I changed my i/c from the AVO to the TDR. I measured airflow by taping a sheet of paper above the mouth hanging down, weighted down with 8 quarters. Then turned the fans on. I took a video before and after. Result: waaaay more airflow with the TDR. I expected a difference but not this much. The reason is that the TDR has much more opening area than the AVO i/c. Which is the whole reason I changed over. I anticipate much better cooling. Will measure temps later. See pics below.

Left is AVO, right is TDR.
Top is paper test, bottom is i/c frontal pic.

 

is that the fans just pulling the air through?

 

Yes just the fans. It means there's far less flow resistance to air.

 

that is some major flow diferential oe fans right?

 

Looks like if you had overheating issues, it'll help quite a bit. At the same time, it'll lower the effectiveness of the intercooled air.

 

How will it lower the IC effectiveness? unless the internal passages are crimped down or something, it seems to me the heat sink quality is better and more evenly distributed, to make the radiator happy.

 

Jason- what are you referring too? the position of the TDR (isn't that the tilt for over the rad pipes)? or the actual intercooler construction?

 

Its basically a comparison between bar/plate and tube/fin. Bar/plate cools better, but is more disruptive to flow through it (to radiator and somewhat to motor), while tube/fin flows better (both ways) and doesn't cool quite as well. Typically tube/fin is also quite a bit lighter than bar/plate.

It's all a matter of picking your poison

 

are you sure that airs going to the IC?

 

if I know jason, he's got every gap around the perimeter of all the cores plugged with some big mattress foam. that air should be going through the cores.

 

and he's NOT running an aftermarket radiator

 

y8s knows me well.

 

I have a CSF all Al "racing" radiator, 1" core, but very very high fin density.
With the AVO cooler, I could barely track the car in 95*F weather;

 

The 2 ic's weigh about the same, surprisingly. (light, much much lighter than the old FM i/c's) I expected the TDR to be lighter.

User datapoints and claims on the TDR i/c is that it has about the same outlet temperature and slightly better pressure loss performance as the AVO. We'll see.

The car feels noticeably faster at the topend, but it may be because of the cool weather today. I will wait for warmer weather to make a datalog.

 

I'm starting to take wagers on how much torque the TDR makes. I say a bit better spool, and more topend.

 

Is the AVO bar and plate? Then the flow argument would be contrary to standard thinking- wouldn't it? Curious as to what makes the TDR such an improvement over the AVO - core design?

 

Don't know, maybe it's just the piping. Yes the AVO is bar/plate. If the temp and/or pressure loss is worse in the TDR then that's the tradeoff.

If it's better, well, the details of a given design matter more than a general "bar/plate vs. tube/fin".

 

Interested only because I'm considering trading out my short coldside IC pipe for an oil cooler position. That would mean running that cold pipe around the heat exchanger assembly.

 

Results:

- spoolup, no change
- topend, slight discernible advantage to AVO (~2%, could be meas error, AEMlog acceleration function)
- temp rise during a 2nd gear run: 4°C vs. 6°C, advantage AVO i/c, BUT the temps drop back down more quickly with the TDR. The AVO appears to have more thermal mass but heatsoak, the TDR airflow cools it down quick. Peak temps on the track, unknown.

I have yet to measure pressure loss.

 

Pressure loss:
TDR is better by 0 to 0.5 psi
2.5 psi pressure loss at 10 psi of manifold pressure, est 240 whp