to pass the same amount of air through then that would result in a 47 HP gain on a 675 HP motor. According to all the calculators I check, 47 HP on a 3500 car would increase MPH by over 3 mph and reduce ET by about .23. .02 is a joke.

Once again I am not dising the BA cooler. Just trying to figure out why it didn't perform.

Sully

 

[V6 Beast]

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

Hey Dave.. go up about 4-5 responses before yours and you will see my response.

 

[V6 Beast]

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

Wrong again Genius. I sent it to you as a joke after you posted my email to you. It had nothing to do with sharing data. It was because you posted a personal email to you to ensure this thread turned into the pissing match you hoped it would when you first started it. Well done! :biggrin:

 

[V6 Beast]

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.

I don't have a double standard. Just offering my opinion on the most likely cause.

 

[BandAid]

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****?

How can that start anymore BS that is not already flying around here ,and what do you have to gain from NOT posting it (ac)

 

[S2V6RACER]

I try to stay out and you just won't let me. Yes the MATs were lower with this much larger, heavier IC. I am not disputing that fact. But I can tell you this for an absolute fact. When I run my car on a 90º degree day and then run the exact same setup on a 40º day, I get more than a .02 increase, fast changes the amount of fuel correction, Injector duty cycle changes considerably, and many other things happen. None of this happened on these runs and there has to be a reason why. So what may be obvious to someone narrow-minded and trying to prove a point about 1 specfic aspect of a car's tune, is not so obvious to someone that is looking at the big picture and doesn't have a personal agenda. :biggrin:

Sully


(Personally I would bet money that you couldn't take the car with either IC and make 3 runs that are less that .02 different)

Study the datalogs 3 and 6 in 3rd gear Sully, the competitors I/C was using more than 5% less fuel than the BA at the same boost level, therefore the BA which used more to maintain the same A/F means the BA made more power.


No agendas here, just keeping things factual.

 

[Cheeseburger]

How can that start anymore BS that is not already flying around here ,and what do you have to gain from NOT posting it (ac)

For one, i never got the logs and for two i could foresee where this was going to head last night, and i was right........

 

[Otto J]

Here is a nice tidbit I picked up from it. A 40º drop in MAT results in ~ 7% more air density. If the intercooler is able to pass the same amount of air through then that would result in a 47 HP gain on a 675 HP motor. According to all the calculators I check, 47 HP on a 3500 car would increase MPH by over 3 mph and reduce ET by about .23. .02 is a joke.

Once again I am not dising the BA cooler. Just trying to figure out why it didn't perform.

Sully

Again Sully,The lack of convertor efficiency is keeping the car from going faster.if we have the time both coolers will be tested with a proper convertor and we will than debate any increase or decrease in power.and it was .04 increase and 1.* mph :biggrin:
1.* mph does equate to more HP,
AS Russ Merritt would say"Wheres your Moses now?"

 

[V6 Beast]

Study the datalogs 3 and 6 in 3rd gear Sully, the competitors I/C was using more than 5% less fuel than the BA at the same boost level, therefore the BA which used more to maintain the same A/F means the BA made more power.


No agendas here, just keeping things factual.

Actually the RPMs in etown 6 are higher which makes the inj DC higher. To the untrained eye it may look like more fuel. The boost average is almost a 1 psi higher as well. Just keeping it really real.

:biggrin:

 

[John Wilde]

Can someone send the files please?

Thanks in advance

 

[top gun]

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:

I guess it all depends who teaches you. I wouldn't put much stock in a guy that has a such a hard time keeping his car in the 8's

 

[S2V6RACER]

MPH difference, your answer.

132.31 is the fastest MPH pass on the competors I/C and the BA netted 133.32, so a MPH gain to back up my claims.

 

[V6 Beast]

.04 increase and 2 mph :biggrin:
2 mph does equate to more HP,

132.31 is the fastest MPH pass on the competors I/C and the BA netted 133.32, so a MPH gain to back up my claims.

you say 1 Otto says 2. ya'll better get your stories straight

I have to go mow the yard. I will be back later to respond to latest barrage.

 

[John Wilde]

132.31 is the fastest MPH pass on the competors I/C and the BA netted 133.32, so a MPH gain to back up my claims.

Ted,

It sounds like a couple people are just being BA Humbugs.

BTW - I am just being difficult!

 

[S2V6RACER]

you say 1 Otto says 2. Which one of you is lieing?

Check out the videos.

 

[V6 Beast]

Check out the videos.

I didn't get any vidoes... other than a 10.62

 

[Otto J]

After reviewing the videos i editted my statement on 2mph
Now i am going to pull jims Convertor out,Be back in 10 minutes

 

[top gun]

It has been proven many times "The Jack" is the worst performing intercooler on the market. The BA, Precision, and the V1 are proven performers and I am sure the new RJC cooler will be added to the elite group.

Lets quit beating a dead horse! The tests are done and The Jack always has a failing grade.

 

[Otto J]

We can argue about crap all day long.But this post was started to supply the public what was found on a 10.00 car with the New BA BMF Intercooler. From my findings it showed no increase but actually a decrease in temps on every run made with it.And these temps were as close to if not ambient temps.If you do not feel the need or feel it is safer to run cooler intake temps do not buy the product.
Do research on the internet as to what an intercooler is designed to do and not do,Then make your judgement.I give this intercooler on the test mule a big thumbs up and imo it with perform just as well on a faster car making over 1000hp.It is on a few 1000 hp cars now and as soon as weather breaks and tracks open more info will be made available to the public and not hidden from anyone.
I guess if trying to find the best intercooler for the best price for the Buick Community is an agenda.IM GUILTY.
By the way Jims convertor is out and being shipped in the am to Anderson Performance.Thanks BillIE

 

[Otto J]

Can someone send the files please?

Thanks in advance

John They are on there way