333pg333

Hey that's my quote!? Leave it alone. It's a good quote and deserves more respect...and just because I can't spell the car's name correctly shows how much I don't respect them...or those that buy them anyway...so there. Ehall my agent's coming after you for royalties too.
Signed
'idot'

333pg333

Andrew, when you did those back to back comparisons with the i/c's , what mods and level of hp was the car on, and how large were the i/c pipes and throttle body? Was it a standard inlet? Just curious. I would think that there would have to be some improvement under certain circumstances by going up in i/c size. On a relatively lower hp car with no mods to the above items I could believe it though.

NZ951

mods were extensive ummm turbo (60-1), exhaust (3" with full length pipe off the tial WG), mild head work, 3 angle cut valves, bored TB, 2.25" IC pipes, blah blah making 365WHP.

ehall

lol! They'll never take me alive!
signed
Quoter of Idiots

gt37vgt

I did some inlet air temp measurments i punched my car round the back streets to no sustained 100mph stuff i have a small aparent "stage 2" turbos (looks standard) running about 20ps the post cooler temps were never more than 10C over ambient i think this was cant remember at what stage whether i had vented thee bonnet or not think it was befor yeh seems the intercooler mods are much later on . if i were to make any IC mods i would buy a cheap water IC off Ebay then cool the water in the standard IC seems schools out on advantages of shorter inlet tracks no solid evidence seen either way

billindenver

IMHO an intercooler isn't being tested on the street, it's not really being utilized on the dyno (not enough air passing over it). I think the real test of an intercooler is heat soaked at the end of a 30 minute all out track session....when someone shows me a modified cooler works better in those circumstances (with test data) I will buy one. Until then, I'm not putting a scabbed in intercooler in front of my radiator (that much is damn certain) and I don't believe there is much benefit in putting larger end tanks on the stock unit...though I will read every one of these threads in the hope that someone shows me an improvement.

The strange thing about the intercooler and 3 inch versus stock versus 4 inch exhaust threads is that those gains should be so easy for a company wanting to sell them to document. You put in some thermocouples and head to the track or you rent a dyno for half a day (for less than the profit on one exhaust system) and you have independent testing done. The lack of that kind of absolute testing...makes me very suspicious of the claims. But then I've been wrong before....

TurboTommy

I have also found that the cooling ability of the stock IC is quite adequate.
However, the real issue is, when the system volume is increased (obviously, going up in displacement is of most significance), the stock IC is a little on the small side because of increased pressure drop. This is just as bad as inadequate cooling ability.

cyinisis

For real results,
Get a 3-5 gallon tank, hide it in the wheel well...
Fish tank submergable water pump.
And some small spray nozzles...I don't know what would work the best here.

Run an actuator switch to your cabin (there are 3 switch pods left there!) that will be power on/off for the water pump.

With tubing, it'd probably run $40, and you'd have a decent H2O squirter system.

Porschefile

The few comparisons I've seen of various types of 951 parts IMO are entirely way too detailed and complicated on relatively simple subjects. 9 times out of 10, you don't have to bust out a science book, complex formulas, etc etc to understand or see where there are improvements or shortcomings. What would be nice is a SIMPLISTIC comparison with a minimal number of variables to keep from skewing the results too much. There just isn't any reason to make these subjects more complicated than they need to be, and there really isn't any reason for the sheer number of threads, discussions, arguments and skepticism on subjects of this nature. It's just not that hard guys. I can understand elaborate and involved comparisons or discussions for things of a more advanced nature such as engine internal design (piston specs, cam specs, etc etc).

Most of the time with the 951 you aren't going to see significant gains with an IC on the dyno due to the lack of realistic airflow compared to a car at speed. The stock IC is good enough that you aren't going from a crappy sidemount IC to a huge FMIC, which explains why gains on the dyno might not be noticeable. One definite benefit to be had over the stock IC is one with more surface area. The stock IC is what, about 6" thick IIRC? Much thicker than a ~3-3.5" thick core and the rear half of the core is significantly less effective due to a reduced amount of airflow reaching the rear part of the core. I think it's pretty obvious why increased surface area is superior so I won't elaborate too much on that. The end tanks have obvious room for improvement as they are not ideally shaped (well at least the one with the kink isn't) and the outlets are relatively small diameter for a 2.5l making over say 300whp. The volume of the IC as well as the inlet/outlet diameter and piping diameter IS important for the same reason exhaust diameter is important on a turbocharged car. In my experience the stock IC pipes, in/out, end tanks, and overall core size are a bit too small for a 2.5l making say 300-350+whp. Will they work just fine? Yeah, and it's been well proven for awhile. Will going larger be worthwhile? IMO yes, and especially on a car that sees the track as reduced intake temps is always a good thing. Anyone feel free to flame away. As always, I have little in the way of "951 proof", though I have yet to see anyone here provide any actual proof to dispute that it is worthwhile. Some good proof would be datalogged IAT's before/after under load and at speed. Hmm, if I keep my 951 much longer I might just have to get off my lazy @ss and do a few comparisons like this!

ehall

You've missed the point. The point is that it takes a significant increase in hp, over stock before a larger IC is needed. Thus, spending the money, before buying and installing the mods to make serious hp, is not a terribly wise use of resources. As for IC needs vis a vis hp, special tool did over 470 hp to the wheels before he went to his current IC. He's now shooting for 500 on pump gas, and should hit 600 on race gas.
Bottomline is that the cash is better spent by the thread starter, by first getting into seroious hp, before spending the cash on an IC.
That said, it's his money and I wish himthe best either way.

Porschefile

No I haven't missed the point. No one has actually PROVEN at what point an upgraded IC is worthwhile on a 951. Someone doing a couple high horsepower dyno runs is absolutely no basis for a comparison whatsoever. Do you even understand simple thermodynamics? I'd like to see someone running 450+whp track their car on a stock IC and log the IAT's as I know they'd be pretty damn hot. On a stock K26 951, yeah a stock IC is perfectly fine and the money would be better spent elsewhere. On an upgraded turbo 951 making over 300whp, you make it sound as if there is no worthwhile gain until you're making well over 400whp, which is completely and utterly wrong. If you disagree, you need to study up on the thermodynamics a bit because the stock IC is WAAAAAAAAYYYYY too small to efficiently (efficiently being the key word) sustain over 400whp for any kind of sustained driving and not just a few dyno pulls. I know this from experience. Hell, even on smaller engines making 300-400whp there are still worthwhile improvements upgrading to IC's significantly larger than the 951's. I know what I've seen with my own 2 eyes on a large variety of cars and different displacement engines. What's your basis for an argument, that I'm wrong because ST's IC didn't explode or have a nuclear meltdown after a couple dyno runs? You're gonna have to come up with something better than that, buddy. Have you even upgraded an IC on a turbocharged car before or used an IC larger than a 951's?

billindenver

Wow file, you are really in quite a passion tonight. I often find that you are a very emotional guy when it comes to stating your knowledge or what you take to be knowledge. No proof, no testing and at one time you seem to argue for a point while later you seem to argue against it....depending on which view will get someone to argue with you. It is possible that you really do have the knowledge you think you have, but your approach..the way you phrase your points can tend to paint you as the professional internet debater.....willing to argue whichever side will generate some drama.

I don't know why you're lashing out at ehall. All he said was upgrading an intercooler before making big HP is a waste of money...and anyone knowing anything at all about these motors would have to agree with that. You state how his view is completely and utterly wrong..but then, you have never modified a 951 in your life, nor have you tested the stock intercooler at any HP level. WAAAYYYYY to small? Based on what wanna be Nissan teenage bigger is certainly better philosophy? You are passionate, I'll give you that, and emotional but neither of those makes you very objective....and that is where you do yourself a disservice and destroy your credibility. I saw nothing in ehalls post that should have fired you up like that. You are constantly fired up because this 'community' does not give you what you believe to be your props....but then you never present yourself in a way worthy of such. Build a car, make it fast, show us where we are in error.....and then talk like you know what is up. As it is, you seem like another teenager who knows everything because he knows how to read specs on the internet.

I have recently seen a car that leads me to believe there may be some gain to be had from modifiying the stock intercooler, but I won't commit either way until I see some data. I can state, however, with complete conviction that the stock intercooler will not melt down your engine even running at high boost levels on the track (for a decade). I can state that because I have done it. You on the other hand will attack someone elses viewpoint based on nothing but what you believe to be basic thermodynamics....a topic I seriously doubt you have spent nearly as much time studying as many of us in here....let alone working with as a living. Most of your conclusions are suspect at best, based on assumptions that you are not qualifed to make. Just because you have seen pictures in Ricer Monthly of a Nissan with a 3 foot by 4 foot intercooler strapped to the front end...doesn't necessarily mean it is needed or even advisable.

IMHO of course.

ehall

1. I'm not your buddy.
2. ST did his runs with one of the best EGT set ups of anyone that has ever built one of these motors, so you can shove your thermohysterics up your tail pipe. Moreover Andrew (NZ951) did extensive testing with data on this very subject.
3. Porsche raced these cars with the very same IC. Of course your knowledge is far more advanced than their's simply based on your cabinet full of professional 24 hour endurance racing trophies.
4."You are constantly fired up because this 'community' does not give you what you believe to be your props....but then you never present yourself in a way worthy of such. Build a car, make it fast, show us where we are in error.....and then talk like you know what is up. As it is, you seem like another teenager who knows everything because he knows how to read specs on the internet."
Well said Bill.
5. Lastly, this was the whole point. " On a stock K26 951, yeah a stock IC is perfectly fine and the money would be better spent elsewhere. "
Thanks for agreeing. To bad you're too dense to leave it at that, because THAT was the entire point. Nothing else.
As Bill said, build something, test it, or just shut up.

Porschefile

I'm just simply trying to point out what lots of other people are doing in other car circles. I mean, is anyone here really naive enough to think that no comparison whatsoever can be made with other cars, even ones with similar displacement? I don't see anyone here jumping at the chance to do an actual comparison on these cars, so you might as well look at what works for similar cars to at least get some ideas. A lot of people spend a lot of time trying to reinvent the wheel here when there are much simpler ways. I don't have anything to prove to anyone here and could care less what any of you think. Sorry Ehall but, you and others like you can ignore me and it makes no difference. It's no wonder this community is so far behind others with attitudes like yours.

EGT's have nothing to do with IAT's and heat soak on an IC.

Who cares that Porsche used these IC's in the '80s. That was 20 years ago.

tommo951

There is a point here, if you are testing a car over a short dyno run even at high RWHP you are not really going to suffer much by way of heat soak in the IC. If you are doing 20 laps of a track at constant WOT then you are going to heat soak the standard IC. Yes Porsche ran a standard IC in the cup cars However, this may have been due to Homologation rules To solve this you can use water spray or Co2 charges to cool the intercooler. Alternatively by making the venting (header panel) and airflow better you will suffer less by way of heat soak.
Has anybody got any IC temperatures after a race?
I do think it is time that Porschefile got round to building a 951 as he seems to be very good academicaly, this does not always transfer itself to practice as he will find. That is not trying to diss you Porschefile, I agree you don't have to prove anything. Some listers may just not give you credibility or respect that maybe you deserve as you are not referring to your own real life experiences. You usually refer to postings on other forums.
If you have the answers to all our problems maybe you should open a tuning shop to show everybody how to do things properly. You would soon have support

Oh yes Ehall............ Lose the avatar.....that is the scariest thing I have seen in ages