Intercooler for TRD supercharger (3 Viewers)

[the shed guy]

[quote author=sleeoffroad link=board=2;threadid=1626;start=msg90237#msg90237 date=1074090271]
No, you should not stop the order. We still want them. I am back on the dark side now. See sig

[/quote]

OK.

 

[bwbski]

how much does a turbo for the 100 series v8 go for. thanks

 

[WolfpackTLC]

IMO an intercooler on a supercharged vehicle is a waste of money. On a turbocharged vehicle it would make sense however... My guess is that a water-air intercooler (commonly called "aftercooler") would actually heat the air up since most air coming in should only slightly be heated up by a supercharger

What?!?

Compressing air heats it up, no matter how it's being compressed... i.e. turbo or S/C. Lot's of factory vehicles that are supercharged come from the factory w/ I/C's. i.e. the Ford Lightning and the Mustang Cobra. Last I checked, water-air intercooler's were called water to air intercooler's, not aftercoolers. If the air is only SLIGHTLY heated up by S/C's, somebody should call those guys that run the 6000 + hp dragsters and tell them they're wasting their time w/ those $5k intercoolers.

Forgive the smartass nature of my post... I just can't believe that anyone would actually call an I/C useless.

Removing heat from an intake charge has two huge areas of merit. First, the reduction of temperature makes the intake charge denser. The increase in density is proportional to the change in temperature ( measured on the absolute scale.) Denser intake charges make more power. Second, but just as important, is the terrific benefit to the combustion process brought about by reduced temps in the intake charge. Detonation is reduced by any reduction in intake temps.

Bottom line? Your engine doesn't know the difference between pressurized intake air from an S/C or a turbo. Colder is denser. Denser is better. Period.

 

[WolfpackTLC]

Oh, and I forgot to mention that the S/C for an 80 unofficially draws an estimated 23 horsepower just to turn it.... So... any gains from an I/C, even if marginal, will result in an improved volumetric efficiency.

 

[Junk]

[quote author=sleeoffroad link=board=2;threadid=1626;start=msg90237#msg90237 date=1074090271]
I am back on the dark side now. See sig[/quote]

That's not the dark side Christo, it's the pink side, as in pink knickers only.

 

[mts]

An air/water intercooler for the TRD SC would not be too hard to build, but it would likely get expensive. You could replace the TRD crossover tube with a core unit from sparco (sp?). That unit could be plumbed into a fluid source, perhaps the coolant overflow tank (might be too small though) and then plumbed to a heat exchanger in front of the radiator. Use a small pump to keep the fluid circulating. I've worked with a similar system on a roots blower before. It worked okay.

Here's a link to a picture of a basic a/w intercooler like one you'd use for the TRD SC. It shows the intercooler core, heat exchanger and pump:
http://www.jacksonracing.com/pages/partsmiata_inf/awintercool_dtl.html

The beauty of the air/water IC is there should be very little pressure drop across the intercooler. Extremely important with a roots blower. With an air/air it's typically higher due to all the plumbing involved. Works well with a turbo, with a roots SC, not so much.

I use water injection instead of building a a/w intercooler mostly because of the simplicity and the cost. The water injection does what I need it to do, likely at 1/2 the cost of an a/w intercooler (even if I put it together myself). It's more simple and probably gets me 70% of the cooling of the charge an a/w would give me.....probably higher once the a/w intercooler got heatsoaked.

Mike