I have been reading a lot in this forum lately but I've found nothing on this topic. I was wondering if anyone had considered using a radiator/intercooler setup like the old Shelby GLHS used (see below)


http://www.turbododge.com/forums/att...tercooler-.jpg

It would keep the charge pipes short.

 

Yes it would work, however no one that I know of has done it. I know a narrow civic radiator has been used with the intercooler in front of it, and the charge pipes pointing backwards on either side. It was that guy who said he had 600hp but never produced the dyno sheet...forget his name. jthewhat or something like that.

For a street car it's probably fine, although there's really no need to reinvent the wheel. We have some mighty short pipes with around the radiator setups and over the radiator setups. Then you can buy off the shelf radiators, and have more (bigger) options for intercoolers.

 

Surface area fail.

 

You can't downsize the radiator and keep coolant temps in check. It's been tried.

IMO, the idea of short charge pipes is not worth spending a moment of time on.

 

You want faster spool and better response there are a bunch of more important areas to achieve this aside from charge pipe length

some fool was selling something like this long time ago. zoom2zoom or something was his name? claimed it worked for him. his car was fail. he later got banned lol.

 

I was just looking at options that wouldn't pump the charge air heat into the cooling system. If it won't work it won't work. I bow to experience.

 

Run a V mount then.

Btw
https://www.miataturbo.net/diy-turbo-discussion-14/side-side-radiator-intercooler-setup-24491/

 

Eh I'll just leave things where they are for now.

 

http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread...RX+INTERCOOLER

 

damn, i was just about to link that thread...

I thought it was the rad that was the thick core...I dont see that working well. I remember something about even the side-by-side oilcooler twincooler thing had compromised cooling and it was only like what 8-10" narrower?

 

Engine cooling issues with a side-by-side oil cooler and radiator make less sense. You're cooling both engine fluids. That's actually a typical OE approach (side-by-side). Of course it would depend on the component sizing, keep the capacity of the rad the same and then improve efficiency with something like cross flow, or multi pass and it should prove beneficial over a big rad and non-exposed oil cooler IMO.

 

I don't have a dog in the fight, but why reinvent the wheel? If you have to upgrade the factory radiator to something larger just to cool the engine, why on earth would you want to make the surface area of it smaller? My experience has shown that less surface area and thicker core != same performance of thinner core and more surface area.

I'd follow the example of experienced members such as Savington, who I believe speaks with race proven experience on the matter.