9M Prototype intercooler test report
05-10-2008, 02:24 AM
#106
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Jussi, yes that is one slow run with the Secan! I have looked closer into the data of these two runs that you mention, and it seems like the Secan started off a very slow pace (for whatever reason, the times are very slow), however it clearly starts picking up as speed increases..
Then at 240kph, it clearly pulls much stronger than the stock IC. The graph below is maybe not too clear, but what it shows is the time it takes between speed increments of 10 kph during the run so the stock takes 2.07 sec to go between 140 and 150 kph, whereas the Secan takes 3.63s. You can see how big the difference is in the lower speeds, and then the Secan comes back very strongly. Between 240-270kph, it takes the Secan about 2.5 s less to reach those speeds and 30 meters!
The question is what happened earlier in the run, and that I cannot answer, but this particular Secan run is much slower than all the other runs.
So I think that no matter how we look at it, the Secan outperforms the stock intercooler across all runs that were done in the higher speeds, would you agree? In a high speed shootout, I am sure your car would gain at least 15-20 kph over a stock intercooler (more boost than this car, 3.8 ltrs and heat, etc..). The more I look at this and the more I am amazed at its performance to be honest, as this is not on a 550+bhp car where real differences would be seen I guess.
Then at 240kph, it clearly pulls much stronger than the stock IC. The graph below is maybe not too clear, but what it shows is the time it takes between speed increments of 10 kph during the run so the stock takes 2.07 sec to go between 140 and 150 kph, whereas the Secan takes 3.63s. You can see how big the difference is in the lower speeds, and then the Secan comes back very strongly. Between 240-270kph, it takes the Secan about 2.5 s less to reach those speeds and 30 meters!
The question is what happened earlier in the run, and that I cannot answer, but this particular Secan run is much slower than all the other runs.
So I think that no matter how we look at it, the Secan outperforms the stock intercooler across all runs that were done in the higher speeds, would you agree? In a high speed shootout, I am sure your car would gain at least 15-20 kph over a stock intercooler (more boost than this car, 3.8 ltrs and heat, etc..). The more I look at this and the more I am amazed at its performance to be honest, as this is not on a 550+bhp car where real differences would be seen I guess.
05-10-2008, 02:50 AM
#107
Pro
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: on the road..
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But at that point, 6.gear change was very slow (miss?) for that stock test.
If you correct that,
just mark, copy and paste it (with PSP or photoshop) to "the right place" as here
Then there is no difference even up to 280kph.
But I admit that this is only a special case and of course that Secan is more efficient but I just wanted to show that these tests can be also misleading.
And if hit the jackpot I would call immediately to RS and say "one big Secan please" and hurry hurry
If you correct that,
just mark, copy and paste it (with PSP or photoshop) to "the right place" as here
Then there is no difference even up to 280kph.
But I admit that this is only a special case and of course that Secan is more efficient but I just wanted to show that these tests can be also misleading.
And if hit the jackpot I would call immediately to RS and say "one big Secan please" and hurry hurry
05-10-2008, 03:27 AM
#108
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Juha
The reason I extracted acceleration for every 10 kph is to discount the impact of the shift, which would fool the numbers if you look at cumulative speed vs time. Here, independently of the shift, the Secan is accelerating faster across each datapoint after the shift. The Secan pulls quite stronger than stock.
From 260-270 for example, the Secan needs 15.93s vs 16.78s for stock.. That's a lot of meters at those speeds.
I am just looking forward for a record 0-300kph run from your car, this record should belong to a 993, not the 996 23s with stock IC should be quickly busted by 3-4 seconds at least just with an IC change, let alone the aero mods. 
The reason I extracted acceleration for every 10 kph is to discount the impact of the shift, which would fool the numbers if you look at cumulative speed vs time. Here, independently of the shift, the Secan is accelerating faster across each datapoint after the shift. The Secan pulls quite stronger than stock.
From 260-270 for example, the Secan needs 15.93s vs 16.78s for stock.. That's a lot of meters at those speeds.
I am just looking forward for a record 0-300kph run from your car, this record should belong to a 993, not the 996
23s with stock IC should be quickly busted by 3-4 seconds at least just with an IC change, let alone the aero mods.
05-10-2008, 07:40 AM
#109
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
To further aid development it would be useful to know the pre-intercooler air temperatures that the high hp cars are developing as this will give us the best measure of how much heat the intercoolers are taking out of the intake air under full load. Does anyone run pre- and post-intercooler temp sensors on a datalogger?
The main problem with this gauge is it is too slow and if one watches the IAT with the Bosch hammer moving up and down and compare it to the gauge you can see just how slow it is which means it doesn't seem able to capture maximum temperatures since the temperature is already falling by the time the gauge is catching up....
With the above caveat it is still indicative of the temps we are talking about so I did a couple of third gear WOT runs to 7000rpm (with ambient around 22degC/72DegF) the I/C inlet temperature indicated a peak 85DegC/186DegF and the post IAT indicated 29DegC/84DegF so the I/C removed 56DegC.....
I was surprised how hot the post turbo temp was wondering just how hot it must get in 35+DEgC ambient race conditions ?
06-05-2008, 08:02 AM
#110
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Quick update:
Hopefully the 9m intercooler will be collected from Phelix today, as soon as it lands back here I propose to send it over to Jussi for more high speed testing on his "private" airstrip, once he has data I'm sure he will continue adding to this thread.
I have also had discussions with our consultant and we think that we could easily enlarge the cores to match the size of the Secan's at which point (in theory!) it would then match the Secan's heat capacity at sustained high load whilst also maintaining its current superior transient response at low speed. The plan is that once Jussi has tested the existing prototype we will sell it on to recover our costs and then build the larger unit from the exchange donor intercooler.
Incidentally, I have also been in talks with another consultant who's had a lot of experience with high performance charge cooling systems, his thoughts are that a properly designed air-water-air system would run at a constant 85% efficiency at high load - in other words could outperform a Secan in race conditions by reducing intake charge temperatures by a further 10-15C, which equates to somewhere between 20-30hp. He's interested in doing the design & manufacturing on a commercial basis, so if anyone is serious about having the ultimate cooling system for their 993TT (or 996TT for that matter) race car please get in touch with me and I'll see if we can put together a suitable plan.
Hopefully the 9m intercooler will be collected from Phelix today, as soon as it lands back here I propose to send it over to Jussi for more high speed testing on his "private" airstrip, once he has data I'm sure he will continue adding to this thread.
I have also had discussions with our consultant and we think that we could easily enlarge the cores to match the size of the Secan's at which point (in theory!) it would then match the Secan's heat capacity at sustained high load whilst also maintaining its current superior transient response at low speed. The plan is that once Jussi has tested the existing prototype we will sell it on to recover our costs and then build the larger unit from the exchange donor intercooler.
Incidentally, I have also been in talks with another consultant who's had a lot of experience with high performance charge cooling systems, his thoughts are that a properly designed air-water-air system would run at a constant 85% efficiency at high load - in other words could outperform a Secan in race conditions by reducing intake charge temperatures by a further 10-15C, which equates to somewhere between 20-30hp. He's interested in doing the design & manufacturing on a commercial basis, so if anyone is serious about having the ultimate cooling system for their 993TT (or 996TT for that matter) race car please get in touch with me and I'll see if we can put together a suitable plan.
06-11-2008, 03:07 PM
#111
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Jussi,
If you catch this post can you please get in touch with me through email so that I can send the intercooler out to you for testing?
Further update, more design analysis has been done and the team think that they can drop the charge outlet temperature of the 9m intercooler by 10C to match that of the Secan without having to increase the plan area of the core, hence maintaining the "standard fit" capability of the unit. If Jussi can back up the excellent data we already have on the first prototype this will allow us to confirm the design parameters and we can go ahead with the second design prototype. The advantage that we think we will have is regarding maintaining the existing low backpressure through the core which should benefit the performance in fast transient conditions. More on this later.
If you catch this post can you please get in touch with me through email so that I can send the intercooler out to you for testing?
Further update, more design analysis has been done and the team think that they can drop the charge outlet temperature of the 9m intercooler by 10C to match that of the Secan without having to increase the plan area of the core, hence maintaining the "standard fit" capability of the unit. If Jussi can back up the excellent data we already have on the first prototype this will allow us to confirm the design parameters and we can go ahead with the second design prototype. The advantage that we think we will have is regarding maintaining the existing low backpressure through the core which should benefit the performance in fast transient conditions. More on this later.
06-12-2008, 12:16 AM
#113
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I am not sure how Jussi is planning to do the testing, but I am guessing he does not have access to a Secan to compare side by side?
I guess the test will be stock IC vs Marston IC, which is already a good thing.
Jussi it would be great if you had access to a track to do the proper testing at lower speeds under load. Two laps with each would be great and definitive. You know Gatebil is around the corner don't you?
Finally please choose a hot day, if that's something you guys ever get!
I am very interested in the outcome, IMO and I might have a different opinion from Colin, so far nothing much has been proven vs stock or Secan. To see more decisive results, the tests need to involve more load in 3rd, 4th and 5h at lower speeds, on a track like environment, to determine their efficiency differences.
Looking forward to the test.
I guess the test will be stock IC vs Marston IC, which is already a good thing.
Jussi it would be great if you had access to a track to do the proper testing at lower speeds under load. Two laps with each would be great and definitive. You know Gatebil is around the corner don't you?
Finally please choose a hot day, if that's something you guys ever get!
I am very interested in the outcome, IMO and I might have a different opinion from Colin, so far nothing much has been proven vs stock or Secan. To see more decisive results, the tests need to involve more load in 3rd, 4th and 5h at lower speeds, on a track like environment, to determine their efficiency differences.
Looking forward to the test.
09-02-2008, 01:32 PM
#114
Nordschleife Master
I just got back from testing a MoTeC equipped 993GT2 race car at Watkins Glen. We compared the Stock (streetcar) intercooler with the FVD, and they were equally as bad. At .8 bar of boost the air temp was 62-63C. I'd like to see about replacing the FVD cores with a set of Marston cores and retest.
09-03-2008, 06:22 AM
#115
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I just got back from testing a MoTeC equipped 993GT2 race car at Watkins Glen. We compared the Stock (streetcar) intercooler with the FVD, and they were equally as bad. At .8 bar of boost the air temp was 62-63C. I'd like to see about replacing the FVD cores with a set of Marston cores and retest.
The "V" style 993tt intercooler sold by Cargraphic, FVD and (looks like) blownsix was originally manufactured for/by TTP, my tests showed it performed slightly worse than stock although my tests were steady state cruising temp differences - your race style observations are more likely to be accuarate...
09-03-2008, 08:46 AM
#116
Nordschleife Master
The ambient temp was 78F during the day (obvious variances occur on a 3.5m track). In looking at the peak temps on the back straight, the data shows that the stock one performed better by 1 degree, however, that could be within the range of error for the variances in ambient temp and other things. At 60c, I program the MoTeC to begin pulling ignition timing at a rapid rate and begin limiting the boost pressure. There is no reason that the air temps can't be in the 110-120F range on the race car as I've observed before on other setups.
On the twin turbo daytona prototype that we tested last month, we are running an air to water intercooler, like many of the prototypes of the 1990 era. It didn't work as well as I had hoped. It might be a design issue with the water radiators, or the speed of the water through the system, I don't know yet.
Given a choice, I'd rather have an intercooler that has more surface area than thickness, like the one LAT pictured here. However, I'm going to speak with Colin today to see if we can replace the FVD cores with a pair of Marston cores and retest on the same car. That might give some interesting data.
On the twin turbo daytona prototype that we tested last month, we are running an air to water intercooler, like many of the prototypes of the 1990 era. It didn't work as well as I had hoped. It might be a design issue with the water radiators, or the speed of the water through the system, I don't know yet.
Given a choice, I'd rather have an intercooler that has more surface area than thickness, like the one LAT pictured here. However, I'm going to speak with Colin today to see if we can replace the FVD cores with a pair of Marston cores and retest on the same car. That might give some interesting data.
09-03-2008, 11:22 AM
#117
Guru
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
The ambient temp was 78F during the day (obvious variances occur on a 3.5m track). In looking at the peak temps on the back straight, the data shows that the stock one performed better by 1 degree, however, that could be within the range of error for the variances in ambient temp and other things. At 60c, I program the MoTeC to begin pulling ignition timing at a rapid rate and begin limiting the boost pressure. There is no reason that the air temps can't be in the 110-120F range on the race car as I've observed before on other setups.
On the twin turbo daytona prototype that we tested last month, we are running an air to water intercooler, like many of the prototypes of the 1990 era. It didn't work as well as I had hoped. It might be a design issue with the water radiators, or the speed of the water through the system, I don't know yet.
Given a choice, I'd rather have an intercooler that has more surface area than thickness, like the one LAT pictured here. However, I'm going to speak with Colin today to see if we can replace the FVD cores with a pair of Marston cores and retest on the same car. That might give some interesting data.
On the twin turbo daytona prototype that we tested last month, we are running an air to water intercooler, like many of the prototypes of the 1990 era. It didn't work as well as I had hoped. It might be a design issue with the water radiators, or the speed of the water through the system, I don't know yet.
Given a choice, I'd rather have an intercooler that has more surface area than thickness, like the one LAT pictured here. However, I'm going to speak with Colin today to see if we can replace the FVD cores with a pair of Marston cores and retest on the same car. That might give some interesting data.
09-03-2008, 12:33 PM
#118
Nordschleife Master
Looking back from my data from turbo cars I've run at WGI, here is what I'm showing from a summer day (no way to tell if it was 75 or 100 degrees ambient temp though)
My 930, 1 bar of boost, Bob Holcombe intercooler - 45c
993GT2, ITBs, lots of power, 1bar of boost, large intercooler, but wide fin spacing 60c
3.6l turbo race car ITBs, large intercooler, 1.05bar of boost - 39c
996GT3R twin turbo, side scoops for intercooler ducting, Blown Six intercoooers, .7bar of boost - 64c
Daytona Prototype with same engine as above, air to water intercooler, 1bar of boost - 55c
I'm sure I have others archived on CD somewhere that I can look for.
My 930, 1 bar of boost, Bob Holcombe intercooler - 45c
993GT2, ITBs, lots of power, 1bar of boost, large intercooler, but wide fin spacing 60c
3.6l turbo race car ITBs, large intercooler, 1.05bar of boost - 39c
996GT3R twin turbo, side scoops for intercooler ducting, Blown Six intercoooers, .7bar of boost - 64c
Daytona Prototype with same engine as above, air to water intercooler, 1bar of boost - 55c
I'm sure I have others archived on CD somewhere that I can look for.
Last edited by Geoffrey; 09-03-2008 at 02:17 PM.
