Notices
Forced Induction Superchargers | Turbochargers | Intercoolers

D1SC Front Mount Upgrade Gains 125rwhp

 
Old 02-02-2019, 01:50 PM
  #1  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default D1SC Front Mount Upgrade Gains 125rwhp

Hey everyone, wanted to share my results from switching from the ProCharger twin intercooler setup to a big front mount intercooler. Although there are many advantages to the twin intercoolers, like ease of installation, keeping the front crash bar, and the reliable stock cooling it just can only move so much air and was becoming a performance bottleneck. I can tell you that it wasn't cheap to do and I had to make a bunch of changes to keep everything to working correctly. Here's the before and after:

Twins Setup - 690 rwhp
- LQ9 370 ci built motor, 9.2 CR, 96lb inj, w/meth
- Stage 3 ported GM 243 heads, 312/255 in/ex @ 0.600
- D1SC Procharger w/Aster bracket 7.65"/3.4" 62k @ 6800
- ATI ProCharger 4.5" Twin intercoolers
- ATI ProCharger Truck Hat inlet with 4" filter
- ATI ProCharger Open Race "Big Red" BPV
- Made around 15 psi

Front Mount Setup - 815 rwhp
- LQ9 370 ci built motor, 9.4 CR, 96lb inj, w/meth
- TEA/TFS LS2 as cast heads, 314/233 in/ex @ 0.600
- D1SC Procharger w/Aster bracket 8.65"/3.85" 62k @ 6800
- Griffen Radiator moved forward
- Shearer Fab 6" Big *** Intercooler 4" inlet/outlet
- Custom 4" intake piping 8" bellmouth w/filter
- Custom 3 1/2" intercooler piping
- ATI ProCharger ProRace BPV
- Made low end of 18 psi

Last edited by white01ss; 02-04-2019 at 01:36 PM.
white01ss is offline  
Old 02-02-2019, 01:58 PM
  #2  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Twin Intercooler Kit





white01ss is offline  
Old 02-02-2019, 02:07 PM
  #3  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Front Mount Setup





white01ss is offline  
Old 02-02-2019, 03:17 PM
  #4  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (17)
 
AnotherWs6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Westchester, NY
Posts: 2,572
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Did you make any other changes? Imagine it needed a retune.
AnotherWs6 is offline  
Old 02-02-2019, 03:40 PM
  #5  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AnotherWs6 View Post
Did you make any other changes? Imagine it needed a retune.
Only major change since then was I changed from stage 3 ported LS6 heads to TEA LS2 heads. The TEAs flowed about the same if not worse. Same compression, intake manifold, fuel system, exhaust, blower, and blower pullies. The previous one was in cold dry air, the after was hot as ***** air. Might dyno again in this cooler weather to see what difference it makes.

The tune didn't need much. Added 3-5% more fuel in most of the boost cells and touched up the upper 16-18 psi cells where it had never been before. Maxed out the 96 lb injectors at 89% though. Engine took 1 degree more timing than before probably due to the cooler intake charge.
white01ss is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 08:18 AM
  #6  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by white01ss View Post
Only major change since then was I changed from stage 3 ported LS6 heads to TEA LS2 heads. The TEAs flowed about the same if not worse. Same compression, intake manifold, fuel system, exhaust, blower, and blower pullies. The previous one was in cold dry air, the after was hot as ***** air. Might dyno again in this cooler weather to see what difference it makes.

The tune didn't need much. Added 3-5% more fuel in most of the boost cells and touched up the upper 16-18 psi cells where it had never been before. Maxed out the 96 lb injectors at 89% though. Engine took 1 degree more timing than before probably due to the cooler intake charge.
If it hasn't been at 16 to 18 psi until after the intercooler swap then it's not apples to apples. You need to see the same boost before and after to have a fair comparison. That said, no real surprise the duals are restrictive. I think I had $400 into making my own custom FMIC kit when I had a D1.
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 09:48 AM
  #7  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
BCNUL8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oskaloosa, Iowa
Posts: 633
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ddnspider View Post
If it hasn't been at 16 to 18 psi until after the intercooler swap then it's not apples to apples. You need to see the same boost before and after to have a fair comparison. That said, no real surprise the duals are restrictive. I think I had $400 into making my own custom FMIC kit when I had a D1.
It seems like a good comparison to me since he didn't change the pulleys or blower rpm. The thing is with the extra psi you are seeing the combination of less restriction and lower iat's effect on power level. He would have to limit the blower rpm to bring boost back down to 15 to see just the impact of lower iat alone. I think his results show the total impact of the larger intercooler. This is why I started right out with the larger 1300hp rated procharger intercooler on my GTO even though I'm making a lot less power for now.
BCNUL8R is online now  
Old 02-03-2019, 09:56 AM
  #8  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (17)
 
AnotherWs6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Westchester, NY
Posts: 2,572
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BCNUL8R View Post
It seems like a good comparison to me since he didn't change the pulleys or blower rpm. The thing is with the extra psi you are seeing the combination of less restriction and lower iat's effect on power level. He would have to limit the blower rpm to bring boost back down to 15 to see just the impact of lower iat alone. I think his results show the total impact of the larger intercooler. This is why I started right out with the larger 1300hp rated procharger intercooler on my GTO even though I'm making a lot less power for now.
Bingo. he didnt crank up the boost, he just got more because of the higher flowing IC.
AnotherWs6 is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 10:55 AM
  #9  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

I appreciate the lower restriction, but it's still not apples to apples. You can't compare say 12 psi to 16 paid, regardless of restriction and claim you gained 125whp from the intercooler swap alone.
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 11:46 AM
  #10  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (11)
 
No Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Minnesota Corn Fields
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

pics of the bellmouth and filter ?
No Juice is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 12:19 PM
  #11  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ddnspider View Post
I appreciate the lower restriction, but it's still not apples to apples. You can't compare say 12 psi to 16 paid, regardless of restriction and claim you gained 125whp from the intercooler swap alone.
I not claiming that it gained 125hp, it did gain it and boost pressure is totally irrelevant here. What's important (the apples) is that the blower rpm stayed consistent at 62k . The point of this was to show how restrictive the twins are compared to a good flowing front mount. I've read some other threads in FI where people have upgraded blowers only to find minimal gains. Further investigation showed that the bargain 1000hp intercooler they were using was not flowing enough to keep up with the bigger blower. They upgraded their intercooler and got the gains they were expecting.
white01ss is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 12:21 PM
  #12  
Teching In
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Northern FL
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ddnspider View Post
I appreciate the lower restriction, but it's still not apples to apples. You can't compare say 12 psi to 16 paid, regardless of restriction and claim you gained 125whp from the intercooler swap alone.
But, I mean, didn't he though? Not saying that it would make more power on the same boost level but the cooler allowed him to run more power, safer. Sure, touched the tune up a little, but can't the argument be made that he DID gain 125whp from a cooler swap?
IDP FTW is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 12:42 PM
  #13  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by IDP FTW View Post
But, I mean, didn't he though? Not saying that it would make more power on the same boost level but the cooler allowed him to run more power, safer. Sure, touched the tune up a little, but can't the argument be made that he DID gain 125whp from a cooler swap?
At the same boost? No, it didn't. The title of the thread is misleading and others, especially newbs, will read it as "gee twin intercoolers suck, I need a front mount so I can gain 125hp!" That's not the whole story. On top of which, No Juice has a good eye. It's well documented that the inlet on the blower can effect both power and boost levels, and there was another upgrade there too.
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 01:01 PM
  #14  
Teching In
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Northern FL
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ddnspider View Post
At the same boost? No, it didn't. The title of the thread is misleading and others, especially newbs, will read it as "gee twin intercoolers suck, I need a front mount so I can gain 125hp!" That's not the whole story. On top of which, No Juice has a good eye. It's well documented that the inlet on the blower can effect both power and boost levels, and there was another upgrade there too.
But running the single IC allowed him to run more, safer, boost. Right?
IDP FTW is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 01:05 PM
  #15  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
BCNUL8R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oskaloosa, Iowa
Posts: 633
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

I see the point...the intercooler wasn't absolutely the only change. If the heads really flowed that much more wouldn't that actually reduce the amount of boost he was seeing by being less restrictive? The pre-blower intake was definitely a factor in reducing restriction as well. At the bare minimum we can see how reducing restrictions and lowering iat's can make big power improvements without needing to spin the blower any faster. This is still a great example while not being 100% related to the intercooler alone.
BCNUL8R is online now  
Old 02-03-2019, 01:41 PM
  #16  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by IDP FTW View Post
But running the single IC allowed him to run more, safer, boost. Right?
No, not alone it didn't.
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-03-2019, 01:42 PM
  #17  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BCNUL8R View Post
I see the point...the intercooler wasn't absolutely the only change. If the heads really flowed that much more wouldn't that actually reduce the amount of boost he was seeing by being less restrictive? The pre-blower intake was definitely a factor in reducing restriction as well. At the bare minimum we can see how reducing restrictions and lowering iat's can make big power improvements without needing to spin the blower any faster. This is still a great example while not being 100% related to the intercooler alone.
I completely agree, great gains and glad the OP posted it. Just a bit misleading thats all.
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-04-2019, 01:42 PM
  #18  
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (34)
 
white01ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You're right about the intake, it should definitely add some power. The intake is a 4" pipe with 90* elbow mated to a vibrant 7" bellmouth and filter combo. Some of the frame support was cut out to make it a straight shot. It's pretty trick. I'll get some pics up here soon.

I put the heads in the parts breakdown complete with flow numbers. Intake flow was nearly the same, but lost quite a bit of exhaust flow which hurts s/c setups. Thinking of this reminded me that the CR changed a little too, from 9.2 to 9.4 due to a thinner head gasket. So I'm guessing the head change is a wash. Geez, I'm forgetting ****.
white01ss is offline  
Old 02-04-2019, 01:53 PM
  #19  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (26)
 
ddnspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 8,801
Received 26 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

No worries, like I said good gains!
ddnspider is offline  
Old 02-04-2019, 03:22 PM
  #20  
TECH Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

To the OP. Looks like you moved the AC condenser off of the face of the radiator and moved it forward. I did that a couple of years ago and it solved my overheating issues by moving the ac condenser to get better air flow to the radiator up from the air dam. The condenser is a restriction in front of the radiator especially in slow moving traffic. Cools the cabin pretty good here in 100 degree Kansas summers. Same high temps as what you have in Texas. My condenser is 28 X 16. It's larger than the stock condenser.

Kept the stock radiator. However it's the standard transmission version sans the tranny cooler tank inside.


How is your ac setup working for you in the summer? Nice work.
dlandsvZ28 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: