Jims5543 Intercooler.
12-15-2004, 08:48 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
I am toying with getting this sucker into production. I am having good success with it. My intake temps at the throttle body are within 1° of the intake temp before the turbo. It is supporting close to 400 RWHP great.
This is a great setup because it fits perfectly in between the side rails int he front of the car in front of the radiator. I used the Greddy piping on mine and was able to loose 5 feet of the greddy piping = less lag.
I have plans for the core and can get the core made for about $500-600 per.
I just need to find a source for the piping. Then figue out a way for the piping to work with different intake applications in an FC (i.e. 13b-RE swap etc..)
Suggestions, comments?
Just need to find a place to mass produce the piping once we have a protoype.
Jims5543 intercooler (bottom) Vs. Greddy
In car:
A pic from underneath from the turbo to the I/C
This is the run from the I/C to the elbow I had a mechanic open up the hole that the battery cooling duct ran through. (yes, the battery needs to be relocated for this I/C)
This is a great setup because it fits perfectly in between the side rails int he front of the car in front of the radiator. I used the Greddy piping on mine and was able to loose 5 feet of the greddy piping = less lag.
I have plans for the core and can get the core made for about $500-600 per.
I just need to find a source for the piping. Then figue out a way for the piping to work with different intake applications in an FC (i.e. 13b-RE swap etc..)
Suggestions, comments?
Just need to find a place to mass produce the piping once we have a protoype.
Jims5543 intercooler (bottom) Vs. Greddy
In car:
A pic from underneath from the turbo to the I/C
This is the run from the I/C to the elbow I had a mechanic open up the hole that the battery cooling duct ran through. (yes, the battery needs to be relocated for this I/C)
12-15-2004, 10:16 PM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
I could never understand why anyone would think the Greddy is that great. Common sense tells me that a botton in Bottom out design is not making use of the entire intercooler. I purposely made a bottom in top out design to get the entire intercooler involved in the cooling process.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
12-16-2004, 12:49 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southeast
Posts: 502
Originally Posted by Jims5543' date='Dec 16 2004, 12:16 AM
I could never understand why anyone would think the Greddy is that great. Common sense tells me that a botton in Bottom out design is not making use of the entire intercooler. I purposely made a bottom in top out design to get the entire intercooler involved in the cooling process.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
Dick swingers that's what. Some people won't buy stuff if it ain't got some fancy name HKS, Greddy, Apexi etc. then it can't be good if you designed it. I don't think you intention is to re-invent the wheel, just to make it better. Yet common knowledge is not so common after all.
Your car is faster than some other guys car, he then says to you but I got a Greddy intercooler. What the hell that got to do with effiency.
I think you design is well thought out, and if I did'nt just buy an intercooler I would certainly buy one from you.
12-16-2004, 07:12 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: California
Posts: 22,465
Originally Posted by Jims5543' date='Dec 15 2004, 08:16 PM
I could never understand why anyone would think the Greddy is that great. Common sense tells me that a botton in Bottom out design is not making use of the entire intercooler. I purposely made a bottom in top out design to get the entire intercooler involved in the cooling process.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
if you're temps are within 1 degree of the pre turbo, how much better can you get?
id say its fine.
12-16-2004, 08:26 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: redondo beach
Posts: 983
Originally Posted by Jims5543' date='Dec 15 2004, 08:16 PM
I could never understand why anyone would think the Greddy is that great. Common sense tells me that a botton in Bottom out design is not making use of the entire intercooler. I purposely made a bottom in top out design to get the entire intercooler involved in the cooling process.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
Do you honestly think more than the bottom 6 rows of the Greddy is actually doing anything?
I discussed the end tank design with Spearco and asked about it. The engineer there told me that it would be more efficient but the amount of effiency gain was negligable.
I guess I could shorten the I/C and Taper the ends like the Greddy if it would make a big difference.
i wouldnt think that where the air leaves in relation to where it enters would affect how much of the IC is used, but more of how the intake end tanks are formed.
and heres a little section of that book that i got for the other thread.
Perhaps the greatest potential for improvement rests in the desgin of the tanks on each end of the charge cooler. Here the wrong approach can much up both air flow and cooling efficiency. Always we have to be thinking in terms of equalizing as much possible charge flow down each tube. Keep in mind that flow losses increase dramatically in those tubes flowing more air. Also, because the volume is higher and they flow faster these tubes will draw off less heat.
which is like your end tanks, there isnt really anything causing the air to flow evenly throughout the tubes. Maybe just add a deflector to put the air down there?
