# APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data!



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

Test Sequence:
Five sequential dyno runs with one minute dwell time between runs.
Each run started with 15 seconds at 2000 rpm's and then a 30 second power sweep.
2007 Audi A3 with APR Full Exhaust and STage 2 ecu upgrade
Test Conditions:
Stock - 92F, 53.5%rh, 29.85in-Hg Core at start of run: 91.9F
APR - 95F, 50.5%rh, 29.90in-Hg. Core temp at start of run: 94.5F
And its power and trq at the wheels.

_Modified by [email protected] at 2:27 PM 7-19-2007_


_Modified by [email protected] at 2:28 PM 7-19-2007_


----------



## dieseldub1 (Jun 15, 2003)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! ([email protected])*

damn it Keith, you guys always coming out with new products, going to make me go broke. when when when is all i want to know. I was already going to order the fuel pump, and now this, anything else i should wait for?


----------



## DeathMoJo (Oct 8, 2006)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! (dieseldub1)*

looking good, what kind of modifications were on the car that posted these logs? Also, any ETA or pricing info?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! (DeathMoJo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DeathMoJo* »_looking good, what kind of modifications were on the car that posted these logs? Also, any ETA or pricing info?









Pricing is set at $1049!
APR Stage 2 on a 2007 Audi A3.


----------



## dieseldub1 (Jun 15, 2003)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! ([email protected])*

pics?









so realistically, how much power can i expect with your stage 2 program, tbe, neuspeed intake, new fuel pump and intercooler? i want to do these mods to support my "eventual" turbo upgrade


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! (dieseldub1)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dieseldub1* »_pics?









so realistically, how much power can i expect with your stage 2 program, tbe, neuspeed intake, new fuel pump and intercooler? i want to do these mods to support my "eventual" turbo upgrade








 
Here is one being pressure tested and end tanks being machined







Bob.G


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

nice


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

Thats nice.
Exactly WHEN is this coming over to Europe...i.e. when can i have it in my hands..


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! (dieseldub1)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dieseldub1* »_pics?









so realistically, how much power can i expect with your stage 2 program, tbe, neuspeed intake, new fuel pump and intercooler? i want to do these mods to support my "eventual" turbo upgrade









the a3 graphs I posted are close, add a fuel pump to the mix. I am trying to get some fuel pump dynos.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! ([email protected])*


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

Any change of getting it in the middle of August ??


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (GolfRS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GolfRS* »_Any change of getting it in the middle of August ??

yup! still going to happen. Looks like I can ship to you on Monday of next week!


----------



## NoahsGTI (Jan 16, 2007)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Can't wait to get mine!!!
Just ordered the A3 pipe to go with this!!


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Keith, when APR calculates HP and Torque figures at the crank, what conversion factor is used from the WHP numbers? For the non apr IC numbers above, when calculated by 1.15, they appear to be about what APR claims with the 93 octane stage 1, however the numbers above aer for a stage two setup. Also, from what I understand, the conversion should be more around 1.13. 
Could you shed some light on this?


_Modified by Arin at 9:47 PM 7-19-2007_


----------



## csih (Aug 27, 2006)

Have you tested this I/C efficiency against S3 i/c?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_Keith, when APR calculates HP and Torque figures at the crank, what conversion factor is used from the WHP numbers? For the non apr IC numbers above, when calculated by 1.15, they appear to be about what APR claims with the 93 octane stage 1, however the numbers above aer for a stage two setup. Also, from what I understand, the conversion should be more around 1.13. 
Could you shed some light on this?

_Modified by Arin at 9:47 PM 7-19-2007_

I'm not sure of the exact figures but the graph seems to reflect about 220whp and 270 wtrq. The ambient temps and conditions are reported and as you can see, they are quite a bit less than favorable. The graph is unsmoothed and uncorrected so with correction the numbers would be much higher to start your 1.13 calculation back to crank. Sometimes posting raw, uncorrected wheel numbers can make them look low but they aren't.









ps, also consider the test procedures. 5 back to back runs with only 1 min of cooling time between each run. The posted power graphs aren't really power pulls.


_Modified by [email protected] at 8:06 AM 7-20-2007_


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (csih)*


_Quote, originally posted by *csih* »_Have you tested this I/C efficiency against S3 i/c?

no, but I am confident it will destroy it based on how bad the oem looks against ours.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Do you know what APR used to calculate crank from WHP in the other graphs on the site? is it 1.13?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_Do you know what APR used to calculate crank from WHP in the other graphs on the site? is it 1.13?

Tom's answer was better.


_Modified by [email protected] at 8:57 AM 7-20-2007_


----------



## Tom/APR (Feb 27, 2001)

*Re: (Arin)*

The dyno numbers are uncorrected. Give the atmoshperic conditions on that day, the correction factor should have been around 1.065.
Secondly, you never multiply by a factor to get crank hp numbers. WHP is a portion of crank hp, so you divide to get crank. 
220whp * 1.065 (correction factor) = 234.3whp corrected.
These cars typically see about 11-12% drivetrain loss, so:
234.3 / .89 (11%) = 263.3 
Pretty good numbers on a 95º day without much airflow... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (Tom/APR)*

Any chance of installed pics? There's always the "bling" factor when it comes to an IC


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BumbleBeeJBG* »_Any chance of installed pics? There's always the "bling" factor when it comes to an IC


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

It's a physically large part that's being replaced under the hood...
I just want to see it installed.
Gosh! Am I that much of an aesthetics whore?
Why do people want to retain stock engine covers? I can't be the only one who wants to see it installed for giggles


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*

You really can't see it when its installed.


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*

From the bottom and you can see it from the top sorta.. I can see my stock one just fine and this looks like it has larger dimensions.


_Modified by BumbleBeeJBG at 9:55 AM 7-20-2007_


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BumbleBeeJBG* »_It's a physically large part that's being replaced under the hood...
I just want to see it installed.
Gosh! Am I that much of an aesthetics whore?
Why do people want to retain stock engine covers? I can't be the only one who wants to see it installed for giggles









It's installed in the same position as stock. . . . it will look pretty much stock.
Dave


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BumbleBeeJBG* »_From the bottom and you can see it from the top sorta.. I can see my stock one just fine and this looks like it has larger dimensions.

the aluminum end tanks look nice and the core is shinier and the thickness is obvious as well.
I would have to remove the belly pan and put the car up in the air to get any good pics though.
I will see if I can post the install instructions, they have some good pics too, Tom?


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

in the second to last picture you can see one assembled with the condenser/rad sandwich goin on. bottom right corner


_Modified by YoungMedic at 8:27 AM 7-21-2007_


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

will the installation require any modifications or cutting or will this install be a fairly simple process. I have heard first hand that the eurojet intercooler requires some cutting. I want to avoid that as much as possible.


----------



## LeBlanc. (Jul 15, 2003)

*Re: (Tom/APR)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Tom/APR* »_The dyno numbers are uncorrected. Give the atmoshperic conditions on that day, the correction factor should have been around 1.065.
Secondly, you never multiply by a factor to get crank hp numbers. WHP is a portion of crank hp, so you divide to get crank. 
220whp * 1.065 (correction factor) = 234.3whp corrected.
These cars typically see about 11-12% drivetrain loss, so:
234.3 / .89 (11%) = 263.3 
Pretty good numbers on a 95º day without much airflow... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


thanks, people don't understand that you need to DIVIDE by 1 - % loss and 
not MULTIPLY by 1 + % loss.


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

Sorry for the noob question, but do you think this intercooler could make a non-chipped, intake and exhaust MKV a little more efficient or is it not even worth it. With the ambient temps here In florida reaching close to 105 degrees I want to keep things as cool as possible. 
P.S. Anyone with a aftermarket intercooler get any check engine lights? Once again sorry if this question is beneath anyones level of expertise.


_Modified by jaydubz at 1:35 PM 7-22-2007_


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

*Re: (jaydubz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jaydubz* »_Sorry for the noob question, but do you think this intercooler could make a non-chipped, intake and exhaust MKV a little more efficient or is it not even worth it. With the ambient temps here In florida reaching close to 105 degrees I want to keep things as cool as possible. 
P.S. Anyone with a aftermarket intercooler get any check engine lights? Once again sorry if this question is beneath anyones level of expertise.

_Modified by jaydubz at 1:35 PM 7-22-2007_

I am thinking of getting this IC without being chipped.
Even though i have an intake an full turboback, i am pretty sure it will give me a healthy gain, and surely protect the engine since over here the temps easily reach 40-45 C .....


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

yes that is exactly what I am thinking. i am not running stage 2 of anything so most people may say that this is a waste of money, but I see it as making the system far more efficient.


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

I can tell you both my mods so far feel at least like 20 HP








Seriously though, upping the boost is the best way to get power out of the car, but if you think "atmospherically" for a minute, all the mods do is help your engine breath more and cooler air !!
Now that IS horsepower..


----------



## 355890 (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: (GolfRS)*

3 questions:
Does this unit attach to or completely replace the OEM I/C?
Is it a straight bolt on unit without any cutting?
Does all the necessary piping come with the unit?


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (355890)*


_Quote, originally posted by *355890* »_3 questions:
Does this unit attach to or completely replace the OEM I/C?
Is it a straight bolt on unit without any cutting?
Does all the necessary piping come with the unit?









 
Replaces
YES 
YES







Bob.G


----------



## Tom/APR (Feb 27, 2001)

*Re: (Arin)*

The dyno numbers are uncorrected. Give the atmoshperic conditions on that day, the correction factor should have been around 1.065.
Secondly, you never multiply by a factor to get crank hp numbers. WHP is a portion of crank hp, so you divide to get crank. 
220whp * 1.065 (correction factor) = 234.3whp corrected.
These cars typically see about 11-12% drivetrain loss, so:
234.3 / .89 (11%) = 263.3 
Pretty good numbers on a 95º day without much airflow... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (Tom/APR)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Tom/APR* »_The dyno numbers are uncorrected. Give the atmoshperic conditions on that day, the correction factor should have been around 1.065.

Tom, to derive the correction factor, would one use this formula








Where PD = the pressure of dry air, in mBar and TC = the temp in Celsius? If so, how could one calculate the pressure of dry air since the air around you usually has water in it?


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

The math scares me, what does all of this mean in the real world? I want something easy to install and far more efficient for since it is over a 1000.00 bucks. Will I notice quicker spooling, better throttle response? Has anyone installed this unit yet and can someone post some installation instructions if they exist!


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (jaydubz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jaydubz* »_The math scares me, what does all of this mean in the real world? 

It means lower intake temperatures and less chance of heat soak. Lower temps = better.


----------



## NoahsGTI (Jan 16, 2007)

*Re: (jaydubz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jaydubz* »_The math scares me, what does all of this mean in the real world? I want something easy to install and far more efficient for since it is over a 1000.00 bucks. Will I notice quicker spooling, better throttle response? Has anyone installed this unit yet and can someone post some installation instructions if they exist!

Your intercooler is what cools your intake charge air. The cooler the air, the more dense it is, thus allowing more bank-for-the-buck in the cylinder. 
APR will include complete install instructions with the purchase. From what I've gathered it's a bit involved and does require removing the front bumper assembly. If you can read Vortex, you can install it (provided you've got basic tools and patience). 
Looking at picking mine up late this week or early next. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_
It means lower intake temperatures and less chance of heat soak. Lower temps = better = *mad crazy horespowah*.


----------



## GTIR6 (Apr 2, 2007)

*Re: (prodigymb)*

how is this better than Forge's twincooler?


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (GTIR6)*

it has 4 x's the surface area


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

I sure would like to get some more info from APR that seems to have "deserted" this post...
Is the cooling compared to stock+Forge superior ?
Anyone got it on yet ??


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*


_Quote, originally posted by *YoungMedic* »_it has 4 x's the surface area









4x the surface area of just the forge, or the forge and stock?

I'd really like to see some independent tuners do a shoot out between the two setups. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## crazywayne311 (Jan 29, 2006)

it would be nice to see total surface area between the forge + OEM and the APR. i'm sure its the same but the APR unit is probably more efficient...then again, maybe not


----------



## AMI Motorsports (Jan 31, 2002)

*Re: APR 2.0T FSI Intercooler Testing Data! (dieseldub1)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dieseldub1* »_damn it Keith, you guys always coming out with new products, going to make me go broke. when when when is all i want to know. I was already going to order the fuel pump, and now this, anything else i should wait for?









We are going to install one on our shop GTI behind the Caractere bumper next week. 
We do have them in-stock also


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

I am anxious to find out how installation and performance will be like!


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (GolfRS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GolfRS* »_I sure would like to get some more info from APR that seems to have "deserted" this post...
Is the cooling compared to stock+Forge superior ?
Anyone got it on yet ??

sure, what's up?
I haven't tested our's against any competition yet.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (crazywayne311)*


_Quote, originally posted by *crazywayne311* »_it would be nice to see total surface area between the forge + OEM and the APR. i'm sure its the same but the APR unit is probably more efficient...then again, maybe not

you would actually be the perfect candidate for a comparison if you would like to participate.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
you would actually be the perfect candidate for a comparison if you would like to participate.

If by that you mean APR will send one to someone with the forge Twintercooler for vag com logging and testing, count me in!


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (jaydubz)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jaydubz* »_I am anxious to find out how installation and performance will be like!

Installation is a peice of cake, really. I'll see if I can get the instructions up soon!


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

its not bad, I think the core support has to come off. Shouldnt take more than a full afternoon to do.


----------



## crazywayne311 (Jan 29, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
you would actually be the perfect candidate for a comparison if you would like to participate.

i'm listening.... or i have pm








did i mention have much i love you guys! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## lnferno (Jun 26, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
you would actually be the perfect candidate for a comparison if you would like to participate.

Let me know when you have one of these bad boys constructed for the A4 B7! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## jaydubz (May 1, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Thanks for the reply Keith, I am looking forward to this part considering I am a stickler on easy to install and good bang for the buck parts. Please let us know when you get this info up, also I am sure this was already mentioned but some more performance numbers would be nice. I am looking forward to picking up this part when I know a little more about it. Let me refrase that, I will pick this up when more people buy them and nothing breaks then I will pick it up immediately. hehe








_Modified by jaydubz at 1:55 PM 7-27-2007_

_Modified by jaydubz at 2:08 PM 7-27-2007_


_Modified by jaydubz at 2:12 PM 7-27-2007_


----------



## WikidMkV (Oct 26, 2006)

*Re: (jaydubz)*

Cant wait to get one... too bad it will be a while...


----------



## jean80 (Aug 1, 2007)

*Re: (WikidMkV)*

Hello .. I have a Audi A3 2.0t + apr stage2
is possible APR INTERCOOLER + FORGE TWIN ?? Or this is a bad idea ?
Thanks


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (jean80)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jean80* »_Hello .. I have a Audi A3 2.0t + apr stage2
is possible APR INTERCOOLER + FORGE TWIN ?? Or this is a bad idea ?
Thanks
















never tried it but it seems that it would be unnecessary imo.


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

*Re: (jean80)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jean80* »_Hello .. I have a Audi A3 2.0t + apr stage2
is possible APR INTERCOOLER + FORGE TWIN ?? Or this is a bad idea ?
Thanks
















bad idea . . . way too much volume to pressurize
Dave


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (crew219)*


_Quote, originally posted by *crew219* »_
bad idea . . . way too much volume to pressurize
Dave
 
X 2 espec on a ko3 car, this APR intercooler showed no signs of heat soak in hot humid weather with a gt 2871 .







Bob.G


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*

It does not matter if it has 4 times the surface area, just because it is bigger it does not mean it is better. Especially due to the fact that it is sandwhiched in to where the stock intercooler normally sits, and the stock intercooler is prone to heat soak. The forge motorsport twintercooler has given me a ton of power all throughout the RPM band and it looks great and was simple to install. I am sure the APR intercooler will be great, but why does everyone have to bash all the other products? They are all pretty similar. Also, I have heard from many Audi/VW techs that too big of an intercooler is actually bad.
Volkswagen 07 2.0T GTI engine modifications: APR 93 Octane Software, Neuspeed P-Flo Full Cold Air Intake, ATP 3" Downpipe, Magna Flow High Flow Catalytic Converter, Neuspeed Downpipe Back Exhaust System, Forge Motorsport Twintercooler Front Mount Intercooler, Neuspeed High Flow Turbo Discharge Kit, Neuspeed High flow Intercooler Pipe, Neuspeed Power Pulley Kit, Forge Motorsport Vacumn Operated Replacement Diverter Valve, Vf Engineering Side Motor Mount, Vf Engineering Pendelum Motor Mount, New South VDO Boost Gauge.
Brake Modifications: Brembo Big Brake Kit With Slotted And Drilled Rotors.
Bryan


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (maitino)*

I dont really see any bashing, and who cares about little smack talk. Who wouldnt want to justify their purchase!?!
Just an FIY. I have the Forge, My buddy is getting the APR, and another person we know has the Eurojet. Our plan is to test all three under the exact same circumstances to see which shows the least heatsoak over stock. Not sure when we'll get around to it, but it should be very interesting to see!


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (Arin)*

Yah that shouls be really cool to see what intercooler is the best. A good point I was thinking of : the best location for an intercooler is in the very front of the car, in the front is where the intercooler will get the largest amount of cold and fresh air. Why is it that every other company(Forge,Eurojet,Garrett,Vf Engineering,etc,etc) has their intercooler in the very front of the car as opposed to APR's intercooler that is sandwiched in the middle of radiator and AC Condenser. I just find it very hard to believe that APR's kit is superior to all other intercoolers. REMAMBER I AM NOT BASHING APR, I AM JUST CONFUSED AS TO HOW THIS COULD BE BETTER? I guess forge and all the other companies are incorrect with their intercoolers and placement?


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Yah that shouls be really cool to see what inter-cooler is the best. A good point I was thinking of : the best location for an inter-cooler is in the very front of the car, in the front is where the inter-cooler will get the largest amount of cold and fresh air. Why is it that every other company(Forge,Eurojet,Garrett,Vf Engineering,etc,etc) has their inter-cooler in the very front of the car as opposed to APR's inter-cooler that is sandwiched in the middle of radiator and AC Condenser. I just find it very hard to believe that APR's kit is superior to all other intercoolers. REMAMBER I AM NOT BASHING APR, I AM JUST CONFUSED AS TO HOW THIS COULD BE BETTER? I guess forge and all the other companies are incorrect with their intercoolers and placement?








 
First off , the other companies inter-cooler kits MAY work well but what separates APR from the rest is.
1) stock factory location which will not effect a already poor A/C system.
2) physical size is HUGH compared to rest and yes size DOES MATTER because it can dissipate heat faster.Why do you think VAG built so big of a factory inter-cooler in the first place ?? and the factory cooler works pretty decent ,compared to a small side mount that was used in previous 1.8T
3) stock location is not going to effect water temps 
4) The stealth location will not throw any red flags up from law enforcement and DMV when you need to go for inspection in states like CA.
To sum it up the rest of the companies im sure will work fine but then you have to ask your self given the little price difference less compared to APR kit why are the others charging so much?? ,because it doesn't look like there was alot of development cost that went into the others compared to APR IMO

p.s.
From first hand experience with APR inter-cooler , I went down the 1/4 mile 3 times back to back no cool off time at all and the car ran exact same trap speed even thou it was consistly slow








but that another issue that being taken car of, then back to the track .


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rracerguy717* »_ 
First off , the other companies inter-cooler kits MAY work well but what separates APR from the rest is.
1) stock factory location which will not effect a already poor A/C system.
2) physical size is HUGH compared to rest and yes size DOES MATTER because it can dissipate heat faster.Why do you think VAG built so big of a factory inter-cooler in the first place ?? and the factory cooler works pretty decent ,compared to a small side mount that was used in previous 1.8T
3) stock location is not going to effect water temps 
4) The stealth location will not throw any red flags up from law enforcement and DMV when you need to go for inspection in states like CA.
To sum it up the rest of the companies im sure will work fine but then you have to ask your self given the little price difference less compared to APR kit why are the others charging so much?? ,because it doesn't look like there was alot of development cost that went into the others compared to APR IMO

p.s.
From first hand experience with APR inter-cooler , I went down the 1/4 mile 3 times back to back no cool off time at all and the car ran exact same trap speed even thou it was consistly slow








but that another issue that being taken car of, then back to the track .


Would it be possible to log some external vs intake temps for us.
I'm planning to get the IC when i manage to find the $$


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (GolfRS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GolfRS* »_
Would it be possible to log some external vs intake temps for us.
I'm planning to get the IC when i manage to find the $$









That's out plan with the Stock, Forge, APR, and Eurojet.
Mark, buy the APR IC already so we can test this ish out all together!


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (GolfRS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GolfRS* »_
Would it be possible to log some external vs intake temps for us.
I'm planning to get the IC when i manage to find the $$








 
NP, when i get the car back ill do some logging







Bob.G


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rracerguy717* »_ 
From first hand experience with APR inter-cooler , I went down the 1/4 mile 3 times back to back no cool off time at all and the car ran exact same trap speed even thou it was consistly slow








but that another issue that being taken car of, then back to the track .


i hot-lapped it about 4 times before i took my frist break at Sho N Go and I trapped consistently for all 4 runs with 1/2 amph of each other.....and i have a stock IC right now.

_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_
That's out plan with the Stock, Forge, APR, and Eurojet.
Mark, buy the APR IC already so we can test this ish out all together!

dude i know, i am working on my audio setup right now and JL hasnt gone down in price hehe.....and i just got the APR pump too. i.e my rice allowance is depleted for the month of august lol


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*

That is total BS. Everyone knows that the best place for the intercooler is the very front not sandwiched in between two radiators.


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_That is total BS. Everyone knows that the best place for the intercooler is the very front not sandwiched in between two radiators.

have u seen the size of the apr intercooler? you cannot fit all that in the front bumper. you are calling BS, did you test it, i doubt it. trust me if it was the "best" APR woulda put it there like they have been for years with their 1.8t fmic kits. n00b


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (prodigymb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *prodigymb* »_
have u seen the size of the apr intercooler? you cannot fit all that in the front bumper. you are calling BS, did you test it, i doubt it. trust me if it was the "best" APR woulda put it there like they have been for years with their 1.8t fmic kits. n00b


A consideration of the design was the ability of the intercooler to handle high hp applications. There simply is not enough room for a core large enough for our future plans behind the bumper. The Stage 3 and 3+ work beautifully with this intercooler as well as do the ko3 and ko4.
The oem radiator is designed for airflow from the ic and coolant temps are showing slightly lower with the APR IC in place.
The oem ac condensor was not designed for airflow after an ic.
The testing speaks for itself and thus far every installation is yeilding excellent results.
The only downside is no r1cer bling to announce that you have turbo but that's not typically what German car enthusiasts are about anyways.


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
The only downside is no r1cer bling to announce that you have turbo but that's not typically what German car enthusiasts are about anyways.


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
The only downside is no r1cer bling to announce that you have turbo but that's not typically what German car enthusiasts are about anyways.


http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Yep...Thats why this is gonna be my choice also....Now i've just gotta find the $$$


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
The only downside is no r1cer bling to announce that you have turbo but that's not typically what German car enthusiasts are about anyways.



Just sell us a silver radiator.


----------



## crazywayne311 (Jan 29, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_I dont really see any bashing, and who cares about little smack talk. Who wouldnt want to justify their purchase!?!
Just an FIY. I have the Forge, My buddy is getting the APR, and another person we know has the Eurojet. Our plan is to test all three under the exact same circumstances to see which shows the least heatsoak over stock. Not sure when we'll get around to it, but it should be very interesting to see!

just to let you know, these tests you are talkin about would still be considered inconclusive UNLESS all 3 of you have the exact same programming and mods. which by that i mean same exhaust system and same flash...you see. 
but either way. who cares. i'm happy with forge. and yes, apr makes great parts so...


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_That is total BS. Everyone knows that the best place for the intercooler is the very front not sandwiched in between two radiators.
 
If your calling BS where ALL your ( before and after ) data to support that BS statement ?.







Bob.G

1) IAT
2) oil temps
3) water temps
4) total timing logs
5) timing correction 
6) air conditioning performance 

Remember the superior intercooler is one that gives the best engine performance, WITHOUT compromising the performance or life span of other hardware components


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (crazywayne311)*


_Quote, originally posted by *crazywayne311* »_
just to let you know, these tests you are talkin about would still be considered inconclusive UNLESS all 3 of you have the exact same programming and mods. which by that i mean same exhaust system and same flash...you see. 
but either way. who cares. i'm happy with forge. and yes, apr makes great parts so...

how do you figure our tests will be inconclusive? my car will have an identical setup to Arins other than the intercooler he has Forge and i will hvae hte Apr. same year, same exhaust, same chip..


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (prodigymb)*

Plus we will be measuring starting temps and then final temps after the same number of runs. If the results show one going ****ing nutty hot and the other really cool, then we know one works better than the other. If the results show pretty much the same before and after changes, then it will show they are almost even.


----------



## GolfRS (Feb 4, 2006)

*Re: (prodigymb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *prodigymb* »_
how do you figure our tests will be inconclusive? my car will have an identical setup to Arins other than the intercooler he has Forge and i will hvae hte Apr. same year, same exhaust, same chip..

Hurry up then !!!


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (GolfRS)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GolfRS* »_
Hurry up then !!!

mani wish i had the money, like i said i just duped a good amount into audi and i got the apr fuel pump too = broke status lol. i think keith should give me one for testing purposes


----------



## sasha18T (Aug 12, 2002)

*Re: (prodigymb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *prodigymb* »_
mani wish i had the money, like i said i just duped a good amount into audi and i got the apr fuel pump too = broke status lol. i think keith should give me one for testing purposes









Let me know how the pump works out...You plan to see gains with stock turbo?


----------



## brandon0221 (Mar 7, 2007)

*Re: (sasha18T)*

I cant wait to get mine I already ordered it but just waiting for the DSG hoses to be completed.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: ([email protected])*

It's kind of funny if you look through many of the posts on the 2.0FSI forum and you will notice that the only company that comes into these forums and tries to make all the ther companies products look bad is APR! I wonder why they are always trying to put down all products except for theirs? Interesting!


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_It's kind of funny if you look through many of the posts on the 2.0FSI forum and you will notice that the only company that comes into these forums and tries to make all the ther companies products look bad is APR! I wonder why they are always trying to put down all products except for theirs? Interesting!


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (syntrix)*

I am sorry I have absolutely no idea what that straight line means in your post?


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (sasha18T)*


_Quote, originally posted by *sasha18T* »_
Let me know how the pump works out...You plan to see gains with stock turbo?

well yes i am planning to see the claimed 25hp and 35 torque. once i get everything setup and the area cools down a bit i will redyno it


----------



## crazywayne311 (Jan 29, 2006)

*Re: (prodigymb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *prodigymb* »_
how do you figure our tests will be inconclusive? my car will have an identical setup to Arins other than the intercooler he has Forge and i will hvae hte Apr. same year, same exhaust, same chip..

ok, first of all, dont hate...what are the odds of someone else, in your area, who you're friends with, to have the same mods as you. so my bad. i think you guys should do this asap. i mean, what are the odds?!


----------



## majid (Sep 29, 2006)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Also, the way that a truely successfull company markets and sells its product is by describing the features and benefits instead of bashing all the other companies that make similar products. 

#1 APR takes more bashing than any other company I've seen on here.
#2 Isn't there a difference between bashing and describing the differences between products. How do you get somebody to buy something that is twice as much as another without comparison? Other than the fact that APR for the most part just flat out makes the best product.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (majid)*

The reason APR takes more bashing then anyother company is because they are always talking crap on everyone else products! Say no to APR!


----------



## Spongebobnopants (Apr 25, 2007)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_It's kind of funny if you look through many of the posts on the 2.0FSI forum and you will notice that the only company that comes into these forums and tries to make all the ther companies products look bad is APR! I wonder why they are always trying to put down all products except for theirs? Interesting!

Are you an APR hater or just a Forge lover? Post your data to show your point or just move on.
VAG-UP or SHUT-UP as I always say.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_The reason APR takes more bashing then anyother company is because they are always talking crap on everyone else products! Say no to APR!

Post examples.


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (Spongebobnopants)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Spongebobnopants* »_
Are you an APR hater or just a Forge lover? Post your data to show your point or just move on.
VAG-UP or SHUT-UP as I always say.









this comes from the other thread

_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_I know for a fact that the Forge Motorsport Twintercooler is the most efficient intercooler! Their is a reason that Forge Motorsport is one of the most trusted names in the business. Also they stand behind their products! Say no to APR!

the post police got ahold of my other rant... oh wells. The idea behind Sales is to sell more than your competitor. that = more money. if you can make your product look better than thats the idea... yes? 

_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_That is total BS. Everyone knows that the best place for the intercooler is the very front not sandwiched in between two radiators.

then why did you choose to keep your existing intercooler which is sandwiched between two "radiators" ?


_Modified by YoungMedic at 6:29 PM 8-12-2007_


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (Spongebobnopants)*

I do not hate APR at all I just do not like their marketing and sales tactics! I have both APR and Forge parts on my car!


----------



## Issam Abed (Feb 12, 2004)

*Re: (maitino)*

Wow Keith...tough crowd









_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_I have both APR and Forge parts on my car!









Until you have purchased both products by both companies and then done the following:
* installed
* dynoed
* posted said dyno comparisons
Then your opinion is nothing but biased.APR builds quality parts and as time has shown,there 1.8T kits truly stood the test of time as they sacrificed balls out performance for reliability and durability.
So as everyone has stated above,either produce the data showing why APR tactics are inferior or simply can it.


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_That is total BS. Everyone knows that the best place for the intercooler is the very front not sandwiched in between two radiators.

When moving more air than your tiny hairdryer of a turbo does, using a setup like Forge's becomes completely asinine. APR's larger, single intercooler will easily outflow the two, smaller, more restrictive IC's that Forge uses. Have you even considered this?
I'd be much happier with a single intercooler with good flow, than two small, restrictive side mounts that likely don't even cool as well as APR's FMIC does.
APR's products have far better rep than Forge's stuff.


----------



## Rub-ISH (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: (TallaiMan)*

LAME...Why does this forum suck so hard. Its a constant pissing contest, even worse than the audizine B6 A4 forum. Motor forums should be more useful than this








Intercoolers don't add horsepower they retain what you already had. Some are slightly more effective than others, and at best you are getting back 1-2 HP is that really going to justify more or less money. Do what you want to on your own budget go for broke or go for budget. In the end any intercooler will help keep your boost cool. I just dont understand why these things start to consume peoples ego's, you like a company and how they do business then stick with them and enjoy the outcome of your mods. I like data being gathered and analyzed collectively, I also like the competion in this new market of 2.0t fsi motors. I am just tired of the rhetoric of pumping up one companies market over another. In the end you are left in your own driveway or parking spot with a car that you have to drive and pay back the bank for. 
Sorry for the sudo rant. Some of these posts don't need to progress as far as they do IMO 


_Modified by Rub-ISH at 2:40 AM 8-13-2007_


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (Rub-ISH)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Rub-ISH* »_LAME...Why does this forum suck so hard. Its a constant pissing contest, even worse than the audizine B6 A4 forum. Motor forums should be more useful than this









I wasn't pissing on anyone. I was discussing the importance of flow...


----------



## TypeR #126 (May 10, 2006)

*Re: (TallaiMan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TallaiMan* »_
When moving more air than your tiny hairdryer of a turbo does, using a setup like Forge's becomes completely asinine. APR's larger, single intercooler will easily outflow the two, smaller, more restrictive IC's that Forge uses. Have you even considered this?
I'd be much happier with a single intercooler with good flow, than two small, restrictive side mounts that likely don't even cool as well as APR's FMIC does.
APR's products have far better rep than Forge's stuff.

Are you familiar with the Forge and APR products for this application? I'm not sure why you would bring up small side mounts in this discussion? 
The rest is a lot of arm chair engineering. Forge ended up with their design after testing both single and multi-core solutions. To say that their setup is "asinine" is both reactionary and without basis in fact.
I personally think both the APR and Forge products are quite nice pieces and more than likely perform very closely to each other. It's entirely possible to achieve similar goals through separate means.
I don't understand the mentality I see quite often on the Vortex that their can only be one product of a certain type that has any worth.


----------



## littleredwagen (May 31, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected]APR)*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
The only downside is no r1cer bling to announce that you have turbo but that's not typically what German car enthusiasts are about anyways.

that is the best feature, with my mkiv every idiot with a civic wanted to race me


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

Keith,
Can you supply the pressure loss across your IC. Thanks.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (TypeR #126)*

Thanks for backing me up brother I feel like everyone in hear has been brain washed by Keith and APR!


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (maitino)*

I am running a EJ with an A/W spray so I can not tell you that the EJ IC alone is superior but I have gotten back some HP. I am going on the rollers on Wed. at AWE so we will see what the engine is putting to the wheels. I live very close to Bill Schimmel and will be installing an Air/Water IC as soon as he has one and funds allow. He too has questioned the pressure drop of some of the ICs out there.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Thanks for backing me up brother I feel like everyone in hear has been brain washed by Keith and APR!

How did he back you up?


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (TypeR #126)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TypeR #126* »_
Are you familiar with the Forge and APR products for this application? I'm not sure why you would bring up small side mounts in this discussion?

Grrr... I saw twincooler and assumed it was a crappy dual SMIC setup, as most "twincoolers" before were.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

I have been thinking about installing an air to water intercooler on my GTI as well, but I heard these are only for Drag racing applications, is that true?


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_I have been thinking about installing an air to water intercooler on my GTI as well, but I heard these are only for Drag racing applications, is that true?

Here is a quote to answer your question:

_Quote, originally posted by *fast_a2_20v* »_It is thermodynamic fact that the water / air intercooler is less efficient then an air to air, given a long enough drive / time where the mass of the cooling liquid comes up to full operating tempurature- above ambient by nature.
The only thing its good for is tight situations or drag racing / dyno use. 
*PS* or marine applications where there is unlimited supply of cool water. Then its f'in fabulous.


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_I have been thinking about installing an air to water intercooler on my GTI as well, but I heard these are only for Drag racing applications, is that true?

no there are factory air/water "aftercoolers" used on forced induction vehicles today. Not just for "drag racing".


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_It's kind of funny if you look through many of the posts on the 2.0FSI forum and you will notice that the only company that comes into these forums and tries to make all the ther companies products look bad is APR! I wonder why they are always trying to put down all products except for theirs? Interesting!

I don't say other companies products suck or anything like that which would be considered bashing.
I do and I will continue to always challenge other companies products and the philosophy for which they were designed.
Something that imo had been an issue in regards to APR and how our products were viewed previously was that all products were equal but APR was just more expensive.
We have disproven this to many, many people through their personal experiences but then how do you relay this to people who are new?
I ask questions and provide our opinion. I am always open to the same from any competitor.
This sometimes becomes confusing due to my interaction with one other company that we have a quite disappointing history with and are in a position to provide information in regards to their personal morals and business tactics as well as detailed knowledge of their operations.
Its also possible to determine engineering philosophies and evaulate the performance of a product through datalogging and such and we are experts at interpreting logs so I provide opinions when asked and sometimes offer them unsolicited.
There is a feeling of comfort in the USA and some other countries that because a company makes it and it is for sale, it must be a good product.
This is unfortunately not the case in the aftermarket because there is zero regulation. Other industries follow government regulations, the FDA, ATF, FAA, DOT, etc as well as independant companies such as Consumer Reports, J.D. Power, etc.
In the big scheme of the world the aftermarket truly is evolving from the wild west into a place where there is a little bit of consumer protection, SEMA has a hand in a small part, but for the most part as things are today, who is there to help someone from a making a financial mistake?
People who know me will agree and I can tell you I started as an enthusiast myself, became an APR distributor and then an employee. I consider myself the bastion of all that is fair and correct and customer service to me means 100% satisfaction even beyond what some consumers believe to be happiness. For example, chip A feels great, I am happy. What about your turbo? Is it happy too?
The layman assumes that there is warranty or verified operation implied since they are selling something. This is not always the case and those that can't provide these guarantee's through experience and sound engineering principles deserve to get asked the hard questions.
If only the most of you could see what I see from where I sit and where I go.
I do this 70 hours a week for you guys. I eat, live and breath these cars, this marketplace and these products. I do not "get off" on e-fighting. I enjoy my job, no secrect there, but at the end of the day, its all about the customer. That's why good business' exist and that is APR's philosophy 100%. We need to make a living sure, just like everyone else, but we get do get do it doing something we love.










_Modified by [email protected] at 2:53 PM 8-13-2007_


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_Keith,
Can you supply the pressure loss across your IC. Thanks.

Third time this has been asked for. PLEASE can we see the pressure loss data and flow digrams. Thanks.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*

Do you happen to know where these air to liquid intercoolers are available for sale? Are they more efficient than air to air intercoolers?


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (maitino)*

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


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Are they more efficient than air to air intercoolers?

This has been answered above. L2Read.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*


_Quote, originally posted by *YoungMedic* »_
no there are factory air/water "aftercoolers" used on forced induction vehicles today. Not just for "drag racing".


Yup. I'm pretty sure my buddy has one on his 04 Cobra.


_Modified by Arin at 8:15 AM 8-14-2007_


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

Ford Cobra and GT, the M-B SLR, Cadillac STS-V/XLR-V, Jag XKR/XJR and Bugatti Veyron are just a few OEM cars that feature A/W intercoolers.
As an aside, I'm not sure where the term "aftercooler" came from, as intercooler always seemed to better describe the same process of cooling the intake charge *between* the forced-induction power adder and the intake manifold of the engine.


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (bripab007)*

I beleive Corky Bell used the term "aftercooler" in his book Maximum Boost, as well as other noted literature on the subject. The correct term for our cars and others that cool the charge after the heat source is Aftercooler, but has come to be known as an all encompasssing "Intercooler" plus it rolls off the tongue a little better















does the lightning also have the a/w cooler under the blower? i thought it did but wasnt sure.


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

Well, I would say "intercooler" is no less correct...it certainly still conveys the idea that something is being cooled between/after the heat source on its way to the head.
I'm sure the Lightning also had an A/W intercooler, yes.


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (bripab007)*

Stilll, it's less efficient than air to air once the water heats up.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_
Third time this has been asked for. PLEASE can we see the pressure loss data and flow digrams. Thanks.

x4


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_
x4

working on it!


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (TallaiMan)*

When I went to the website listed below it stated that the air to water intercoolers are more efficient than air to air intercoolers? I am not saying that they are but instead just listing the facts in regards to what the website said. I am actually going to look into these air to liquid intercoolers and see if I can find one that fits my car!
http://www.spturbo.com


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
working on it!

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


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

A/W intercoolers are more efficient IF you can keep the water temps down...typically, that involves having a much larger reservoir and pump than one might imagine.


----------



## rracerguy717 (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: (bripab007)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bripab007* »_A/W intercoolers are more efficient IF you can keep the water temps down...typically, that involves having a much larger reservoir and pump than one might imagine.
 
and the most important part of a A/W inter-cooler is efficient * heat exchanger * . But it just gets too expensive and complicated for no reason , the A/A does a great job and its simple .
I can tell you WONT see heat soak with the APR inter-cooler under any and all conditions. When i get my car back ill do some IAT logs and timing pull , total timing logs .







Bob.G


----------



## magilson (Apr 18, 2005)

*Re: (rracerguy717)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rracerguy717* »_ I can tell you WONT see heat soak with the APR inter-cooler under any and all conditions. When i get my car back ill do some IAT logs and timing pull , total timing logs .







Bob.G

Agreed. I've seen the logs of several people who've actually experienced lower coolant temps as a result of the APR Intercooler's efficient ambient air flow. This is actually opposite of what I expected based on the intercoolers end tanks protruding over the OEM radiator and it's thickness.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

when are we going to see the data on pressure loss. Been weeks now.


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_when are we going to see the data on pressure loss. Been weeks now.

I'd sure like to see pressure loss on all the IC's available since you're being so insistent on data solely from APR.








Dave


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (crew219)*


_Quote, originally posted by *crew219* »_
I'd sure like to see pressure loss on all the IC's available since you're being so insistent on data solely from APR.








Dave

Oh the drama!


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_when are we going to see the data on pressure loss. Been weeks now.

bear with me guys. I don't have a flowbench in house so I am looking at companies that provide this service. I hope to have some more info soon. I am currently looking at who I would like to perform the testing. The data needs to be as clean as possible. Its viable to install pressure transducers in the vehicle itself and measure pressure drop across the entire boost system but we want to show what the intercooler itself creates.
Does anyone know how other companies that offer claims in regards to their pressure drop collect the data? It would also be nice to be able to compare to them but the process has to be identical.


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
bear with me guys. I don't have a flowbench in house so I am looking at companies that provide this service. I hope to have some more info soon. I am currently looking at who I would like to perform the testing. The data needs to be as clean as possible. Its viable to install pressure transducers in the vehicle itself and measure pressure drop across the entire boost system but we want to show what the intercooler itself creates.
Does anyone know how other companies that offer claims in regards to their pressure drop collect the data? It would also be nice to be able to compare to them but the process has to be identical.

What would be nice is if an independant person did the tests on the most popular IC solutions availible for the MkV hmm....


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
Does anyone know how other companies that offer claims in regards to their pressure drop collect the data? It would also be nice to be able to compare to them but the process has to be identical.

magnahelic
You go grap google now, lol.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (syntrix)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syntrix* »_
magnahelic
You go grap google now, lol.



lol, we have gauges and transducers, I want the test done in an enclosure at a range of cfm's.








I have parts, I am looking for a service.
My life would be so much easier if I would click the spell check button!


_Modified by [email protected] at 9:13 AM 8-15-2007_


----------



## Kid Hobo (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_








I have parts, I am looking for a service.

ISO 17025 & NIST Traceable Calibrations
http://www.graftel.com
tell them Sean sent you. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (Kid Hobo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Kid Hobo* »_
ISO 17025 & NIST Traceable Calibrations
http://www.graftel.com
tell them Sean sent you. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

emailed Jim ?Grover?
thanks for the lead!


----------



## Kid Hobo (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Actually it's Glover...


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (Kid Hobo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Kid Hobo* »_Actually it's Glover...









relative?


----------



## Kid Hobo (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Nope, he runs the cal lab, and I run the seperate rubber company. We share a common owner of both companies. They happen to also do nuclear cals, and through that we get to use their QA program to certify our rubber for nuclear grade applications. So there's mutual benefits. 
I just realized, Jim's going to be out of the office for 2 weeks on vacation. check your PM with updated contact info.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (Kid Hobo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Kid Hobo* »_Nope, he runs the cal lab, and I run the seperate rubber company. We share a common owner of both companies. They happen to also do nuclear cals, and through that we get to use their QA program to certify our rubber for nuclear grade applications. So there's mutual benefits. 
I just realized, Jim's going to be out of the office for 2 weeks on vacation. check your PM with updated contact info.









got it! thank you! rubber you say?


----------



## NoRegrets78 (Jul 6, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_
got it! thank you! rubber you say?

I can see the wheels in Keiths head spinning from here!


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (NoRegrets78)*

heh


----------



## magilson (Apr 18, 2005)

*Re: (syntrix)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syntrix* »_
magnahelic
You go grap google now, lol.


You might have tried that yourself. They make equipment (good stuff, too) but they won't run tests for the average company let alone an aftermarket autoparts manufacturer.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: ([email protected])*

give the BT guys a call, Schimmel or Kinetics come to mind. I think they can help you out.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

Any word on the pressure loss across the IC yet??


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_Any word on the pressure loss across the IC yet??

x6
AS you can tell I really want to see these numbers.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

I find it a little suspicious that we have all asked for the pressure loss data several times over a period of 7 days now and we still cant seem to receive the requested info!







Keith where are yo!


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

Do you guys find it a little suspicious that Keith has been asked for the pressure loss data in regard to the APR intercooler about 12 times and he never can come up with the requested info! When Forge Motorsport came out with the Twintercooler intercooler thay had all the dyno information/pressure loss information which was confirmed by a seperate independent dyno company! Keith I know you can hear me!


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Do you guys find it a little suspicious that Keith has been asked for the pressure loss data in regard to the APR intercooler about 12 times and he never can come up with the requested info! When Forge Motorsport came out with the Twintercooler intercooler thay had all the dyno information/pressure loss information which was confirmed by a seperate independent dyno company! Keith I know you can hear me!









Where is the forge twintercooler pressure loss information? I have this and would like to see it.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_
Where is the forge twintercooler pressure loss information? I have this and would like to see it. 

If I remember correctly, from last summer when I asked, it was between 1 and 2 psi. Not bad but not outstanding.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_
If I remember correctly, from last summer when I asked, it was between 1 and 2 psi. Not bad but not outstanding.

I show on my gauge and log around 21-22psi. Are you sayin that w/o my forge intercooler I would be seeing 23-24 psi? Seems a little high.


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_
I show on my gauge and log around 21-22psi. Are you sayin that w/o my forge intercooler I would be seeing 23-24 psi? Seems a little high.

No, because your gauge is most likely tapped post intercooler and post throttle body.
If you car requests 22, it tries to make 22 at the map sensor, or there about, or within ME9 logic. If you actually hooked up a second boost gauge BEFORE the IC, you would see a higher reading.
A magnahelic gauge can read the differential between these two readings, which is why I suggested using one. That is the differential that people are asking for.... the difference between pre-IC and post IC.


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (Arin)*

Before I put my Forge intercooler on my GTI I was running at 22PSI according to my boost gauge and now that the intercooler is installed I am running at 21PSI. So I think that means the pressure loss of the intercooler is 1PSI. Right?


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (syntrix)*

How can pressure between two different spots on a tube be different? In essence, the IC is just a big tube.


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_How can pressure between two different spots on a tube be different? In essence, the IC is just a big tube.

It's not just a tube. Hence the pressure difference.
If your ecu specs 22psi, and you make that in the manifold, you could be making 24psi at the turbo outlet.
If pressure drop across the IC is greater, then the turbo gets even more out of it's efficiency range, as it then has to output more, to make the same requested manifold psi.
That's about as generalized as it gets, you could substitute "manifold" with "map sensor" but that might confuse everyone more.


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

Just as if, instead of an intercooler, you had a 300ft long charge pipe that twisted around the engine bay and car before making its way into the throttlebody, there would be a pressure drop.


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (bripab007)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bripab007* »_Just as if, instead of an intercooler, you had a 300ft long charge pipe that twisted around the engine bay and car before making its way into the throttlebody, there would be a pressure drop.

Much simpler explanation http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (syntrix)*

I understand that the IC is not just a tube, but if you were to pressurize it, how could there be more pressure on one end than the other? I'm probably missing something here.


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_I understand that the IC is not just a tube, but if you were to pressurize it, how could there be more pressure on one end than the other? I'm probably missing something here.









You are missing flow.


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (syntrix)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syntrix* »_
You are missing flow. 

Among a few other factors.
But yes, I find it hilarious that someone thinks that flowing air will reach a pressure equilibrium.


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

Take two straws and put a chamber like a IC between the two and cap one end. Now blow into it and remember how hard you had to blow to create a certain pressure at the capped end.
Now do it again without the chamber.
Notice you didn't have to blow as hard.
I know no one is going to do it but, this might help you conceptualize it.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (iThread)*

That does make sense. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (TallaiMan)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TallaiMan* »_But yes, I find it hilarious that someone thinks that flowing air will reach a pressure equilibrium.

Hey man, you can't learn unless someone teaches you. No need to be a dick. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## TallaiMan (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_Hey man, you can't learn unless someone teaches you. No need to be a dick. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif 

Sorry, I didn't mean that to be directed at you. I go to school with people who want to be physicists and engineers who make that mistake many times. I agree that the forums are for learning.


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (maitino)*


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_I find it a little suspicious that we have all asked for the pressure loss data several times over a period of 7 days now and we still cant seem to receive the requested info!







Keith where are yo!


_Quote, originally posted by *maitino* »_Do you guys find it a little suspicious that Keith has been asked for the pressure loss data in regard to the APR intercooler about 12 times and he never can come up with the requested info! When Forge Motorsport came out with the Twintercooler intercooler thay had all the dyno information/pressure loss information which was confirmed by a seperate independent dyno company! Keith I know you can hear me!










Can you imagine the crap that one person has to sift through each day being in a similar position?
Why dont you buy one and come up with the data? The clocks ticking.. ill pester you every day for it too... see how long it takes. Your gonna need


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re:  (YoungMedic)*


_Quote, originally posted by *YoungMedic* »_

Can you imagine the crap that one person has to sift through each day being in a similar position?
Why dont you buy one and come up with the data? The clocks ticking.. ill pester you every day for it too... see how long it takes. Your gonna need









And posts like these help? 
Why can apr post "testing results" and not simple, but essential, "testing data"?
I think Keith previously stated they had the magnahelic differential gauges already, so they just need to hook up and go go go!!!


----------



## maitino (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*

Calm down Mr. big bad fireman!


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (syntrix)*


_Quote, originally posted by *syntrix* »_
And posts like these help? 
Why can apr post "testing results" and not simple, but essential, "testing data"?
I think Keith previously stated they had the magnahelic differential gauges already, so they just need to hook up and go go go!!!

im just tellin homeboy to settle down throwing conspiracy theories around for nothin... he's wadded up about somethin thats for sure.


----------



## five0vw (May 21, 2004)

*Re: (355890)*

finally saw one of these up close @ ICS and boy am I excited.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (five0vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *five0vw* »_finally saw one of these up close @ ICS and boy am I excited. 

Don't get too excited until some pressure loss data is revealed.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

goin2Fast, do you have the tools to the stock setup? If so, could you?


----------



## ItalianGLI (Nov 14, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_
Don't get too excited until some pressure loss data is revealed.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_goin2Fast, do you have the tools to the stock setup? If so, could you?

??
IM me.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

Sorry, I edited my post and ****ed it up.
I meant to say "Do you have the tools to test the pressure loss on the stock setup?"


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*

I do not have any mag gauges that I can get my hands on. I would think that a dealer could answer this question.


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_I do not have any mag gauges that I can get my hands on. I would think that a dealer could answer this question.

And by dealer, I'm 100% sure you meant a vendor, such as APR. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (syntrix)*

True,
I am going to make a call and get some stock info. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## ItalianGLI (Nov 14, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_True,
I am going to make a call and get some stock info. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

So wait.....you are knocking APR about saying to someone that they will see pressure loss with their intercooler, but decide to get your facts from the same company?


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

What??
I am not knocking anyone, just asking for data.


----------



## prodigymb (Mar 9, 2004)

*Re: (ItalianGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ItalianGLI* »_
So wait.....you are knocking APR about saying to someone that they will see pressure loss with their intercooler, but decide to get your facts from the same company?









did you see him say that he was going to call *APR*, cuz i didnt.
L2R http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (prodigymb)*


_Quote, originally posted by *prodigymb* »_
did you see him say that he was going to call APR, *cuz i didnt*.
L2R http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Neither did I. I just saw a statement that implied that he was seeking data/truth.
Nothing wrong with that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (syntrix)*

Fanboyz are killing the MKV scene. IMO


----------



## ItalianGLI (Nov 14, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

Ok, ok, my mistake then. Since he replied to syntrix post, which he stated that APR would be someone that would have that info, I just assumed that's who he was calling.
And i'm not a fanboy of anything either, I just buy whatever works the best


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (ItalianGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ItalianGLI* »_And i'm not a fanboy of anything either, I just buy whatever works the best









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


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: (ItalianGLI)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ItalianGLI* »_Ok, ok, my mistake then. Since he replied to syntrix post, which he stated that APR would be someone that would have that info, I just assumed that's who he was calling.
And i'm not a fanboy of anything either, I just buy whatever works the best









I didn't state that specifically







See iThread's picture.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (syntrix)*

So Keith,
Any luck on getting us the requested data?


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

I will be posting Mfg claimed pressure loss data for EuroJet and Forge as soo as I can get it.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

Just got this info from a reliable source;
"P drop on the B7 A4 system (from turbo outlet to throttle body) to be about 2.5 psi peak on a chipped car." He has not tested the MKV but feels that it would be a bit less. This is on stock IC.


----------



## five0vw (May 21, 2004)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_
Don't get too excited until some pressure loss data is revealed.

pressure loss is not a major concern of mine as long as that it isnt significant. The IC would have to be manufactured very in-efficiently in order to suffer sufficient pressure loss. the main benefit of the IC is to keep temps lower as revs rise. The BT kit produces more of its power @ a higher RPM range. Losing a few psi in the initial spike where there is less power anyways is not a concern of mine. This is my take of course. Ic why someone with a stock Turbo would be concerned with pressure loss.


----------



## five0vw (May 21, 2004)

*Re: (five0vw)*

lets see some more useful info. Keep it coming guys. Wheres my Keith. He has been swamped lately. Poor guy.


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

By the very nature of its design and intended purpose, an intercooler has to have at least SOME pressure loss, in that it's purpose is to slow down air molecules enough so they shed heat from rubbing against the metal fins (can't remember what they're called..."turbolators?") of the core.
Given the same engine/turbo and two different intercoolers...the one that has a lower pressure loss will typically have a lower efficiency/intake air temperature delta, while the one with the higher pressure loss will be the more efficient/higher temp delta drop.
Generally speaking...


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (bripab007)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bripab007* »_By the very nature of its design and intended purpose, an intercooler has to have at least SOME pressure loss, in that it's purpose is to slow down air molecules enough so they shed heat from rubbing against the metal fins (can't remember what they're called..."turbolators?") of the core.

True, but the size of the IC, location of baffles, amount of turbulence in the end tanks and amount of piping will play a greater roll in the delta P.

_Quote, originally posted by *bripab007* »_Given the same engine/turbo and two different intercoolers...the one that has a lower pressure loss will typically have a lower efficiency/intake air temperature delta, while the one with the higher pressure loss will be the more efficient/higher temp delta drop.
...

In theory this makes sense but not in the real world as the flow of air is not through a straight path. there is give and take but the benefits of a larger turbo are negated when the pressure loss becomes greater. What we need to see are numbers. A 1 or 2 psi loss across the IC is going to be ok for street, track driving (not for the 1/4 mile but a 3-5psi loss would not be acceptable.
We need hard Data gentlemen.


_Modified by goin2fast at 10:44 AM 8-22-2007_


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_True, but the size of the IC, location of baffles, amount of turbulence in the end tanks and amount of piping will play a greater roll in the delta P.


Perhaps I should've been more specific than "same engine/turbo," but my example was meant to explore the differences in intercooler cores...that is to say...both using identical piping and similar end-tank construction. In this case, I was specifically thinking about the difference between vertical flow cores and horizontal flow cores; it is definitely the trend right now to go with horizontal flow cores, as they allow the charge air to come into connect with more turbolators, shedding more heat, at the expense of pressure loss. For street applications, the pressure loss is negligble, but on many high-power drag/road race cars, you'll see the use of very large, vertical flow cores.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (bripab007)*

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


----------



## five0vw (May 21, 2004)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

now we are getting somewhere.







where is the data!!! We need more car nerd-geek like ppl on here.


----------



## YoungMedic (Mar 22, 2006)

*Re: (five0vw)*


_Quote, originally posted by *five0vw* »_now we are getting somewhere.







where is the data!!! We need more car nerd-geek like ppl on here. 










mmmm numbers are fun!!


----------



## five0vw (May 21, 2004)

*Re: (YoungMedic)*

hahaha


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (five0vw)*

data please,................................................... buhler, buhler.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 14, 2005)

*Re: (goin2fast)*

The biggest delay in providing the data is that we have to decide how to present it. I have some pressure transducers on either side of the core while installed in the car with the previous IAT testing and what not we performed with the release.
The issue is that to truly understand the pressure drop associated with an i.c. you would want to see incremental steps at different cfm's.
Finding some who can test this for us is proving to be difficult.
I am working with the engineering dept. to make sense of some of the pd data we took and I hope to be able to at least post that data soon although its not really ideal as far as what data needs to be collected.


----------



## fastconti (Jul 25, 2007)

*Re: (bripab007) Heat exchange*

Although there is an inherent pressure loss in intercooler design, it is still better to have smaller pressure losses. Heat convection is based on the velocity of air and higher velocity results in greater heat convection to the intercooler material (fins and tubing). Pressure loss can be reduced through design in the plumbing and material finish. 
Larger intercoolers have greater temperature reduction because they have larger areas of conduction and convection, not because they slow the air down. Increased velocity in the intercooler can actually raise the amount of heat loss. Of course this is all constrained by the convection of heat on the outside of the intercooler.
The other consideration, time of heat exchange, also comes into play. The longer a fluid is in the heat exchanger, the greater the heat exchanged. However, once the temperature is reduced so that the difference is not very large, it becomes increasingly difficult to reduce that temperature difference. At some optimal point the value of pressure outweighs cooling of the charged air. 
Just my two cents. Hope it helps and sorry for being a little off topic.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (bripab007) Heat exchange (fastconti)*

Any Data yet? Going on 2 months.


----------



## zemun2 (Sep 2, 2004)

pressure loss?
crappy cores (tube and fin) will have no pressure loss, but they will not cool down charge air.
Good cores (bar and plate with high density fins) will have pressure drop but will cool down charge air.
What do you wanna have cool intake temps and some press drop or hot intake temps and no press drop?
if your answer is no press loss then you should source your FMIC from eBay.

I sell custom FMIC and one thing i can tell you is that bar and plate cores cost 3 times more then tube and fin.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (zemun2)*

I too know how good and bad ICs work. I am juat asking to see the delta across such a big core. There is pressure loss and then there is PRESSURE LOSS.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 26, 2001)

*Re: Pressure Drop Performance*

It's seems that there is some confusion about intercooler pressure loss and a lot of the basics of intercooler design. It is astonishing how few performance companies actually understand many of these basics. This is abundantly obvious to me by looking at some of the aweful designs out there. I see many more bad designs than good. The irony is that it is relatively straightforward to design a good setup.
I can take a quick look at an intercooler and know how it will perform to a pretty good degree of accuracy. Sound crazy? No it isn't. It isn't complicated although there are a few things that require a trained eye. I can tell by the basic layout and dimensioning if the core is going to be relatively efficient or inefficient or if the pressure drop is going to be low or high. I can also tell by the overall dimensions what the approximate airflow capability of the core is going to be. If you know the different construction techniques and are familiar with fin densities you can throw that into the equation as well. 
Then there is the end tank design- you could almost say that you have would have to try to screw up the end tank design but I see it happening again and again on 'performance' intercoolers. The last major factor for intercooler performance that is far too often overlooked but is a HUGE contributor to performance is positioning of the intercooler on the vehicle and ensuring that the vehicle ductwork supplies the intercooler core a high pressure supply of cooling air. Although I am familiar with all of this and using just this knowledge I can design an intercooler solution that performs exceptionally, we of course will sit down, run calculations, and review manufacturer data to make sure that our setup is as near optimal as possible to get that last few percent of performance.
I won't go into endtank designs right now. I also won't go into detail on intercooler core construction or fin configurations at this time except to say that the difference between tube/fin and bar/plate construction is exaggerated /erroneous. Some of the lightest, most thermally effective cores are of the 'less desirable' tube/fin construction. There are advantages/disadvantages to both manufacturing techniques. The core manufacturer is far more important than the style. Unfortunately there are a slew of crappy cores out there in both styles that should be avoided entirely. For the record, we use bar and plate on all of our current applications.
What I will talk about is pressure loss since that has come up several times in this thread:
First of all I will define intercooler pressure drop. The pressure drop is the change in pressure from the engine air inlet side of the intercooler to the engine air oulet side of the intercooler due to the air resistance across the intercooler. 
All intercoolers will have a pressure drop if there is flow through the core. This pressure drop increases roughly proportionally with the volumetric flow rate as the flow through the intercooler increases. Hence you cannot characterize an intercoolers pressure drop without referencing the volumetric flow rate. For instance, when the engine is off and there is no flow through the intercooler the pressure on either side of the intercooler is the same (atmospheric). In this condition, the pressure drop of the intercooler would be zero. (Not to be confused with intercooler pressure drop is a drop in the pressure of the air flowing through the intercooler due to the fact that the air has been cooled by the intercooler. This is governed by the ideal gas law and is outside the scope of this post.) 
The intercooler pressure drop is predominantly a function of the area of the intercooler charge flow end and the length of the charge flow (yes, there are some assumptions made here.) The charge flow ends are the sides of the intercooler core that the engine air flows in and out of. We are interested in the area of this side- take the width and multiply it by the height to get the area. The length of the charge flow is going to be the distance between the charge flow ends. This is the distance the engine air has to travel through the intercooler core. 
What you are about to read may be categorized by some as generalizations and sure there could be exceptions to these rules/points but these are good rules of thumb for intercooler design and some relevant points: (There are some assumptions, such as decent core material and appropriately spec'ed fin densities, decent endtank design, etc.):
1. A larger charge flow end will have less pressure drop than a smaller charge flow end.
2. A shorter charge flow length will have less pressure drop than a longer charge flow length.
3. It is wise to try to maximize the charge flow end and minimize the charge flow length as dictated by packaging contstraints while maintaining the efficiency of the core (i.e. You can't use a huge charge flow end and a 1" flow length as the efficiency will be crap- determining the relative dimensions of the core that maintain optimal efficiency is beyond the scope of this post.)
4. The most common mistake I see on 'performance' intercoolers is a charge flow area that is undersized. Sometimes the area is the same as stock or only moderately larger than stock. Sometimes the area is smaller than stock! Combine this with a long charge flow length and you have very high pressure drop. Bad!
5. Most modified cars, particularly those that are heavily modified, require a core that has significantly better pressure drop performance than the stock intercooler for optimal performance.
6. Many intercoolers in the performance market have similar or worse pressure drop performance than the stock intercooler.
7. You can have a big core that has high pressure drops and you can have a big core that has low pressure drops. See above.
And now as to how pressure drop relates to our MKV intercooler and a few other points:
1. Our intercooler will always have lower pressure drop than the factory intercooler. This is predominantly due to the fact that our intercooler charge flow area is ~2 times that of the stock intercooler while our charge flow length is similar.
2. Our intercooler has been designed to have a pressure drop low enough to allow exceptional performance at flow levels well beyond what even our stage 3 configuration is capable of.

3. We cannot provide you a representation of our intercooler's pressure drop performance solely using a single pressure drop number because it is impossible to characterize any intercooler's pressure drop performance with a single number. (Flow numbers must be included and for a full picture a curve of flow versus pressure.)
4. We have performed pressure drop analysis of our intercooler versus the stock intercooler and verified that our intercooler does indeed outperform the stock intercooler in terms of pressure drop. Unfortunately, we don't have a good way to present that data to Joe Public. We would have to re-perform the tests to have something presentable. We don't have unlimited time to do these sorts of things as this uses valuable engineering resources.
5. Any numbers that we did provide would be useless for comparison purposes as there is no competitive data to compare to.
6. We have already provided more useful technical data on our intercooler than anyone else has in this market has provided for an intercooler.
7. Lastly, I personally guarantee that our intercooler will outperform anything on the market.

Thanks and I hope that helps.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

Holly crap.......all that and still no numbers.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: (goin2fast)*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_Holly crap.......all that and still no numbers.

Ahhh Mister I don't read and comprehend.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: Pressure Drop Performance ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *goin2fast* »_Holly crap.......all that and still no numbers.

Ahhh Mister I don't read and comprehend.

_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_ Hence you cannot characterize an intercoolers pressure drop without referencing the volumetric flow rate. 



_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_ 
1. Our intercooler will always have lower pressure drop than the factory intercooler. This is predominantly due to the fact that our intercooler charge flow area is ~2 times that of the stock intercooler while our charge flow length is similar.



_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_ 
3. We cannot provide you a representation of our intercooler's pressure drop performance solely using a single pressure drop number because it is impossible to characterize any intercooler's pressure drop performance with a single number. (Flow numbers must be included and for a full picture a curve of flow versus pressure.)



_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_ 
4. We have performed pressure drop analysis of our intercooler versus the stock intercooler and verified that our intercooler does indeed outperform the stock intercooler in terms of pressure drop. Unfortunately, we don't have a good way to present that data to Joe Public. We would have to re-perform the tests to have something presentable. We don't have unlimited time to do these sorts of things as this uses valuable engineering resources.



_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_ 
5. Any numbers that we did provide would be useless for comparison purposes as there is no competitive data to compare to.


----------



## goin2fast (Mar 23, 2006)

*Re: (Arin)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Arin* »_
Ahhh Mister I don't read and comprehend.

I read and understand but I like numbers as they substantiate what is being spewed. I am a scientist I believe nothing if I do not see fact (numbers).


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: Pressure Drop Performance (Arin)*

THANKS ARIN for quoting that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
I also think an apr engineer (not vendor/sponsor) chimed in and said it was designed with the "bt" kits in mind.
It's odd that a kit would have less pressure loss than factory, but yet be good enough for a BT kit. 
That's unpossible!!!


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 26, 2001)

*Re: Pressure Drop Performance (syntrix)*

What is it that is not understood? If you have specific questions, Arin, let me know and I will help out.

_Quote, originally posted by *syntrix* »_THANKS ARIN for quoting that http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

Syntrix, if you are trying to imply that the quoted portions somehow contradict each other than you aren't comprehending what I said at all. I would suggest you spend more time mentally processing my post.

_Quote »_I also think an apr engineer (not vendor/sponsor) chimed in and said it was designed with the "bt" kits in mind.

Even if this was true, your point would be? It will work with many configurations.

_Quote »_It's odd that a kit would have less pressure loss than factory, but yet be good enough for a BT kit. 
That's unpossible!!!









Either you are being completely sarcastic or my entire post went right over your head.







Either way I see no point or relevant information in your post.


----------



## Arin (Jun 27, 2002)

*Re: Pressure Drop Performance ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_What is it that is not understood? If you have specific questions, Arin, let me know and I will help out.

I was just saying the other guy I quoted didn't comprehend what you said. I was calling goin2fast 'Mr. I_don't_read_and_comprehend'. Arguably the worst joke ever. Basically you said the pressure drop isnt just 1 number like many are expecting to see. Correct?


_Modified by Arin at 2:25 PM 9-16-2007_


----------

