I've started working on turbocharging my 85 SE with a 3500 swap, and I was wondering what the turbo crowd is doing about intercooling(air to air) their turbo motors? if you could post pics of how you are set up, I would love to see them.
Thanks-
Eric
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
There seems to be varying opinions on this. Who would have thought...?
Some like the air-air intercoolers and say that they provide more constant temperature control. The heat exchanger might get hot but it only gets to a certain point and doesn't go hotter.
Some like the liquid-air intercoolers and say that they will pull more heat from the air charge. However, the water may eventually heat up to a higher temperature than you want and the air charge will not be cooled as much.
For me, I'm on the liquid-air side of the fence. If I'm at the drag strip and my water gets too hot, I can throw a bunch of ice in it. For that matter, I'll likely throw ice in it to cool the air charge WAY down below what any air-air intercooler could dream of.
Air-air is cheaper but you'll likely have to riun a lot of tubing for one in a Fiero. There isn't a good place to mount one in a Fiero, other than in the front bumper.
The debate on this issue as it relates to the Fiero is the lack of data showing the intake temps on the few that have mounted their intercoolers down low ahead of the cradle vs. those who have air to water intercoolers. I've proven on my car at least that so far a front mount intercooler is the best provided you are okay with running tubes from front to rear which I did, but removed because I could not inclose them sufficiently inside the rocker panels. You can experiment with square aluminum from McMaster Carr if you'd like. The results were intake temps within about 20 deg of ambient.
My experiment with an intercooler in front of the cradle FACING the theoretical air stream prooved it was near non existent partly due to the front air dam and a waste of time for my application. Until someone posts their logs showing the effectiveness of the rear mount intercooler, I can't imagine it being better than an air to water setup based on my experience.
You can also do water/meth injection, there's a lot on its effectiveness to read about.
It doesn't matter what our oppinions on the matter are, the numbers as proof are most important.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-29-2012).]
IP: Logged
08:11 AM
Darth Fiero Member
Posts: 5922 From: Waterloo, Indiana Registered: Oct 2002
Originally posted by Joseph Upson: My experiment with an intercooler in front of the cradle FACING the theoretical air stream prooved it was near non existent partly due to the front air dam and a waste of time for my application.
Don't take this the wrong way but, the truth of the matter is you botched your rear mount Air-to-Air IC install. So I'm not surprised when you say the air-to-air IC didn't do anything for you. But I would appreciate it if you would be honest and disclose that fact when you post on this subject.
Yes, there is a lack of test data on air-to-air IC setups in a Fiero. Joseph was correct about that. But that lack of data doesn't automatically mean water-to-air IC setups are superior. The simple fact of the matter is there are so many different sizes, types, and ways an intercooler can be set up in a Fiero that it would be difficult to draw a conclusion as to which is better at this point. Joseph has posted about 1/4 the total necessary test data we need to determine just how good his water-to-air IC setup is (he only told us some temp readings, he did not take nor post any pressure drop data). So that really isn't giving us anything conclusive. I will say he might be on to something with the square tube idea (to use as the coolant transfer tubes from front to back). Although I would recommend that rectangular box steel tubing be looked into as well as it could also double as frame ties if installed correctly (not that the Fiero needs them but having a more rigid spaceframe would certainly not hurt).
Having said all that, I did build a 3800 Series 2 Turbocharged Fiero a number of years ago (now owned by PBJ) which recently just broke into the 10s (in the 1/4 mile). And if I'm not mistaken, it is still using the "ineffective" (as some would put it) AIR-TO-AIR intercooler I put on it. Keep in mind this is not a gutted Fiero - it was in full street trim when it was raced, so I would even go out on a limb and say it is might be one of the heaviest Fieros to make it into the 10's. And if the air-to-air intercooler is as ineffective as some believe, then I would say to that this is one of the faster hot-air setups I have ever seen.
-ryan
------------------ OVERKILL IS UNDERRATED Custom GM OBD1 & OBD2 Tuning | Engine Conversions & more | www.gmtuners.com
Originally posted by Darth Fiero: Don't take this the wrong way but, the truth of the matter is you botched your rear mount Air-to-Air IC install. So I'm not surprised when you say the air-to-air IC didn't do anything for you. But I would appreciate it if you would be honest and disclose that fact when you post on this subject.
-ryan
No problem. It wasn't botched. It just didn't work Darth. I can't imagine it being simplified any further than the way I installed it, hanging about 2 inches above the ground which is much lower than the front air dam and still making practically no difference on inlet temps with ~18"x6"x3.5" core. That's the same way it would be positioned if in the front of the car except a little higher up. If by botched you mean it was too low, okay.
I plan to install an air to water setup but never stated I had done so to date. I would certainly have posted my results right away. I have been working with water/meth injection the past couple of weeks so you may have seen me post something on that.
With the heat exchanger for an air to water intercooler placed up front where it should be I can't imagine it not being more effective than an intercooler underneath the car with the core facing the ground and fans trying to pull a sufficient amount of air through them. I believe that's a reasonable assessment from what I experienced.
I wouldn't buy a CX racing water to air intercooler unless I was sure it was the equivalent in efficiency to what siliconeintakes offers on their site.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 04-29-2012).]
IP: Logged
12:48 PM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3136 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
No problem. It wasn't botched. It just didn't work Darth. I can't imagine it being simplified any further than the way I installed it, hanging about 2 inches above the ground which is much lower than the front air dam and still making practically no difference on inlet temps with ~18"x6"x3.5" core. That's the same way it would be positioned if in the front of the car except a little higher up. If by botched you mean it was too low, okay.
It was botched because of not only the way you mounted it, but also because of the fact you didn't use an airdam nor did you put any fans on it. The way you had it set up didn't prevent any air from rushing around it so therefore not much air was forced to run thru it.
The front airdam on the car doesn't cut all airflow from running under the car either, unless of course your have your car sitting at NASCAR ride height (which would probably be impossible to pull off if you drive your car on public roads).
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:
Darth;
Can you post some pictures to show the differences between the right way and the wrong way?
I can't seem to find the thread where Joseph posted the picture of how he mounted his air-to-air IC when he tried it. I wanted to show you that picture to give you an example of what doesn't work. Joseph found this out thru his own testing.
I do have a a picture of what I did and it does work. How well does it work? I can't tell you that because I didn't have time to do the proper testing (but that car just ran an impressive time on 94 octane fuel, so I'll let the results speak for themselves).
There were two electric fans set up as pullers mounted to the top of the above pictured IC. We wanted to run a 3rd but I think either the A/C lines or the trans mount was in the way. Can't remember, it has been a while since I built that swap. Is this the absolute best way to do an intercooler on a Fiero? I'm sure it's not. But it works. And I think it works well; well enough that when I get the time to upgrade the IC on my own Fiero, I'll probably use and do the same thing. And when I do, I will do some testing to see just how good it is. I will make those tests results public when I get them.
A front-mount air-to-air IC would be the best, but there just isn't any room under the Fiero to run charge air tubing (of any significant size) to the front; not without significantly modifying the spaceframe anyway. And even if you could, there isn't much room up front for a heat exchanger / air-to-air unit anyway.
Can you post some pictures to show the differences between the right way and the wrong way?
2002z28ssconv;
I want to do air to air, not air to water.
Joseph Upson;
I may do water/meth at one point, but I don't think it'll be right away.
Darth is a pretty sharp member here on the forum with a lot of knowledge and know how, but as I've mentioned to him before, I think here he just doesn't want to be wrong because despite the location in front of the cradle on the example he showed in a previous thread on this subject, the install looked pretty darn good and it would be a shame if such a nice install didn't produce.
I've lost count of the number of intercooler trials I've performed on the Fiero, the front mount was the only one worth the trouble. Maybe a car at normal ride height will do better with the setup Darth produced but I would have to see numbers on it before I would even think about it at this point. Think about how much hot air is given off by the little Fiero heater core and how much more effective a properly sized liquid to air heat exchanger is than that at transfering heat from hot water.
Just do your research, poor planning or, results waste time and money.
IP: Logged
08:59 PM
darkhorizon Member
Posts: 12279 From: Flint Michigan Registered: Jan 2006
I can't seem to find the thread where Joseph posted the picture of how he mounted his air-to-air IC when he tried it. I wanted to show you that picture to give you an example of what doesn't work. Joseph found this out thru his own testing.
I do have a a picture of what I did and it does work. How well does it work? I can't tell you that because I didn't have time to do the proper testing (but that car just ran an impressive time on 94 octane fuel, so I'll let the results speak for themselves).
There were two electric fans set up as pullers mounted to the top of the above pictured IC. We wanted to run a 3rd but I think either the A/C lines or the trans mount was in the way. Can't remember, it has been a while since I built that swap. Is this the absolute best way to do an intercooler on a Fiero? I'm sure it's not. But it works. And I think it works well; well enough that when I get the time to upgrade the IC on my own Fiero, I'll probably use and do the same thing. And when I do, I will do some testing to see just how good it is. I will make those tests results public when I get them.
A front-mount air-to-air IC would be the best, but there just isn't any room under the Fiero to run charge air tubing (of any significant size) to the front; not without significantly modifying the spaceframe anyway. And even if you could, there isn't much room up front for a heat exchanger / air-to-air unit anyway.
-ryan
Why and where would you put an air dam on an intercooler hanging face first in a supposed air stream or fans for that matter? It makes no sense to think air would not flow through my intercooler but will readily turn 90 degrees and go through yours. There's not enough air flowing underneath the car. At best the fans do a great job at low speed travel but at speed the airflow wants to go straight.
For the second time. Get the numbers and prove me wrong and I'll consider doing it your way if the return is worth it. You can have it from here. When you post respectable numbers then you can legitimately refer to my experiment as botched.
Otherwise a flat cooler with fans on it and an air brake trying to redirect air is no match for a proper liquid air install in a Fiero. The laws of physics are working hard against your idea whether you accept it or not.
You couldnt research your way out of a wet paper bag.
That made me smile, you spelled research correctly. I should have known the lid wasn't on the "trash" can too awful tight and that you'd be showing up soon :-) You all have a good day and keep it clean.
IP: Logged
09:15 PM
PFF
System Bot
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3136 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
how about mounting one under one (or both) of the decklid vents with a fan to keep airflowing over it? or maybe mounting inside of the rocker where the stock air intake was? sounds like both of those spot wouldn't allow for a decent size intercooler/much airflow at all. any other ideas?
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
i plan on doing a water to air when i do mine, findind somewhere to mount it and a pump just seems alot easier then finding a place to mount a air to air that gets proper flow, etc etc...
Maybe it's my own inexperience, but common sense tells me a water-to-air intercooler would be more effective when you are running the lines from the back of a Fiero to the front. I think it would be more efficient for water to travel that distance in smaller lines, then air pressure in much larger lines.
IP: Logged
12:33 AM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3136 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
Well this is about your only option unless you mount it in the trunk with fans and new holes everywhere for air flow. I gurss you could make a big spoiler out of one on the deck lid too. Other than that, an air-to-air has to be big enough to get the job done and the only reasonable location for that is below the starter. If not there you're running tubes to the front and the only reasonable place for those is in the rocker panels. Special shaped tubes will likely be required. Make them as big as possible or the length of tubing will be too much of a restriction. Boost levels will drop significantly.
If you use the [Search] feature you can find the thread that the picture came from.
Sorry for the liquid-to-air suggestion. I missed where you said that was the only method you would consider.
[This message has been edited by 2002z28ssconv (edited 04-30-2012).]
Originally posted by ericjon262: how about mounting one under one (or both) of the decklid vents with a fan to keep airflowing over it?
Done it minus the fan. Years ago I tried this before finally taking note of how hot the vents get due to hot air flowing through them from the engine and exhaust. The Fiero is just a tough platform to intercool effectively with an air to air core somewhere in the back of the car without direct air flow.
It's just magical thinking to believe air is going to effectively fill voids adjacent to its direction of flow as vehicle speed increases under load. The faster you go, the less the air stream will bend away from its direction of flow. An enclosed scoop like what is used for ram air applications would be needed to trap and direct it properly.
To keep things on track here, I have a lot of respect for Darth and his contributions here, he has helped me quite a bit directly and indirectly, I just can't accept his intercooler arrangement as an efficient enough alternative based on my own experience in a Fiero with turbocharging without logged inlet temps to prove it worthy. The air is just not there unless my car is some how scaring it away due to the need of a paint job.
IP: Logged
08:01 AM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
I have a bus heater core up front because it was the biggest that I could get into the right side intake of my murci replica. In the back is the biggest air to water intercooler I could find. I used a pump that was designed for a solar water heater to move the water and I have a reservoir that is big enough for 20 lbs of ice. I used the area in front of the engine for the intercooler and reservoir, but I have an extra ten inches there. They could be mounted in the trunk of a stock Fiero. When I designed my system I considered both air to air and air to water. Also front mount and rear mount air to air in front of the engine was considered. There were several reasons to go either way. Air to air is simpler and if fans can get enough movement through it, it might work. Drue has an intercooler mounted like that on his pr 3.4. Although a front mounted air to air would get better air movement through it I think that the long air tubes might contribute to turbo lag. I mounted my intercooler as close to the engine as I could for that reason. So far it has been all theoretical in my design and I hope to test it out real soon. Unfortunately there is no air to air to compare it to so it's still theory. Good stuff in this thread! I just dumped a crap load of money into my tranny in an effort to get the hp to the ground without breaking.
IP: Logged
10:51 AM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
I haven't got a good tune on it yet, but Fieroaddictions turbo N* has an air to water with both the turbo and the intercooler where the trunk used to be.
You know... I was at the 25th annual show in Michigan and GM had their prototype 85 or 86 turbo setup... The inter cooler was mounted in the wing.. Flushed, of course. It was clean with the piping running the the wing stands and strapped to the underside of the hood. They used an accordion style L's at the base of the trunk lid brackets to allow the trunk to open. I checked into the L shapped couplings and found that now a days they have swivel style L's that have sealed, smooth internally and can handle pressure for these areas instead of the accordion setup.. I think GM was on to something here and I'm surprised that no one has tried it since.. This is one rOute I'm going to attempt when it comes time for my turbo.. With and extra wing and deck lid, of course.
IP: Logged
01:34 PM
wftb Member
Posts: 3692 From: kincardine,ontario,canada Registered: Jun 2005
i had an air to air similar to the previous pics but minus the fans .it reduced my charge temps but on a hot day they would get up to around 44C .you definitely need fans to make that setup effective .my current setup results in charge temps very close to ambient temps .the water cooler is up front with a cold can reservoir in the front trunk .i have HP tuners so i scan for intake temps whenever i have the laptop in the car .the one thing i really like about this setup is how close the charge cooler is to the intake .i run 10-12 psi of boost and i also run water meth injection .
[This message has been edited by wftb (edited 04-30-2012).]
To keep things on track here, I have a lot of respect for Darth and his contributions here, he has helped me quite a bit directly and indirectly, I just can't accept his intercooler arrangement as an efficient enough alternative based on my own experience in a Fiero with turbocharging without logged inlet temps to prove it worthy.
Go find a 3rd gen Trans Am and climb under the front of that car and tell me how the radiator in it works at all then. Those cars have NO open grills in front for oncoming air to rush straight into the radiators. NONE. And to make matters worse for that setup, the air has to make TWO turns in order to get into the radiator of those cars. My under-car air-to-air IC setup only requires the air to make ONE turn. Every time the air has to change directions, it slows down. But just because it slows down doesn't mean it stops flowing. Air will flow from one place to another if there is a pressure difference. The airdam creates this pressure difference; in two places, actually. It creates a high pressure area ahead of it while creating a low pressure area behind it. That's why it is essential for every Fiero (as well as many other vehicles) to have an airdam under the radiator in order for the engine cooling system to work. The same principle applies to the rear mount air-to-air IC arrangement. And if you think those open slots in your Fiero GT's front nose are all that is needed to keep the radiator cool, you better think again...
In order for Joseph's air-to-air IC to have worked where he put it and how he had it facing the oncoming air, he would have had to lower the IC core to within probably 1" of the ground level which would have made it impossible to drive on the road without damaging it. That's just a simple fact. If he had the room, he could have moved it up and built an under-car scoop for it so air coming under the car would be directed up into the front-facing IC, BUT AGAIN, that airflow would have had to make TWO TURNS in order to get into the intercooler. My way of doing it only requires air to make just one turn, and I think the airdam I use directs enough air for it to work. A custom built scoop might work better, but I doubt it would survive long if the car is driven on public roads. That airdam is designed to take a beating - and at least on my car I know it takes a beating.
I know air flows thru my air-to-air IC setups. The increased amount of dust and dirt that accumulates on the engines of these builds proves that (it is significantly more than Fieros that don't have the same setup). Is my IC setup the absolute best setup you could possibly do? No. We are working with Fieros here. Everything is going to be a compromise of how you do it vs. cost.
I'm sorry I don't have the proper test data to prove how well my way of doing things works (or doesn't work, whichever the case may end up being). But it is a factor of time; and right now I'm absolutely buried in work. I simply don't have the time to do the proper testing. And so far, I haven't seen anyone else on this forum do any PROPER testing of their IC setups either. (Simply getting one temp reading from the outlet of the IC doesn't constitute a proper test). JOSEPH: If you want to prove my setup doesn't work well, then you need to duplicate exactly what I built and do the proper testing (measuring both IC inlet and outlet temps and pressures). You can't just stick 2" of a front-facing IC core down into the under-car airflow without doing anything else like you did and call that "tested". Like I said before, I'll save you the trouble and tell you doing it that way you did won't work very well so don't waste your time.
[This message has been edited by Darth Fiero (edited 04-30-2012).]
IP: Logged
05:01 PM
wftb Member
Posts: 3692 From: kincardine,ontario,canada Registered: Jun 2005
if you look at the picture i posted, you can see the intake air temp sensor after the intercooler and before the intake .that is where my HP tuners scans for temperature .i took scans with no intercooler , air to air and air to water .air to water worked the best and gave me the shortest charge pipe length (about 5 feet shorter ).as for the temperature before the intercooler , i have no idea and i cant scan that .but i dont really care , all that matters to me is the temp of the air that the engine is using .the air to water only requires rubber hoses run to the front and a bit of wiring that can be tucked along the gas tank .the heat exchanger at the front is first in line and i run a fan that is on all the time .the pump runs all the time as well ,only about 2 amps total draw .ecotecs run very cool anyway so engine coolant temps are not affected . i just found air to water the easiest way to do my setup .you can make any setup work , and if you have scanning capability you can see the results right away .
IP: Logged
06:11 PM
Darth Fiero Member
Posts: 5922 From: Waterloo, Indiana Registered: Oct 2002
if you look at the picture i posted, you can see the intake air temp sensor after the intercooler and before the intake .that is where my HP tuners scans for temperature .i took scans with no intercooler , air to air and air to water .air to water worked the best and gave me the shortest charge pipe length (about 5 feet shorter ).as for the temperature before the intercooler , i have no idea and i cant scan that .but i dont really care , all that matters to me is the temp of the air that the engine is using .the air to water only requires rubber hoses run to the front and a bit of wiring that can be tucked along the gas tank .the heat exchanger at the front is first in line and i run a fan that is on all the time .the pump runs all the time as well ,only about 2 amps total draw .ecotecs run very cool anyway so engine coolant temps are not affected . i just found air to water the easiest way to do my setup .you can make any setup work , and if you have scanning capability you can see the results right away .
The problem is you only know what the IC outlet temperature is. You don't know what the inlet temp is, nor do you know what the inlet pressure and outlet pressure is. It is possible that IF you were using a restrictive water-to-air IC it could be artificially lowering the charge air temps because of this restriction (which would also result in a loss of boost pressure across the IC). The only way you would know that is if you simultaneously measured inlet and outlet pressures as well as inlet and outlet temperatures. With this information (along with ambient temp readings), you can properly measure the efficiency of a given intercooler. The problem with a lot of water-to-air IC's I see people using is their small size. So I have to question how efficient they really are. They may very well be more efficient in a Fiero than the air-to-air IC’s I use; but if you don't do the proper testing, you won't know for sure if it is or not - so you can't really say it is better. You can only speculate it is with the information you have available.
And of course, the next thing I would like to know is does it heat soak? In other words, does it have a problem with being able to cool down the charge air temps when you are doing back to back power runs? Lots of water-to-air IC setups do have problems with this so it can be a factor.
Don't take this as a pissing contest, rather I think you should view it as a fact-finding exercise.
IP: Logged
09:36 PM
dratts Member
Posts: 8373 From: Coeur d' alene Idaho USA Registered: Apr 2001
I agree with all of what you posted. My intercooler is twice the size of those pictured because I worried that the smaller ones might not be adequate. Is there a downside to having too big of an intercooler and it's radiator? I went with a large reservoir with a big lid so that I could address any heat soak issues with ice. I would like to have temperature and pressure sensors fore and aft of the intercooler to measure it's efficiency. I do have laser thermometers so I can at least measure the temperature difference across the intercooler. I apologize to the op for taking this away from air to air, but it's already gone that way a bit.
quote
Originally posted by Darth Fiero:
The problem is you only know what the IC outlet temperature is. You don't know what the inlet temp is, nor do you know what the inlet pressure and outlet pressure is. It is possible that IF you were using a restrictive water-to-air IC it could be artificially lowering the charge air temps because of this restriction (which would also result in a loss of boost pressure across the IC). The only way you would know that is if you simultaneously measured inlet and outlet pressures as well as inlet and outlet temperatures. With this information (along with ambient temp readings), you can properly measure the efficiency of a given intercooler. The problem with a lot of water-to-air IC's I see people using is their small size. So I have to question how efficient they really are. They may very well be more efficient in a Fiero than the air-to-air IC’s I use; but if you don't do the proper testing, you won't know for sure if it is or not - so you can't really say it is better. You can only speculate it is with the information you have available.
And of course, the next thing I would like to know is does it heat soak? In other words, does it have a problem with being able to cool down the charge air temps when you are doing back to back power runs? Lots of water-to-air IC setups do have problems with this so it can be a factor.
Don't take this as a pissing contest, rather I think you should view it as a fact-finding exercise.
IP: Logged
10:53 PM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3136 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
I may do a heat exchanger still, I just need to find a place to mount it, and get the additional materials, like a pump, and a small radiator, or a large heater core, possibly mounted below the sail panel.
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
got any recommendations on where to buy air to water setups? I think that may work out better, my main concern is additional cost, I'm on a pretty tight budget...
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
Can you post some pictures to show the differences between the right way and the wrong way?
2002z28ssconv;
I want to do air to air, not air to water.
Joseph Upson;
I may do water/meth at one point, but I don't think it'll be right away.
For the heat and humidity we have here, a2a on a mid engine car is a HUGE mistake if you ask me.
------------------ Whodeanie built 1988 Fiero GT, loaded, 14k original miles, F23, built L67 swap, ST2 cam and matching valvetrain, PT67 bb turbo, w2a charge-cooled ----400-500whp?????? More mods when I get it back (interior, suspension, lighting etc). Stay tuned! 1987 Fiero GT Road Racer. 1st documented 3.4TDC swap- built in 1994. 5MT Isuzu, Quaife prototype LSD, HT Tubular A-arms, Fully poly & Heim jointed suspension, Custom 3 way adjustible sway bars, HT Bump Steer kit, Koin's, 320# springs, GA brakes, ZEX N20 and more! Under full restoration. 2007 Toyota Tacoma Double cab Prerunner SR5 Stock, and staying that way. 2009 KTM 250SX motocross bike. Modded and fun as hell!
IP: Logged
12:12 AM
darkhorizon Member
Posts: 12279 From: Flint Michigan Registered: Jan 2006
wait, cost was the driving concern on an air/water???
Air/water is going to be cheaper per "unit of intercooling" every day of the week... To get the same intercooling out of an air/air in that location would cost you $600+.... Akursedx's setup was not cheap, it was custom built, and still quite small and ineffective for the type of air it is seeing.
IP: Logged
12:12 AM
ericjon262 Member
Posts: 3136 From: everywhere. Registered: Jan 2010
I've started shopping around a bit more, and it seems as though the air to water setups aren't as large of a price jump as I thought, and I think I may be able to do a mount it where the lower portion of my trunk used to be, and the radiator where the factory air intake was, or maybe on the other side.
------------------ there's a Group on 60degreeV6.com for us 660 Fiero owners!
got any recommendations on where to buy air to water setups? I think that may work out better, my main concern is additional cost, I'm on a pretty tight budget...
http://www.siliconeintakes....d2e492e3123dc275e7a1 has near complete base kits minus the hoses and using properly designed cores for liquid/air available starting at about $300 and that includes the fan. I think about $500 will be closer to the actual cost once you go through the options and fine tune the base kit for best fit. You can run the hoses for the heat exchanger right along side the lower part of the fuel tank to the front of the car and put the cooler itself down in front of the cradle if your exhaust system permits. The 600 hp unit is not that big so you shouldn't have problems with fitment.
I purchased my braided steel line from them for a great price and when one stretch arrived with a nick in the middle where someone accidently started a cut they promptly sent me a replacement free of charge.
wait, cost was the driving concern on an air/water???
Air/water is going to be cheaper per "unit of intercooling" every day of the week... To get the same intercooling out of an air/air in that location would cost you $600+.... Akursedx's setup was not cheap, it was custom built, and still quite small and ineffective for the type of air it is seeing.
My a/a core cost $300 (It's listed for $345 now). I was looking at a custom core but it would have run around $800, but I was fortunate to find an off-the-shelf option with the exact measurements I needed. Add the fans ($20x2) and the airdam ($5 at the junkyard) and you are looking at under $400 for parts. Now to install a water/air in the same spot on the car I checked out frozenboost.com and came with with $169 for a 14"x5"x4.5" long core good to 550cfm (my ic was rated to 650cfm), then $119 for a bosch ic pump, and $149 for a suitable heat-exchanger. So right there you are at $437 and you still have to buy hose, some more clamps, and a reservoir. I'm sure you can find some things cheaper if you look around, but unless you buy everything used, you would be hard-pressed to do w/a cheaper than a/a if you are mounting them in the same spot, which is one of only a few options that would keep your trunk.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with either option and both have their positives and negatives. If I were to build another 3800 turbo car, I would still probably go with an a/a core
Originally posted by AkursedX: Personally, I see nothing wrong with either option and both have their positives and negatives. If I were to build another 3800 turbo car, I would still probably go with an a/a core
Do you have a datalog showing boosted inlet temps to share with us? The point of interest is not which is better, but which is best for the Fiero in that location since a front mount IC is out of the question. Whichever of the two options does the best job of cooling the air in that location is what I'd side with. If front mounting an air to air IC was practical for the Fiero I'd choose it everytime.
Originally posted by dratts: Unfortunately there is no air to air to compare it to so it's still theory. .
You don't need a comparison, just a demonstration of its efficiency. If you manage 70% or better intake charge cooling, nothing you compare it to will change such an impressive accomplishment.
IP: Logged
02:42 PM
E.Furgal Member
Posts: 11708 From: LAND OF CONFUSION Registered: Mar 2012
one I saw, the intercooler was in the best place to get air, on ANY CAR, and great on a mid/rear engined one.. it was in the rear bumper, the rear bumpers area catches a ton of air, ask anyone in nascar, they used to make the rear bumper mounts so weak that it get bumped and be gone.. it replaced the inner support of the cover, and they nicely intergrated a screen into the bumper cover.. kept the piping short..
IP: Logged
03:20 PM
Will Member
Posts: 14278 From: Where you least expect me Registered: Jun 2000
Is there a downside to having too big of an intercooler and it's radiator?
More is more and less may not be enough. I suppose at some point you could go "too big", but that might be hard to do in a Fiero.
quote
Originally posted by darkhorizon:
wait, cost was the driving concern on an air/water???
Air/water is going to be cheaper per "unit of intercooling" every day of the week... To get the same intercooling out of an air/air in that location would cost you $600+.... Akursedx's setup was not cheap, it was custom built, and still quite small and ineffective for the type of air it is seeing.
AkursedX beat me to the reply. But I'll add: NOBODY makes a bolt-on IC kit for a Fiero. So ANY IC kit, a2a or w2a is going to need to be custom built for Fiero use. Nice try tho, DH. I do suppose though you might be able to find w2a parts in your junkyard which might allow you to build it cheaper than we were able to do the a2a unit for in AkursedX's car.
