Air to water, or Air to Air?
#21
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
I used my own version of this, I toy'ed with the idea of using my Ceramic coated AST tank from my RX7, never got around to it though.
We had my resevior in the hatch (eg hatch) and with the extra hoses and the resevoir, i went from 1.5 gallons of water to 5 gallons....now do you really think its easier to cool 5 gallons, when a resevoir does nothing but hold water and heat? I use an 8gpm pump and with the resevoir, once the temps would began to heat up...they just kept going up and the would level off at like 160-180.
Now that my exchanger hold 90% of the water, it is always cooling.
I hope i explained that the way i wanted?
#22
Racetracks
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: How long is a piece of string?
Posts: 15,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
Pressure drop doesn't matter if you don't have enough frontal area to get the job done, which gets into the core efficiency debate. What I'm saying is that a low pressure drop intercooler is worthless if you don't have enough thermal mass to do what you need.
#23
Small cars rock
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Louisville
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
You miss my point. Thats why I also asked what he has currently, tube and fin or bar and fin, also thickness would be pertinent information.
#24
Team Rad Racing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: HELLTRACK
Posts: 1,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
Originally Posted by Optimus Prime
You miss my point. Thats why I also asked what he has currently, tube and fin or bar and fin, also thickness would be pertinent information.
#26
Racetracks
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: How long is a piece of string?
Posts: 15,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
You're fooling yourself if you think an air/water isn't going to have the same difference in performance between cool nights and hot days. The bigger the difference between charge air temp and ambient temp, the better the intercooler will work, it doesn't matter what type you have. If you don't notice a difference between cold outside and hot outside, something is wrong with your setup.
You're not going to go below ambient air temp with either one, so they'll perform the same if they are both adequately sized. Basically, if they're both big enough, one won't really perform any better than the other. It's just physics.
Don't fall into that trap, air/water isn't more efficient no matter what, that's BS. You can still end up with a core that's too small or a radiator that's too small, or a pump that doesn't flow enough, or an inefficient core, etc., if you don't pay attention to detail. I'm not saying that theres anything wrong with air to water setups, just that making sweeping generalizations about either is dangerous. It's actually difficult to make a air/water match the efficiency of a well designed air/air.
So don't just slap an air/water setup on there and think it will outperform what you have now, because it may not, make sure you design your setup carefully.
I don't blame you for wanting to get rid of that 19x6" core you have now, I'm not a big fan of cores that are that long with that little cross sectional area. I always wince when I see those 30x6" cores with square end tanks on Hondas, they're like a big air restrictor..
You're not going to go below ambient air temp with either one, so they'll perform the same if they are both adequately sized. Basically, if they're both big enough, one won't really perform any better than the other. It's just physics.
Don't fall into that trap, air/water isn't more efficient no matter what, that's BS. You can still end up with a core that's too small or a radiator that's too small, or a pump that doesn't flow enough, or an inefficient core, etc., if you don't pay attention to detail. I'm not saying that theres anything wrong with air to water setups, just that making sweeping generalizations about either is dangerous. It's actually difficult to make a air/water match the efficiency of a well designed air/air.
So don't just slap an air/water setup on there and think it will outperform what you have now, because it may not, make sure you design your setup carefully.
I don't blame you for wanting to get rid of that 19x6" core you have now, I'm not a big fan of cores that are that long with that little cross sectional area. I always wince when I see those 30x6" cores with square end tanks on Hondas, they're like a big air restrictor..
Last edited by Fabrik8; 02-09-2006 at 07:03 AM.
#28
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
in cab A2W is where its at. if you are gonna do it right keep everything possible away from that engine bay. i did tons of research on this and most on this site have seen that setup i had in my mr2.my setup never saw more that 10 degrees above ambient air temps even in the summer sitting in traffic. the only reason some see heatsoak so bad is because of how their setup is done. i also paid close to 2k in just the piping, core, heat exchanger, pump, lines, fittings, and other little things.
Last edited by judge; 02-13-2006 at 06:35 PM.
#29
Racetracks
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: How long is a piece of string?
Posts: 15,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
There really isn't much reason to do an incab setup though, if you have enough flow and the setup is shielded from direct heat properly, why waste the cabin space? I'm not saying it's not good, just that it's not necessary. No matter what, you'll have some temp rise in traffic because there isn't much (or any) ambient flow through the rad core. Like I said, ceramic coating can do so much to defect ambient heat away from piping, core, etc. About the incab stuff: there comes a point that doing something more radical just doesn't really net any benefit if the original setup is done properly in the first place. With a proper setup, there should be very little theoretical performance gain between in and out of the engine bay. You can't prevent having charge air piping in the engine bay, no matter where the intercooler core actually is, so ceramic coat it and call it a day. We're seeing almost 40% less radiated heat from our exhaust header (race car) after getting it ceramic coated, and roughly the same should apply for keeping heat out of charge piping. The amount of cooling power in the core vs. the amount of radiant heat it absorbs from the engine bay is small compared to the heat that the core has to dissipate from the charge air, so that's not too much of an issue either.
I think in cab stuff is cool (and convenient) for race setups, but I'm not willing to sacrifice interior room for such a small performance gain that can be gained from doing some other thing instead.
I think in cab stuff is cool (and convenient) for race setups, but I'm not willing to sacrifice interior room for such a small performance gain that can be gained from doing some other thing instead.
#30
Re: Air to water, or Air to Air?
Originally Posted by Fabrik8
There really isn't much reason to do an incab setup though, if you have enough flow and the setup is shielded from direct heat properly, why waste the cabin space? I'm not saying it's not good, just that it's not necessary. No matter what, you'll have some temp rise in traffic because there isn't much (or any) ambient flow through the rad core. Like I said, ceramic coating can do so much to defect ambient heat away from piping, core, etc. About the incab stuff: there comes a point that doing something more radical just doesn't really net any benefit if the original setup is done properly in the first place. With a proper setup, there should be very little theoretical performance gain between in and out of the engine bay. You can't prevent having charge air piping in the engine bay, no matter where the intercooler core actually is, so ceramic coat it and call it a day. We're seeing almost 40% less radiated heat from our exhaust header (race car) after getting it ceramic coated, and roughly the same should apply for keeping heat out of charge piping. The amount of cooling power in the core vs. the amount of radiant heat it absorbs from the engine bay is small compared to the heat that the core has to dissipate from the charge air, so that's not too much of an issue either.
I think in cab stuff is cool (and convenient) for race setups, but I'm not willing to sacrifice interior room for such a small performance gain that can be gained from doing some other thing instead.
I think in cab stuff is cool (and convenient) for race setups, but I'm not willing to sacrifice interior room for such a small performance gain that can be gained from doing some other thing instead.