Project SC400TT

PARTS FOR SALE: Send an email to [email protected] for availability.

Zuffen

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
5,402
Location
Sydney, Australia
UTA,

My engine is in a Range Rover and I have around 6" additional under bonnet clearance.

You can fit both M90 and M112 under the bonnet by using either a Rush Imports manifold (I hear Neil doesn't sell them to the States) or one from Joel (Jordyskiboat.) Both gents are on this Forum. With these manifolds I don't think you would fit an intercooler under the bonnet.

I'm using the MP112 of a Lightning.

I started fitting mine yesterday and I'm using the Lightning supercharger, interccoler and manifold.

So far I've cut the manifold down so it fits in the valley of the engine (I had to remove the knock sensors, starter and heater pipe). I need to relieve a little from the area beside the ports on the head so the manifold will sit in the bottom of the valley.

Once I have the manifold sitting as low as I can get it I'll probably send it to Joel so he can do the machining required to fit my manifold to it.

Fitting the system doesn't look too hard or complicated but having to re-locate the starter makes this conversion only acceptable for cars with lots of ground clearance as the starter is now under the engine.

The attached photo shows the system sitting on the engine. I expect it to drop by another 3". You'll notice the intercooler imediately below the supercharger. This unit is 2" high and will stop you getting it all under your bonnet. Also you'll see the supercharger has the wrong bolt pattern for the intercooler. This is a spare unit I have.

The second shot is a side view of the intercoler. You can see how it hangs down into the valley.
 

mikeedmr

New Member
Messages
11
Location
upstate NY, US
Zuffen, I think you're missing something.
Boost with an air-air intercooler that is not warmed up already is good, because it does take heat away quicker when it's cold. You're also right about heavier intercoolers being able to contain more heat, and so they're colder for long. So, weight is one factor, but I think that surface area and heat conductivity are more important. It's the same principal as a radiator.

Say you have a 15 pound air-to-air intercooler which has 1000 cfm of air moving through it (not the compressed air,) and theres 50 square feet of surface area, both for the internal and external passages. A heavier one with the SAME airflow and surface areas will take longer to warm up, but it will eventually reach the same temperature and not perform any better. That's the effect mass has. Here's what you missed: Bigger intercoolers and radiators are better mainly because of the larger volume of air coming in contact with it, and being able to get heat out of the intercooler and into the air quicker, thus keeping a lower peak tempurature. It's ALSO taking longer to heat up, ignoring the effect of a usual higher mass, since it is being drained of heat quicker (relative to how much heat its gaining on the inside.)

Edit: This is just in reply to Zuffens post on the first page. I see that constant boost isn't really being considered. I'm not arguing air-air vs. air-water, either, I just wanted to point out that mass isn't everything. Oh, and I'm jealous of that engine. :)
 

UTA LS

New Member
Messages
33
Location
DFW, TX
Dang, that's what I was expecting. Well, I have an Apten ported m112 off a lightning sitting next to me that I am going to try to trade for a 03/04 mustang cobra mp112. I think I can fit it with one of whipples thin intercoolers as long as I have a rear entrance blower. I believe their thin water to air intercoolers are only about 1-1.5" thick so I atleast have a chance of fitting it under the hood. My only real issue with the lightning supercharger is the plenum and tb take up too much room on the top of the motor for me to use it.
 

cribbj

"Supra" Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,789
Location
Houston, TX
mikeedmr said:
Zuffen, I think you're missing something.
Boost with an air-air intercooler that is not warmed up already is good, because it does take heat away quicker when it's cold. You're also right about heavier intercoolers being able to contain more heat, and so they're colder for long. So, weight is one factor, but I think that surface area and heat conductivity are more important. It's the same principal as a radiator.

Say you have a 15 pound air-to-air intercooler which has 1000 cfm of air moving through it (not the compressed air,) and theres 50 square feet of surface area, both for the internal and external passages. A heavier one with the SAME airflow and surface areas will take longer to warm up, but it will eventually reach the same temperature and not perform any better. That's the effect mass has. Here's what you missed: Bigger intercoolers and radiators are better mainly because of the larger volume of air coming in contact with it, and being able to get heat out of the intercooler and into the air quicker, thus keeping a lower peak tempurature. It's ALSO taking longer to heat up, ignoring the effect of a usual higher mass, since it is being drained of heat quicker (relative to how much heat its gaining on the inside.)

Edit: This is just in reply to Zuffens post on the first page. I see that constant boost isn't really being considered. I'm not arguing air-air vs. air-water, either, I just wanted to point out that mass isn't everything. Oh, and I'm jealous of that engine. :)
Julian Edgar did an article a couple years ago in AutoSpeed on automotive intercooling. It was a real eyeopener, particularly when he drew the analogy between an automotive intercooler and a heat sink. His theory, which was borne out by real world results, was that an IC for an automotive application simply absorbs heat in short spurts, then releases it between those spurts - which is more like heat sinking than continuous heat exchanging. This was versus an IC for an industrial engine application, which has to transfer the heat continuously to its cooling medium.

Although I'm still a big fan of air to air intercooling, the heat sink analogy is a strong argument for the water to air IC. It sure enables the water to air unit to have a smoothing effect on charge air temps, however a heatsoaked water/air unit isn't going to "recover" nearly as fast as a heatsoaked air/air, nor is it going to produce charge air temps as low as an air/air can (unless it's packed with ice!)

John
 

Trvln Nalzmn

New Member
Messages
45
Location
Auckland
cribbj said:
Julian Edgar did an article a couple years ago in AutoSpeed on automotive intercooling.
John
If that is the one on water sprays then there was no comparision to water to air, just testing on air to air and it didn't quite make sense to me.
 

Zuffen

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
5,402
Location
Sydney, Australia
Julian's article was specifically intercooling not water sprays. He covers them under separate cover.

Auto Speed is an excellent source of informed opinion with supporting evidence. I suggest more people read such Sites before pontificating.

I have yet to read an article from any recognised expert who recomends A2A over W2A except where you're trying to save money and are prepared to accept second best.
 

Trvln Nalzmn

New Member
Messages
45
Location
Auckland
Zuffen said:
Julian's article was specifically intercooling not water sprays. He covers them under separate cover.

Auto Speed is an excellent source of informed opinion with supporting evidence. I suggest more people read such Sites before pontificating.

I have yet to read an article from any recognised expert who recomends A2A over W2A except where you're trying to save money and are prepared to accept second best.
I've been reading Julians stuff for over 10 years and he is really good. I'm registered on the site but I can't find any article comparing them where he does testing.

Has anyone found any comparison with real world tests on the net that has been done in the last couple of years?
 

SC400TT

Moderator
Messages
1,282
Location
Orlando, Florida
Guys, Let me start by stating that I am not an IC expert, and do not claim to know anywhere near it all about IC's. This is why I consulted with many on IC's before I decided to go with Dave Noble's W2A design. Everyone seems to be so concerned about heat soak and heat soak recovery of W2A's and that this is where they lose with a FMIC. Please correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that a properly designed W2A with a properly sized IC, a properly sized coolant reservoir, and a properly sized external heat exchanger cannot possibly experience much heat soak even from a long period of boost, and that it will run cooler air more efficiently hands down compared to a FMIC. And properly sized does not mean "HUGE", just properly matched up and designed.

I appreciate your comments on this Dave, Zuffen, Lextreme, or anybody else wanting to share their opinion.

Thanks,

Ryan
 

Trvln Nalzmn

New Member
Messages
45
Location
Auckland
I can go out tomorrow and buy a large A/A FMIC for $500 that has the following properties. 80%+ efficiency at 20mph+ and less than 1psi drop of boost. If you wanted the very best you could probably get 90% and 0.5 psi boost drop at 10mph. I'd hazard a guess that this standard of intercooler was not around 10 years ago or was not economical.

Your not going to beat those figures hands down and in fact as I have been trying to point out the water to air only wins if the car with the air to air sits for a period of time and the heat soak from the engine gets into the intercooler.

Heat soak from the engine will get into the water reservoir and also into the water to air heat exchanger (that is used for cooling the water).
 

Zuffen

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
5,402
Location
Sydney, Australia
Mext time you sit at the traffic light ready to blow of that 440 Challenger remember to tell your intercooler not to heat up.

Me I'll have water in my intercooler, just like my Scotch.

You know what comes out of an A2A intercooler, Hot Air!
 

R-Jay

New Member
Messages
428
Location
Sydney
Zuffen said:
Trvln,
Yes I could turbo my engine but unlike Rjay I don't like snails in my engine bay. I prefer them on my Plate! They need garlic but so what.
Mmmm.. snails.
 

SC400TT

Moderator
Messages
1,282
Location
Orlando, Florida
Trvln Nalzmn said:
I can go out tomorrow and buy a large A/A FMIC for $500 that has the following properties. 80%+ efficiency at 20mph+ and less than 1psi drop of boost. If you wanted the very best you could probably get 90% and 0.5 psi boost drop at 10mph. I'd hazard a guess that this standard of intercooler was not around 10 years ago or was not economical.

Your not going to beat those figures hands down and in fact as I have been trying to point out the water to air only wins if the car with the air to air sits for a period of time and the heat soak from the engine gets into the intercooler.

Heat soak from the engine will get into the water reservoir and also into the water to air heat exchanger (that is used for cooling the water).
I have to disagree with you on the heat soak of W2A when the car is in idle. My design takes into effect the best location to mount each component of the IC. The heat exchanger will hardly be effected, if at all ,and the reservoir is insulated against engine heat.
 

SC400TT

Moderator
Messages
1,282
Location
Orlando, Florida
Looks like the exhaust system will be from Greddy, engine management is still being decided upon. I have stumbled upon a slightly used Haltech- nothing wrong with it, all sensors and harnesses are included with it. The car was wrecked and being parted out. The possible problem is I will probably have to have a tuner completely rewrite furl mapping, etc, as well as go through install process, definitely not a plug-n-play. I will still need to look into this. We are about 60-90 days away from completion.

Ryan
 

Lextreme

Just call me "Lex"
Messages
12,048
Location
City of Halos
Ryan,

Are you sure you know what u are doing? Seems like you made few million changes already. I wonder when your project going to take off. You need to have a plan and follow the plan. Listen to the experts and not be sway by misc info. People don't plan to fail, people fail to plan. Work it out on a paper. So, now the turbo is in the airbox? This is what i tried to tell you two years ago.

Secondly, you mention using draw throgh MAF? I asked why and you stated why not? Its alot harder to do that system and not much benefit for you 8 psi application.
 

SC400TT

Moderator
Messages
1,282
Location
Orlando, Florida
David,

First of all, this is my project, my car, my money. It will take me as long as it takes to get it done. I do not have to do anything within your time frame.

Secondly, if I decide to change my design, no matter what it is, that is my prerogative. Since when did it mean that if I change my mind that I have no clue as to what I am doing? Do I know the most there is to know about FI? Hell no. Neither do you.

I am offended by your remarks, but I will not say what I really want to say to you right now.

I thought that we were friends...

Ryan
 

Zuffen

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
5,402
Location
Sydney, Australia
Gentlemen,

Please retire to neutral corners.

You're both right and at the same time the opposite, I won't say wrong.

Planning is important but you also need to be flexible enough to change direction if that is best for your project.

Sometimes what we type comes out differently to how we meant it.
 
Top