UrS6 FMIC solutions

[UrS4boy]

nope got this one a while back

I have had this argument before: The end tanks on that FMIC are too shallow and the inlet and outlet are too close to the bottom (top in your photo). There is very little "incentive" for flow to turn sharply and head up through other half of the core.

To work better, the end tanks need to be deeper (more volume) and the inlet and outlet need to be further away from the bottom (closer to half way up).

The Apikol FMIC is much better at this (albeit more money).

For even better efficiency, you really need a vertical flow FMIC (flow distributed from bottom to top), short core (8" or so) like this one I posted on AudiWorld:

http://forums.audiworld.com/s4s6/msgs/139821.phtml

IMHO

Dave F.

[Animal Mother]

This was my original plans, I might still give it a go.

I'd say that a very linear flow would be the most effieient.

Wether it fits is the only problem.

[UrS4boy]

This was my original plans, I might still give it a go.

I'd say that a very linear flow would be the most effieient.

Wether it fits is the only problem.

IMHO, that short, long, horizontal flow FMIC is the worst idea. Most of the heat exchange is the first 8" or so. As a result, with that long length, you get very little additional heat exchange but a lot of head (pressure) loss, especially because the velocities are going to be high.

Dave F.

[Jamo]

This was my original plans, I might still give it a go.

I'd say that a very linear flow would be the most effieient.

Wether it fits is the only problem.

IMO that is sh*t the pressure drop across it would be massive.

[Animal Mother]

Isn't all of that irrelevant as its just the internal volume that matters.

I understand that the larger the turbo-->IM system, the lower the boost pressure. Is that what you are both getting at?

Surely if this IC has the same internal volume as a flat tall one then pressure drop would be the same.

[UrS4boy]

Isn't all of that irrelevant as its just the internal volume that matters.

I understand that the larger the turbo-->IM system, the lower the boost pressure. Is that what you are both getting at?

Surely if this IC has the same internal volume as a flat tall one then pressure drop would be the same.

Sorry but you obviously do not understand fluid mechanics. Pressure drop is a function of velocity, friction and flow length. Pressure drop typically increases with the square of the velocity so a narrow opening, long, FMIC will have a) high velocities and therefore high(er) head losses per unit length and b) more head loss because of the longer length.

The link to the vertical flow FMIC has the best of both worlds: a) a larger flow area (vertical) so the velocities and head losses are lower per unit length and b) a very short flow length (through the core) so even lower losses.

Volume had more to do with lag, i.e. the larger the volume the more air has to be compressed before it pushes the "stagnant" air out of the intercooler core.

Please do not use that long narrow short FMIC set up. It's the worst possible solution and is probably worse than the OE intercooler.

[Jamo]

Isn't all of that irrelevant as its just the internal volume that matters.

I understand that the larger the turbo-->IM system, the lower the boost pressure. Is that what you are both getting at?

Surely if this IC has the same internal volume as a flat tall one then pressure drop would be the same.

Are you serious?

[Knight Rider S4]

Someone has been buying this product i think

http://www.bofunk.com/video/5525/odweeds.html

[jogi730]

Originally Posted by Animal Mother
This was my original plans, I might still give it a go.

I'd say that a very linear flow would be the most effieient.

Wether it fits is the only problem.

IMHO, that short, long, horizontal flow FMIC is the worst idea. Most of the heat exchange is the first 8" or so. As a result, with that long length, you get very little additional heat exchange but a lot of head (pressure) loss, especially because the velocities are going to be high.

Dave F.


I ran this set-up with a Garrett T34 - 390bhp and had NO LAG (or if I did it was barely noticable). This can be verified by a few on this forum!
This IC would have been good for 450 - 500 bhp, especially with a water-spary system installed. Just not sure would have been up to the T61 I upgraded to or the GT35 hybrid I will be running soon (very soon ).

@ANimal,
I have not forgotten about measurements. Just that garage key is with car at tuner right now and the friends that hold my spare are away visiting their kids. I will get the dimensions for you ASAP as promised. Sorry if this is an inconvenience.
Cheers
CHris

[UrS4boy]

I ran this set-up with a Garrett T34 - 390bhp and had NO LAG (or if I did it was barely noticable). This can be verified by a few on this forum!
This IC would have been good for 450 - 500 bhp, especially with a water-spary system installed. Just not sure would have been up to the T61 I upgraded to or the GT35 hybrid I will be running soon (very soon ).
Cheers
CHris

You can always make a square peg fit a round hole, as long as you have a big enough hammer, aka "BFH". In this case your "BFH" is a big turbo ("BFT"). I would contend that you could either make more hp with this turbo and a better FMIC, or you could make the same hp with a smaller turbo and a better FMIC.

But I presume that you will disagree.

[jogi730]

Whoa matey!
Not having a go here. I'm just saying how the IC performed on my car. The turbo could possibly have run up to 410-420bhp max, but that would have been flat out.
I'm no mechanic or technician which I openly admit so don't really understand the physics behind it. All I know is it worked very well on my setup. More to the point, Ahmed Bayjoo (who's he?) was well impressed!
CHeers
Chris

[UrS4boy]

Whoa matey!
Not having a go here. I'm just saying how the IC performed on my car. The turbo could possibly have run up to 410-420bhp max, but that would have been flat out.
I'm no mechanic or technician which I openly admit so don't really understand the physics behind it. All I know is it worked very well on my setup. More to the point, Ahmed Bayjoo (who's he?) was well impressed!
CHeers
Chris

No problems. All I am saying is you could have done better with a better FMIC than that one. Even if you don't know or understand physics, you know that blowing through a 2 inch pipe is easier than blowing through a drinking straw.

But we don't want to start any new threads on blowing now do we?

[jogi730]

Is this a good time to re-ignite Jamo's favourite arguement........
you can go too big with an IC! :mischeif:
Cheers
Chris

[Jamo]

Is this a good time to re-ignite Jamo's favourite arguement........
you can go too big with an IC! :mischeif:
Cheers
Chris

You too big, sucky sucky 5 dollar!

[Jamo]

Jogi that solution was perfect for your car due to restricted space but for a UrS6 it's nowhere near ideal as there are better solutions for that car and that's my point.

If I was that limited for space i'd use a charge cooler