built in progres









more come...

Very nice pictures.

But that turbo looks awfully small for a track car!!

Yes i now, that´s GT28R, GT2871R coming soon.

Great job

Stole few ideas......great.....
Why is the second lambda, and is there any gain or loss with dual pass FMIC???
PS - is these wheel spacers alloy?? If yes, isn't this too risky......

dual pass = loss..... i would change it to a single pass when you change your turbo johny, but otherwise looking really nice

one original lambda, one AEM lambda for tuning. FMIC is great they have short way for air = smaller turbo lag, FMIC is better with one side for inlet + outlet.

I am doing some investigation into intercoolers at the moment and yours looks interesting. Can you give me the dimensions of the core? I see it has twelve tubes (2 x 6 as it is dual pass) but what are their length, and how 'thick' is the core (i.e. how wide are the tubes) and what is the overall height?

Thanks.

I was chatting with a customer about this subject the other day, he said that a lot of double-pass intercoolers don't even have dividers in the end tanks
Can you imagine what kind of confusion that causes inside?
That and the fact that the air could in theory (probably at certain boost levels) simply go in and out without even going through the core...

I would imagine that without a divider in the end tank the majority, if not all, of the flow would take the 'short cut' and not pass through the core at all!

It would be interesting to know for certain exactly what would happen, it would definitely be some messy kind of situation going on in there, I dread to think....

Just assume they don't work at all - or if they do they are very inefficient.

Sorry but if your 'short way' is meaning to the pipework runs, 'lag' doesn't really come into it in this sense. With regard to the I/c, same side connections certainly is not better and in fact is a bigger restriction than having a 'normal' intercooler with 20 miles of pipework.

Lag is so mis-understood it is a function of internal inertia and flow, we are stuck with a certain amount of lag and that applies to all turbos, that is the inertia part. The flow part is where people go wrong, it takes time to pressurize a turbine and it takes time for boost to build in the inlet manifold. The time is governed by restriction to flow, NOT the distance or volume the compressor has to fill.

Here's the interesting part, if there is a delay in pressurizing the inlet due to restriction, the cylinder won't burn as much mass within this transiant time period - therefore less waste energy and subsequently pressure is produced, less pressure behind the turbine leads to guess what ? LAG. So you can see a time delay in the inlet system effects the volume of gas feeding the cylinder before it sees the turbine, and untill all these things "catch up" it is a re-occuring problem.

^ nice post ^

My FMIC have good dimension and in inlet/outlet part have 2 separate room, relax people, intercoolers with one side in/out are good, don´t panic. (Most of serial cooler have this construction) and I want this construction, i paid it two times more than normal IC. This is better solution.

As in my post above, I would be grateful if you would let me know the dimensions of your intercooler.

ok, tomorow in work.

Sure, I guess you have a small "Quick spool" turbo to keep the lag down too

Thanks

I am having a similar (smaller than yours) intercooler for several years now and have no problems.
Great work.

Is there any real tests about efectiveness of dual pass IC compared with same volume core single pass IC......
I still not 100% sure that there is really huge difference.

It's my first FMIC run it for 4-5 months - dual pass with a divider.

Then i modified it, 8 rows less(IC size was 600\300\100), single pass.

Same turbo, same pipes, same ecu map, the only difference was maybe(just maybe) little less lag......
And let's assume that i'm not a big brain in fluid dynamics, i just share my sense of the car behavior and my opinion.

It would be like testing to see if a Cheetah had anything in common with a tortoise.

You don't have to be a professor. Take a look at the OPs pic, (not allowing for the depth, just on face value) his IC has 16 tubes, the air is only fed one way through 8 at once.
If the same size IC was used, but just side to side you would have air going through 16 tubes.

8 Tubes

16 tubes

Which is going to fit more air through?

It's all about shifting air and as much as possible - a BB T38 blows out at an airspeed of 5 metres of air per second on tickover.

A GT30 307RS produces .1bar on a high tickover speed (1000 rpm).
A heck of a lot more when they are up to full speed, why restrict it?

Same quantity of air, but dual pass IC will cool better due longer air travel into the IC!?!?
I don't comment if there is boost losses......
PS - wonder if there is divider into the water rad's......at least 80% of it is kind of "dual pass" type.....

Well this is the second thread recently on the same topic, we are just going over the same argument again. There was a clip posted which showed an over stretched T3 turbo blowing out 120'c into the intercooler (with 190mm long tubes)which then knocked it down to 34'c (outside temp was 15'c).

Not everything is made the same, I've seen some terrible intercoolers from Ebay, also some quite good ones, both same money - it just depends on which Chinese factory they fell out of.
Same maybe goes for water rads, the ones we sell are double pass (which is the most effective for cooling water) with end tank dividers, I can't vouch for anyone elses.
Water cooling and air cooling are completely different, there shouldn't really be any comparison - you want the water to stay in the rad for as long as possible because water doesn't lose its heat energy very easily (compared to air).
I've seen oil cooler cores used as charge-coolers, they didn't work very well.

Another way of looking at it is this: Show me a factory built road car or an aftermarket successful high performance car with a double pass fitted.
If you can I'll show you 10 times as many with single pass 'coolers fitted.....
The only automobile I can think of which is regularly (and incorrectly) fitted with a double pass as an 'upgrade' is a diesel Landrover and you don't wanna be copying that....

I not argue about which "pass" is better, cause i still havent persuasion of it, i just want to know more about this subject.
I don't support either of that conceptions, but it's interesting for me why there is so different opinions. I know that Google not always shows the best results, and it's not criterion of right or wrong, but at least everybody can make an comparison.
Too much offtopic, sorry about....

That is partly true, the systems are completly diferent but we don't want the water to stay in the radiator for longer in terms of lower flow rate. The extra cooling effect from the double pass comes from exposure to more surface area, if anything it is better to have a higher flow rate through the radiator.

One thing (on the internet) which will throw you right off course is when people incorrectly label intercoolers:



Quite often wrongly.

No need for apologies, it's all good discussion.

It's debatable (not saying you are wrong) - but the longer it is in there the cooler it becomes and we don't have to worry about pressure losses like in an intercooler.

Oh dear, here's Martin with his clouded opinion again, you've not hardly got a handle on intercoolers yet so it's best you don't divert into engine cooling systems.

Also, stop trying to tout for business, these poor Coupe owners don't deserve that horrible fate. They already have "specialists", the difference being they do know what they are talking about and deserve the work.

Yes :-) but the longer it is in there (time in the rad) the more heat energy the water has to absorb from the engine, and heres the thing - if it spends longer in the rad, it spends longer in the engine too.

Radiator designs all cool very similar from one to another if nothing else is changed because it is a closed circiut and the system isn't a highly dynamic one. If the coolant temp coming out the engine is stabilized at 90 deg and the heat load and flow remains the same, lets say the rad cools the water by 10 deg, average rad temp is 85- the difference between the average rad temp and ambient is X.

Another radiator of larger dimension fitted to the same engine will cool the water more effectivley, but will have the same 10 deg temprature drop across its core. The inlet temprature will stabilise lower, due to the more effective cooling through the whole system and the outlet temp will be lower in proportion by the same amount. The difference between the average rad temp and ambient cooling air is now lower than X because of this. With a lower driving force between the two mediums this nets the same temprature drop and therefore running temp as the smaller rad becuase the two cancel each other out.


The only way to improve cooling with a bigger rad is with a higher flow rate, higher differential temp or better transfer of heat load.

It is just the theory but, do you see ?

So why is that a bad thing?

There will be an optimum speed for water through the engine. Too slow and it could boil, too fast and it won't pick up enough heat, but through the rad slower is better.



How can a rad cool more effectively, but still only drop the temps by the same amount? This doesn't make sense to me.




I'm afraid not, maybe it's just the way you are explaining it.
I wonder if it is possible to have different water speeds in different parts of the system......?

Can I try a post here,

Have you done the bit of MORE tubes of smaller diameter would present more cooling area instead of large tubes allowing allot of the flow to travel down the middle of the tube without touching the cooler sides of each tube?

Just a thought

I guess that thermostat matters how long coolant stays in the rad, and it's role is just as a "door" for the coolant. Mention it because i can't see it into this equation......

Haha, glad you said that. I don't know where to start.

However I can suggest a car with a dual pass intercooler and its a Fiat! Punto mk1! Also, I remember a Renault sedan from the 80's with a dual pass. 1.6 carby turbo thing. It had a funky temperature operated internal devider. I guess under low temperature it would bypass the intercoler.

Obviously not.



Ah, so that's what where should be looking for ideas an inspiration, those high end performance icons of the 80's, those guys really knew what they were doing.
Dammit, back to the drawing board for us....

Obviously not.

Martin, I see you misunderstanding the obvious again, the reference to not knowing where to start is aimed at your glaring ignorance on the subject of water cooling systems. Try as you might to appear knowledgeable it can't be masked to those that do know some about a subject, you'll remember the BS sensor?

Also, wonder what the Punto boys would make of you disrespecting their chosen auto? I see you passing others opinion as your own again

The 5 gt's had this also. Temp. sensor with an spring (thermostat style). If i remember correctly, there was also always an part that was open. So some of the charge was allowed to bypass the core. When the temp.sensor was hot enough, the flap that blocked the core, opened and allowed the cooling process to begin.

Now you will probably wont find any without an screw in it, as they did not survive long (the mechanism), and to keep the flap open some nice screw engineering was done .

If you don't get that simple first part Mr. Crabtree then I can't explain to you any further. Read it again and think about it.




Is it ? Sure about that are you ?

The stat is what staiblizes the inlet temp.

Dual Pass V Single Pass

The difference between these two is that the dual pass has half as many tubes but twice the length. As a result the heat exchange area - both internal and external - are essentially the same and therefore the cooling efficiency will be more or less the same, though allowing for the heat sinking effect of the alloy construction, having the cool outlet adjacent to the hottest area of the cooler would possibly reduce the cooling effect somewhat.

The biggest problem with the dual pass comes from

1) having all the charge air flow through half as many tubes

this will double the pressure drop

2) having all the charge air pass through tubes twice as long

this again will double the pressure drop

so, if the cooling effect is the same but the pressure drop is 400% of the single pass cooler, I think the only possible benefit of the dual pass could be an easier installation as both inlet and outlet are at one end.

How this number is figured out? I thought this is not an exact science.
I'm agree with the above principles, but 400% seems a lot to me....

Pressure drop is in direct proportion to drag.

Drag is a function of L x Re / Dh

Where

L = length
Re = Reynolds number
Dh = hydraulic diameter

The hydraulic diameter is a constant in this case because the geometry of the tubes is the same (i.e. diameter/cross sectional area/fins) in both cases, so, that leaves us with L and Re

Re is a function of flow rate (volume) Dh (diameter) viscosity and flow area. Dh and viscosity are constant in this case, so the only variables of concern are flow rate and area.

To flow the same amount of volume through half the area requires velocity to double, so in the dual pass cooler Re is twice that of the Re of the single pass cooler.

We also know that L is double that of the single pass cooler so we have the formula

Drag(dual pass cooler) = (drag(single pass cooler) x2L x 2Re)/(L x Re)

Which is the same as

Drag(dual pass cooler) = drag(single pass cooler) x 2 x 2

= Drag(dual pass cooler) = drag(single pass cooler) x 4

which is 400%

Not to mention the sharp 180 deg turn at the end ? It might be asking a bit much, but what percentage drag does that add !!!

That would cause a 'minor' loss compared to the major loss caused by the length and increase in flow rate. I haven't even attempted to quantify it on that basis.

370PS 480Nm Garret GT2871R









Please no more off topic, thanks ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IZpeHUkMvM
my lights xenon & led

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gtPD855eBI
first drag race with ZR1 700PS

http://youtu.be/7wcwP1U0vIA
dyno test

looks good

BGW on a coupe is actually starting to grow on me

Ninja

liking the progress. just wondering why you have made your under tray shorter

I like the uprated parts you've added, BUT exterior wise I think you have ruined what looked like a nice Sprint Blue 20vt, looks very chavvy with silly rear wing and neon light!!!??

But it's your car.

Don't take offense my age is starting to show, I seem to detest overly modified exterior on cars nowadays.

Foto for PowerMagazine

http://www.mojevideo.sk/video/164ec/autosalon_nitra_2012_tuning_battle.html

small exhibition on tuning battle 2012 - final

Looks great!! I like the rims. What brand?

Sounds of my engine
Autoslalom competition

Hey Johny,
Like Freddan I'm liking the rims. Could you give us any information. Are they a standard fitment, or did it take some work?

Tom

Mean looking car with the sound to match

OK, wheels are ADVAN racing, 7Jx 17" ET40 (4x100/114,3) and + spacer. I give it new red stickers.

Carbon vinyl covering :-)

nice but you need to grind the paint off the cam cover to reveal the letters

Where did you find that formula?

Even if that formula were true, Drag, as you state is a function of, not equal to which you have used in your proof.

Here is the answer

Darcy-Weisbach

I will re-word it:


Pressure loss(dual pass cooler) = (Pressure loss(single pass cooler) x2L x 2Re)/(L x Re)

Which is the same as

Pressure loss(dual pass cooler) = Pressure loss(single pass cooler) x 2 x 2

= Pressure loss(dual pass cooler) = Pressure loss(single pass cooler) x 4

I understand your math just fine. You missed the whole point of my somewhat condescending reply. Sorry about that.

To everyone else, all you can assume is that a twin pass is going to be be more efficient (will transfer more heat per unit area) but it will come at the cost of higher pressure drop. The absolute figures are very difficult to determin and would be different case by case anyway.

I think you're on the right track but that's a lot of words. I struggle to follow this too. Let me try,

A larger radiator has more surface area so it has the potential to do more cooling all things equal. Another way for the radiator to do more cooling would be to drive at a higher speed or drive in cooler ambient temperature. For a given flow rate, the engine will see it all the same, the radiator is just doing more cooling so the coolant returing to the engine will be cooler.

However the coolant temp in the engine is regulated by the thermostat. If the radiator is cooling better the thermostat must close a little to REDUCE the flow rate or it will simply run cooler. This reduction in flow will DECREASE the efficiency of the cooling system ( The radiator will do less cooling) and restablise the engine temp.

Likewise if the engine produces more heat, to maintain the same temperature the thermostat must open a little to increase flow. This must INCREASE the efficiency of the system.

Just remember this,

More Flow = More Cooling

There are no exceptions. Forget about the time spent in the radiator and all that, it's irrelevant.

Can you actually request no off topic?

That seems a reasonable request to me in the light of recent disagreements here.

That's a bit boring isn't it? Decent discussion (even if it is a bit abrasive) is hard enough to come by on here without stifling it further. Besides, it's fun to pull Gp5L's leg

Thank you that continue to SPAM my topic :-)

Johny where did you get that exhaust manifold from?! I want one! Would you be able to send me some pics of it with no wrap on it?

It is all custom work, A-M-A exhaust company in Slovakia. Very good work, excelent. i looking for photo, wait please.