Intercooling

[Gage]

Karo:

Love the Ideas.
I'm wondering if a Intercooler might be able to find it's way up in the nose of the car, for those who are wanting to, "Boost", their cars.
Ty

Hey Ty,

It is very rare to find a mid or rear engined car with an intercooler mounted in the nose because all the piping to travel that far kills boost. Every turbocharged Ariel Atom I have seen for example mounts the intercooler near the engine or air intake. I doubt a rear or mid engined exocar will ever have an air to air intercooler mounted up front. Then with the Lancer Evolution, Dodge SRT-4, etc. etc. The intercoolers are always up front because the piping routes directly to the engine.

Also, regularly I see you comment on aerodynamic improvements to the SL-R. I just want to stress that these cars are the opposite of aerodynamic. They are flying bricks. If you put a body on one it could radically alter its aerodynamic properties...and it would not longer be what it is.

As it is, an Exocar is typically a frame, motor, wheels, and driver with minimal body work. They aren't designed to be aerodynamic, and making them so would dramatically change their nature. They aren't practical as high speed machines either, unless you make serious changes to the cockpit and how the driver is shielded from wind. I.E. Change everything.

An Atom, much like an SL-R, is a nightmare to drive over 100 miles per hour because of wind buffeting and helmet lift. And that is WITH a wind bubble.

In my opinion these machines specialize in raw acceleration, and a raw viceral experience of such...oh and the handling like it is your feet on the road. Love it! Aerodynamics and Top end speed simply aren't in the picture.

With all that said, It has been demonstrated that adding side panels, wind screens, etc. makes these type of cars significantly faster. I say that based on posts from Atom owners who simply added side panels to their cars and went from a top track speed of 111mph on a given stretch to 117mph. If such additions ever become available, I'll be thrilled.

[Exonut]

Hey Ty,

It is very rare to find a mid or rear engined car with an intercooler mounted in the nose because all the piping to travel that far kills boost. Every turbocharged Ariel Atom I have seen for example mounts the intercooler near the engine or air intake. I doubt a rear or mid engined exocar will ever have an air to air intercooler mounted up front.

You may not be familiar with air to liquid intercooling. I believe all of the supercharged Ecotec Atoms had front mounted intercoolers, no? I have a mid-engined turbocharged V8 car with a front mounted intercooler. The induction air passes through a air/liquid heat exchanger and the liquid is circulated through a remote liquid/air heat exchanger. It's a very practical and effective way to intercool mid-engined car. Air/liquid intercooling is used by OEMs on the Cobalt SS, Ford Cobra, Lightning, and others.

On a typical mid-rear engined car there isn't a really good place to stick an air/air IC in the back, but on an open car like the SLR the complexity of an air/liquid system may not be worth the trouble. It is another option though and it can provide a nice cool charge even with limited airflow.

[Gage]

You may not be familiar with air to liquid intercooling. I believe all of the supercharged Ecotec Atoms had front mounted intercoolers, no? I have a mid-engined turbocharged V8 car with a front mounted intercooler. The induction air passes through a air/liquid heat exchanger and the liquid is circulated through a remote liquid/air heat exchanger. It's a very practical and effective way to intercool mid-engined car. Air/liquid intercooling is used by OEMs on the Cobalt SS, Ford Cobra, Lightning, and others.

On a typical mid-rear engined car there isn't a really good place to stick an air/air IC in the back, but on an open car like the SLR the complexity of an air/liquid system may not be worth the trouble. It is another option though and it can provide a nice cool charge even with limited airflow.

I was specifically referring to air to air intercooling. However, Ty may have been including air to liquid. I wasn't sure. Given proper sizing of all components and the potential injection of super cooled liquid, such systems have great merit. Daily driving is always my chief concern.

Also I referred to Ariel Atoms that have been equipped with aftermarket Turbo systems with air to air intercoolers vs. the stock air to liquid supercharger heat exchangers they come with. The stock systems have proven conclusively to be grossly inefficient in extended high rpm use such as in a track environment. They are barely adequate for short term use in daily driving.

Air to Air Intercoolers have been mounted on Ariel Atoms directly behind the driver's where the air intake filter and tube were. This places them near the engine but in a direct flow of air. HUGE A/A Intercoolers have been mounted behind the engine bay with success as well.

[Tyoneal]

Hey Ty,

Gage:

Thought I would address each of these within your text so it would be easier to follow since we both are not encumbered by our typing fingers. Please read this with an eye for constructive discussion and nothing else. I enjoy our writings and don't wish for mine to be thought of as demeaning or offensive, just purely as an exercise in good (hopefully) well thought out conversation, nothing more. I hope you will enjoyed my attempt to develop my position. (That's why it took me a while to think things through before I answered you)

It is very rare to find a mid or rear engined car with an intercooler mounted in the nose because all the piping to travel that far kills boost.

Why does distance traveled kill boost if the line holding the pressure, can, well, hold the pressure? Shouldn't the distance traveled by the boost continue to cool the boosted gas as long as it is warmer on the inside of the piping than on the outside? Or, to put another way, wouldn't having an aluminum pipe carrying the boosted air act as an intercooler of sorts, itself? If you had a A/W intercooler upfront, you very well might get some A/A inter-cooling back on it's way to the rear.

An intercooler, A/A or A/W is nothing more than a Radiator of sorts, right? Rear and mid engine cars have had radiators in the front of most of them all along. (As far as I know, the good ones anyway.)

Every turbocharged Ariel Atom I have seen for example mounts the intercooler near the engine or air intake. I doubt a rear or mid engined exocar will ever have an air to air intercooler mounted up front. Then with the Lancer Evolution, Dodge SRT-4, etc. etc. The intercoolers are always up front because the piping routes directly to the engine.

Perhaps wrongly, I have always thought that most IC locations were due in part to packaging concerns, now that said, you could always run a IC in a side pod and the radiator (If needed) in the other side pod.

In other standard cars it would make sense if the IC was located under a hood, along with, one or two glowing Turbo chargers to have the piping from the IC to the Engine as short as possible, because the ambient air around the inter-cooled air piping is 1500+ degrees. What I am referring to is just the opposite.

STS, your probably familiar with them, runs the Turbo Chargers in the rear of the car thus keeping the heat out from under the hood. Then the air is piped to the front of the car. Here is the Technology Link. It's a good read even if you are familiar with the system.

http://www.ststurbo.com/the_technology

Also, regularly I see your comment on aerodynamic improvements to the SL-R. I just want to stress that these cars are the opposite of aerodynamic. They are flying bricks. If you put a body on one it could radically alter its aerodynamic properties...and it would not longer be what it is.

Not all, "Exocars", evidently are,"Exocars". (Check out the car in the upper right hand of this page. (The Sonic 7) By definition it doesn't appear to be an exocar, however I think our only differences here is that you are taking the term literally, and I am taking the term broader to mean, "Very Lightweight or Featherweight". You are technically correct as far as I can tell, so I hope it's not a punishable offense. ;-)

I do understand that typically aerodynamics takes a backseat to "to say", lightweight in importance.

As it is, an Exocar is typically a frame, motor, wheels, and driver with minimal body work. They aren't designed to be aerodynamic, and making them so would dramatically change their nature. They aren't practical as high speed machines either, unless you make serious changes to the cockpit and how the driver is shielded from wind. I.E. Change everything.

I agree with your examples of minimalism as a priority in their design, however I don't think it could be argued that they are not made to be aerodynamic, otherwise they would ALL be shaped liked bricks, and clearly the pointed noses alone should verify that statement. I would agree however that aerodynamics has not been optimized.

" ............and making them so would dramatically change their nature. They aren't practical as high speed machines either, unless you make serious changes to the cockpit and how the driver is shielded from wind."

Yes, to add positive aerodynamic changes would definitely change their nature.

This facet of your statement sound counter productive to your argument in that, These cars are fast, and handle well because they are lightweight, however by making them more safer at speed would ruin the performance of the car, thus making them possibly dangerous, or to say that poor aerodynamics is a positive thing, is not a bonus in my mind, and could possibly turn me off on the car altogether. (As mentioned earlier, I promise I'm not trying to be a Turd, I just trying to dissect each of our positions for the sake of good conversation, please don't take it any other way, ok? It certainly is NOT intended)

An Atom, much like an SL-R, is a nightmare to drive over 100 miles per hour because of wind buffeting and helmet lift. And that is WITH a wind bubble.

Given that on many tracks you could get run over at 100 mph, would not necessarily give me a lot of confidence with this car being a good purchase for some possible, "Open Track", time.

Being a, "Nightmare over 100 mph", is also pretty spooky. A proper designed wind screen, and a Tonneau Cover, along with a proper fitting helmut will fix most if not all of the problem with Helmut Lift, and Wind Buffering. Le Mans comes to mind.*(See below)

In my opinion these machines specialize in raw acceleration, and a raw visceral experience of such...oh and the handling like it is your feet on the road. Love it! Aerodynamics and Top end speed simply aren't in the picture.

To even a minimal amount, Aerodynamics and Top Speed, have to be in the picture of any kind of car as necessitated by it's intended function, or you have a dangerous amount of under engineering.

For me anyway, proper aerodynamics:

a) Definitely make a car safer at speed over 80+mph

b) Make a car handle better (One of the big reasons (As listed in your response) this car is so great anyway)

c) In my opinion, make a car look really cool

Every Customer has in his own mind what kind of car they want to purchase, that's why there are things called "Options". I want a car that is blindingly quick, feels like it is riding on rails, and is faster than I want to drive it, due to the speed being traveled, and not for fear of an accident or being blown off the road. Would love to be able to buy a great looking Body to go with the performance that looks, drives (Slow or Fast), Corners, and smells as close to a F1 as I can find and afford. I think this car can do that. I do also think that your desired aspects of this car can be every bit as fulfilled as mine. They just won't look a like, which is not a bad thing either.

With all that said, It has been demonstrated that adding side panels, wind screens, etc. makes these type of cars significantly faster.

"Exactly."

I say that based on posts from Atom owners who simply added side panels to their cars and went from a top track speed of 111mph on a given stretch to 117mph. If such additions ever become available, I'll be thrilled.

Based on your last sentence maybe our cars would look alike. ;-)

I look forward to your reply.

Respectfully,

Ty O'Neal

* I found a nifty article when researching, "Wind Buffeting". I thought I would post the paragraph in which it is used, and the link in the case anyone wants to read it in it's entirety.

Here is the paragraph:

"It's snug and a little claustrophobic inside the narrow bubble cockpit. A fat carbonfibre hoop reassuringly encircles the cabin from screen header to floor, while ahead is a small squared-off wheel with metallic paddles, and a small Bosch electronic dashboard. Much of the upper portion of the turret-like, curved windscreen is blanked off but the pill-box view matches that of my crash helmet aperture so visibility is fine. Even so, as Bell explained the previous evening, most drivers prefer open Le Mans cars despite the wind buffeting: 'You get very hot and sweaty in a closed car and when it rains water finds its way in, so at the end of a stint you're wringing wet. And the windows steam up. Still, when you're upside down at 180mph you appreciate having a roof.'"

Here is the link:

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:EmQhaKlHKw4J:www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/cargrouptests/41549/bentley_speed_8.html+define,+%22wind+buffeting%22, +automotive&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us

[Gage]

Ty,

We should have started another thread. =0)

The more bends in the pipe, or the further the distance that has to be traveled, the more pressure is lost from the time the turbocharged air leaves the turbo to the point where it enters the engine. I am not an engineer, or a designer of such systems. I'm too busy to look up the straight forward information on why that is. It isn't complicated. That is why you will see large intercoolers mounted behind a rear engine race car rather than in the nose. It uses far less piping and reduces the boost loss. I have intimate experience of the subject from owning several turbocharged cars. Even when the intercooler is close to the engine, poorly designed intercooler piping can result in a significant loss of boost pressure from the turbo to entry into the engine.

In regard to aerodynamics... There are dozens of track cars that have an aerodynamic profile. SL-R's and Ariel Atom's aren’t two of them. There is a full wind screen option now available for the Ariel Atom now from the UK factory. In my opinion with side panels, full windscreen, and aerofoil’s, it still isn't a very efficient design in terms of aerodynamic performance. Owners notice improvements..but it just isn't a sealed cockpit stream lined design.

Yes, Ariel Atoms and SL-R's can be blindingly fast.. but rarely in relative comparison to high speed aerodynamic track cars on straight aways. An Atom gets completely owned on long high speed stretches. Nearly all "Supercars" catch the Atom and pass it. At high speeds it's light weight is negated by it's poor aerodynamic design. Certainly you can drive one at speeds above 100 miles per hour, but it is exhausting, and I mean far more so than typical track driving which is in itself a labor not unlike riding a roller coaster. All the assist items like a better fitting helmet, a helmet lip, a Hans device, etc. wont negate that, they simply help.

To put it simply: Atom/SL-R like cars tear up curvy tracks and eat bigger cars alive there, only before top end speed and aerodynamics enter the picture. Zero to 100 is great. It isn’t so great after that.
I state that from personal experience on the street and hours on a race track.

Minimalism has a price. Minimalism with high speed aerodynamic design has a much steeper price in my opinion.

But I must stress, with an Exocar like we refer to, You simply never notice that your car isn't SICK SICK Stupid fast unless you get in a race against a supercar/dedicated track car over 100 miles per hour on a straight. Light weight rules the turns and corners.

[bolus]

Two points

1. It may have already been mentioned but the air to water intercooler on the Atom did not work. I had 190F AIT2 on the track and that caused the engine to pull a lot of timing. Why didn't it work? because the radiator was small so that it could fit into the compact Atom without looking like a frankenstein Intercooler.

2. 120MPH is a class 3 huricane wind speed. That is what your face gets in these cars. Bugs hurt, rocks HURT. If you dont have goggles you cant keep your eyes open. If you got a helmet on it feels like someone very strong is pulling it off your head. I had a track instructor in the atom have his helmet come 90% of the way off (he caught it just in time) down the straight at PIR.

[mkim1]

Great conversation, guys!!!

First of all, love you all, so no offenses EVER intended for any of my comments below. : )

As an ex-Ford engineer (not that it matters any nowadays : ), I can tell you that the MAIN reason for OEM intercoolers near the engine is COST. Hate to say it, but if you can save 5 cents per vehicle, you become a rock star at any OEM and that's your ticket to a promotion (sad, isn't it?). That's why we put A/A intercoolers up front in front of the radiator for front-engined cars, and intercoolers on the side or on top of the engine bay for mid-engine or rear-engine layout. The goal is to get the COLDEST clean air at the lowest cost possible.

I must admit, I argued with STS guys for hours on the remote cooling and forced induction. I was confident that with my B.S. (probably) degree in Mech. Engineering and Master's degree in Industrial Engineering, I could prove that remote cooling sucks due to what I thought would be lots of turbo lag. But once they made me realize that as long as the tubing is tightly sealed -thus turbo lag is minimal (verified by Bolus' graph in my thread)- I was to admit my misunderstanding in this matter.

What I learned from STS was that the most critical factor in minimizing the turbo lag (thus making us feel like it's been eliminated) is the amount of exhaust gas getting to the turbine wheel. I originally wanted a twin-turbo on my 4.0L V6 engine, and the amount of exhaust gas out of only 3 cylinders (1 bank) wasn't large enough turn such a huge turbo (I wanted a 70mm. What a Dumbass! : ). That's why BMW & Nissan use small turbos (spool quicker, thus minimal lag).

Once the turbine spools and the air gets compressed from the air filter tube, STS told me the goal is to get as much compacted air into the combustion chamber as possible. And the colder the air, the more air into each chamber, thus TONS more power. STS is so conficent that, with their A/A intercooler, they can achieve cooler air temp. than ANY other turbo makers out there since they 1) get the cooler air from underbody 2) underbody piping workes like the 1st stage intercooler, and 3) intercooler up front cools it even more (just like Ty mentioned earlier). They said if you absolutely want the coldest air, add methanol injection right before intake manifold. : )

BTW, Gage is right about the bend in tubes. That's why STS's kit for C6 Corvett actually goes around the rear wheel well (larger, smoother arc) instead of tight bends through its IRS.

Stuart from MEV confirmed that there is enough space in front of the radiator to add A/A intercooler up front. As Bolus mentioned, the Atom's cooling design is so sorry that the engine will easily overheat. That's why I'll most likely order the Sonic7 kit, since it has a wide enough frontal area for radiator & intercooler. I wouldn't dare trying to run the tubing on the exposed frame, but with the body panels hiding it, I see some benefit of doing something this radical (thus getting me the precious rear view mirror in the windshield). If I get enough visibility in the rear, I would probably go with Bolus' recommendation of Lotus setup (intercooler above engine).

Anyways, great conversation, guys! : )

[bolus]

There was a rally car, I think subaru, in the x games rally competition that had this gigantic boost tube. It was huge, like 12 inches wide. I cant find a pic of it though. It goes against all common sense though.

Granted if you look at those boost tubes on the STS they are quite small. If you had a boost tube the size of an oil tanker, it would lag like crazy building up the pressure. Gas is very compressable but fluid is not. that is why hydrolics works so well. the STS stuff just looks well designed for the appication. If they were running 4" boost tubes to the front and back I suspect there would be a lot more lag.

I doubt STS can beat the cooling capacity of water injection. They were using that tech back in WW2. My friend Atom has water injection with his "H"eaton supercharger and he actually runs colder after the dyno run than the start. He was getting 60F AIT2's. That was colder than ambient temp.

There is no intercooler on the planet than can get the air cooler than the outside air.

So dont forget the cooling power of water injection.

[Tyoneal]

Ty,

We should have started another thread. =0)
Gage:

It's nice to hear from you again.

I'm going to take a shot at these and why they would be occurring.

The more bends in the pipe, or the further the distance that has to be traveled, the more pressure is lost from the time the turbocharged air leaves the turbo to the point where it enters the engine.

I'm going to say there are at least two reasons maybe more, for this phenomena: (Given your system can hold pressure)

1) You have a larger volume to fill with the longer tubing before significant pressure can be built (This is nothing that can't be solved by proper Engineering when choosing a Turbo Size)

2) As you cool the pressurized air, you will lose pressure due to one of the laws of thermodynamics. Cool Dense Air is the secret for making big power and avoiding detonation. (This to is an issue for the designing Engineer to tackle, as when this drop in pressure is accounted for on one end, it can be compensated for on the other end) A drop in pressure, given a sealed system, means your cooling methods are working.

3) Regarding the a bend in a tube. Anytime a gas or fluid has to change direction, efficiency of the flow of the gas or fluid is compromised. The trick to avoiding this is proper planning when laying out the route the gas/fluid has to travel. Like with Brake fluid, nothing greater than a 45 degree angle should be the acceptable limit of any bend you have in the line. While not perfect, it should definitely help in the flow. (I'm sure an Actual Engineer can chime in and make or break any of these three assumptions/explainations.)


I am not an engineer, or a designer of such systems. I'm too busy to look up the straight forward information on why that is. It isn't complicated.

That is why you will see large intercoolers mounted behind a rear engine race car rather than in the nose.

Could you please give me some examples of a race cars that position their IC's behind their engine in a rear engine Car. (As far as I know, The F1, F2, GT40s etc. seem to be in front of the engine in most applications (Usually in the side pods) other than some of the rear engine Porsches that I can think of that have an IC in the High Pressure area of the, "Whale Tail") I'm sure there are more, but I believe packaging convenience mixed/balanced with the amount of performance gain, balanced with aerodynamics, probably drive the final decision. You also have to decide the type and size of radiators and IC you have to have for the car to perform correctly.

It uses far less piping and reduces the boost loss.

Is the "Boost Loss", you are referring to aka. "Turbo Lag"?

I have intimate experience of the subject from owning several turbocharged cars. Even when the intercooler is close to the engine, poorly designed intercooler piping can result in a significant loss of boost pressure from the turbo to entry into the engine.

I do agree, every components needs to be properly designed. Undersized IC's, inefficient pluming designs etc., however the IC being right beside the engine I don't think is necessarily a reason for poor performance. With a boosted Engine with a cooling device of some kind, while using inconsistent fuel suppliers, coupled with changes in the weather and altitude, ambient temperature, and the big one a proper tune and the right gearing, all can make an engine not work quite as well on one track as another. I'm sure your experience far out weighs mine, and if I am going down multiple wrong trails with my thinking, please point them out. I am certainly here to learn everything I can when participating on this forum.

In regard to aerodynamics... There are dozens of track cars that have an aerodynamic profile. SL-R's and Ariel Atom's aren’t two of them. There is a full wind screen option now available for the Ariel Atom now from the UK factory. In my opinion with side panels, full windscreen, and aerofoil’s, it still isn't a very efficient design in terms of aerodynamic performance. Owners notice improvements..but it just isn't a sealed cockpit stream lined design.

A sealed car I think can be helpful, however, even unsealed cars can have decent cg's if worked on properly.

Have they run any Wind Tunnel Evaluations on these new designs? If so, what was their cd before and after the changes?

Also, with the addition of wings and other devices, did they disclose the improved downforce gained by the Wings, spoilers, canards etc. vs. the cost of drag of having them on the car?

All these evaluations and more have to be done to effectively design a efficient aerodynamic kit. Each added piece adds weight, and drag, and different kinds of turbulence, vortexes and so on. Many if not all these pieces have to work in concert with each other to formulate a package that when working together create an overall improved effect in the way it moves through the air, with certain desired properties (Downforce) within a specific speed range.

Yes, Ariel Atoms and SL-R's can be blindingly fast.. but rarely in relative comparison to high speed aerodynamic track cars on straight always. An Atom gets completely owned on long high speed stretches. Nearly all "Supercars" catch the Atom and pass it. At high speeds it's light weight is negated by it's poor aerodynamic design. Certainly you can drive one at speeds above 100 miles per hour, but it is exhausting, and I mean far more so than typical track driving which is in itself a labor not unlike riding a roller coaster. All the assist items like a better fitting helmet, a helmet lip, a Hans device, etc. wont negate that, they simply help.

Is the Chassis/Suspension one of the items that adds to exhaustion of driving at higher speeds? Steering to twitchy?

If you wouldn't mind describe if you would all the different items that directly add to the accelerated rate of exhaustion. I would be really interested by your experience.

To put it simply: Atom/SL-R like cars tear up curvy tracks and eat bigger cars alive there, only before top end speed and aerodynamics enter the picture. Zero to 100 is great. It isn’t so great after that.
I state that from personal experience on the street and hours on a race track.

It's really cool you have so many hours in an Atom, your knowledge should prove to be really insightful for all of us looking to buy one.

Minimalism has a price. Minimalism with high speed aerodynamic design has a much steeper price in my opinion.

But I must stress, with an Exocar like we refer to, You simply never notice that your car isn't SICK SICK Stupid fast unless you get in a race against a supercar/dedicated track car over 100 miles per hour on a straight. Light weight rules the turns and corners.

It will be fun if things work out ok to work on things like top speed performance. As you have probably noticed, I really like the research involved, and hopefully the benefit of greater understanding.

Again I look forward to your response.

Take care,

Ty O'Neal

[Tyoneal]

Two points

1. It may have already been mentioned but the air to water intercooler on the Atom did not work. I had 190F AIT2 on the track and that caused the engine to pull a lot of timing. Why didn't it work? because the radiator was small so that it could fit into the compact Atom without looking like a frankenstein Intercooler.

2. 120MPH is a class 3 huricane wind speed. That is what your face gets in these cars. Bugs hurt, rocks HURT. If you dont have goggles you cant keep your eyes open. If you got a helmet on it feels like someone very strong is pulling it off your head. I had a track instructor in the atom have his helmet come 90% of the way off (he caught it just in time) down the straight at PIR.
======================
Bolus:

I can't even imagine driving anything at that speed without a full face helmut. When I had my bike I ALWAYS had some kind of windshield even if only short. It makes a heck of a difference.

I can certainly understand why that would be uncomfortable.

OUCH!

Ty

[bolus]

/mini thread jack

I at least have the goggles on :)

I took a guy for a test drive (who started out thinking his 911 turbo was plenty but then bought an Atom after the drive) up a mountain road. We were getting hit with so many bugs I had to slow down. It was like having a rubber band snapped on your face every 2 seconds. Very hard to concentrate on driving :)

[Chadillac]

^ Bolus, you make driving an exocar sound so exciting. I seriuosly can't wait until mine is on the road with the sweet taste of victory (bugs).

By the way, great looking Atom. I love the black with the carbon fiber. That's the look I am trying to go for in the SL-R with a little touch of red. The carbon fiber is just going to have to come a little bit later.

[Conquest351]

OK,
Here's my take on boost and intercooling and all that jazz. LOL

I worked at a Ford Performance shop in Austin, TX for about 5 years. We specialized in supercharging and turbocharging just about anything. Main emphasys was on the 2.3 Turbocharged Ford engines found in the SVO's, Thunderbird Turbo Coupe's, and Merkur XR4ti's. Anyway, I learned a lot while I was there about boost, intercooling, piping, etc. The smoother the radius and the shorter your tubes are, the better. NOW, this gets very contradictory when you're working in the confines of a "well engineered" vehicle. (No disrespect to Ford engineers, but you guys must have the smallest hands in the world. Haha, just playing.) There's always something in the way that you can't move or are unwilling to move/modify. Now you need a bend, and another, and another. Ever seen how an Indy Car runs its turbo? How about a Porsche 962? Take a look at the picture I attached and tell me what you think...

Very short & sweet on the intake tract eh? As for the Exocars, I have an idea. The new Ecotec that's in the 2008 Cobalt SS and HHR SS and the Saturn Sky Redline and Pontiac Solstice GXP are all the direct injected DOHC turbocharged engines. There are gaseous fuel injectors available for direct injection engines. And that's exactly where gaseous fuel would be a perfect application.

Think about it, the main drawback from gaseous fuel is most of it is lighter than air and just tries to come back up the intake tract. In a direct injection system, you're injecting liquid gaseous fuel directly into the combustion chamber the moment it's needed. You combine that with a cool dense air charge from an intercooled turbo system and then further cool that with liquid propane, methane, or even hydrogen and you have yourself a combination for insane power. Plus with gaseous fuel you reduce carbon emmissions, you reduce oil contamination from fuel blow-by, and your engine internals look clean and new forever just about. Have you ever seen a fleet truck with 200,000+ miles that's been run on propane or CNG? The bearings, pistons, valves, etc all look brand spankin new. I had one of our techs tell me about when he worked for the city and they had a fleet of CNG F150's and I didn't believe him. We went by and they were pulling the head off a 225,000 mile vehicle that had a leaking head gasket from one of the cooling passages. I swear to you the pistons and valves looked brand new. I think there was even cross-hatching STILL on the cylinder walls!!

Anyway, that's my thoughts. Since we're kind of limited on the acreage in these cars, direct injected gaseous fuels may be the way to go. Either that or make a rear spoiler out of an intercooler.


Hey... That may not be such a bad idea...
Get an intercooler made with the fins at an angle... Hmmmmmm

[bolus]

that turbo is a little small dont ya think?

[Conquest351]

that turbo is a little small dont ya think?

Maybe, could do with a little upgrade. LOL

[mkim1]

Hey, I like the intercooler acting as the rear spoiler! : ) Maybe like the NASCAR spoiler if you can find one w/ low-height & wide-width!

[Conquest351]

Remember that the most efficient intercooler has as many rows as possible and as short as possible. So, you need an intercooler that looks like this...

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/Intercooler%202.jpg

As opposed to one that looks like this...

http://www.201motorsports.com/images/P/APSDR525FrontMountIntercooler.jpg

What that does is it gives the air more surface area to exchange heat. Also you want a really well designed core with the correct turbulator setup so you don't drop your pressure too much or restrict the flow. The long tubes that are used in the intercooler on the WRX there will kill your pressure and restrict your flow because there's only 11 rows as opposed to the 41 rows on the other one. Again as I said, the shorter rows give the air more effective surface area to exchange heat as well as keep the pressure and flow up by not spending so much time in the tubes with all the little turbulators. Bell Intercoolers can make you just about anything you want as long as you give them dimensions. Plus those guys are awesome to work with and Corky Bell is one of the best in the business, and a great guy. We did lots of work with them when I worked for Motion Dynamics and we were building SVO intercooler replacements and front mount intercoolers for the Vortech supercharged Mustangs.

Laters,

Brian

[Conquest351]

Ok, lemme see if I can break it down a little better. I was trying to explain it all in my last post, but it may come off a little confusing. Lemme try again...

As far as intercooling goes, you've got to realize that air is a fluid. The less obstructions you have, the smoother the flow. Also the velocity isn't effected. Now, turbulators are those little deals inside the intercooler rows or tubes that add surface area exposure to the air coming through the intercooler rows. I don't know how many of you have actually looked into the design of an intercooler, so I'll just give you a little inside view before I talk more...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/01/Ic-interior.jpg

Ok, you see the little wire looking things in there? Those are the turbulators. They are attached to the outter walls of the intercooler rows and they create more surface area for the air to contact in order to exchange heat with the media used. In this case, air. Liquid to air intercoolers look pretty much the same, except the outside is enclosed in order to hold the water in.

Now, you see how tightly packed the turbulators are? You can imagine that these things will slow down your airflow, so you want the exposure to these things to be short & sweet. Now the only problem with that is, you can't cool a lot of air if it's only in there for a moment. Hence the increased number of rows for the air to pass through. Now you have significantly increased the effective surface area of the air exposed to the heat exchanging media and thus increased the efficiency. The longer rows allow for the air charge to spend more time exposed to the heat exchanging media, BUT, you also are allowing the air charge a longer time to be exposed to the turbulators thus dropping your pressure and flow.

It's an art designing the perfect intercooler, but I know for a fact that the ones we were using for the SVO's and Vortech supercharged Mustangs were flowing about 2,500 cfm at a 1.5 lb. pressure drop. This means that at 15 lbs. of boost you're actually seeing 13.5 lbs. at the throttle body. But you're reducing the air charge temperature by a huge margin. Another figure I'm going to throw out. On a 97 degree day with the intercooler installed on a 1999 Mustang GT running 12 lbs. of boost, we were seeing 210 degrees coming out of the supercharger and 107 degrees going into the throttle body. That's a reduction in temperature of 103 degrees!!! That's only 10 degrees above ambient temperature!

Now the difference between air to liquid and air to air is this. Well, let me offer my opinions on which to use for what purpose.

- Air to air: This is going to be best for road racing, street, or endurance runs. You're not going to have to worry about heat soaking the media you're using to exchange heat. BUT you're at the mercy of the elements. If it's 110 degrees outside, thats the best you can possibly do.

- Air to liquid: This is best for drag racing and short quick runs. You can pack these full of ice or completely freeze the intercooler and it'll run much cooler than ambient temperature. BUT, you're at the mercy of your media supply. If you're running an offshore boat, this isn't an issue. You're not going to heatsoak the friggin ocean. You will however heat soak the 2 gallons of coolant you're using to exchange air charge temperature with. Plus you're adding weight to the system.

So the decision is up to you. I hope this little bit of information was helpful to you. If it wasn't, well then piss off. LOL J/K

Laters,

Brian

[mkim1]

Great explanation, Brian! Thanks!!!

[aloysius]

...
- Air to air: This is going to be best for road racing, street, or endurance runs. You're not going to have to worry about heat soaking the media you're using to exchange heat. BUT you're at the mercy of the elements. If it's 110 degrees outside, thats the best you can possibly do.
Brian

As a seemingly knowledgeable person, maybe you can help me understand something. Why does everyone allow the compressed air from the supercharger to expand BEFORE feeding it into the intercooler? When air is compressed it rises in temperature. Why not keep this temperature high when entering the intercooler to greatly improve the efficency of the heat exchange and also reduce the size of the plumbing. After the compressed air is cooled, then let the pressure drop and its subsiquent temperature. (ain't this exactly how the AC is done?) I'm sure this isn't a new idea so what's the reason? Just a thought that maybe you can clear up for me.

[Conquest351]

Well from my experience, the temperature entering the intercooler is high. When we tested the temperatures on the Mustang, we had the temp probe about 3-5" from the outlet of the blower. The tubing to the intercooler was about 2-3' long if memory serves. Now you're right, intercooling should be done just about instantly and then straight into the intake of the engine. Your tubing and total travel should be as straight and short as possible to minimize pressure loss and expansion, but you usually keep the piping the same diameter. We usually matched the tubing size to the outlet of the blower or turbo. As far as routing the piping, usually there's a pain in the ass like, chassis or body pannels in the way and you have to bend and plan an alternate route. The beauty of this car, is you can put the intercooler right where you want it.

I kinda know what you're trying to ask, but an AC system turns the freon into a liquid and then under evaporation it cools... I think. LOL Could be backwards, I didn't do too well on my ASE certification studying for that. LOL What I do know is that there's a difference between voume and velocity. You need both for optimum performance. Now the best thing is you already have velocity from boost, you just need volume. The cooler the air charge and the more of it you have, the better off you are.

So, reading back over my response and your question, I may not have explained it well. LOL Sorry, if I didn't. Please feel free to call me dumb and ask me to do it again. LOL

Laters,

Brian

[Conquest351]

I was just thinking of how and where to install an intercooler on these cars and the spoiler area was sounding good to me, but I just thought of something better...

How bout mounting it in the spoiler mounting spars? You have the spars that come up from the frame of the car and the spoiler sits on top, you mount the intercooler in the space between the spars. I'd just have to see the dimensions of that area though. It'd have to be big enough to mount a decent sized intercooler in there. Otherwise, it's not worth the effort.

Laters,

Brian

[Karlo]

How bout mounting it in the spoiler mounting spars?

Laters,

Brian


Where is that?

[Conquest351]

Where is that?

See attached picture. Depends on the size of the area in there on each car as to whether it's do-able or not.

[Gage]

I don't know how well it would work, but I like the idea. Anyone know of a spoiler that will bolt onto that curved rear structure bar?

[Conquest351]

Well I believe that Fran is working on a rear spoiler for the SL-R and I believe the Atom already has one available. There should be plenty of airflow as all the air should be coming right through there off the structure of the car. What would really help is if there was a rear engine cover with a channel in it to force the air through that area. Anyway, I need to see the actual spoiler Mr. Fran has in mind and see what's available for the Ariel as well.

[bolus]

OK dumb question since I know nothing about fluid dynamics, but isn't this type of intercooler going to have more flow just on one side and be less efficient?

[Gage]

Here are some possible mounts for the spoiler. There have got to be other solutions.

http://www.amcracing.com/amcy2k/kartalog/spoiler_mounts.htm

http://www.elise-shop.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=765

http://www.stevehillmotorsport.com/parts-department/parts/exterior-styling/rear-wing.htm

http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?form_prod_id=4391&action=product

http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?tpc=Universal_Aluminum_Clamp_Mount_Brack ets&form_prod_id=578,212_93&action=product

[mkim1]

OK dumb question since I know nothing about fluid dynamics, but isn't this type of intercooler going to have more flow just on one side and be less efficient?

Yes. It would always be better to have the airflow not make a 180 turn, but flow as straight as possible. Many twin-turbo intercoolers have 2" inlets at the bottom of either side, with a 3" outlet at the top, going straight into the intake manifold. The one in your photo is usually reserved for cars with packaging constraints (one side totally blocked off, thus using the other side for both inlet & outlet).

[Tyoneal]

To All:

FWIW: I think what you are speaking about is a wing or aerofoil, instead of a spoiler. Spoilers from what I've read are attched to the trunk area of the vehical and become a part of the contour of the car directly useing downforce for it's effectliveness. It's main use is to divert the air flowing over the top of the car and thus over the Top Side of the spoiler to create downforce on the rear tires. In some designs it can also help extend the negative pressure of, "Ground Effectrs", to gain a bit more perfomance from the shape of the bottom of a car.

A wing is an inversly suspended (Airplane) wing that allows air to travel on the top and the bottom of it. It's effectiveness depending on it's design is threefold:

1) By mounting the wing inverted you create a low pressure area on the bottom side of the wing and a high pressure area on the top part of the wing. Exactly like what gives an airplane the ability to fly except the top pushes down on a car and up on a airplane.

2) The second finction of a correctly designed wing gives the owner the ability for it to be tilted down in front and up in back up to about (+ or -) 10 degrees as to increase the down force on the wheels. in essents you raise the down force with the tilt of the wing while maintaining the negative pressure on the lower face caused by the shape of the wing. For wings to be optimized you should run end plates to help capture the positive and negating pressure created from literally sliding off the open ends of the wing and vastly hurting their performance. The design of the end plates varies on the shape and size of the wing, speed and contoures of the car it's mounted on, and the purpose it was specifically designed for.

Further, when properly designed double and triple element wings are used generally for slower speed racing. The wings ability to create and manipulate the effectiveness of the pressure differences, can increase dramatically the downforce on your car. Larger end plates on this type of design are common.

3) In case you aren't interested in the first two, many think they look cool. ;-)

Having an intercooler mounted below the rear wing woud most likely hurt the performance of a well designed wing by neutralizing all or part of the low pessure created on the underside of the wing.

I hope I didn't bore you, and CERTAINLY if anything I said is in error, please correct me. I don't want to mislead anyone, nor do I wish to have a poor understanding of this subject myself.

I hope this has been useful.

Thanks,

Ty

Thinking about this, you might be able to run slightly larger ductwork infront of the rear wheels with the intercool on one side, and have the radiator on the other. (Both with good puller fans and a tight cowl around them) Also, by adding an expanding lip of the leading edge of both side "Pods" out an inch or so, this might be enought to increase the effectiveness of what's there so no other things need to be done.

Thoughts??

[Conquest351]

OK dumb question since I know nothing about fluid dynamics, but isn't this type of intercooler going to have more flow just on one side and be less efficient?

Yes. It would always be better to have the airflow not make a 180 turn, but flow as straight as possible. Many twin-turbo intercoolers have 2" inlets at the bottom of either side, with a 3" outlet at the top, going straight into the intake manifold. The one in your photo is usually reserved for cars with packaging constraints (one side totally blocked off, thus using the other side for both inlet & outlet).

Yes & no. Mkim1 summed it up pretty nicely. That is the correct style intercooler for maximum efficiency, but not the most efficient inlet & outlet designs. Now the optimum inlet & outlet would be straight in & straight out as Mkim1 mentioned, but under packaging constraints, this is the best available. Kind of a loaded question. LOL

As for the term spoiler or wing, it's pretty interchangeable in my dictionairy. If you wanna get all technical, then I guess it's a wing. But I call them all spoilers, although a spoiler technically was first installed on airplanes to spoil the airflow over the wings and thus destroy the lift and slow the plane down for landing. These spoilers are reverse aerofoils used to create downforce and not lift. Call it what you will, but you'll have to excuse my "Texas Automotive Terminology" :thumb2:

Laters,

Brian

[Ken_Kim]

That intercooler DOES accomplish the goal of many short paths rather than a few long ones. Break out your test gear or CFD to see how well it works.

[bolus]

So how about heat dispersant coatings? I had this guy put a heat dispersant coating on my intercooler mostly because I wanted it painted black but did not want to effect the cooling. I think it has actually helped. http://www.brookscoatsit.com/heatdisp.html

As you can see it is a pretty small intercooler (9" longest dimension).

Sitting still on the dyno (with no meth injection) I get AIT2 temps from 200-220F down to 90F even after 10-15 runs.

[Conquest351]

OH yeah, heat dispersant coatings are the way to go. If I had the money available, the coatings in my engine would be insane.

Heat dispersant coating:
- Intake manifold
- Bottom of pistons
- Turbocharger compressor housing & center section
- Intercooler
- Radiator & oil cooler
- Engine block
- Valve springs

Oil shed coating:
- Crankshaft counterweights
- Connecting rods
- Crankcase walls
- Oil return passages
- Top of the cylinder head to aid oil return to the pan

Thermal barrier coating:
- Combustion Chamber
- Intake & exhaust valve heads
- Exhaust ports
- Top of pistons
- Turbocharger turbine housing
- Exhaust header

Lubricant coating:
- All bearings
- Valve stems & valvetrain (rollers on rockers, lifters, etc.)
- Cam lobes
- All bearing surfaces on crank, rods, cams
- Piston skirts, rings, and wrist pins
- Turbocharger shaft & bearings

I think that's about it. But yeah, coatings rule and free up a nice bit of horsepower because you're helping the efficiency of the engine by containing heat, dispersing it, and reducing friction.

Good stuff!!!

Brian

[bolus]

if anyone is curious. it costs about $200 for the coating. well worth it since I dont need to buy methanol now