Independant Intercooler Test
#166
11-15-2013, 09:03 PM
If it's a purpose built IC tester it probably has the correct sensors, but make sure the sensors you use with it are intended for the temperature range in question. Not so much because of accuracy or damage to the sensors, but if you're using the wrong sensors they will read very slowly (too much mass in the element) and will read low as they take too long to heat up. I've noticed anecdotally in my own datalogs on the 997 that temps continue to rise quite a bit after I back off the throttle, which I have attributed to the IAT sensor reading a bit slowly.
I had made some custom sensors and used them with my old Motec, they literally read 2x as fast as the standard Motec sensors. However the downside to them was they didn't last as long, but they were cheap and it was very easy to tell when they needed to be replaced.
I had made some custom sensors and used them with my old Motec, they literally read 2x as fast as the standard Motec sensors. However the downside to them was they didn't last as long, but they were cheap and it was very easy to tell when they needed to be replaced.
#167
11-16-2013, 09:40 AM
Here is a good article.
Read more.
http://www.enginebasics.com/Advanced...20Test%20.html
Above is the equation we can use to quantify intercooler efficiency (Figure 7). Looking at the equation, you can clearly see that a higher temperature drop (Tin - Tout) is going to increase the calculated efficiency, but there’s more to the equation. The bottom of the equation (Tin – Tambient) takes ambient temperature into account because obviously if the air outside is colder, then the intercooler is going to transfer more heat to the cooling fluid, which increases the intercooler’s calculated efficiency. So this equation does a good job at leveling the playing field for varying ambient temperatures. That way, performing these tests in the dead of winter, or desert heat won't appreciably skew our results.
http://www.enginebasics.com/Advanced...20Test%20.html
Last edited by cjv; 11-16-2013 at 08:44 PM.
#169
11-17-2013, 01:10 PM
Hi,
it looks like as if this is a one gear long pull. Can you provide the full log of that run? It would be interesting to see how long that pull took and what boost level you ran.
Andreas
it looks like as if this is a one gear long pull. Can you provide the full log of that run? It would be interesting to see how long that pull took and what boost level you ran.
Andreas
#170
11-17-2013, 01:19 PM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 
Is this what you need?
#172
11-17-2013, 02:32 PM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 I do not know why the ambient temperature could change like this apart from maybe the altitude? I was travelling down the motorway.
#173
11-17-2013, 04:06 PM
All this temperature logging is missing one thing: temperatures don't move a car. Load does. Having lower temps without checking if this is creating more load is not everything we need to know.
Having said that, here is my temp logging from about 100 to about 270 - traffic was in the way to do more. AT was 19 degrees C. IAT at start was 26 - I did not let the ICs cool off much before I did that run (did 2-3 pulls before).
BTW: these were 100-200 runs starting at 80 and this one I let go thru the gears after the main pull.
Max boost was 1.4 bar with 18G turbos going thru gear 3/4/5/6.
Having said that, here is my temp logging from about 100 to about 270 - traffic was in the way to do more. AT was 19 degrees C. IAT at start was 26 - I did not let the ICs cool off much before I did that run (did 2-3 pulls before).
BTW: these were 100-200 runs starting at 80 and this one I let go thru the gears after the main pull.
Max boost was 1.4 bar with 18G turbos going thru gear 3/4/5/6.
Last edited by GT996; 11-17-2013 at 04:14 PM.
#174
11-17-2013, 04:10 PM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 All this temperature logging is missing one thing: temperatures don't move a car. Load does. Having lower temps without checking if this is creating more load is not everything we need to know.
Having said that, here is my temp logging from about 100 to about 270 - traffic was in the way to do more. AT was 19 degrees C. IAT at start was 26 - I did not let the ICs cool off much before I did that run (did 2-3 pulls before).
Max boost was 1.4 bar with 18G turbos going thru gear 3/4/5/6.
Having said that, here is my temp logging from about 100 to about 270 - traffic was in the way to do more. AT was 19 degrees C. IAT at start was 26 - I did not let the ICs cool off much before I did that run (did 2-3 pulls before).
Max boost was 1.4 bar with 18G turbos going thru gear 3/4/5/6.
What coolers are you running?
#176
11-18-2013, 01:24 AM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 These are Markskis 911tuning 4.5" Race Intercoolers.
#177
11-18-2013, 01:42 AM
Hi,
the turbos are K24 2480 - kinda like 18G regarding flow capability - running 1.4 bar on pump 102 octane.
Yes, 996 turbo and these runs are 6 s flat 100-200. Car was still heavy (Gemballa GT 600) with 1628 kg. Weight has been reduced since then. I am down to 1520 kg and hope to get down to 1480 kg finally.
Actually I am doing a change to Tial Alphas A28 and hope to make some test runs before the season really ends.
Andreas
the turbos are K24 2480 - kinda like 18G regarding flow capability - running 1.4 bar on pump 102 octane.
Yes, 996 turbo and these runs are 6 s flat 100-200. Car was still heavy (Gemballa GT 600) with 1628 kg. Weight has been reduced since then. I am down to 1520 kg and hope to get down to 1480 kg finally.
Actually I am doing a change to Tial Alphas A28 and hope to make some test runs before the season really ends.
Andreas
#178
11-18-2013, 02:16 AM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 Hi,
the turbos are K24 2480 - kinda like 18G regarding flow capability - running 1.4 bar on pump 102 octane.
Yes, 996 turbo and these runs are 6 s flat 100-200. Car was still heavy (Gemballa GT 600) with 1628 kg. Weight has been reduced since then. I am down to 1520 kg and hope to get down to 1480 kg finally.
Actually I am doing a change to Tial Alphas A28 and hope to make some test runs before the season really ends.
Andreas
the turbos are K24 2480 - kinda like 18G regarding flow capability - running 1.4 bar on pump 102 octane.
Yes, 996 turbo and these runs are 6 s flat 100-200. Car was still heavy (Gemballa GT 600) with 1628 kg. Weight has been reduced since then. I am down to 1520 kg and hope to get down to 1480 kg finally.
Actually I am doing a change to Tial Alphas A28 and hope to make some test runs before the season really ends.
Andreas
Cheers Andreas.
It's great to hear about your car and what you are doing with it sounds like a nice machine.
But this thread is about intercoolers and is aimed at 997 turbos which predominently use the vtg turbos so unfortunately your data does not help this thread as vtg's run a lot hotter than the conventional style turbo as k24's are a bigger turbo to begin with also on a 997 turbo even with stage 1 software run more boost.
The only way you could help this thread is to send the 4.5" cooler in for a test at the same place that tested mine independently.
Is this something you are able to do?
#179
11-18-2013, 02:39 AM
Yes, I know this is about 997, but at my HP level no 997 I know is running VTGs any longer (or at at least the GT2RS ones), so I thought this might be useful data - never mind.
Is there any data proving that the output of the VTGs is really hotter? And as a sidenote: we both don't know how hot my turbos are. But you are correct: it really depends largely on the turbos and the boost level in use. Only a back to back test will show differences - if any.
I hope to have my car back to working condition in about a week and my ICs are necessary for that, so I can't send them anywhere, sorry.
I'll let you talk about the 997 stuff now.
Andreas
Is there any data proving that the output of the VTGs is really hotter? And as a sidenote: we both don't know how hot my turbos are. But you are correct: it really depends largely on the turbos and the boost level in use. Only a back to back test will show differences - if any.
I hope to have my car back to working condition in about a week and my ICs are necessary for that, so I can't send them anywhere, sorry.
I'll let you talk about the 997 stuff now.
Andreas
#180
11-18-2013, 02:46 AM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London (UK)
Posts: 1,677
Rep Power: 154 Yes, I know this is about 997, but at my HP level no 997 I know is running VTGs any longer (or at at least the GT2RS ones), so I thought this might be useful data - never mind.
Is there any data proving that the output of the VTGs is really hotter? And as a sidenote: we both don't know how hot my turbos are. But you are correct: it really depends largely on the turbos and the boost level in use. Only a back to back test will show differences - if any.
I hope to have my car back to working condition in about a week and my ICs are necessary for that, so I can't send them anywhere, sorry.
I'll let you talk about the 997 stuff now.
Andreas
Is there any data proving that the output of the VTGs is really hotter? And as a sidenote: we both don't know how hot my turbos are. But you are correct: it really depends largely on the turbos and the boost level in use. Only a back to back test will show differences - if any.
I hope to have my car back to working condition in about a week and my ICs are necessary for that, so I can't send them anywhere, sorry.
I'll let you talk about the 997 stuff now.
Andreas
Thank you for understanding Andreas.
Just trying to keep the thread on the straight and narrow and trying to compare as many apples to apples as possible as this thread did go sideways a few times ;-)
Testing only takes a day so 3 to 4 day turnaround is possible upto you. Obviously at your expense but at least you get to see if they really stack up against the rest!