Intercoolers

[Doug_RS2]

I was thinking about the 10mm(IIRC) spacer between the gearbox and engine - so if the pulley is less deep on a 3B - then that is more room - so it might not be too far off.

[Audi_CQ]

There is a pressure drop because the intercooler acts like a valve. The air travelling into the intercooler looses some of its volume as it passes the intercooler, before it can be used by the engine. There is a very simple test. Take a boost reading before you install your larger intercooler, then after. There is always a pressure drop.

Pressure drop because of lower temp are OK. Same amount of air with less pressure entering engine = same power with less boost
Pressure don't make power, max amount of oxygen does.........

Cheers,
Roger

[SteveH]

I wanted the 3 inch intercooler and not the 4,as I know the 3 inch is a great fit and it does a good job. I'll see what the supplier says about returns, shipping, etc. Bit of a pain, but a great bargain all the same..

[quattroTurbo]

No one mentioned pressure making bhp (of course it helps, otherwise no one would use a turbocharger!). Actually, flow is what makes bhp, a denser intake of air only makes it better. It's getting all the ingredients to work together in synchrony that is the difficult bit.

[S2central.net]

More correctly in my mind - it is air *MASS* which makes the power. The more air the better, and the colder it is the better. Thats why we like turbos and intercoolers round these parts !


Paul

[quattroTurbo]

F1 engines are developing 1000bhp from 10 cylinders, 3.0 litres and 19,000+rpm. These engines breath the same air as any other engine, using only 100 octane fuel to achieve this. Air density ("MASS", if you will) has relatively little effect on their power output - plus or minus 50bhp. They develop that 1000 or so bhp with an engine design that optimises flow. As much air in and out as possible efficiently.

Even during the turbo era intercoolers were not so large. BMW produced a qualifying 1500cc four cylinder turbo that produced up to 1800bhp and had an intercooler core size of 500mm x 500mm x 100mm. Relatively small for its power output.

[Jay]

The core size may have been small but the flow through and over the core was optimised ( after aprox 45mph air stalls in front of a core be it a rad or IC so the inlet can be made smaller and have a reverse cone to stop air spilling out and force it through) also these engines ran "rocket" fuel to get these horse power fig'

Air density makes all the difference.

Jay

F1 engines are developing 1000bhp from 10 cylinders, 3.0 litres and 19,000+rpm. These engines breath the same air as any other engine, using only 100 octane fuel to achieve this. Air density ("MASS", if you will) has relatively little effect on their power output - plus or minus 50bhp. They develop that 1000 or so bhp with an engine design that optimises flow. As much air in and out as possible efficiently.

Even during the turbo era intercoolers were not so large. BMW produced a qualifying 1500cc four cylinder turbo that produced up to 1800bhp and had an intercooler core size of 500mm x 500mm x 100mm. Relatively small for its power output.

[Audi_CQ]

F1 engines are developing 1000bhp from 10 cylinders, 3.0 litres and 19,000+rpm. These engines breath the same air as any other engine, using only 100 octane fuel to achieve this. Air density ("MASS", if you will) has relatively little effect on their power output - plus or minus 50bhp. They develop that 1000 or so bhp with an engine design that optimises flow. As much air in and out as possible efficiently.

Even during the turbo era intercoolers were not so large. BMW produced a qualifying 1500cc four cylinder turbo that produced up to 1800bhp and had an intercooler core size of 500mm x 500mm x 100mm. Relatively small for its power output.

Try running that 1000bhp engine at Mount Everest where the density is lower, and the power will by way down I'm afraid
If you only got 1/2 density you need twice the pressure(boost) to make the same amount of power.

Cheers,
Roger

[Mihnea]

F1 engines are developing 1000bhp from 10 cylinders, 3.0 litres and 19,000+rpm. These engines breath the same air as any other engine, using only 100 octane fuel to achieve this.

This is where you are wrong An average F1 engine breathes 4 liters of air per 2 crank revolutions at WOT. This means a 133.33% volumetric efficiency. Also, today's F1 engines only run unleaded RON 98 gas FYI


Mihnea

[Mihnea]

They develop that 1000 or so bhp with an engine design that optimises flow. As much air in and out as possible efficiently.

That is contradictory with your previous statement that an F1 engine is an engine that breathes as nornally as any other engine.

Even during the turbo era intercoolers were not so large. BMW produced a qualifying 1500cc four cylinder turbo that produced up to 1800bhp and had an intercooler core size of 500mm x 500mm x 100mm. Relatively small for its power output.

AFAIK no turbo F1 engine has ever been dynoed above 1500 HP simply because they had no dynos to measure that sort of power at that time.

Mihnea

[Albert]

good article to read

http://www.are.com.au/techtalk/intec...0-%20or%20Ribs.

[quattroTurbo]

Actually BMWs head of engine design until recently (Paul Roache - I think) quoted one of their engines as producing 2200Kw on the test bench. He was also the source for my information on their qualifying engine bhp.

Using the Mt Everest example is extreme and irrelevant. The statement referred to F1 cars using the same air as our cars do - you may as well say outer space for all its relevance to the topic of air density.

Never said that an F1 engine breathes as normally as our engines. It said "breathes the same air". It's what the F1 engine does with that air between inlet and exhaust that really matters. Their engine design makes the bhp not air density. The cold air obsession is such a "ricer" thing. Remember, you only gain 2bhp per 10 degrees C drop in intake temp.

Point is: air density makes some difference, but certainly not all the difference. More emphasis should be put on design and quality of product rather than that "ricer" big is better BS.

[Jay]

Very good link, need more like this if any one knows????

Cheers

Jay

good article to read

http://www.are.com.au/techtalk/intec...0-%20or%20Ribs.

[s2-1.5bar]

My intercooler pic 1

[s2-1.5bar]

pic 2