1) Why was such a long non direct path taken to get to the intercooler? Was it b/c of endtank location and for it not to block the radiator?

2) With such longer piping, is throttle response significantly worsened?

Thanks.

 

yes. Corky used to be all about the vertical runners, which placed the endtanks in odd locations.

no, it won't, not one bit.


he's since updated that design:

 

Interesting choice with the BOV location for the recirc. I'd have probably made the charge side shorter and run a long pipe to the intake.

 

Different strokes for different folks... some people just stick the bov/bpv on the hotside so the recirv is short and simple, others do like you stated, others do like corky, and others vta

 

I have given much thought to location of the bov and I think corky has done so as well. The kit I bought two years ago (the last 1.6 bell/FM setup on their shelf) had the bov go from right after the compressor outlet to just before the compressor. It was difficult to install correctly and I modified the pipes to have a VTA bov right after the intercooler since then. Corky has also gone to a post intercooler bov in kits after that. I am assuming there is very little measurable diffence between those two setups, but my rational for placing the bov after the Intercooler is because there is a pressure drop in the intercooler and there will be a little bit less blow off ... if that makes any sense.

Anyway it probably does not matter.

 

FWIW I always figured a BOV before the IC was better, as it keeps less heat from going through the IC. However, a bov that see's cooler air will probably last longer so that may be the underlying reason for most kits.

 

Just to clarify, I didn't mean BOV pre or post IC, I meant I would put the BOV over by the throttle body and run a longer recirc tube to the intake.

 

Any accurate articles on throttle response / spool time with different sized intercooler piping. TDR swears up and down that th e"over the radiator" pipes are superior to the plumbing of the BEGi kit. It makes sense I guess, but I'm not intelligent to understand this stuff of the top of my head. Longer piping = more air to compress in the pipes.

 

here's a test:

buy two air compressors.

buy a length of 500' hose and 10'.

attach the same nozzle on each.

pressure the tank to 60psi.

keep the regulator closed, hold the nozzles open.

turn the regulators open at the same time....


which nozzle gets air first? how much faster? Can you measure it?


I'd suggest the air moves so fast that there will be no delay in boost response.

 

What Brain says makes plenty of sence. Another example, when I used to work in a Goodyear shop, the Air hose farthest from the compressor worked just as good as the one closest to the compressor. As far as the over the top IC, the only reasons I like that setup is becasue 1 it looks nicer and 2 there are less points of failure. Would I pay $1000 for it, HELL NO.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

would I do it if i had a blow through intercooler or it was easier....yes!

 

The shop air was kept under constant pressure, unlike the charge piping scenario.

 

I read that every 90* of bends is a 1% increase in flow loss. If that's the case, your loosing about 6-7% of flow from all those bends. Does that matter, I don't know. I would think it would. Maybe it's not enough to affect throttle response, but wouldn't it effect HP to the tune of 6-7%? I don't know, so I'm asking.

It seems that a 20* reduction in temps going into the IC is only going to drop the temps out of the IC by maybe 5*. That's an improvement over an over the radiator setup, but not much. Is that gain not covered up by the flow losses from the extra bends?

 

but i mean we are talking about pressured air here, when is the last time you turned on your garden hose and only a little water trickled out because the thing was still wound.

 

Braineack- I was saying a 1% increase in flow loss on a motor running boost. Water in a pipe, I don't know, but I would imagine at 40PSI water flow losses are less. Your example would prove that. That 1% number is from Bell's book. He changed a lot in his IC section as you have informed me, so that number could very well have been revised as well. Also there are flow losses also associated with the extra length as the around the radiator method has more length as well as more bends. I don't know all the math, but it's bound to be more restrictive than an over the radiator setup. On a SC'd car, flow losses are more important, since my blower runs off the engine's crankshaft. You turbo guys get a 'free ride' so to speak so the losses are not 'as' critical I suppose. If it takes an extra 5 hp to push the air through those extra bends then your turbo takes care of it for you. My SC takes that power from the crank.

 

yes, exactly. i would want the shortest pipes possible on a SCed miata. On a turbo I'd be hard pressed if there is any calculatable difference.