I say not a chance

 

The screen will cost him power, but not in terms of heat. The compressor will see it as a pressure loss, just like being at higher altitude. The turbine doesnt have the advantage of higher altitude greater expansion ratio, so its kind of a double whammy.

 

Agree, unless the setup was totally maxed out and your looking for 5hp then sure maybe it will get you to a 1001 sitting at 996. But I've taken screens and full filtered intake setups off on the dyno and not seen 20hp gain.

For comparisons sake I logged IAT on another car with similar turbo placement right behind the radiator, but with an air to air intercooler. Idling at temp fans running I saw ~112 IAT, but during a pull IAT dropped to ~106. So intake air temps don't seem to be an issue for a properly working intercooler.

 

I feel like the 417 ic is steadily being backed into a corner with NO outs. Im guessing after the last bit of tests goes thru, it ll be that particular cores fault in thier eyes as the other 449 of em sold are working great!lol. For those that knew all of this already, its obvious you ve been around a long time and are good readers. For those of us jus jumping into the turbo game, its kinda shocking this type of hi dollar stuff makes it as far as it did in the market.

 

That 50+º difference is actually more than that once it's compressed. It doesn't explain away the main issue, but it's certainly worth trying to get ambient air into the compressor. Especially if it's only a matter of a straight piece of tubing, a coupler, and some zip ties.



On the screen filter restriction debate... Technically, by the numbers, a restriction at the intake, for the same manifold pressure, will move you higher on a compressor map (increase your PR), which could put you into a different efficiency island. Could be better, worse, or the same. However, that's just "technically". I have no references to indicate how that might transfer into reality. Judging by the posts above, might not be worth any power. But then again, every engine combination is unique.

On the far right side of compressor maps, the islands are very close together. What might not be an issue on one combination, might be huge on another. Won't know until you try it.

Good luck this weekend. Anxious for results.

 

I was looking around trying to figure out how much air those screen “Turbo guards” block and came up with this. Always felt they were a super poor design.

Used this to get my numbers…

http://www.wirecloth.com/measure-mesh/

Then use the top calculator to see how much airflow is blocked.

http://www.wirecloth.com/calculators/

Standard fiberglass mesh found in windows is .011” with 35 threads per sq inch. Looks like only about 7% of the airflow is blocked using those numbers? I thought it would have been higher… Am I doing it wrong?

The mesh on the turbo guard doesn’t look like it has near as many threads per SQ inch as a window screen does. Would be cool if you could get the thread count per sq inch and the wire diameters for us on that guard. That way we’d know.

 

People keep saying this but I've yet to see the answer as to why a more efficient air to water intercooler (on paper anyways) needs cooler inlet air then a less efficient air to air intercooler to work properly?

If we have the same turbo on two cars, same size engine, same boost level, same turbo location, same inlet temps... why does the air to air cross the traps at 115 degrees and the air to water 220 degrees? Both have the ~110 degree inlet air and both are supposedly creating ~350+ compressor outlet temps. How does the air to water not shine? On paper it "should" but in practice I'm not seeing it.

 

I've taken screens off on the dyno and gained 5hp at the 700hp level, maybe 10 at the 900hp level. We can take the turboguard off the OP's car and log fuel consumption. If it picks up MPH, fuel consumption, or anything to show it made a difference it will be posted. But most people especially street cars would rather have something to prevent debris entering the turbo then 5 or 10 more hp.

 

I think the simple answer to your question is because at very high speeds there is a metric **** ton of air being forced through an A2A. With an A2W you are most likely limited by water pump flow at that point and the efficiency of the intercooler transfering the heat from the hot air to water. The heat exchanger (that is transferring heat from hot water to ambient air) is most likely performing better than the intercooler so its not a restriction. In general the primary advantage to A2W setups is you can cool the cooling fluid (water in this case) to well below ambient whereas in an A2A setup the coldest the cooling fluid can be is exactly ambient. Packaging could go either way since A2As are simpler, but larger, and A2W setups have more parts.

Cooling ability is basically Airflow*HeatTransfer (HT). A2As have a poor HT but their airflow at high speeds is very high. A2Ws have a good HT because of the water, but not as much of an airflow capacity at higher speeds (and by this I mean the A2Ws ability to take the heat from the hot air and reject it to the ambient). Best case for A2W is all of the heat is transfered to the water alone and there is enough capacity in the water to meet the heat demands, which is why a lot of racecar setups dont use a heat exchanger and just run a massive water tank with ice.

If you arent using ice in an A2W setup then there is not much advantage aside from packaging. In terms of heat, any intercooler is better than none.

 

So what you're saying is this "1500hp" core simply cant transfer heat like a 900hp air to air core.

I believe core flow comes into play with the heat transfer you reference. The air to water core flows ~680cfm. The core I used for my air to air intercooler is rated for 1300cfm. A key difference I see is they are rating 680CFM for 1500hp, while my intercooler is only rated for 900hp with 1300cfm! That appear grossly overrated to anyone else?

 

Isn’t that 1200HP rating usually referring to pressure drop? I was under the impression that meant you could flow 1200hp worth of air (CFM wise) without unreasonable pressure drop… Usually 2psi or so. A2A are rated the same way.

If the OP was running a 540" big block at 10lbs he could make 1200hp at much cooler IAT’s without unreasonable pressure drop across the core. While a 2.0 liter engine might push 90lbs of boost to hit 1200hp and have mile high IAT’s.

 

Yea it depends how it is rated.

Usually A2As are in terms of pressure drop assuming some BSFC and AFR to get power, but because there are basically 2 heat exchangers in A2W systems I am not sure which one you rate it by; the one absorbing heat from the air and transferring to the water or the one rejecting heat from the water to the ambient or if you do it by heat ability or pressure drop.

So pressure wise it could probably be a "1500hp" intercooler, but heat wise it might just be a "900hp" intercooler. Too much ambiguity.

If intercooler makers really wanted to be specific, they would tell you the heat rejection capability given an ambient temp, and a pressure rating at specified airflows (or vice versa). Both are important.


Heres a good example, imagine a horizontal flow intercooler that is 30" long, 15" high, and 4" thick that is rated for "1000hp". A pretty common size that meets both thermal and aerodynamic requirements.
Case1: 3" long, 15" high, and 4" thick. This meets the aerodynamic requirement of pressure drop really easy since it is so small, but doesnt have the area to absorb and disapate much heat, so its barely doing anything in that regard. This might be "1000hp" aerodynamically but only 200hp thermally.

Case2: 30" long, 15" high, and 0.5" thick. This has tons of room for heat dissipation but the pressure drop will be very high because it does not have much internal flow area. So maybe this one is "1000hp" thermally but only 200hp aerodynamically.

 

If there's some sort of universal industry standard out there, I'd like to know it.

The 2 psi drop that's been mentioned a couple times... what initial pressure does that assume? Is it rated at atmospheric pressure, similar to the way carburetors and cylinder heads are, on a flow bench? Or is it another assumed static value, like 2 bar/15psig?

Every and any intercooler will flow more with increasing upstream pressure.

So, it would be nice to know what the conditions of these ratings are based on. Otherwise, it's purely marketing... Which is fine too. "Model#1500HP" sells more units than "Model# 55ydl78932" every day of the week, only to be surpassed by "Model# *****" or "Sex".

 

Bigger is better ? lol

 

Not sure if you quoted me to pose a relative statement/question, or if you're actually asking.

There are reports of the unit in question working well and reports of it not working so well. Question is, why?

I get your point. However, in any circumstance and no matter what intercooler, or no intercooler at all... there's absolutely no reason to pass up the opportunity of getting cooler air into the compressor. You make it sound as though it's of little concern. If I put as much effort into a build as the OP has, I'd be highly concerned. He'd be absolutely crazy to settle with hot air, when cool air is so easy to achieve.

 

I read somewhere that for every 1 degree drop in inlet temp that it's worth 2 degrees in charge temp. I don't remember where but i would say I can see that being true

Edit: not saying this is your issue. Just sharing info. Issue is probably that it's a pos

 

It's not it's of little concern...BUT...The issue here is that when running 20lbs of ice and near freezing water through a $3,000 all in intercooler combo, it's not unreasonable to think it ought to be able to take 100* inlet temps, keep them at bay on wastegate boost levels on a combo that MIGHT make 700hp at that level. Not every single car has the ability to have the inlet of the turbo forward facing sucking in 40* ambient ram-air everywhere it goes every day.

So while I see your point that I can probably figure out a way to finagle a 5.5" pipe somewhere off my inlet, A) there really isnt THAT much of anywhere to go in my bay that's cool because it's so tight/cramped, and B) an efficient intercooler would laugh at 15psi boost and 100* inlet temps... It just would.

 

Mess around with that spreadsheet I made a few posts back and see for yourself. Change the ambient temp values (B2), boost pressure (B10), and turbo efficiency (B15) and compare the compressor outlet temps (B16).

 

ok, pre-cooler MAT sensor is installed.


What is a good temp drop to see across the core?

 

I been waiting to see the results of this. Could meth injection be added to this if needed to get temps down to were u need them? hate to see money spent like that and not make use of it!