Aftermarket 3rd Gen intercooler data

Are we going to throw out stupid questions for the hell of it now?

The point is if pressure is reduced pre-CAC it will be reduced post CAC. It sure as hell isn't going to increase. Depending on overall flow I guess a miniscule increase could be seen at the manifold.

The real benefit lies in flow and air density.
 
Runninlean said:
Are we going to throw out stupid questions for the hell of it now?

The point is if pressure is reduced pre-CAC it will be reduced post CAC. It sure as hell isn't going to increase. Depending on overall flow I guess a miniscule increase could be seen at the manifold.

The real benefit lies in flow and air density.
Click to expand...

Point is your wrong. Throw a theoretical ball valve between the charger and manifold and start closing it down at full flow. Pressure will rise on the charger side with a pressure drop across the valve. This is 6th grade elementary **** here.
Have this exact data set from dyno work last winter and when I put better flowing ports on my CAC there was a slight drop in CAC inlet pressure and corresponding gain in manifold and 50 facking HP.
 
Runninlean said:
Guess your not taking into account the drop in the pre CAC psi with this line of thinking? With less restriction down stream comes over all drop in friction forces.. At some point the amount of flow also becomes a factor.
Click to expand...

Runninlean said:
Are we going to throw out stupid questions for the hell of it now?

The point is if pressure is reduced pre-CAC it will be reduced post CAC. It sure as hell isn't going to increase. Depending on overall flow I guess a miniscule increase could be seen at the manifold.

The real benefit lies in flow and air density.
Click to expand...

Joesixpack said:
Point is your wrong. Throw a theoretical ball valve between the charger and manifold and start closing it down at full flow. Pressure will rise on the charger side with a pressure drop across the valve. This is 6th grade elementary **** here.
Have this exact data set from dyno work last winter and when I put better flowing ports on my CAC there was a slight drop in CAC inlet pressure and corresponding gain in manifold and 50 facking HP.
Click to expand...


Now explain to me how your example in bold contradicts what I said?

So if by shutting your theoretical ball valve increases Pre CAC pressure is it not logical to assume opening said ball valve would reduce that pressure?

What I was wrong about was making my statement as a general one. It should have been referenced for mostly stock applications. The story changes when you add a sizable amount of additional air flow witch in turn effects velocity, flow and pressure.

By the looks of your claimed results the test bed used was not a near stock air flow. The HP gains mentioned are not very relevant either as was likely more a derivative from better flow thus efficient cooling producing denser air.
 
What he is saying is you won't have a pressure loss across a better flowing IC hence, a higher manifold reading than what you previously had. Not an increase in boost, just less pressure loss.

Analogy:
Same prinicipal in down hole hydraulics in oilfield. Basically you want to have all your pressure loss at the bit(head), but you loose some in the drill pipe(piping), and loose some in the BHA(intercooler). Now in the oilfield we can only read pressure at the pump(turbo) we can't read it at the bit(head), just calculate it. If we have 2500 psi at pump(turbo) we can calculate pressure loss in drill pipe, BHA, and at the bit. On trucks we can read it at the head(bit). So if we reduced some of the pressure loss in the BHA, we would gain it at the bit(head) as long as we kept pump pressure the same. Same principal with engines, if you reduce the pressure loss across the IC, keep turbo boost at 40 psi, you will gain pressure at the head.

Tons of other factors involved also, and the changes to the cores may not make much difference on most low power trucks.
 
Ghostman said:
What he is saying is you won't have a pressure loss across a better flowing IC hence, a higher manifold reading than what you previously had. Not an increase in boost, just less pressure loss.

Analogy:
Same prinicipal in down hole hydraulics in oilfield. Basically you want to have all your pressure loss at the bit(head), but you loose some in the drill pipe(piping), and loose some in the BHA(intercooler). Now in the oilfield we can only read pressure at the pump(turbo) we can't read it at the bit(head), just calculate it. If we have 2500 psi at pump(turbo) we can calculate pressure loss in drill pipe, BHA, and at the bit. On trucks we can read it at the head(bit). So if we reduced some of the pressure loss in the BHA, we would gain it at the bit(head) as long as we kept pump pressure the same. Same principal with engines, if you reduce the pressure loss across the IC, keep turbo boost at 40 psi, you will gain pressure at the head.

Tons of other factors involved also, and the changes to the cores may not make much difference on most low power trucks.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you just stated. You also have to take into consideration added volume (larger CAC) as well as we are talking a gas vs a liquid both become factors.

Of course a straight pipe in place of a CAC would increase manifold pressure. Add a piece of 18" pipe in its place and see if that holds true.
 
I wouldnt have posted it if it didnt hold true. Its also nice to have dyno info and datalogs to back it up on this site. You can figure pressure loss for any substance at given pressure per specific pipe size. This is the reason on a truck i did some a intercooler and piping on i set it up hto have zero straight piping and only one 4inch 90deg piece. Easy 20hp because of reduction of pressure loss.
 
Back on topic. What intercoolers are you guys running?
Which one do you think works best?
Any egt drops cruising/ wide open?
 
Rhett24 said:
For all 3rd gen cummins owners.
What aftermarket intercooler are you running?
What was your cruising egts vs stock?
What was your top egts vs stock?
What was your boost increase vs stock?
What do you not like about your aftermarket intercooler?
Was your turbo able to spool easier/quicker?
Click to expand...

Trying to get data
 
You want to look at the core size. I would find out which brand uses the thickest cores. Also use one that has smooth unrestricted larger inlet outlets. Those two will make the biggest difference on perrformance. The 3rd gen intercooler is a decent design anyways. Its going to be hard to make a big improvement on a oem replacement because there just isnt space to do it.
 
Garret makes the best cores right now. You can get a core from them and make up your own mounting and end caps if you're inclined to. That might be the best bang for your buck if you can do the work yourself.
 
CorneliusRox said:
Garret makes the best cores right now. You can get a core from them and make up your own mounting and end caps if you're inclined to. That might be the best bang for your buck if you can do the work yourself.
Click to expand...

Yup, I agree with this. I have had good luck with the garrett cores, have one sitting by my tig right now that I am going to make end tanks for a 06 dodge, pretty excited to see how it turns out.
 
Throw this wrench into the boost equation, the more efficient the cooler is at lowering air temperature (increasing density) the more pressure drop it will cause. Think of aftercooling as another small stage of compression/increase air density.
 
Rhett24 said:
For all 3rd gen cummins owners.
What aftermarket intercooler are you running?
CX Racing

What was your cruising egts vs stock?
Intercooler swap made NO difference

What was your top egts vs stock?
Intercooler swap made NO difference

What was your boost increase vs stock?
Intercooler swap made no difference

What do you not like about your aftermarket intercooler?
POS mounting "system", missing brackets & hardware, having to change out the grill for clearance, the "slightly" bigger inlet / outlet tubes

Was your turbo able to spool easier/quicker?
nope
Click to expand...


All comparisons were done post compounds and are according to what I saw on my CTS (another pos) as I thought I was having a intercooler issue so I put the stocker back in for a month or so. Ended up blowing the right tank off the stock one. Sent the CX out and had tested to 120 psi, no leaks, so it went back in. Although the core and tanks are really stout and it will hold 120 psi, the install hassles / poor engineering, ruined it for me.
 
I've been looking at some of the companies warranty's and mishimoto has the best by far a limited lifetime and even covers accidents. Almost all other companies only have a limited 1 year.
 
I have a mishimoto and it seems to work great. Boost dropped about 7 psi and intake air temps dropped a ton Idr actual numbers, but I can hold my hand on the cold side of my intercooler after a hard jaunt now. Egts will still spike at 1600*+, drop back down to about 1400* almost immediately. I have no complaints about the mishimoto especially since I got it on xdp for less than $800. They also warranty the 2 boots and 4 clamps that come with their intercoolers. They have awesome customer service and are quick to respond also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top