To intercooler or no that is the question.
02-13-2017, 09:57 AM
#22
So you aren't out of turbine wheel, just turn it up.
The data logs I have on non IC cars are maxing the GM sensors before the 1/8th. They are super inacurate much over 200* anyway. You'd need someone with a decent after market sensor to get any good info.
With a little data you can calculate charge temps roughly here.
http://www.stealth316.com/2-turbotemp.htm
The data logs I have on non IC cars are maxing the GM sensors before the 1/8th. They are super inacurate much over 200* anyway. You'd need someone with a decent after market sensor to get any good info.
With a little data you can calculate charge temps roughly here.
http://www.stealth316.com/2-turbotemp.htm
02-13-2017, 10:06 AM
#23
Restricted User
Also, Silver_82 was running a stock bottom end 5.3 on E85 with no intercooler, making 31 PSI and running 8.teens in the quarter.
E85 can be forgiving with a good tune and a well planned out setup.
E85 can be forgiving with a good tune and a well planned out setup.
The following users liked this post:
fucter (10-17-2023)
02-13-2017, 10:37 AM
#24
Teching In
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all up to you honestly. You don't have to run an IC if you don't want to. IMO since you daily drive it, I would keep it on there or sell it and use the money towards a little bit better IC that suits your needs a little more. I'm a fan of trial and error. Buy the on3 5" IC and see what happens. Since you have turbo left you can always just up the boost a little to make up for any real power loss, though I don't think it would be that much. Think of it as protecting your investment.
02-14-2017, 06:16 AM
#30
If there is data to be had, I have it, 3x.
Through the system 19-20gal/minute at the return verified multiple times, -16 feed and return lines, EMP pump. I have tried 2 locations in the lower manifold for the sensor with 2 different high quality sensors (GM and Holley). I went as far as to put a go-pro inside my resevoir to make sure pump was running at WOT because post cooler temps were getting so hot. Flow remains steady.
I have upgraded everything around this core because I have been told repeatedly it is something wrong with my lines or pump or sensor and no matter what I cant get temps under control even on a 50* day with 20lbs of ice in he resevior.
You'd agree that 230* IAT is way too high for these flow #s with ice and air/water cooler with 20-22psi on an S484? I wont mention what intercooler it is yet because I'm hoping to get some help from the manufacturer. 👍
Through the system 19-20gal/minute at the return verified multiple times, -16 feed and return lines, EMP pump. I have tried 2 locations in the lower manifold for the sensor with 2 different high quality sensors (GM and Holley). I went as far as to put a go-pro inside my resevoir to make sure pump was running at WOT because post cooler temps were getting so hot. Flow remains steady.
I have upgraded everything around this core because I have been told repeatedly it is something wrong with my lines or pump or sensor and no matter what I cant get temps under control even on a 50* day with 20lbs of ice in he resevior.
You'd agree that 230* IAT is way too high for these flow #s with ice and air/water cooler with 20-22psi on an S484? I wont mention what intercooler it is yet because I'm hoping to get some help from the manufacturer. 👍
02-14-2017, 08:15 AM
#31
Sounds like one of those cores that mount to the intake maybe? Thought I remembered your posts from YB about this? Wondering if its not a sensor picking up manifold heat or something. Could be a faulty core if not.
Guys are seeing sub 80* temps at 1200-1400hp worth of air flow on $75 china A2W cores with enough water flow. So something's up for sure with 230* temps.
Guys are seeing sub 80* temps at 1200-1400hp worth of air flow on $75 china A2W cores with enough water flow. So something's up for sure with 230* temps.
02-14-2017, 08:25 AM
#32
Sounds like one of those cores that mount to the intake maybe? Thought I remembered your posts from YB about this? Wondering if its not a sensor picking up manifold heat or something. Could be a faulty core if not.
Guys are seeing sub 80* temps at 1200-1400hp worth of air flow on $75 china A2W cores with enough water flow. So something's up for sure with 230* temps.
Guys are seeing sub 80* temps at 1200-1400hp worth of air flow on $75 china A2W cores with enough water flow. So something's up for sure with 230* temps.
02-14-2017, 08:36 AM
#33
Restricted User
I've seen half a dozen reports of those Hi-Ram mounted IC cores not doing anything. Didn't we just have this discussion a few weeks ago with a Caddy guy not being able to keep his temps below 200* with one?
02-14-2017, 08:41 AM
#34
The short answer is yes... I have since done more testing and verified every potential culprit I've been told was causing the issue. I've been told that over 400 units have been sold and I have the only one that's ever been ineffective at keeping temps at or below ambient with ice. I even turned boost down to 11psi (again, with a S484), and am able to generate 50* rise in IAT2 with just a 2nd and 3rd gear pull with 20 lbs of ice. Just trying to see what could possibly be going on because I've exhausted every test and upgrade I can do to this point is all.
02-14-2017, 08:45 AM
#36
Only reason I'm chiming in now on this thread is I have done testing with my intercooler pump OFF and heatsoaked the entire intercooler brick to 100* and done pulls as a test and find that the temp rise on identical pulls with the pump OFF are within 5* of with the pump ON and fully iced. Hence my curiosity with non-intercooled temps in comparison.
02-14-2017, 08:55 AM
#37
Can your manifold be picking up heat from the block and transmitting it to the sensor? So it's not picking up true air temps. Most of the cheapo A2W kits I see are on the charge pipe pre/post IC. Hard to do that with a core clamped to your intake.
Have you made back to back passes at lowish boost with the pump on/off and see MPH losses? With pumps on off guys are reporting 100* temp difference at the same timing/commanded AFR and 3mph loss. Seems like you'd notice a substantial difference and that would tell you if the sensor was incorrect.
Have you made back to back passes at lowish boost with the pump on/off and see MPH losses? With pumps on off guys are reporting 100* temp difference at the same timing/commanded AFR and 3mph loss. Seems like you'd notice a substantial difference and that would tell you if the sensor was incorrect.
02-14-2017, 09:01 AM
#38
I am seeing a net 10-15* difference between pump off, and pump on with ice on 11psi boost. I doubt MPH would change being that minimal but I haven't raced it like that. Not interested in 12 second timeslips lol.
I stopped pulling timing before 200* because I couldn't make it to the 1/8th mile traps before seeing over 170*. When we were pulling timing around 150, the car was struggling to back half over 22mph due to so much timing pull. Once we kept the timing in it back halfs 34-35mph
I stopped pulling timing before 200* because I couldn't make it to the 1/8th mile traps before seeing over 170*. When we were pulling timing around 150, the car was struggling to back half over 22mph due to so much timing pull. Once we kept the timing in it back halfs 34-35mph
Last edited by gtistile; 02-14-2017 at 09:08 AM.
02-14-2017, 09:28 AM
#39
My theory (which might be totally wrong) is that the sensor is picking up heat from intake/block. So looking the the temperature readings alone won't ever be correct. If you have a way to look at actual power (trap speed or dyno) and don't see a major improvement with the pump on/off. You'll know the sensors are probably correct and its a core issue.
Last edited by Forcefed86; 02-14-2017 at 09:53 AM.
02-14-2017, 09:32 AM
#40
Restricted User
If temps slowly crept up, I would say its the intake/block, especially if they don't go back down.
When they jump 80 degrees in a few seconds, its probably not heat soak.
When they jump 80 degrees in a few seconds, its probably not heat soak.