Braineack

iTrader: (62)

you can see the point where there is no "extra" cooling benefit on the PDF between 4000-600pms. The best comparison would be to test another aftermarket "single" setup and see the inlet temps vs. each other, and see if the "twin" setup actually is better an onther aftermarket setup.

The way i see it is the first intercooler is only warming the second one, so you get lots of heat soak and less efficency from the 2nd intercooler. Can you guys plug the 2nd intercooler inlets up and take the same inlet temp readings?

PAT!

iTrader: (1)

Eh? What graph are you looking at? At 6000rpm there is a 15* celsius difference, about 7* at 4000...

Independent testing has been done, that is why I made the claim. I'm not hear to sell anything I'm just trying to add to the stimulating intellectual conversation

We have done just that and it disproves the way that you see it. It would be nearly impossible for the first intercooler to warm the second, they are not sequential, the charge air from one does not pass through the other. Actually I think it might be impossible for it to heat anything as the core isn't a heat source... But I think maybe the way you worded that isn't exactly what you meant...?

I would like for someone with a high degree of understanding of fluid dynamics to add their thoughts. Any explanation that I give will be conjecture and thats a little too close to talking out of my *** for my taste.

What I REALLY want to see is pre and post temps for both coolers plotted against rpm and pressure, THAT would be the most telling thing. But I don't think that they (the UK development guys) have access to the car any longer.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

it looks like there is no additional cooling benefit past 27*C, so what I'm suggesting is; does it require both intercoolers to reach that temp?

could the same cooling benefit be achieved with less (could you reach 27*C with the one intercooler)?

has the test been done off the dyno for substained periods of time?

when heatsoak sets in, does it do better than a traditional setup?


no i totally understand, i just think it's overkill.


no, once air passes through the first intercooler it's heated. so the air hitting the second intercooler is substanially warmer than ambient, then the air hitting the radiator is even warmer passing through the second inctercooler.

me too.


me too.

Loki047

iTrader: (6)

Pat, Whats your pressure drop?

PAT!

iTrader: (1)

It doesn't. But running just our front mount caused a power loss in the lower rpm ranges and was more prone to heatsoak than the twin setup. Several cores were tried, bigger smaller, different endtank setups and this set-up proved the best.

Yes, but... see above.

Yes, we have VAG-Com, a hardware/software package which allows for data-logging for just about everything. And the prototype was on the car for months before we released the final product.

Heatsoak was harder to achieve and less severe.



Well the thing of it is on the new VW cars the stock intercooler is also the radiator support. So removing it is a royal pain in the *** and requires fab'ing a new support.




I got you, you're talking about ambient air not the charge air. Your theory is definitely sound but duplicating the performance of the twin setup with a single core would be very difficult. Mainly due to space/trimming issues but apart from that a core with a comparable amount of thermal capacity always seemed to take a hit to power down low.

yadayada

If it's all about cooler air, just get a Co2/(nitrous for big money) kit with a halo and let it **** all over the intercooler. The more area you have in between your compressor and your throttle body, the longer it will take to fill those pipes up with air, causing longer waits for full boost. I may or may not be talking out of my ***, but, it only makes sense.

Loki047

iTrader: (6)

Pat Whats the pressure drop?

PAT!

iTrader: (1)

I'll see if I can find that out.