View Single Post
polizei polizei is offline
Registered User
 
polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Collegeville, PA
Posts: 1,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobieboy View Post
I remember Gerhard mentioned that while shorter tubes are better, there's also the "too short is bad" factor. He mentioned something like 10" minimum. So with the core shown in the picture, I'd have thought going side-to-side would be more effective even though you'll have more pressure drop (which he says, crank up the boost/bigger turbo )
I think this is starting to make sense. So the length of the end tanks largely determine the flow (CFM) of the IC while the length of the tubes/fins along with the core thickness determine the "cooling capability"? If I'm understand this correctly, the above intercooler sacrifices cooling (length of tubes/fins) for minimal pressure drop (end tank size)? By contrast, the below intercooler (excuse my art work) would have worse flow (350 CFM according to Bell IC's) but would be more effective at cooling the charge:



Gerhardt calculated that I would need around 700 CFM to support 400 rwhp. He estimated a 2-3psi loss in pressure with an IC that flowed that poorly relative to the HP output. Would there be any negative effects (aside from turbo wear & tear) to turning up the boost to compensate for this pressure drop? I suppose alternatively I could go with the better flowing IC and just add water/methanol injection to drop the charge temp further.

What are your thoughts? Am I thinking along the correct lines?
__________________
Andy - 1987 911 Carrera Coupe
Old 08-15-2008, 11:04 AM
  Pelican Parts Catalog | Tech Articles | Promos & Specials    Reply With Quote #5 (permalink)