|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,786
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,786 |
I'll take just the higher PSI compressor and bracket. I wonder what it would do if you could do a smaller FMIC that will fit in the Contour's bumper, and then a water/air right in front of the TB (besides eat up more money). Ice the water when it's go time, but still take advantage of some of the long pipe that has to go back to the TB anyway.
-Auto Mak or-
-Experiment or
-Station Wagon or-
-Computeriz or-
I have a foot that is bigger than a foot.
SuperChipFOR SALE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
Well, I've been giving it more thought, and I've come to the conclusion that I will wait to see what the ADC turbo kit will offer.
With the additional parts & tuning that this SC kit will require, I might be better off, dollar for dollar, to get an ADC kit to fit my ATX - IF it offers some basic tuning & upgraded injectors with the package. I like plug & play. Especially if an extra grand will get me some basic tuning so I can tool around for a couple of months until I can get to a dyno & have a Superchip re-programmed to suite.
The SC kit is great in the fact that you have less plumbing for turbo cooling & exhaust manifolds to fab/replace. Simple is better for somebody with limited experience, or time, or desire for tearing into the car, so it may yet be the best option for me. I won't be putting down a huge amount of power. Just looking for a greater fun factor. Adding all sorts of extras like an Xcal2 & having to buy injectors & what-not (on top of learing to tune) to make a safe kit is just not worth it for some.
All I want is some bolt in goodness with minimal fuss. Doesn't have to be ideal - I can tweak it if the spirit ever moves me, but for now, simple is better. Maybe I'm being un-realistic, but I am new to FI.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829 |
I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.
Just a thought...
SVT Parts For Sale!PM Me.
2006 M6 Cyclone Gray GTO
1995 Mazda Protege Commuter Special
93 FXDWG Dyna Wide Glide
I'm A TROLL Now!~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by DrFrankenbarge:
Water to air can be more efficient... but it eventually becomes limited by ambient temp just like an air to air... what do you think cools the water after it sucks all the heat from your compressed air... it's the ambient air.
Water/Air IC's are typically used in one-shot cars like drag cars so they can pack them with ice... or in the case of the contour, cars w/o a good spot/room to put an air/air.
Correct.
Even without ice the water to air is more beneficial in the short run with the car at low air speeds because the coolant can still absorb heat without airflow going through the radiator.
However, prolonged idling and stop and go traffic will kill the water to air setup when the watter gets too warm. So I don't know, I like the water to air in the long run despite any issues. In winter time it will actually warm the incoming air charge up a little bit as well.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.
Just a thought...
No room there unless its ON the hood. 
Stazi had a plan to use a hood scoop above the stock airbox locationfor a small eclipse Air-Air byt it just turns out better all the way around with the water-air because of how small the core can be to get the same intercooling effect.
Of course you have to have plenty of area for the exchanger in front of the radiator too though.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 67 |
it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors
00 Contour SVT Black
#557 of 2150
Fabricated Nov 24 1999
Currently unmoded
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 829 |
Originally posted by warmonger:
Originally posted by Rev. Po-Jay:
I may be stating the obvious, but has anyone thought of putting a Top-Mount IC (Ala- WRX) just ahead of the firewall? It seems like there could be enough room and the piping already routes that way with this kit. It might not be the prettiest setup, but it has to be better than notching the frame to fit a FMIC.
Just a thought...
No room there unless its ON the hood.
Stazi had a plan to use a hood scoop above the stock airbox locationfor a small eclipse Air-Air byt it just turns out better all the way around with the water-air because of how small the core can be to get the same intercooling effect.
Of course you have to have plenty of area for the exchanger in front of the radiator too though.
This coming from a man that has proven there is no "Can't"? Tom, you are letting me down. Sure there is room. Make room. A bit of a nice hood cowl and Ba-Da-Bing, you are in there!~ 
SVT Parts For Sale!PM Me.
2006 M6 Cyclone Gray GTO
1995 Mazda Protege Commuter Special
93 FXDWG Dyna Wide Glide
I'm A TROLL Now!~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,786
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,786 |
Originally posted by Number47:
it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors
Wrong.
-Auto Mak or-
-Experiment or
-Station Wagon or-
-Computeriz or-
I have a foot that is bigger than a foot.
SuperChipFOR SALE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by Number47:
it was my understanding that air to air works better because your always running the charged air to the ambiant air temp. example: random numbers to, 150 to 75 there is a greater difference than the water type that is at 90 so your trying to get 150 to 90. but i dont know, thats just how i understood it on our tractors
Not really. Heat transfer into the water from the aluminum core is faster and the water can hold more heat before the temperature raises by 1 degree than air can. Putting it back out into the air means that you still have to think of it the same as an air to air.
Let me better explain: Assume no ice is used and that the water temp operates between intake air temp and ambient temp.
Next, the medium that the heat is going through are as follows:
For air to air IC: Air->Alum->Air
For air to water IC: Air->Alum->water->Alum->Air
The only difference is the water in the middle and since heat transfers between aluminum and water 14x faster than between Aluminum and air, having the water in the middle is negligible. Therefore, without some outside factors such as introducing iced/cold/hot water to the system it will act much like an air to air cooler.
With one or two exceptions. The water temp will respond much slower to ambient temperature differences so if ambient temps cool down or you run through a patch of cooler air then you won't see an immediate benefit in your intercooler efficiency until the water has had time to cool down. On the other hand, if ambient temps raise or you run through a patch of hot air, you won't see the penalty as quick. But counting on the benefits of the last statement are so rare you may as well not include it in the discussion.
This is why you are shooting yourself in the foot if you use a very large capacity coolant system in your water to air intercooler!!!!! Your car cannot cool down the coolant quickly once it is heat soaked without a lot of airflow across the heat exchanger, as in driving down the road for a few minutes. Idle heatsoak will reduce the system efficiency. Also, the more tanks and lines you have running the car the more surface area you have to absorb outside sources of heat, and that is anything higher than the coolant temps. The signficance of this is that putting a bucket of ice water in the cooler and esp. having it in the trunk means it absorbs heat from all across the car, often being too warm by the time you get through the staging lines! Only a drag race team with the container next to the IC core with easy acess to flush with iced water can really see the benefits of a large volume resevoir and ice.
So I come back full circle to the discussions over the past three years that the large trunk mounted tanks are a waste of time, money, space, and of course too much added weight (figure 8#s/gallon)!!
Even though there is a sweet spot in coolant amount for best efficiency, you should think of it as using only enough coolant to fill the lines, cores, and a small resevoir to provide enough coolant for when the water contracts as it cools down.
This improves transient temperature efficiency.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Hey, I used the words UNLESS in my post!  Unless you make a hood scoop or cowling. Anything is possible.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
