# FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

I'll keep it short so that a certain someone doesnt start crying and has this locked.
Highway testing reveals that the additional airflow on an FMIC from speeds of 45-110 doesn't do anything to increase it's cooling ability vs. an SMIC. Coolant temps get hotter, and stay hotter longer with the FMIC in place. More later when I compile the data.


----------



## killa (Nov 26, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_I'll keep it short so that a certain someone doesnt start crying and has this locked..


----------



## Blue.Jester.02Gti (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

good to know http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif cant wait to see the data


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Blue.Jester.02Gti)*

what SMIC and what FMIC???


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_what SMIC and what FMIC???

This post will create a lot more questions than it answers. My first post is all I will say. If I say more, it might be locked. Sorry.


----------



## VWGolfA4 (Apr 5, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Blue.Jester.02Gti)*

WOW really? Why is this? I just always assumed that FMIC were better...
But is this data dependent upon how much boost and how big the turbo is?
Did you happen to test say the Stock vs Forge FMIC vs Forge SMIC?


----------



## DarkSideGTI (Aug 11, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (VWGolfA4)*

I'd be willing to bet $1,000 that my Greddy cools much better than my stock SMIC. I think I have an idea on what type of core was used. And that doesen't really suprise me.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Jedi801)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Jedi801* »_I'd be willing to bet $1,000 that my Greddy cools much better than my stock SMIC. I think I have an idea on what type of core was used. And that doesen't really suprise me.

Yes, your Greddy will work better than the stock SMIC. That's not what I said. If you stuffed your Greddy core inside the fender and did a run from 45-110, it would perform the same as if it were out front.


----------



## Illegal Gardener (Oct 8, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Yes, your Greddy will work better than the stock SMIC. That's not what I said. If you stuffed your Greddy core inside the fender and did a run from 45-110, it would perform the same as if it were out front. 
aye, but coolant temps would be higher with it mounted up front as it obstructs the radiator, no?
to my understanding, that seemed to be one of the primary objectives of these tests.
good info


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

mike...I think i know what you tested...


----------



## groftja (Jul 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

Thanks for the info. Do you mean to say that the results from before have a similar outcome (when comparing the two vs each other) to these new high airflow tests? As in, the trends between the two are the same as before.
Also, good to know the FMIC increased coolant temps. That's what some of us were guessing would happen.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (groftja)*








http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Nice job guys.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_what SMIC and what FMIC???


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid sig* »_ TyrolSport Super SMIC now being tested!


and an evo FMIC..


----------



## QuickK03Crap (Oct 5, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

So what's the concensus on WHY the Forge SMIC sucks compared to even stock? I mean if SMIC's are just as good as FMIC's, why would it not perform better than a stock SMIC?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_So what's the concensus on WHY the Forge SMIC sucks compared to even stock? I mean if SMIC's are just as good as FMIC's, why would it not perform better than a stock SMIC?

Thats a really good question because some of the data that was collected on it by more then one person contradicted itself.
First it did not remove heat efficiently from the charge air which was probably because it was a tube and fin design which generally has less pressure drop but does not remove as much heat. This would make you think taht then the IC would not be as hot..
However there is the second part, it retained its heat much longer then the stock IC.. and stayed hotter.. which makes no sense. but this was shown on more then one run on more then one test..


----------



## okanagan45 (Feb 19, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

I'm not surprised there is no difference, otherwise manufacturers would mount them in the front. Wouldn't they? The only car I know of is the Subaru which mounts their inter-cooler on top of the engine with a hood scoop, seems almost self defeating if you think about under-hood temps would get cooked during a short stop, or city driving.


----------



## SlvrBllt (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_So what's the concensus on WHY the Forge SMIC sucks compared to even stock? I mean if SMIC's are just as good as FMIC's, why would it not perform better than a stock SMIC?

Because it was made out of components (the core) designed for heavy equipment- not cars. Remember, Forge's main business is heavy equipment parts. The motorsports thing is a spin off.


----------



## Scarab_Beetle (Dec 11, 2004)

srt4 is front mount, and i think the evo 8 is as well, but doesn't appear to be too much room for sidemount in those cars


----------



## TurboZen (Oct 15, 2000)

*Re: (Scarab_Beetle)*

the issue here is our cars cooling systems can't deal with the decreased cool airflow that would be caused by a front mount. possibly a aftermarket radiator would be the solve?


----------



## eggroller (May 25, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (okanagan45)*


_Quote, originally posted by *okanagan45* »_I'm not surprised there is no difference, otherwise manufacturers would mount them in the front. Wouldn't they?
Uh, the Audi A3 2.0T FSI utilizes a FMIC (big one, too). I would assume that the new MK5 GTI 2.0T FSI is the same setup.


----------



## Jack Skelington (Jul 5, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

In the first test the FMIC had the lowest intake temps, yet the highest knock voltage. Those two dont typically go hand in hand. If the theory that the FMIC blocks off to much flow to the radiator is true then helping air get to the rad is a must if we want to take advantage of the lower temps. Perhaps either hardwiring the OEM Rad fans or installing two fans on the back of the core to help pull air through and get it to the radiator would help.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (eggroller)*


_Quote, originally posted by *eggroller* »_Uh, the Audi A3 2.0T FSI utilizes a FMIC (big one, too). I would assume that the new MK5 GTI 2.0T FSI is the same setup.


Yup MK5 will be like that also.
Many saabs and volvos also come with an Ic like that.. SRT4 and EVO as pointed out.. and many many many others.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (ZER0)*

When the car is sitting the motor doesn't really need the extra flow of air(unless stopped for long periods of time).Its only under accel that you would need the extra air.when the car is moving turning on the fans would probably turn into a air restriction.


----------



## MRP2001GTi (Oct 6, 2000)

*Re: (TurboZen)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TurboZen* »_the issue here is our cars cooling systems can't deal with the decreased cool airflow that would be caused by a front mount. possibly a aftermarket radiator would be the solve?

Dont make an issue out of an non issue. I have had my FMIC on for two So Cal summers with trips to Az and Vegas in 100+ summer heat, and in stop and go traffic, never ONCE did my coolant temps go any higher than 190.


_Modified by MRP2001GTi at 3:21 PM 2-16-2005_


----------



## QuickK03Crap (Oct 5, 2004)

*Re: (MRP2001GTi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MRP2001GTi* »_Dont make an issue out of an non issue. I have had my FMIC on for two So Cal summers with trips to Az and Vegas in 100+ summer heat, and in stop and go traffic, never ONCE did my coolant temps go any higher than 190.

_Modified by MRP2001GTi at 3:21 PM 2-16-2005_

Are you basing this off of VAG logs or the lame ass temp gauge?


----------



## screwball (Dec 11, 2001)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*

i'm curious how this new eurojet core stacks up.


----------



## MRP2001GTi (Oct 6, 2000)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_
Are you basing this off of VAG logs or the lame ass temp gauge?









Both you people need to understand a product is being pushed here, of course it will do better in all test performed by the person wanting to sell it. Give me a break....


----------



## QuickK03Crap (Oct 5, 2004)

*Re: (MRP2001GTi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MRP2001GTi* »_Both you people need to understand a product is being pushed here, of course it will do better in all test performed by the person wanting to sell it. Give me a break....

I'm aware of that. But VAG logs are in Celcius for coolant and intake temps. You quoted 190. I know you're smarter than that, but I have a hard time believing the coolant temps NEVER fluctuated. Just wanted some clarification. I have an FMIC, and I don't care what tests show, I have no desire for a SMIC.


----------



## MRP2001GTi (Oct 6, 2000)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_I'm aware of that. But VAG logs are in Celcius for coolant and intake temps. You quoted 190.

If bouncing around from 79C to 82C is an issue for some people then I give up.
174.2- 179.6F


_Modified by MRP2001GTi at 3:49 PM 2-16-2005_


----------



## QuA (Apr 7, 2003)

Hmmm this is interesting. 
If your gonna go larger turbo I just cant see how you can keep your SMIC effiecient enough to support something 300+ HP. You need a FMIC in larger turbo applications. What is this test on? What car?


----------



## mesuky22 (Feb 20, 2003)

*Re: (QuA)*

coolant temp will always stay the same becuase the cooling system has what they call a thermostat. the tntercooler is cooling the air that goes in the engine not engine coolant.


----------



## MRP2001GTi (Oct 6, 2000)

*Re: (mesuky22)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mesuky22* »_coolant temp will always stay the same becuase the cooling system has what they call a thermostat. the tntercooler is cooling the air that goes in the engine not engine coolant. 

Ya think????


----------



## DarkSideGTI (Aug 11, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (eggroller)*


_Quote, originally posted by *eggroller* »_Uh, the Audi A3 2.0T FSI utilizes a FMIC (big one, too). I would assume that the new MK5 GTI 2.0T FSI is the same setup.









that thing has to be big.. it's only an incha and a half thick.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (QuA)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuA* »_Hmmm this is interesting. 
If your gonna go larger turbo I just cant see how you can keep your SMIC effiecient enough to support something 300+ HP. You need a FMIC in larger turbo applications. What is this test on? What car?

It worked great when we did it.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_
I'm aware of that. But VAG logs are in Celcius for coolant and intake temps. You quoted 190. I know you're smarter than that, but I have a hard time believing the coolant temps NEVER fluctuated. Just wanted some clarification. I have an FMIC, and I don't care what tests show, I have no desire for a SMIC.









He may be using VWtool.. In VW tool you can select F or C for temp readings...


----------



## 9VW23yrs (Jun 22, 2000)

*Re: FWIW*

Open up a large hood vent like on the EVO and watch temps go down!


----------



## Frank aka Rick (Aug 27, 2002)

*Re: (KOOTER)*

not that yours didn't perform well, but how would if fair vs. a comparable bar & plate fmic? Just food for thought since this thread has stroked your ego so much


----------



## the awesome (Oct 7, 2003)

*Re: (mesuky22)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mesuky22* »_coolant temp will always stay the same becuase the cooling system has what they call a thermostat. the tntercooler is cooling the air that goes in the engine not engine coolant. 

u mean i shouldn't be adding antifreeze to my intercooler thermostat


----------



## obvious510 (Apr 14, 2003)

*Re: (mesuky22)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mesuky22* »_coolant temp will always stay the same becuase the cooling system has what they call a thermostat. the tntercooler is cooling the air that goes in the engine not engine coolant. 

Want to switch handles dude? I think you deserve it more than I do.


_Modified by obvious510 at 4:40 PM 2-16-2005_


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (DubTron41)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DubTron41* »_u mean i shouldn't be adding antifreeze to my intercooler thermostat

LOL


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

so how long until you wow us with the hard evidence of your findings?
cause im teatering on the edge of spending 800bucks for a fmic which looks hella bad ass and is increadibly functional versus getting a SMIC for 500 bucks and the lower IC pipe and have it hidden for none to see!
*cough*


----------



## QuickK03Crap (Oct 5, 2004)

*Re: (MRP2001GTi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MRP2001GTi* »_If bouncing around from 79C to 82C is an issue for some people then I give up.
174.2- 179.6F


I was just asking man. Wasn't questioning you. Lighten up. And thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Illegal Gardener (Oct 8, 2004)

*Re: (MrPiZaT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MrPiZaT* »_so how long until you wow us with the hard evidence of your findings?
cause im teatering on the edge of spending 800bucks for a fmic which looks hella bad ass and is increadibly functional versus getting a SMIC for 500 bucks and the lower IC pipe and have it hidden for none to see!
*cough*
i'm with you 100% on looks and all.. but as my daily driver i'm concerned about how most fmic's rest on the valence and the driveways and ****ty roads that i'm basically forced to deal with. even though most scrapes and bumps won't break the valence, i'm worried that it could cause stress cracks to the fmic. for that reason and that alone i'll end up with a side mount... but power to ya if you go fmic... it looks totally sharp.
i'm really interested to hear the full deal of the results


----------



## QuickK03Crap (Oct 5, 2004)

*Re: (Illegal Gardener)*

You'd hit your oilpan before you ever hit your FMIC. I've done the former and not the latter.


----------



## Illegal Gardener (Oct 8, 2004)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*

that really sucks man, sorry to hear.
the driveway into my workplace is ridiculously steep and on a somewhat busy road... if you take it anywhere even close to head on, you'll loose your front bumper. 
good info though


----------



## obvious510 (Apr 14, 2003)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_You'd hit your oilpan before you ever hit your FMIC. I've done the former and not the latter.









Not always...you should see my driveway lol got a hummer?


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_You'd hit your oilpan before you ever hit your FMIC. I've done the former and not the latter.









the absolute statement over the specific statement always gets burned in the end.
i'd like to see the raw data if possible. it is a HUGE shame data supporting a legit test gets skewed as future product support. this has the implications that EVERY post regarding a future product is ILLEGAL according to the rules of this forum. talk about scrutiny of any legit data that may be posted in the future for any product, i would be ashamed to post any data within these constraints. the scientific method gets flushed down the toilet with this attitude. as a scientist, i have to protest this. it stymies the spread of valid scientific data in favor of the dollar.
well done vortex. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 31, 2004)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*

Your breaking the beakers! 
<quote from severe beating of a HS science teacher>


----------



## gtiiiiiiii (Mar 6, 2004)

*Re: (Jolly Roger)*

i think this test is pretty sad. lets pick a crappy fmic, and test it against a bigger and more efficient smic, and see what does better. I dunno I'm sorry but I find this test to be a waste of time honestly.
No offense but I don't find vw tuners to be on the edge of technology, we are leaps and bounds behind any other brand of tuners to be honest... honda, nissan, subies, it's just sad lol. Of course I love my vw, but it doesn't mean I think we're going to be breaking any new ground exactly.
If you don't like blocking the radiator, try whats called V MOUNT!








I'd love to see someone pull that off though since we have no room to do such things.


_Modified by gtiiiiiiii at 10:00 PM 2-16-2005_


----------



## GTIMOLA (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*

I want to see some before/after dynos and logs of a car that has been upfitted with a more efficient radiator. If coolant temps really do affect timing retard more than IAT then advancing timing should be more successful with a better radiator.
Then the vortex could have a whole new topic to beat to death...
"which radiator will give me the most HP?"


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (gtiiiiiiii)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gtiiiiiiii* »_i think this test is pretty sad. lets pick a crappy fmic, and test it against a bigger and more efficient smic, and see what does better. I dunno I'm sorry but I find this test to be a waste of time honestly._Modified by gtiiiiiiii at 10:00 PM 2-16-2005_

You don't even know which ICs were tested......I never said whether the SMIC was the stock unit, nor did I say which FMIC was used. And no one in this thread was present during the testing either.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (MrPiZaT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *MrPiZaT* »_so how long until you wow us with the hard evidence of your findings?
cause im teatering on the edge of spending 800bucks for a fmic which looks hella bad ass and is increadibly functional versus getting a SMIC for 500 bucks and the lower IC pipe and have it hidden for none to see!
*cough*

Just make sure that the FMIC and SMIC you choose to buy have legitimate testing data on the dyno and on the street. A lot of FMICs and SMICs out don't have either. I wouldn't want to see you waste your hard earned money.


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

totally agree on the hard earned money part. now then we keep hereing talk about this whole thing so why dont you let us in on the specifics mysterio before you get the real cry baby flamers up in a bunch (kinda suprised they've been at bay this long! :-D


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
You don't even know which ICs were tested......I never said whether the SMIC was the stock unit, nor did I say which FMIC was used. And no one in this thread was present during the testing either.









Why would you change what was tested this time and last time kind of throws out any comparison... you're not that stupid which means it was an EVO and your SMIC....


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
Why would you change what was tested this time and last time kind of throws out any comparison... you're not that stupid which means it was an EVO and your SMIC....

Who's to say some new ones weren't thrown into the mix?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Who's to say some new ones weren't thrown into the mix?









Didnt' say they weren't but that does not change the fact that some are known.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
Didnt' say they weren't but that does not change the fact that some are known.

After the first dyno test, some people thought the results would change because a dyno is not real world airflow over the core. Well, it turns out that real world airflow over the core does little to nothing to improve performance in a single 1/4 mile or highway run. As a matter of fact, taking the stock SMIC and moving it forward didn't do anything to improve it's performance. This applies to a single long pull from 30-120.


----------



## racintweek (May 30, 2004)

If a taller thinner FMIC is used it will most def give cooler charge temps than a short thick one with the same flow, which i'm sure most of you know. Which is probably why VAG is using that design on the FSI. There should be more IC tested than just one SM and one FM. I'm sure there would be some SM to do better than some FM, and vice versa. Bar & plate and tube & fin will also have there differences. 
IMO if it there is going to be a true test you need more than just Bob's SMIC vs Ted's FMIC.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Why would moving it forward be expected to change anything.. thats kind of silly to even think that.
Air still has to get into that opening in the bumper whether its right at the front or its 6 feet back isnt' gonna change a thing.


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (racintweek)*

let's not forget the cost/funding issue of some of these statements !


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Why would moving it forward be expected to change anything.. thats kind of silly to even think that.


I agree. That's why I tested it. Because some people on here just believe that an IC will give better results if it is located up front, vs. the side. I have reams of data to prove otherwise now. Oh well. Can't post it because it could be construed as commercial.


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

come over to the dark side and post, pm me and i'll unlock it for ya to post more stuff


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Air still has to get into that opening in the bumper whether its right at the front or its 6 feet back isnt' gonna change a thing.

Even if you enlarge the opening, it won't change a thing on a single run. The key is making sure that the core can get airflow through it. We even tried blocking off the backside of the core with some perforated cardboard. This would simulate(albeit poorly) a really thick core that would slow down/stop airflow.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Even if you enlarge the opening, it won't change a thing on a single run. 

I didtn' mention anything about enlarging it. I was commenting on the fact that moving it forward with the same opening of course would do nothing because the same amount of air going to it would still be present.

_Quote »_We even tried blocking off the backside of the core with some perforated cardboard. This would simulate(albeit poorly) a really thick core that would slow down/stop airflow. 

The problem with thicker cores is not total airflow.. Same amount of air still goes through it. The real issue with a thicker core is that the air cooling the front side of the core is ambient air. By the time it reaches the rear portion of the IC it has now picked up heat and would not be working as effciently to remove the heat from the core. Restricting airflow would not simulate this.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
I agree. That's why I tested it. Because some people on here just believe that an IC will give better results if it is located up front, vs. the side. I have reams of data to prove otherwise now. Oh well. Can't post it because it could be construed as commercial. 

Thats not testing it as to what people think up front means....


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
The problem with thicker cores is not total airflow.. Same amount of air still goes through it. The real issue with a thicker core is that the air cooling the front side of the core is ambient air. By the time it reaches the rear portion of the IC it has now picked up heat and would not be working as effciently to remove the heat from the core. Restricting airflow would not simulate this.


by how much does the ambient air heat up, and how much does it affect anything?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_
by how much does the ambient air heat up, and how much does it affect anything?


Those numbers would depend alot on total effciency of the IC core and how much is being removed.. But the heat has to go somewhere it does not just disappear... if 10 degres come out of the first inch of the core.. then the air would be roughly 10 degrees warmer as it gets to the second inch..


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_

Those numbers would depend alot on total effciency of the IC core and how much is being removed.. But the heat has to go somewhere it does not just disappear... if 10 degres come out of the first inch of the core.. then the air would be roughly 10 degrees warmer as it gets to the second inch.. 

the LOCALIZED air is warmer. heat does not spread quickly in air. this means that the whole mass of air does not heat up instantly with regards to the speed at which it travels through the core. the core also causes turbulance of the air, meaning a "packet" of air to which heat exchange happens with the core may not be in a position in space to undergo another heat exchange process.
cores are quite complicated like this


----------



## passatG60 (Aug 16, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_

Those numbers would depend alot on total effciency of the IC core and how much is being removed.. But the heat has to go somewhere it does not just disappear... if 10 degres come out of the first inch of the core.. then the air would be roughly 10 degrees warmer as it gets to the second inch.. 

An intercooler is a heat sink. You didn't account for the cooling fins that are inside that absorb temps. As ambient air touches the channels, the inner fins absorb the temps as they are pretty thin and act in cooling the incoming air. Ambient air may heat up a little as it gets past but it is being cooled throughout anyway as it passes the fins and along cooling channels. Most of the cooling is done w/in the first inch or so and is continually absorbed as the air passes through a fin-filled core...
All this would apply to a GOOD core, not some of the stuff floating around these days


_Modified by passatG60 at 2:20 PM 2-17-2005_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_
the LOCALIZED air is warmer. heat does not spread quickly in air. this means that the whole mass of air does not heat up instantly with regards to the speed at which it travels through the core. the core also causes turbulance of the air, meaning a "packet" of air to which heat exchange happens with the core may not be in a position in space to undergo another heat exchange process.
cores are quite complicated like this

the first set of data disagrees with what you are saying.
The smaller yet thinner core with more frontal area was more effcient at removing heat even with an inferior core type compared to the thicker smaller frontal area superior type core....


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (passatG60)*


_Quote, originally posted by *passatG60* »_
An intercooler is a heat sink. You didn't account for the cooling fins that are inside that absorb temps. As ambient air touches the channels, the inner fins absorb the temps as they are pretty thin and act in cooling the incoming air. Ambient air may heat up a little as it gets past but it is being cooled throughout anyway as it passes the fins and along cooling channels. Most of the cooling is done w/in the first inch or so and is continually absorbed as the air passes through a fin-filled core...

I agree with what you are saying but again the data collected so far shows that a thicker core is not as effcient.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
I didtn' mention anything about enlarging it. I was commenting on the fact that moving it forward with the same opening of course would do nothing because the same amount of air going to it would still be present.

I know you did not mention anything about enlarging it. I did. We cut the hole larger for one of the tests on a crappy front bumper cover and it didn't do much if anything to improve the SMIC performance. 


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
The problem with thicker cores is not total airflow.. Same amount of air still goes through it. The real issue with a thicker core is that the air cooling the front side of the core is ambient air. By the time it reaches the rear portion of the IC it has now picked up heat and would not be working as effciently to remove the heat from the core. Restricting airflow would not simulate this.


Restricting airflow through a thinner core would slow the air down and let it pick up more heat, so that the backside of the core would not get the cooler ambient air temps the front side would.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
the first set of data disagrees with what you are saying.
The smaller yet thinner core with more frontal area was more effcient at removing heat even with an inferior core type compared to the thicker smaller frontal area superior type core....

The core types were the same. Neither one was inferior or superior.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
The core types were the same. Neither one was inferior or superior. 

ah right I forgot the APR is the one with the tube and fin, not the evo.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_

Restricting airflow through a thinner core would slow the air down and let it pick up more heat, so that the backside of the core would not get the cooler ambient air temps the front side would. 

restricting airflow would slow it down but that does nto mean it would pick up more heat.. or cool any better then having fresh air freely moving through it.


----------



## dcomiskey (Mar 13, 2002)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

I'm still favoring going with a Forge SMIC and CO2 halo.


----------



## BoostedGolf02 (Sep 21, 2002)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


----------



## WhiteG60 (Aug 20, 2001)

*Re: (QuickK03Crap)*


_Quote, originally posted by *QuickK03Crap* »_You'd hit your oilpan before you ever hit your FMIC. I've done the former and not the latter.









Or not







I've scraped my APR FMIC and never scraped my oil pan and my car is sitting on race springs and rpi shocks. Once the Coils go on in a few weeks, its all over... hense me getting one of Kooters BASMs.


----------



## frprado (May 30, 2003)

*Re: (WhiteG60)*

Sorry, I am new to this, but when you guys are talking about THICKER CORE, how thick are we talking about?


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (dcomiskey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dcomiskey* »_I'm still favoring going with a Forge SMIC and CO2 halo. 

now that is a BIG waste of your money


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
ah right I forgot the APR is the one with the tube and fin, not the evo.

not anymore, the apr unit is now bar and plate. their website has yet to be updated with this info


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_
not anymore, the apr unit is now bar and plate. their website has yet to be updated with this info

ah was that part of the update a while back? I"d only seen the older ones.


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

they switched to bar and plate as of mid-october or sooner last time i was there and said 'hey, why the switch?' when i saw a different batch of cores.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## HatchedGTI (Sep 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Yes, your Greddy will work better than the stock SMIC. That's not what I said. If you stuffed your Greddy core inside the fender and did a run from 45-110, it would perform the same as if it were out front. 

I don't know, but I was under the impression a FMIC worked better not because it was out front, but becuase the core was bigger. THe only reason why it was out front was because you can fit a larger core behind the front bumper. Maybe I was wrong, but I would expect a SMIC with a larger core to cool better. I think it's all about the core size not the placement.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (HatchedGTI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *HatchedGTI* »_
I don't know, but I was under the impression a FMIC worked better not because it was out front, but becuase the core was bigger. THe only reason why it was out front was because you can fit a larger core behind the front bumper. Maybe I was wrong, but I would expect a SMIC with a larger core to cool better. I think it's all about the core size not the placement.

Exactly. It's about the core size and the core construction, not the placement. And bigger is not always better when it comes to core size. IMO, Bar and Plate is better in almost all circumstances. Everyone has their opinion on that matter though.....


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_Exactly. It's about the core size and the core construction, not the placement. And bigger is not always better when it comes to core size. IMO, Bar and Plate is better in almost all circumstances. Everyone has their opinion on that matter though.....









...ok. its all about core size? so i'll put a big ass core in my trunk. ...nah, placement isn't something to neglect.


----------



## dcomiskey (Mar 13, 2002)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Raman Gain)*

Why?


----------



## HatchedGTI (Sep 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (gelatin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gelatin* »_
...ok. its all about core size? so i'll put a big ass core in my trunk. ...nah, placement isn't something to neglect.


ur correct, but placment of an SMIC vs. FMIC is somethign to neglect... Or at least that is my view of the matter.


----------



## groftja (Jul 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (HatchedGTI)*

I think the SMIC placement is good for not allowing the air to go around the IC which can more easily happen with a FMIC. But that's just one of many factors of course.


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (HatchedGTI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *HatchedGTI* »_ur correct, but placment of an SMIC vs. FMIC is somethign to neglect... Or at least that is my view of the matter.

...you suggest there is no bad place to put an SMIC.


----------



## HatchedGTI (Sep 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (gelatin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gelatin* »_
...you suggest there is no bad place to put an SMIC.

There are, but most aftermarket SMIC's fit in the stock location.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (gelatin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gelatin* »_
...ok. its all about core size? so i'll put a big ass core in my trunk. ...nah, placement isn't something to neglect.

Obviously placement has to be within reason. Nobody is going to plumb an IC and mount it to their passenger seat(Even though it would make a good heater in winter time). As long as it has a decent amount of cooling airflow, whether it's in the front of the car, on top of the engine, or in the fender, it doesnt matter. Construction and sizing are more important. That's what the data we've gathered has proven to us.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Exactly. It's about the core size and the core construction, not the placement. And bigger is not always better when it comes to core size. IMO, Bar and Plate is better in almost all circumstances. Everyone has their opinion on that matter though.....









Its also about airflow across the core.. it showed more frontal area on a smaller overall cubic inch core was better at cooling the air.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
Its also about airflow across the core.. it showed more frontal area on a smaller overall cubic inch core was better at cooling the air.

Yup.


----------



## TurboZen (Oct 15, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

you made me think of other places I've seen the intercooler/oilcooler setup in cars.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (TurboZen)*

Can you go to big on a intercooler?Yes you probably could,but anything you can fit in the fender of a VW isn't a problem.
The main thing that affects how long a cooler takes to heat soak is the mass.Unless your on the dyno doing back to back dyno pulls(and lots of them) you will have a very hard time overcoming the mass of a bar and plate core with heat(when welding the end tanks on my cooler you can weld all the way around the tank and still hold your hand on the core).
Once the car is moving and there is air moving through the core it really doesn't matter where or how thick the core is.Sure we could start analyzing what the ideal situation would be for better cooling.The real question here is how much better could a FMIC be?The answer to that question is probably not that much.


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

am I the only one here that thinks even testing this was pointless. It's quite obvious that core design/size is the single most important factor when dealing with the proformance of an IC. Surface area alone should suggest that a larger surface area on the core would increase the unit proformance. if this thread is just that location doesnt matter then whats the point.......most people get a FMIC because of the way it looks. 
I offer up a car example of Don R's mk4. pretty impressive in the realm of proformance but where is his fmic? he runs 2 SMICs, do you think that he would run smics if they werent effective?
Now to my point.
Post the results or just delete this thread because i could just as easily pop in here and say something like..."After much testing with all setups i have found that GHL 2.5" exuahst is no better then the magna flow 2.5. 
if you are soooo worried that your results will be misconstrued as commercial then freaking put them up on a very simply website and then link to them. I see people putting up results on here daily....who cares.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (KOOTER)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KOOTER* »_
The real question here is how much better could a FMIC be?The answer to that question is probably not that much.

The initial tests showed that an FMIC total volume but more frontal area then the SMIC cooled better.. so there already shows you that the FMIC has a one up becuase it can allow for this greater area..


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_The initial tests showed that an FMIC total volume but more frontal area then the SMIC cooled better.. so there already shows you that the FMIC has a one up becuase it can allow for this greater area..

How much better?How does that affect power?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (KOOTER)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KOOTER* »_
How much better?How does that affect power?

The SMALLEST FMIC on the market was tested against the BIGGEST SMIC that could be fit and still cooled the air better.. what other questions do you have?


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (chris86vw)*

Nothing too technical to add, just an observation. 
By looking at the industry norm and trends you can get a good barometer of what works and what doesn't. From what I see, the VW market in particular, is the only market that dabbles with SMICs (I could be VERY wrong). Why is that? 
Do tuners automatically assume that because the factory produced an SMIC with our cars that in order to improve upon that they have to make a bigger and better SMIC? 
I personally think, from the numbers and observations that I have made, that the V-mount FMIC set-up on the FD's is the best. I just don't understand the side-mount, or the point of this test. There is really no data to be observed and therefore no reliable analysis can be made. 
Disclaimer: Just a bunch of babble from a guy that really doesn't know or care.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Ta_Ma_de)*

I believe the point to all of this is....
The market for upgraded charge air cooling is NOT
completely comprised of ppl who want big, noticeable
FMIC's. Can we all agree on this?
Of course some JUST want the 'look' of a FMIC.
I'm guessing a small %. Everyone else wants a performance upgrade.
Of these, there is a significant % (not majority by any stretch)
who are on the fence between SMIC and FMIC solely for the reason 
it's generally believe FMIC perform better.
The point of this is to push these ppl off the fence.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
The point of this is to push these ppl off the fence. 

I agree with pushing people over the fence. But, in order to convince me I would want a little more than cardboard comparisons and sketchy figures. 
I just don't get it, the majortiy of high performance cars/tuners use the FMIC, so are they all wrong?


----------



## HatchedGTI (Sep 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_
I agree with pushing people over the fence. But, in order to convince me I would want a little more than cardboard comparisons and sketchy figures. 
I just don't get it, the majortiy of high performance cars/tuners use the FMIC, so are they all wrong? 

No, they are not wrong. The core size of those cars are like 4" wide and incredibly long and tall. There would be no way to fit such a big core on the side. The main reason the IC are moved out front is to provide a bigger surface area and depth. Where in a SMIC situation you are limited by the size of the space. FMIC are less limited and thus can be bigger. The FMIC core that was tested was smaller (and maybe of inferior design) than the SMIC. Honestly the only way to get a TRUE test would be to get a SMIC and FMIC of the same manufacturer and same core size and then compare. That would be the only way to truly tell if there is a benefit of a FMIC over an SMIC.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (HatchedGTI)*

^^^
Ehh, I got money to burn and it would get me out of the house. But, would it really have any effect or prove anybody wrong? Just seems like a pissing contest and one side in particular did not drink a whole lot before he showed up.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

there is no room in the nose of a gti / jetta for a V mount FMIC setup. 
FD has a long nose.


----------



## rex_racer (May 19, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_Nothing too technical to add, just an observation. 
By looking at the industry norm and trends you can get a good barometer of what works and what doesn't. From what I see, the VW market in particular, is the only market that dabbles with SMICs (I could be VERY wrong). Why is that? 
Do tuners automatically assume that because the factory produced an SMIC with our cars that in order to improve upon that they have to make a bigger and better SMIC? 
I personally think, from the numbers and observations that I have made, that the V-mount FMIC set-up on the FD's is the best. I just don't understand the side-mount, or the point of this test. There is really no data to be observed and therefore no reliable analysis can be made. 
Disclaimer: Just a bunch of babble from a guy that really doesn't know or care. 

the vw market is NOT the only market that plays w/ smics. take the mazdaspeed protege for example. similar displacement, similar turbo size. the car comes stock w/ a small ic that is placed vertical in the frt of the car. but the fact remains that it is VERY VERY small. the norm used to be to go w/ a large FMIC, such as the likes that we see on most "tuner" cars etc. however another company came out and designed a SMIC for the car. core size was very similar to the factory unit. of course there were huge differences in types of materials used and the core type etc etc. but the SMIC came to market and dominated. it actually produced hp amazingly enough. now all the big name companies that had FMICs started making SMICs as well, in order to compete w/ the new tuner.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (rex_racer)*

^^^
As did Forge, eurosport and so on...
If demand calls for it, regardless of efficiency, companies will make it...Heck, look at the CF boser threads going on, couldn't be a bigger waste of money out there but people are all over them.


----------



## rex_racer (May 19, 2001)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Ta_Ma_de)*

but in this case the SMIC actually performed a LOT better than the FMICs. less pressure drop, capable of supporting the same power and put down better #s due to higher flow and equal if not better cooling ability.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

because it was compared to a POS IC.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
The SMALLEST FMIC on the market was tested against the BIGGEST SMIC that could be fit and still cooled the air better.. what other questions do you have?

Are you sure it was the smallest FMIC on the market? It almost sounds like you are stating a fact, when indeed you are incorrect. There are smaller FMICs on the market, and on top of that, one of the smaller, VERY common ones, is a tube and fin.....Everyone get out your rulers and measure the core volume of the FMIC on your car, come back, and we can compare data.










_Modified by tyrolkid at 6:07 PM 2-19-2005_


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_because it was compared to a POS IC. 

What defines a POS IC? Tube and Fin? Bar and Plate? What is the minimum core volume and core type that is acceptable in your book for a 275whp car?


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

- I do not like vert flow ic's
-i do not like tube and fin ic's
-a good sized front mount would be in the 500-600ci+ volume.


----------



## tim18t (Feb 1, 2003)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

so what front mount was it?


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_- I do not like vert flow ic's
-i do not like tube and fin ic's
-a good sized front mount would be in the 500-600ci+ volume. 

Those criteria make just about every MK4 FMIC on the market a POS.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tim18t)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tim18t* »_so what front mount was it?

Orginally it was the evo.. now he claims to have tested more... but of course wont' say that
Small Greddy is 2.5X 7.5X 23 = 431
Standard ATP is 3X 6.5X 24 =468


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
Those criteria make just about every MK4 FMIC on the market a POS.










yup. never said they weren't.


----------



## Rippinralf (Jun 21, 2002)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_

yup. never said they weren't. 

LOL, where are some nice ones.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
Orginally it was the evo.. now he claims to have tested more... but of course wont' say that
Small Greddy is 2.5X 7.5X 23 = 431
Standard ATP is 3X 6.5X 24 =468

The actual core volume on the standard ATP = 3x6x18=324. I just measured it 2 min. ago. Hint Hint.
24" is the total width including endtanks. 6.5 is the height with the caps. It's really 6". 


_Modified by tyrolkid at 8:10 PM 2-19-2005_


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (Rippinralf)*

I think its funny that everyone here is all worried about what 3deg temp difference?The difference in the power would be on the small side of the decimal point.
There is never going to be a clear victor in the SMIC vs FMIC battle because they both do their job just fine.


----------



## 4thvw (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: (KOOTER)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KOOTER* »_
There is never going to be a clear victor in the SMIC vs FMIC battle because they both do their job just fine.

Maybe now that you and Tyrolsport have developed sidemounts that work, but until this it was front mount as the only way to go.


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

bottom lin eis you really don't need that much cooling for 275 - 300 whp.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

Just thought this string of discussion was amusing:


_Quote, originally posted by *rex_racer* »_but in this case the SMIC actually performed a LOT better than the FMICs. less pressure drop, capable of supporting the same power and put down better #s due to higher flow and equal if not better cooling ability.


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_because it was compared to a POS IC.


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_What defines a POS IC?


_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_- I do not like vert flow ic's
-i do not like tube and fin ic's
-a good sized front mount would be in the 500-600ci+ volume.


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_Those criteria make just about every MK4 FMIC on the market a POS.










_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_yup. never said they weren't.


So in a round about way, *fast_a2_20v* states that this smic out performs just about every MK4 FMIC.


----------



## petesell (May 7, 2002)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
So in a round about way, *fast_a2_20v* states that this smic out performs just about every MK4 FMIC.


was thinking the same exact thing. informative *and* entertaining thread.


_Modified by petesell at 3:52 AM 2-20-2005_


----------



## aqua_blue_pearl_g60 (Dec 4, 2001)

with the temps post intercooler being close, from what i gathered, how many inches of piping to we lose/gain with a smic compared to a fmic if any? maybe 3 degrees isnt a big deal but posibly the length of ic piping is?


----------



## Seanathan (May 1, 2002)

*Re: (aqua_blue_pearl_g60)*

you also have to take into factor the diameter of the piping. And with a well designed intercooler setup, it shouldn't be too much of an issue.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (Seanathan)*

When I first told everyone about my cooler everyone talked me down like I was commiting a crime.


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (KOOTER)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KOOTER* »_When I first told everyone about my cooler everyone talked me down like I was commiting a crime.

Welcome to the Vortex. lol
Now it's your turn to say


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (SnowGTI2003)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SnowGTI2003* »_Welcome to the Vortex. lol
Now it's your turn to say









I'm not going to say anything because its not constructive.


----------



## cdn20VALVE (Jan 23, 2002)

*Re: (KOOTER)*

You the man Kooter!







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Rippinralf (Jun 21, 2002)

*Re: (cdn20VALVE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cdn20VALVE* »_You the man Kooter!







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

he rules!
http://www.hockeyautographexch...r.jpg


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_So in a round about way, *fast_a2_20v* states that this smic out performs just about every MK4 FMIC.


----------



## KOOTER (Aug 13, 2003)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (KOOTER)*

well this was tested with rather cool temperatures coorect???


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
So in a round about way, *fast_a2_20v* states that this smic out performs just about every MK4 FMIC.


That actually only means HE thinks they are a POS.. if you actually paid any attention to half his posts you would realize his opinions are not only usually incorrect but based on 600whp hondas..... not 300whp street vws.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (KOOTER)*


_Quote, originally posted by *KOOTER* »_When I first told everyone about my cooler everyone talked me down like I was commiting a crime.

No everyone talked down to you ebcause the same day you posted about your intercooler claiming it was so great you also started a posted about how data logging and testing things were stupid......


----------



## cdn20VALVE (Jan 23, 2002)

*Re: (kilmer420)*

You can test efficiency of an air to air intercooler as long as ambient temps are lower then compressed intake air temps.


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (cdn20VALVE)*


_Quote, originally posted by *cdn20VALVE* »_You can test efficiency of an air to air intercooler as long as ambient temps are lower then compressed intake air temps.

I completely understand this but thicker cores tend to take longer to heat soak, but after they do, it's almost impossible to cool them down without co2, nitrous, or just letting the car sit...
how is this cooler going to perform in florida, dade county in August is my question?


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_how is this cooler going to perform in florida, dade county in August is my question?

how about mid-march in central florida ?


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_
how about mid-march in central florida ?

I was being allegorical raman


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
That actually only means HE thinks they are a POS.. if you actually paid any attention to half his posts you would realize his opinions are not only usually incorrect but based on 600whp hondas..... not 300whp street vws.

1) It's call "humor", you might think of getting some.
2) I was commenting on what HE SAID in the quoted discussion which was self contain, and NOT what HE MEANT which are completely 
different more than often for many ppl. Thus, humorous.
Rey


----------



## EdsGTI (Mar 9, 2003)

what other fmic was tested, besides the big smic, and the evoms fmic. Were both bumpers on, was there ice on either core? What was the 'other' tested intercooler. btw its time to ditch vette tech...imho


_Modified by EdsGTI20VT at 10:34 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (kilmer420)*

I did some more data crunching this AM. Here's a little tidbit. Average coolant temps while cruising down the highway with the FMICs was 5-10deg Celsius hotter than with the SMICs. This is a simple cruise, no boost.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (EdsGTI20VT)*


_Quote, originally posted by *EdsGTI20VT* »_what other fmic was tested, besides the big smic, and the big fmic. Were both bumpers on, was there ice on either core? What was the 'other' tested intercooler.

The bumper covers were all on, as this was done on the highway. No possibility for icing, either. Same thing on the dyno.


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

if I knew what you are comparing it this would be helpful mike...
my core which is very very similar to the EVO core:
core itself are 2"D x 25"W x 7"H
A bar and plate core was used along with a beaded 2.25" inlet and outlet. Endtanks are tapered to distribute air flow through the entire core. The unit has been pressure tested up to 80 psi and has been flow tested with a rating up to 700 cfm.
never had any issues with timing retard with a t3t4 on 94 octane boost on 20psi using all stock piping as well, I'll gladly do some logs on IC temps and coolant temps, but I just think it's rather useless now since it's so cold certain days and times...I just think these tests would be better during warmer climates...I know you live in NYC and kooter is from MN...if somebody from the south buys this, i would love to see their results...


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
1) It's call "humor", you might think of getting some.
2) I was commenting on what HE SAID in the quoted discussion which was self contain, and NOT what HE MEANT which are completely 
different more than often for many ppl. Thus, humorous.
Rey

correct it would be humorous if OTHERs were taking it that way.. but OTHERS were taking it literally.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (kilmer420)*

The argument being presented that testing in hot weather will change the results is somewhat flawed. In hotter weather, it is a given that charge temps will be hotter, and the ability of an IC to shed heat will be diminished. HOWEVER, the delta will be the same for all ICs. Eg. if FMIC X performs better at 30deg temps than SMIC X, it will also perform better at 100deg. They both will obviously perform worse, but the deltas will be near identical. As stated above, as long as charge temps are higher than ambient, the actual test temperatures are irrelevant(as long as all the ICs are tested in the same conditions). You can project the data we accumulated across all temp ranges.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_I did some more data crunching this AM. Here's a little tidbit. Average coolant temps while cruising down the highway with the FMICs was 5-10deg Celsius hotter than with the SMICs. This is a simple cruise, no boost. 

5-10C is an OUTRAGOUS claim to make without backing it up.... http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
5-10C is an OUTRAGOUS claim to make without backing it up.... http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 

No problem, I'll post the raw data shortly, then. Can someone help me post Excel files so that the columns are readable and aligned? Can I take a screenshot somehow?


_Modified by tyrolkid at 11:14 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
correct it would be humorous if OTHERs were taking it that way.. but OTHERS were taking it literally.

Is it me, or do you speak for everyone a lot?
Has anyone taken my post iiterally yet?
Anyone?
I think you don't give ppl enough credit.
I can't speak for everyone, but I know I LOVE having YOUR words
shoved in my mouth.
Rey


_Modified by elRey at 8:11 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (elRey)*

^^^
Couldn't agree more.
And, I just realized that this is nothing more than an advertisment...


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_The argument being presented that testing in hot weather will change the results is somewhat flawed. In hotter weather, it is a given that charge temps will be hotter, and the ability of an IC to shed heat will be diminished. HOWEVER, the delta will be the same for all ICs. Eg. if FMIC X performs better at 30deg temps than SMIC X, it will also perform better at 100deg. They both will obviously perform worse, but the deltas will be near identical. As stated above, as long as charge temps are higher than ambient, the actual test temperatures are irrelevant(as long as all the ICs are tested in the same conditions). You can project the data we accumulated across all temp ranges.


you can quote theory all you want mike...
but a thicker core SMIC in hot weather isn't going to outperform a FMIC IMHO ... that's where I am getting at ... especially during daily driving ... in traffic and on the hwy ... after it gets soaked how are you going to show stats/facts for that ??? just asking? 
did you heat soak the IC's before you tested...cause that's where I think it's helpful to see how it performs..


_Modified by kilmer420 at 11:28 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
Is it me, or do you speak for everyone a lot?
Has anyone taken my post iiterally yet?
Anyone?
I think you don't give ppl enough credit.
I can't speak for everyone, but I know I LOVE having YOUR words
shoved in my mouth.
Rey

_Modified by elRey at 8:11 AM 2-21-2005_

What words did I put in peoples mouths?? go read you Idiot.. the two fools trying to shove SMICs down your throat.. one who hates data.. the other who is claiming its just for the good of all man and isnt' trying to sell you antying are the ones who agreed with you..


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_^^^
Couldn't agree more.
And, I just realized that this is nothing more than an advertisment...

You agree with the guy who cant' even read the responses to his own statement and it took you a month to realize this was an advertisement.......


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_you can quote theory all you want mike...
but a thicker core SMIC in hot weather isn't going to outperform a FMIC IMHO ... that's where I am getting at ... especially during daily driving ... in traffic and on the hwy ... after it gets soaked how are you going to show stats/facts for that ??? just asking? 
did you heat soak the IC's before you tested...cause that's where I think it's helpful to see how it performs..
_Modified by kilmer420 at 11:28 AM 2-21-2005_

I think I misunderstood your point. My comments above were more relevant to the "cold weather testing is a waste" people. I agree that a thicker core SMIC is not going to perform as well as a thinner IC. What can be debated is at what thickness this begins to happen. Will a 3" or 3.5" thick FMIC perform that much better than a 4" SMIC? I have no data to prove or disprove that point. 
We have proved that an SMIC will cool just as effectively as some FMICs below 300whp, on both dyno and highway. The heat soak issue is simply based on core volume and mass. If an SMIC with a certain volume and mass gets heat soaked in stop and go driving, I can promise you that an FMIC with equal mass and volume will get heatsoaked as well, and the smaller SMICs and FMICs will get heatsoaked even faster.
Please remember, we set out to do these tests with no specific point to prove. The tests could have EASILY gone the other way, and I would have become the biggest FMIC supporter on the tex. I have to stand by the data we collected unless someone goes out and proves otherwise. This is part of the scientific method. SMICs are not the best solution for a 400whp 1.8T, as you can't get enough volume and mass to cool the charge in the fender. All the data thus far is geared towards the 200-300whp crowd. All bets are off when going above that. Anybody out there want to test the SMIC vs. FMIC on a BIG HP car?


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_
I was being allegorical raman









I _may_ have been factual


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

If the SMIC or FMIC are getting proper cooling/heating exchange thru head wind provided they are same in dims and volume does it matter whether it's Font mounted or sidemounted?...As long as there is proper ducting it would yeild the same results.
In the case of a FMIC you have a radiator that is also trying to exchange heat by head wind in which the FMIC is already exchaning leaving the radiator with less than optimal heat exchange...Since, engine temps do adjust timing, and fuel enrichment...etc..etc.. there will be implications on performance.
Common sense?....


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re: (Don R)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Don R* »_
Common sense?....

...seems like it.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_What words did I put in peoples mouths?? 


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_but OTHERS were taking it literally.

----------------------------------------------------------------


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_go read you Idiot..

I assume this implies that I haven't grasp the following:

_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_the two fools trying to shove SMICs down your throat.. one who hates data.. the other who is claiming its just for the good of all man and isnt' trying to sell you antying are the ones who agreed with you.. 

I've always recognized and understood these opinions. However, I was not commenting on, supporting or arguing against their motives or even whether or not this is a good product.
-----------------------------------------
Now to contribute to the post:
I can't say whether or not the SMIC out performs FMICs. But it SEEMS that the difference in performance is not enough to keep ME on the fence. IF the data is valid, it at least offers that good smic's are valid ALTERNATIVES to FMIC's for those who don't want the FMIC look but do want a performance upgrade. I BELIEVE that the motives of the these post were never to push smic's as fmic REPLACEMENTS, but ALTERNATIVES that many ppl are looking for but declined due to the general perception that smic no where near perform as good ad fmic.
Rey


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

Next...IC mounted on top of engine bay with a scoop al la Subby styles and perhaps one mounted just aft the trunk lid al al Porsche styles...


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (elRey)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_
I can't say whether or not the SMIC out performs FMICs. But it SEEMS that the difference in performance is not enough to keep ME on the fence. IF the data is valid, it at least offers that good smic's are valid ALTERNATIVES to FMIC's for those who don't want the FMIC look but do want a performance upgrade. I BELIEVE that the motives of the these post were never to push smic's as fmic REPLACEMENTS, but ALTERNATIVES that many ppl are looking for but declined due to the general perception that smic no where near perform as good ad fmic.
Rey

If these were not the motives then why are the two largest supports of them also member who refuse to advertise but continue to plug their product and sell SMICs??
I am not arguing the merits of the testing.. anyone who does is not paying attention the test were done correctly.. (DOESN:T MATTER IF ITS 10 DEGREES OR 90 DEGREES). The point is that this is an advertisement and testing is being done by the manufacture so there it is very quenstionable in their motives and how reliable the tests actally are or how they present the data (this woudl be true in any case not just of those here in this instance).
There is not enough data to say if the SMICs are worth replacements for FMICs because there is no data on what they are bing compared too.
There is already proof that a smaller FMIC cooled better then a larger SMIC.. So that alone points towards the FMIC.. But there are other factors such as the coolant temps which *I* was the one who brought up last time and was shot down... but now seem to be the key to why one made less power even though it cooled more.
Without knowing what was tested and the exact conditions the data is questionable in making a decision as to what is actually better.


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

so in newyork this morning it was nice and cool.
what about in texas where i am where my intercooler heatsoaks a good 2 minutes into my drive......(and makes me sad)


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re:  (Don R)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Don R* »_Next...IC mounted on top of engine bay with a scoop al la Subby styles and perhaps one mounted just aft the trunk lid al al Porsche styles...

...porsche puts them behind the rear wheels now don't they? i could be off...


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (gelatin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gelatin* »_
...porsche puts them behind the rear wheels now don't they? i could be off...

On the watercooled cars yes they are on the sides becuase they now have a radiator where they used to be located in the aircooled cars.. which is on top of the engine.


----------



## Don R (Oct 4, 2002)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
On the watercooled cars yes they are on the sides becuase they now have a radiator where they used to be located in the aircooled cars.. which is on top of the engine.

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *elRey* »_I BELIEVE that the motives of the these post were never to push smic's as fmic REPLACEMENTS, *but ALTERNATIVES *that many ppl are looking for but declined due to the general perception that smic no where near perform as good ad fmic.


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_If these were not the motives then why are the two largest supports of them also member who refuse to advertise but continue to plug their product and sell SMICs??

^^ Read carefully.
Maybe I'm giving them TOO much credit. With the Forge SMIC synonymous w/ smic upgrades now, I wouldn't think they would be stupid enough to follow in the same steps that are so ingrained in Texers these days. Granted the Forge was SMIC vs stock smic, but this isn't that big of a leap for them to overlook the similarities.
Rey


_Modified by elRey at 10:09 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
I think I misunderstood your point. My comments above were more relevant to the "cold weather testing is a waste" people. I agree that a thicker core SMIC is not going to perform as well as a thinner IC. What can be debated is at what thickness this begins to happen. Will a 3" or 3.5" thick FMIC perform that much better than a 4" SMIC? I have no data to prove or disprove that point. 
*thank you*
We have proved that an SMIC will cool just as effectively as some FMICs below 300whp, on both dyno and highway. The heat soak issue is simply based on core volume and mass. If an SMIC with a certain volume and mass gets heat soaked in stop and go driving, I can promise you that an FMIC with equal mass and volume will get heatsoaked as well, and the smaller SMICs and FMICs will get heatsoaked even faster.
*what are these SOME??? why put a test together and give us 1/75th of the information??? which is vital. Also, I know that in stop and go it will heat soak one or the other...the questions is how quickly will it recover?*
Please remember, we set out to do these tests with no specific point to prove. The tests could have EASILY gone the other way, and I would have become the biggest FMIC supporter on the tex. I have to stand by the data we collected unless someone goes out and proves otherwise. This is part of the scientific method. SMICs are not the best solution for a 400whp 1.8T, as you can't get enough volume and mass to cool the charge in the fender. All the data thus far is geared towards the 200-300whp crowd. All bets are off when going above that. Anybody out there want to test the SMIC vs. FMIC on a BIG HP car? 
*I am probably right around 300whp maybe slightly more...and will test it if you want...as I run stock piping...and you say this fits stock piping...*


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (kilmer420)*

what are these SOME??? why put a test together and give us 1/75th of the information??? which is vital. Also, I know that in stop and go it will heat soak one or the other...the questions is how quickly will it recover?
I can only give 1/75th of the info because someone in this very thread might have it locked, and I intend to abide by the rules.
Measuring how quickly an IC gets heatsoaked and then recovers would be tricky at best. What exactly defines "heatsoak"? The ability for an IC to no longer cool the charge whatsoever? What defines "recovery"? There are so many variables, that I think it would be impossible to do given our budget and constraints.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
I can only give 1/75th of the info because someone in this very thread might have it locked, and I intend to abide by the rules.


Grow some balls you fkn pansy.. its pay to play... they are not my rules and I have NOTHING to do with your threads getting closed its your lack of respect for a website that has grown your business from nothing to what it is now (still nothing).. THEY close your threads not anyone in this thread... 



_Modified by chris86vw at 11:46 AM 2-21-2005_


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Grow some balls you fkn pansy.. its pay to play... they are not my rules and I have NOTHING to do with your threads getting closed its your lack of respect for a website that has grown your business from nothing to what it is now (still nothing).. THEY close your threads not anything in this thread... 

Waaaaaay outa line. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 
Lets keep the personal attacks out of the threads.... This is like reading a damn soap opera.


_Modified by SnowGTI2003 at 2:49 PM 2-21-2005_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (SnowGTI2003)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SnowGTI2003* »_
Waaaaaay outa line. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 

Why because mike refuses to pay for advertising and then accuses me constantly of getting them black holed how is that out of line.
He ******* and moans about the politics on vortex yet doesnt' post his information anywhere else becuse he knows it wont' get the attention.. And cant' even post it on other sites becasue he wont' pay there either..


----------



## syktek (Nov 23, 2002)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Grow some balls you fkn pansy.. its pay to play... they are not my rules and I have NOTHING to do with your threads getting closed its your lack of respect for a website that has grown your business from nothing to what it is now (still nothing).. THEY close your threads not anything in this thread... 

wow...talk about being completely disrespectful...to the rest of us that are trying to learn something through debate and discussion


----------



## syktek (Nov 23, 2002)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Why because mike refuses to pay for advertising and then accuses me constantly of getting them black holed how is that out of line.
He ******* and moans about the politics on vortex yet doesnt' post his information anywhere else becuse he knows it wont' get the attention.. And cant' even post it on other sites becasue he wont' pay there either..

you are the only person that ever brings this up...you are the only person that cares what mike does on vortex when it comes to not paying for something...gorw up a little bit


----------



## Blue.Jester.02Gti (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Why because mike refuses to pay for advertising and then accuses me constantly of getting them black holed how is that out of line.
He ******* and moans about the politics on vortex yet doesnt' post his information anywhere else becuse he knows it wont' get the attention.. And cant' even post it on other sites becasue he wont' pay there either..

dude the mods lock things when they get off topic or start an online shouting match... and that is what you are doing here, youre like the NRA saying 'guns dont kill people, people do', which is right to an extent, but the gun does help, if you get my meaning... lets try to keep this open


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_Why because mike refuses to pay for advertising and then accuses me constantly of getting them black holed how is that out of line.
He ******* and moans about the politics on vortex yet doesnt' post his information anywhere else becuse he knows it wont' get the attention.. And cant' even post it on other sites becasue he wont' pay there either..

No one would have know it was you he was accusing if you didn't speak up. Perhaps a few of the inner circle might have but not 99% of the people that visit here.
Anyone that escalates these issues just make things worse. There's just no need for it. Not saying anyone is right or wrong. That's not for me to decide as I'm simply a user that reads the forums, and gets tired of reading threads that degenerate to garbage by bickering, fighting, and nit-picking.
Everyone just wants to get in the last punch, and that how we get these messes. Sometimes it's better if people just keep quiet when all you have to type is to get in a jab at someone else.
This is by *no means* directed specifically at you Chris. There are many users that are far worse.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (syktek)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syktek* »_
you are the only person that ever brings this up...you are the only person that cares what mike does on vortex when it comes to not paying for something...gorw up a little bit

Stephen clearly you also care since you report my threads with no commercial posting to the moderators simply for warning people that commercial therads get locked....
And stephen for the record my contract ran up and I did not agree to the new terms at the time, I am hoping we can come to some agreement soon and I will be advertising again.. more then you can say about others.


_Modified by chris86vw at 12:25 PM 2-21-2005_


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (SnowGTI2003)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SnowGTI2003* »_
No one would have know it was you he was accusing if you didn't speak up. Perhaps a few of the inner circle might have but not 99% of the people that visit here.
Anyone that escalates these issues just make things worse. There's just no need for it. Not saying anyone is right or wrong. That's not for me to decide as I'm simply a user that reads the forums, and gets tired of reading threads that degenerate to garbage by bickering, fighting, and nit-picking.
Everyone just wants to get in the last punch, and that how we get these messes. Sometimes it's better if people just keep quiet when all you have to type is to get in a jab at someone else.
This is by *no means* directed specifically at you Chris. There are many users that are far worse. 



_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_
I'll keep it short so that a certain someone doesnt start crying and has this locked.


That ws the FIRST line in this entire thread.. so please spare me. This thread was STARTED with an attack on me.. where do you think it was gonna go..


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_
Grow some balls you fkn pansy.. its pay to play... they are not my rules and I have NOTHING to do with your threads getting closed its your lack of respect for a website that has grown your business from nothing to what it is now (still nothing).. THEY close your threads not anyone in this thread... 
_Modified by chris86vw at 11:46 AM 2-21-2005_

First you call me a "fool" and then a "fkn pansy". The professionalism of PDPerformance/Chris86VW is clearly evident. Your name has not been mentioned once in this thread.
We are here trying to push the envelope of 1.8T tuning, using the scientific method and data analysis. I apologize to everyone in advance for the way this thread has turned out. We refuse to engage in such behavior at any time.










_Modified by tyrolkid at 3:38 PM 2-21-2005_


----------



## 4thvw (Jan 4, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Wow, back from the blackhole, how did that happen?


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (4thvw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *4thvw* »_Wow, back from the blackhole, how did that happen?

'tyrolkid
Advertiser'








Post some fackin' data man! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## fast_a2_20v (Jun 25, 2004)

i
n
b
4
t
h
e
l
o
c
k


----------



## cburkart (Jan 10, 2000)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

don't you mean "in after the lock?"








Now this means Mike can post up all his data/procedures, right? Let's see it!


----------



## FreshieMedia (Jul 4, 2002)

*Re: (cburkart)*

i'm still waiting for someone to prove something.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (FreshieMedia)*

It's interesting how Chris pops off at the mouth whenever he can. Why not, he is not an advertiser anymore, so its free reign right? He can bad mouth anyone now, because he can't get in any sort of trouble from the mods. Let me guess why he couldn't continue: 1. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month. 2. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (fast_a2_20v)*

in after... the... lock








edit... nm, someone said it before me.


----------



## FrankiEBoneZ (Jun 4, 2002)

*Re: (elRey)*

OH SHEEET!!! MOFO' is a mofo'in advertiser!!
WE HARDCORE NOW!!!


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (FrankiEBoneZ)*

I'm going to compile the data today and tomorrow.....sorry it's taking so long, but we have a lot going on over here....


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_I'm going to compile the data today and tomorrow.....sorry it's taking so long, but we have a lot going on over here.... 

Hooray!


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_It's interesting how Chris pops off at the mouth whenever he can. Why not, he is not an advertiser anymore, so its free reign right? He can bad mouth anyone now, because he can't get in any sort of trouble from the mods. Let me guess why he couldn't continue: 1. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month. 2. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month.

for the REcord the timing belt kits are actually selling very well, thanks for the plug though








..
My contract ran out in december and I did not agree to the new terms at the time and I have been trying to work out new ones with them... nothing to do with a timign belt kit or not being able to afford 300 bucks a month (it has to do with the fact that its not 300 bucks a month)


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_It's interesting how Chris pops off at the mouth whenever he can. Why not, he is not an advertiser anymore, so its free reign right? He can bad mouth anyone now, because he can't get in any sort of trouble from the mods. Let me guess why he couldn't continue: 1. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month. 2. His timing belts didn't sell too well so he can't afford the $300 a month.


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_And stephen for the record my contract ran up and I did not agree to the new terms at the time, I am hoping we can come to some agreement soon and I will be advertising again.. more then you can say about others.

read before you post mkkkkkkkay!

oh and data would be great mike p.!!!


----------



## GT_Series_18T (Jan 26, 2005)

*Re: (FrankiEBoneZ)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FrankiEBoneZ* »_OH SHEEET!!! MOFO' is a mofo'in advertiser!!
WE HARDCORE NOW!!! 

Frankie...*cough* turbo timer *cough*


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: (kilmer420)*


_Quote, originally posted by *kilmer420* »_oh and data would be great mike p.!!!


http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (SnowGTI2003)*

Here is the first graph of the coolant temp data. All tests done on the same day, same road, same procedure, etc. Average of 3 runs. I overstated the case when I said 5-10 degrees in my post earlier. Average is 5. Range is 3-7. 









_Modified by tyrolkid at 12:50 PM 2-23-2005_

_Modified by tyrolkid at 12:51 PM 2-23-2005_


_Modified by tyrolkid at 12:52 PM 2-23-2005_


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

use images that work!


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

One thing I find interesting is that the average temps for the UG are below normal operating temps for most of the run.. Since they are average that would mean that the first runs would not have been done on an engine that was fully warmed up....
Again I was the one who brought up this whole coolant thing so I am not disputing the data. Just questioning the validity of the data.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

If the EVO core is that bad, I am really surprised. I am having a hard time swallowing the validity of the data because it can be so easily manipulated (especially on an excel worksheet) to lean in your favor.


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Looks good. 
Just as I suspected. 
*Especially* for the stock, chip, exhaust - small mod type guys: FMIC's are a waste of money, time, weight, radiator and condenser efficiency. 
I wonder what VWAG is doing with the A/C condenser with the new FMIC on the new engine? So they will be stacked 3 deep now- with maybe and oil cooler or p.s. cooler or something thrown in?







JK
Trust me, over_ time and mileage _the exterior fins of those stacked components will get clogged with road grime, especially "highway cars" and it will make a real difference to the effectiveness (especially of the radiator) that can be observed. I've seen it happen too many times.
I agree with an earlier poster that that is a much better looking FMIC on the picture of the 2.0FSI than anything aftermarket I've seen- nice and thin and light -doesn't look like it would retain heat. But I wonder if much pressure drop would occur with it spread out like it is? I guess they've got it all figured out.
I know. Lets put the radiator and single fan in one wheel well and the A/C condenser with one fan in the other wheel well and just leave the whole front end for the intercooler. 
That'll make the intercooler OC's happy.


----------



## SlvrBllt (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_One thing I find interesting is that the average temps for the UG are below normal operating temps for most of the run.. Since they are average that would mean that the first runs would not have been done on an engine that was fully warmed up....
Again I was the one who brought up this whole coolant thing so I am not disputing the data. Just questioning the validity of the data.

1 degree celcius is not a huge variance.


----------



## SlvrBllt (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (slickfisher)*


_Quote, originally posted by *slickfisher* »_Looks good. 
Just as I suspected. 
*Especially* for the stock, chip, exhaust - small mod type guys: FMIC's are a waste of money, time, weight, radiator and condenser efficiency. 


But yet, all of the lemmings run for the FMIC cliff in every new FMIC group buy post.


----------



## Frank aka Rick (Aug 27, 2002)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SlvrBllt* »_1 degree celcius is not a huge variance.

but it is weird that the upgraded smic would have a lower temp than then stock one. thats all he's saying.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (slickfisher)*

^^^
This does not prove anything. I don't understand how your suspicions can be confirmed with such a biased and uninformed test. I don't get it. 
Teacher: Airplanes don't actually move, they suspend themselves in the air, and the earth rotates beneath them. 
Student: Aha, I knew it. Teacher you are a genius.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chris86vw* »_One thing I find interesting is that the average temps for the UG are below normal operating temps for most of the run.. Since they are average that would mean that the first runs would not have been done on an engine that was fully warmed up....
Again I was the one who brought up this whole coolant thing so I am not disputing the data. Just questioning the validity of the data.

Also, it is DEAD WINTER right now. I want to see this test done in the Summer when heat soak is prevalent. I doubt that the 8 inch thick SMIC that you are running will be able to efficiently cool the air. There is not a chance that the air has ample surface area in an SMIC to do that...


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SlvrBllt* »_
But yet, all of the lemmings run for the FMIC cliff in every new FMIC group buy post.

BLING BLING factor
add's 15HorsePowa


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Can you give us a run down of how this test was conducted.
i.e.
Order which the IC where tested.
How many runs each.
Warmup before each IC run
Guesses are that you tested UG before stock OR that the
warmup period was less for the UG than at least the stock.
But if you say everything was kept the same, I'd take your word for it.
1 degree is small but present none the less.
It also could be as simple as the fan/water pump coming on for
one and not the other.
http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif for data one way or another
edit: I don't believe data is being (or continuing to be) skewed when everyone is screaming about the issue from the get go. 
Rey


_Modified by elRey at 11:02 AM 2-23-2005_


----------



## Blue.Jester.02Gti (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*

not sure if this has been answered yet or not, but do you have some sort of ventialtion into the wheel well, such as the tt vent?


----------



## AVANT (Jun 25, 2001)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*

Well I would like to review more data before making any conclusions on the FMIC vs SMIC debate.


----------



## SlvrBllt (Oct 15, 2001)

*Re: (Frank aka Rick)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Frank aka Rick* »_
but it is weird that the upgraded smic would have a lower temp than then stock one. thats all he's saying.

It took time to swap the intercoolers. The ambient temps can swing 1 degree celcius pretty quick.


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_^^^
This does not prove anything. I don't understand how your suspicions can be confirmed with such a biased and uninformed test. I don't get it. 
Teacher: Airplanes don't actually move, they suspend themselves in the air, and the earth rotates beneath them. 
Student: Aha, I knew it. Teacher you are a genius. 

So wait... Let me get this straight. You're accusing him of posting false results ( tampering with the original data) , because you can't understand why they look the way they do? 
For someone with an obviously limited knownledge of turbo systems ( http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1718985 ) you sure are mighty outspoken on this issue.
If you cared to read the entire thread you see where this was all coming from.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SlvrBllt* »_It took time to swap the intercoolers. The ambient temps can swing 1 degree celcius pretty quick. 

Good point


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_
Also, it is DEAD WINTER right now. I want to see this test done in the Summer when heat soak is prevalent. I doubt that the 8 inch thick SMIC that you are running will be able to efficiently cool the air. There is not a chance that the air has ample surface area in an SMIC to do that...

It's has been explained numerous time here and elsewhere that the temperatures in which the ICs are tested are irrelevant. They will perform worse in hotter weather, but the differences between the units tested will remain the same. The results are directly applicable to any temperature seen in your neck of the woods, from Arizona to Alaska. There is no debate in this, it's a scientific fact. The SMIC tested is not 8" thick(maybe you're thinking of Kooters?). The one we tested is 4.5" thick.


----------



## SnowGTI2003 (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_ The one we tested is 4.5" thick.

But that's not much thicker than stock...... I guess images of this SMIC are in the future? I want to know how you crammed it in there.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SlvrBllt* »_
1 degree celcius is not a huge variance.

My point is taht apparently the UG SMIC causes the car to start running at temps below fully operational while for some reason the stock starts higher as does the FMIC... Numbers from each run would be more useful in this case then averages.


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SlvrBllt* »_
It took time to swap the intercoolers. The ambient temps can swing 1 degree celcius pretty quick. 

Its not ambient temps its engine temps.. The engine is going to run the similar temps regardless of ambient temps.. If its very very cold yes it may never get up to full operating temps that is a problem in some areas.


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Ta_Ma_de* »_Also, it is DEAD WINTER right now. I want to see this test done in the Summer when heat soak is prevalent. I doubt that the 8 inch thick SMIC that you are running will be able to efficiently cool the air. There is not a chance that the air has ample surface area in an SMIC to do that...

Heat soak can still be tested.
Run both IC's for long runs datalogging the whjole way.
Trying to stay in boost in low gears to raise temps with
less air flow. Bring temps up to a point then cruise @
constant speed and measure time it take temp to return
to pre boost levels. Repeat.
This will give a comparison that you can then use against know
heat soak recovery performance of FMIC's in summer.
similair to this stock smic log
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1649698








Rey


_Modified by elRey at 11:26 AM 2-23-2005_


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (elRey)*

that's a sweet plot...


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (Ta_Ma_de)*

I'm flattered that your would see me as your teacher. 
Really, I'm just an middle aged guy who got out of a life of turning wrenches while he still had somewhat of a body left.
An FMIC is a big deal. Big money (for the good stuff), big dis-assembly, some weight and complication, and it restricts the airflow for the exchangers behind the FMIC.
And I think there are small losses in pressure/flow and spool up time. 
Why would someone with a stock or even slightly larger turbo go through the trouble and expense when a stock or slightly larger side mount would do? 
Then there is the old saying- if it ain't broke don't fix it. 
I don't need a $1000 dollar test set up to form common sense mechanical opinions generated from decades of practical experience. 
That's whats wrong with our society/government. "Lets spend 2 billion to study whether installing sidewalks will increase the likely hood of people getting out and walking/exercising/socializing in their neighborhoods." When it would cost 10 million to install the freaking sidewalks in the whole neighborhood. That's what we don't have anymore in this country- common sense.
*Sorry for the jog from the topic.* This is an issue going on in our local area now, but you get the point. 
Hopefully









_If one has a BT or stage 3 etc. - they don't need to respond. I understand their point._


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (SlvrBllt)*

And all of the wildebeest jump into the muddy river even though they know a certain percentage of them will be eaten alive by crocodiles.


----------



## TyrolSport (Mar 4, 1999)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Charge Temp Data, 2500-6500rpm, third gear highway run, average of 3 runs:


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Looks like an almost equivalent *alternative* for a fmic (for specified applications) to me.
Should make _some_ ppl's decisions a lot easier now.
Now we just need some product choices.
Rey


_Modified by elRey at 1:27 PM 2-23-2005_


----------



## MrPiZaT (Jun 4, 2003)

very interesting


----------



## Jack Skelington (Jul 5, 2004)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

Would a lower temp thermostat help get the coolant back to acceptable temps sooner?


----------



## Kilmer (Sep 5, 2001)

*Re: (ZER0)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ZER0* »_Would a lower temp thermostat help get the coolant back to acceptable temps sooner?

I thought about this but nobody has ever mentioned this
the newer thermostats in the newer cars stay open longer than the older cars when that was a must "MOD" for increased HP applications due to more heat...now adays I wonder if it could be helpful???


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (ZER0)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ZER0* »_Would a lower temp thermostat help get the coolant back to acceptable temps sooner?


Just went and did some tests of my own on a car with a GT28RS and eurojet old FMIC... about 24psi.. did 5 3rd gear pulls in about 2 minutes or less.. lots of just driving around at 25-50mph... and lets just say the t stat is probably not even open the temps are so cool.


----------



## Jack Skelington (Jul 5, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

Are you sure?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (ZER0)*

IT was a total of about 11 minutes 
Ambient temps of 5C (40F)
from idling before I left... driving around by the time I got a mile down the road in a 25 doing about that plus maybe a little it was it had cooled from high 90s just parked to 84C that was two minutes total time.
50 seconds of being stopped it went from 84C to 88C
About 1 minute of driving in 40ish mph traffic it went from 88-86C
20 seconds at a traffic light and it went from 86-87C
Little over a minute 87-91 C... this was stop and go slow moving traffic
First 3rd gear pull 1750 to 6500, temps stay at 91C the whole time intake temps start low 20s... go down into the teens as boost builds and end up at 33. (10 second pull)
10 second coast down coolant temps drop to 90C
second 3rd gear pull 2600-6000 coolant temps drop from 90 to 87.. intake temps 25-30C (7 second pull)
36 second coast down (after hard braking) including a jug handle.. temps drop from 87 to 82C..
15 seconds at traffic light.. temps from 82 up to 85C
little bit of driving up to 3rd gear, 10 seconds
Third 3rd gear pull 1960 to 5800 9 second pull, 86 to 87C, intake temps 17 to 31.
10 second coast down temps remain at 87
fourth 3rd gear pull 2680 to6400 temps remain still at 87C.. intake temps start 24... dip down to like 18 and end up at 36C.. 8 second run.
36 seconds stays at 87C.. this was slowing down.. crossing a road, turning around in a parking lot and getting back on the road.

fifth 3rd gear pull was only 4 seconds becuase there were now cars around and I wasnt' gonna mess around. coolant still stayed at 87C.. 
DRove back to the shop... stays at 87C for 5 seconds... up to 88C for 8 seconds.. back to 87C for 30 seconds. Drops to 86C for 20 secods back up to 87C for just over a minute.. THen up to 88C for 40 seconds. This was all doing about 30mph through some back roads.
15 seconds of 5mph max while I get it back into the shop it goes up to 90C.

So what was that about the FMIC causing excessive coolant temps???
The spreadsheet is ridiculous when I come up with a way to make it graphable I"ll put it up (also on my laptop looking at the data so I cant' host it)
EDIT: I started to make graphs of each of these different types of driving situations to break it up since 11minutes of logging is a bit insane to try and show on one graph accurately. Basically what you can see is that with any airflow on the car it maintains a nice sub 90C engine temp.. if you let it sit it slowly starts.. and the faster you go the cooler it goes.. This info is not definitve since it is one car and not compared to stock or any other IC. But it gives you a good idea of how airflow is still making it through.
Tommorrow I am going to try and do the same route but block the IC area with cardboard. Essentially then the only airflow to the rad would be the grill and this will give a good idea of if the IC is actually blockign airflow.


_Modified by chris86vw at 4:40 PM 2-23-2005_


----------



## slickfisher (Oct 16, 2004)

*Re: (ZER0)*

Not a good idea. 
Thermostats are designed to help keep an engine within a temp. operating range. This range has effects on everything from engine management to burning off volatiles left over from the combustion process that eventually create sludge. 
A degree or two here or there _may not hurt_. And it might work for a while or in certain circumstances. But that's not the long term answer.
If an engine is getting too hot. It either has a failure/damage somewhere or does *not have enough capacity *too meet the thermal demands of the engine.
Putting something in front of the radiator will decrease its ability to cool. Same thing happens when rads get old and externally plugged up with road grime and bugs etc.
Have you even seen big rig tractor trailer trucks with zippered covers over their radiators in the winter or whenever they are running too cool?
Heat is a good thing to the combustion process- as long as it is kept under control and at the right temp.


----------



## Dynamic Rollover (Mar 19, 2004)

*Re: (chris86vw)*

I have to give credit to Chris, He is pretty smart and thorough. I just wish that you were not so ritalin refused and antagonistic at times.


----------



## jaydw11 (Mar 11, 2003)

i had the same thought about the thermostat thing just the oher day. brought on by this thread.
my brother had a chip in his monte carlo and it came with a lower temp thermostat to go with the new timing curve. it seemed to be effective although he could barely get heat in the winter. it was very noticeable


----------



## groftja (Jul 19, 2004)

*Re: (jaydw11)*

Good job on the data so far guys. Here is my advice and I realize none of this is new to you guys but it still helps for us to hear it occasionally. Keep the data coming and the more data there is, the stronger the conclusions can be. It seems like a pain to gather it but it is worth it in the end when you can sit back knowing you missed nothing. When something doesn't make sense, repeat the tests and keep an eye on repeatability of the data. If something varies a lot when tests are repeated, the data is questionable. Averages only make sense to show when the variances are small. If nothing can possibly explain a trend (like 2 side mount ICs causing different coolant temps), some other variable has crept in that you didn't intend. 
Hope that helps even though I made it so general. I do testing (not telling the world what kind







) for a living so I have to use these guidelines all the time.


----------



## Wolfsburg1.8 (Sep 23, 2003)

*Re: (groftja)*

so what's the info on the dual side mount offerings like on the 225 TT?
Seems like you'd reduce heat soak without affecting flow to the rad and everything would be good, no? Does anybody have expierence with these dual side mount units?


----------



## fatrogus (Feb 20, 2005)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

will a dry nitrous system help?


----------



## Jack Skelington (Jul 5, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (fatrogus)*

Did the test car have a greentop coolant temp sensor?


----------



## elRey (May 15, 2001)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*

It's pretty quiet in here. 
What's the CFM rating again?
When can we expect product pics/pricing/release?

Rey


----------



## FQP VR6 (Nov 7, 2002)

*Re: (tyrolkid)*


_Quote, originally posted by *tyrolkid* »_The argument being presented that testing in hot weather will change the results is somewhat flawed. In hotter weather, it is a given that charge temps will be hotter, and the ability of an IC to shed heat will be diminished. HOWEVER, the delta will be the same for all ICs. Eg. if FMIC X performs better at 30deg temps than SMIC X, it will also perform better at 100deg. They both will obviously perform worse, but the deltas will be near identical. As stated above, as long as charge temps are higher than ambient, the actual test temperatures are irrelevant(as long as all the ICs are tested in the same conditions). You can project the data we accumulated across all temp ranges.


Well not really... how about material properties... Not all metals behave in a linear pattern


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re: (FQP VR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FQP VR6* »_Well not really... how about material properties... Not all metals behave in a linear pattern








 
this is certainly true for the thermal diffusivity(convection is temp dependant too but dunno how)... so to all the people wanting tests in summer temps, you should continue to request them.
...chris, did you get around to blocking off the IC yet?


----------



## chris86vw (Feb 23, 2000)

*Re: (gelatin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gelatin* »_ 

...chris, did you get around to blocking off the IC yet?

No it was a customers car and it had snowed between him picking it up and me doing some more tests.. with it.
I do have my car with me (finally melted out) so maybe I'll try similar on mine in the next few days...mine has the small greddy.


----------



## dots gti (Jan 8, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (tyrolkid)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif







and thank you to all the people who have *contributed* to this post. Very imformative.


----------



## FQP VR6 (Nov 7, 2002)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (dots gti)*

I think it all comes down to relative surface area. In other words, if you take two intercoolers and both have the same mass, material construction and cooling air flow the one having the highest relative surface area, will cool the most. Relative surface are is the ratio between surface area (SA) and volume (V). [ i.e., SA/V where we shouldn't forget that SA MUST also include the suface area of the fins) 
Now the problem under a thermodynamic and heat transfer engineering stand point is much more complex than this and one could go on forever talking about it. Under a 'dynamic condition" where there is air flowing through the IC there are several more factors adding to the equation.
For instance shape will affect pressure drop, which in tern will affect charge pressure, which will affect exhaust and engine temperature and therefore the entire system including charge temperature. There is a cause and effect to jus t about anything in life








I think that it is great to bring experimental reults to the table, and i consider very original that somone had the will, passion and desire to go through the effort of finding out for real. It is thanks to these persons that often new things can be learned and designs can be improved. Theory works well on paper but only facts can confirm the theory! In the case of this particular experiment i am 100% sure it was driven by the passion and love these persons have for automotive. It is a passion I share myself and it is driven by something it can't really be put into words. It is good to follow what you like... it generates a lot of pride and it will reward you.
Anyhow on a side note, since we are in the topic, can someonegive me more insight on these? http://www.pwr-performance.com/intercooler.htm
How do these air to water IC's perform, because i have a friend in europe that wants me to buy one for him for his higly modded Corrado Sc. I king of like the compactness of the design and it would seem like it requires a lot less piping to put it in place.
Well keep the comments and knowledge coming...
take care


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (FQP VR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FQP VR6* »_Now the problem under a thermodynamic and heat transfer engineering stand point is much more complex than this and one could go on forever talking about it. Under a 'dynamic condition" where there is air flowing through the IC there are several more factors adding to the equation.
For instance shape will affect pressure drop, which in tern will affect charge pressure, which will affect exhaust and engine temperature and therefore the entire system including charge temperature. There is a cause and effect to jus t about anything in life









they're called coupled differential equations, and a good software tool like MATLAB makes solving them possible, if a bit time-consuming.
odesolve in MATLAB is your friend http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## silverbullet420 (May 21, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (FQP VR6)*


_Quote, originally posted by *FQP VR6* »_Anyhow on a side note, since we are in the topic, can someonegive me more insight on these? http://www.pwr-performance.com/intercooler.htm
How do these air to water IC's perform, because i have a friend in europe that wants me to buy one for him for his higly modded Corrado Sc. I king of like the compactness of the design and it would seem like it requires a lot less piping to put it in place.
Well keep the comments and knowledge coming...
take care









i think that using a air-to-water IC is more complex considering the plumbing, water reservoirs and pumps, etc. that must be considered. But the greatest advantage it has over air-to-air IC is that water has a much higher heat transfer coefficient than air, allowing it to get rid of much more heat. But I'd say that's a more logical approach for high powered applications, not for regular street cars IMO.


----------



## gelatin (Apr 26, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_they're called coupled differential equations, and a good software tool like MATLAB makes solving them possible, if a bit time-consuming.
odesolve in MATLAB is your friend http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

...or FEMLAB, which is what i would rather as i'd guess you should model with PDE. but still, solving for the air flow would be no joke and not something i would chase for this thread. chances are, instabilities would stop both those packages from having success without serious effort. sorry, off topic.


----------



## Nonlinear Optics (May 14, 2003)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (gelatin)*

i hate theory modeling. for fiber raman amplifiers, it is necessary for product development. thank god PDEs and BVPs are not necessary for finding the best solutions. the shooting method works just fine.
sorry, off topic


----------



## Jack Skelington (Jul 5, 2004)

*Re: FMIC vs. SMIC Highway testing Results (Raman Gain)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Raman Gain* »_i hate theory modeling. for fiber raman amplifiers, it is necessary for product development. thank god PDEs and BVPs are not necessary for finding the best solutions. the shooting method works just fine.
sorry, off topic









Raman Gain....the Vortex's very own Egon Spangler


----------

