Perfectly answered!

 

Aha. Thanks for the explanation.

 

Do you have a log of IAT's before and after the IC? That opening in the IC duct, as nice as it looks, seems to be too small - especially with the location of the core and lack of low pressure relief out the bottom/back side of the IC.
There is a reason that the intercoolers are the way they are in the TT cars. The IC efficiency goes WAY down with the way that air to air is setup.
Can you share some data on this please?
-J

 

Holy crap you posted

 

Gorilla - We did not save the logs just did live viewing using both the Durametric and Brockway in different driving conditions. If this did not work, we would not have used it. Below the intercooler is plenty of room with the design and bracket to have the air pull through as well. Having dyno'd/driven the competitors kit, I can say this setup we have done definitely performs well in comparison. Not that I need to, but I do have those sheets that can be overlayed in comparison. As far as the opening, air flow, function of it, it works very well.

 

Well, though I appreciate your answers, you telling me "it works well" doesn't really say anything. And neither does a dyno graph. I want to know how this IC will handle heat soak during track use as well as city stop and go driving. A huge intake fan over the duct while on the dyno doesn't give any real world data.

-J

 

I appreciate your questions. You cannot replicate airflow through the decklid and into the intercooler on a dyno, so a fan is required. This is not a huge fan by any means (besides the point).

It works better then well, it exceeds the competition in cooling, performance, driveability, and more. Did we R&D and test this kit since January, yes. With that being said, alot of data was reviewed during the entire process which made us confident in releasing this kit.

Having owned a 996 C2 with a supercharger, a 996TT with 700HP and a 997TT with 800HP, and worked with others forced air products, we are very well in tuned to what works and what does not.

 

Again, you telling me all the cars you've owned doesn't mean anything. The REAL world data(if any) on this system would. But, if you are not willing to point out, with data, how "superior" your system is, then that is your business.

Good luck with the product sale.

-J

 

Our experience in building cars and products is important. Sometimes, you dont have to share everything. I dont think you are a buyer anyways.

 

Well, whether I am a buyer or not shouldn't change real world data on a $9k product rather than just "it works well".....

-J

 

We have real world data from our testing. That is what was said. Thanks for your encouragement.

 

Back on topic....

So we just finished up the carbon kevlar upper IC pipe to the throttle body. This 1 piece tubular part looks incredible in the car. We also added the Agency Power headers per the customers requests.

Now the question, should we annodize the intercooler black or leave it raw aluminum to show off those amazing welds

 

Question on the carbon fiber intake. I assume that the air box is mounted to the car in a similar way to the OEM air box. However the engine is on mounts that allow some movement. The OEM rubber boot from the air box allows some flexibility so that if the engine moves some relative to the air box it is tolerated. In using the carbon fiber boot aren't you worried about cracking when the engine moves relative to the air box?

The system looks great, if only the price was a little more affordable.

 

This is not a air intake box rather then a duct for the intercooler. The intercooler has a bracket which keeps it "floating" like the stock box using the factory mounts. The carbon/kevlar duct mounts on top of the intercooler and fixes to the intercooler with tabs. There is double sided foam tape between the cooler and the duct. On the IC pipe side, there are black silicone couplers that go between the pipe and the throttlebody as well as the pipe and the intercooler (not pictured).

 

Looking beautiful! Wish I could afford a kit.