Sneak peak of my new coolers!
11-15-2012, 10:03 PM
#31
With all due respect Nick, without doing comparative testing against the new CMS coolers that's just speculation. This is also where Champion got off on the wrong foot by claiming better flow than the .2tt coolers but omitted the most important point of how much better they actually reduced the IAT's (than the .2 coolers). But at least they did a quantitative test on the flow i guess......not that it seems to have amounted to anything at this stage where a lot of buyers are concerned. Expensive coolers with no comparative IAT testing against the .2tts makes it hard to justify the large spend imo.
Now with yours, again back to back testing should be done against the .2tt coolers to make a true evaluation to quantify the real IAT differences...especially if these are to be commercially viable. Because ultimately for most the key will be the price vs IAT benefit and i suspect this is where the .2tt coolers will maintain to hold the trophy as better bang for buck..
Incidentally I noticed skandalis447 whilst congratulating the results, which are very good
mentioned that your IAT's would be better again if you weren't using alloy end tanks. The alloy tanks also being a high cost component similarly as the CMS coolers are making for a less price competitive cooler. So, whilst not as fancy looking the .2tt coolers would likely hold the edge being not as heat retentive as the alloy ones. OK, maybe not as pretty but who sees them on the car anyway... Maybe there is an opportunity there to use the non alloy tanks to bring pricing down? Sorry, didnt hear you mention anything yet about how much these would likely be priced at. Any ideas yet?
So ultimtely it comes down to dollars vs actual IAT'S gained for those dollars.
Now with yours, again back to back testing should be done against the .2tt coolers to make a true evaluation to quantify the real IAT differences...especially if these are to be commercially viable. Because ultimately for most the key will be the price vs IAT benefit and i suspect this is where the .2tt coolers will maintain to hold the trophy as better bang for buck..
Incidentally I noticed skandalis447 whilst congratulating the results, which are very good
mentioned that your IAT's would be better again if you weren't using alloy end tanks. The alloy tanks also being a high cost component similarly as the CMS coolers are making for a less price competitive cooler. So, whilst not as fancy looking the .2tt coolers would likely hold the edge being not as heat retentive as the alloy ones. OK, maybe not as pretty but who sees them on the car anyway... Maybe there is an opportunity there to use the non alloy tanks to bring pricing down? Sorry, didnt hear you mention anything yet about how much these would likely be priced at. Any ideas yet? So ultimtely it comes down to dollars vs actual IAT'S gained for those dollars.
11-16-2012, 06:27 AM
#32
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
My eyesight is not so good but those comparative logs do not look very comparative !
The before logs (stock cooler) are reving out in 4th gear then changing at 6XXXrpm into 5th whereas your new intercooler logs start in 5th at lower revs from the begining ?
If the above is right then the comparison is flawed since the stock coolers have to deal with much more heat from the rev out in 4th ?
Having said that they undoubtedly look better than stock but are they better than GT2RS at these sorts of low boost/power levels ? These are the cheaper Marston cores as used by the UK GTR tuning guys right ?
The before logs (stock cooler) are reving out in 4th gear then changing at 6XXXrpm into 5th whereas your new intercooler logs start in 5th at lower revs from the begining ?
If the above is right then the comparison is flawed since the stock coolers have to deal with much more heat from the rev out in 4th ?
Having said that they undoubtedly look better than stock but are they better than GT2RS at these sorts of low boost/power levels ? These are the cheaper Marston cores as used by the UK GTR tuning guys right ?
11-16-2012, 11:16 AM
#33
Rennlist Member
11-16-2012, 12:00 PM
#34
With all due respect Nick, without doing comparative testing against the new CMS coolers that's just speculation. This is also where Champion got off on the wrong foot by claiming better flow than the .2tt coolers but omitted the most important point of how much better they actually reduced the IAT's (than the .2 coolers). But at least they did a quantitative test on the flow i guess......not that it seems to have amounted to anything at this stage where a lot of buyers are concerned. Expensive coolers with no comparative IAT testing against the .2tts makes it hard to justify the large spend imo.
Now with yours, again back to back testing should be done against the .2tt coolers to make a true evaluation to quantify the real IAT differences...especially if these are to be commercially viable. Because ultimately for most the key will be the price vs IAT benefit and i suspect this is where the .2tt coolers will maintain to hold the trophy as better bang for buck..
Incidentally I noticed skandalis447 whilst congratulating the results, which are very good mentioned that your IAT's would be better again if you weren't using alloy end tanks. The alloy tanks also being a high cost component similarly as the CMS coolers are making for a less price competitive cooler. So, whilst not as fancy looking the .2tt coolers would likely hold the edge being not as heat retentive as the alloy ones. OK, maybe not as pretty but who sees them on the car anyway... Maybe there is an opportunity there to use the non alloy tanks to bring pricing down? Sorry, didnt hear you mention anything yet about how much these would likely be priced at. Any ideas yet?
So ultimtely it comes down to dollars vs actual IAT'S gained for those dollars.
Now with yours, again back to back testing should be done against the .2tt coolers to make a true evaluation to quantify the real IAT differences...especially if these are to be commercially viable. Because ultimately for most the key will be the price vs IAT benefit and i suspect this is where the .2tt coolers will maintain to hold the trophy as better bang for buck..
Incidentally I noticed skandalis447 whilst congratulating the results, which are very good
mentioned that your IAT's would be better again if you weren't using alloy end tanks. The alloy tanks also being a high cost component similarly as the CMS coolers are making for a less price competitive cooler. So, whilst not as fancy looking the .2tt coolers would likely hold the edge being not as heat retentive as the alloy ones. OK, maybe not as pretty but who sees them on the car anyway... Maybe there is an opportunity there to use the non alloy tanks to bring pricing down? Sorry, didnt hear you mention anything yet about how much these would likely be priced at. Any ideas yet? So ultimtely it comes down to dollars vs actual IAT'S gained for those dollars.
In regard's to using plastic end tanks yes they will be better for heat soak and cheaper if you make hundreds of them but then again the cost of making a mould and finding someone to make just 4 of them for me just aint going to happen.
The price of the coolers haven't been set yet as there still needs to be more testing.
11-16-2012, 12:08 PM
#35
My eyesight is not so good but those comparative logs do not look very comparative !
The before logs (stock cooler) are reving out in 4th gear then changing at 6XXXrpm into 5th whereas your new intercooler logs start in 5th at lower revs from the begining ?
If the above is right then the comparison is flawed since the stock coolers have to deal with much more heat from the rev out in 4th ?
Having said that they undoubtedly look better than stock but are they better than GT2RS at these sorts of low boost/power levels ? These are the cheaper Marston cores as used by the UK GTR tuning guys right ?
The before logs (stock cooler) are reving out in 4th gear then changing at 6XXXrpm into 5th whereas your new intercooler logs start in 5th at lower revs from the begining ?
If the above is right then the comparison is flawed since the stock coolers have to deal with much more heat from the rev out in 4th ?
Having said that they undoubtedly look better than stock but are they better than GT2RS at these sorts of low boost/power levels ? These are the cheaper Marston cores as used by the UK GTR tuning guys right ?
What I do know is I just took a snip out of the logs I have and used the vehicle speed as a reference to try and get similar comparison.
As far as testing them, there is more to do so there will be plenty more logs coming in the near future.
These are not the cheaper marston cores that the GTR boys use they are the highest spec martson do.
Even higher spec marston cores than what CTR used in theirs from what I have been told who purschased their cores from a company in silverstone.
Either way I am glad you have commented as I know you are a bit of a Guru when it comes to this topic.
11-16-2012, 12:12 PM
#36
Well I can only go on how the car felt when I changed them and to me there was a notable difference, but I was also prepairing the car for when I bolt the hybrids on as I am sure the extra volume of air should be needed.
11-16-2012, 01:19 PM
#37
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Nick, I posted on here (as well as PH) so a more world wide audience can join in
If you are going to present data logs it is important to compare like for like. You did the tests same day, similar ambient temps, this is good. The wrong gear issue is a big one and renders the comparison pretty void as the stock coolers would have had much hotter IATs coming through at the 206kph mark courtesy of the turbos spinning at their maximum revs in 4th gear so the data is wrong for comparison purposes.
I would say you also need to include throttle position and boost in the data to give a good picture of what is happening.
I understand you were just excited and wanted to share your new toys, I've had that feeling
Re your cores, I think they are made by the (Marston) people who made them for 9M when he had a stab at making some 993 turbo intercoolers, a good product but from what I understand a different manufacturer to the guys who made mine ?
I understand there are two producers within HS Marston, the Heat Transfer division who I think made yours and the Motorsport division who made mine. I presume these divisions work out of different locations ?
If you are going to present data logs it is important to compare like for like. You did the tests same day, similar ambient temps, this is good. The wrong gear issue is a big one and renders the comparison pretty void as the stock coolers would have had much hotter IATs coming through at the 206kph mark courtesy of the turbos spinning at their maximum revs in 4th gear so the data is wrong for comparison purposes.
I would say you also need to include throttle position and boost in the data to give a good picture of what is happening.
I understand you were just excited and wanted to share your new toys, I've had that feeling
Re your cores, I think they are made by the (Marston) people who made them for 9M when he had a stab at making some 993 turbo intercoolers, a good product but from what I understand a different manufacturer to the guys who made mine ?
I understand there are two producers within HS Marston, the Heat Transfer division who I think made yours and the Motorsport division who made mine. I presume these divisions work out of different locations ?
11-16-2012, 02:18 PM
#38
Nick, I posted on here (as well as PH) so a more world wide audience can join in
If you are going to present data logs it is important to compare like for like. You did the tests same day, similar ambient temps, this is good. The wrong gear issue is a big one and renders the comparison pretty void as the stock coolers would have had much hotter IATs coming through at the 206kph mark courtesy of the turbos spinning at their maximum revs in 4th gear so the data is wrong for comparison purposes.
I would say you also need to include throttle position and boost in the data to give a good picture of what is happening.
I understand you were just excited and wanted to share your new toys, I've had that feeling
Re your cores, I think they are made by the (Marston) people who made them for 9M when he had a stab at making some 993 turbo intercoolers, a good product but from what I understand a different manufacturer to the guys who made mine ?
I understand there are two producers within HS Marston, the Heat Transfer division who I think made yours and the Motorsport division who made mine. I presume these divisions work out of different locations ?
If you are going to present data logs it is important to compare like for like. You did the tests same day, similar ambient temps, this is good. The wrong gear issue is a big one and renders the comparison pretty void as the stock coolers would have had much hotter IATs coming through at the 206kph mark courtesy of the turbos spinning at their maximum revs in 4th gear so the data is wrong for comparison purposes.
I would say you also need to include throttle position and boost in the data to give a good picture of what is happening.
I understand you were just excited and wanted to share your new toys, I've had that feeling
Re your cores, I think they are made by the (Marston) people who made them for 9M when he had a stab at making some 993 turbo intercoolers, a good product but from what I understand a different manufacturer to the guys who made mine ?
I understand there are two producers within HS Marston, the Heat Transfer division who I think made yours and the Motorsport division who made mine. I presume these divisions work out of different locations ?
Here is 2 logs from the same gear.
I just went through the entire logs to find something suitable
Stock core
Aerospace core
11-16-2012, 02:21 PM
#39
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Toby can probably post pictures of "his" Marston cores. The advantage of his is the 14 charge air pressure tubes with fins on each side vs 12 on your design. This will produce a little more back pressure> but the trade off is more surface area for charge air cooling. Post 33 shows Toby's Marston cores.
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...rcooler-3.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...rcooler-3.html
11-16-2012, 02:25 PM
#40
Toby can probably post pictures of "his" Marston cores. The advantage of his is the 14 charge air pressure tubes with fins on each side vs 12 on your design. This will produce a little more back pressure> but the trade off is more surface area for charge air cooling. Post 33 shows Toby's Marston cores.
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...rcooler-3.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...rcooler-3.html
11-16-2012, 02:25 PM
#41
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
The true test for consumers is to bolt on a set of 997.2TT or GT2RS intercoolers the same day and run the tests back to back. The stock 997TT cores really don't do anyone justice. We already know that for $1000 one can purchase the new Porsche cores.
For your next datalog you should include throttle position, boost pressure, and MAF output.
For your next datalog you should include throttle position, boost pressure, and MAF output.
Last edited by Kevin; 11-16-2012 at 03:08 PM.
11-16-2012, 02:28 PM
#42
The true test for consumers is to bolt on a set of 997.2TT or GT3RS intercoolers the same day and run the tests back to back. The stock 997TT cores really don't do anyone justice. We already know that for $1000 one can purchase the new Porsche cores.
For your next datalog you should include throttle position, boost pressure, and MAF output.
For your next datalog you should include throttle position, boost pressure, and MAF output.
11-16-2012, 02:42 PM
#44
Drifting
A small amout of fabrication to the plastic shrouding around the IC. Also the IC outlets are a slightly larger size than the OEMs. Hoses need to be modified as well as clamps
My information is from a Member here who did the install.
I believe Paul (Speed21) also has a lot of installation information on the GT2 RS IC's..
There is a thread here on the installation somewhere..
11-16-2012, 03:13 PM
#45
A small amout of fabrication to the plastic shrouding around the IC. Also the IC outlets are a slightly larger size than the OEMs. Hoses need to be modified as well as clamps
My information is from a Member here who did the install.
I believe Paul (Speed21) also has a lot of installation information on the GT2 RS IC's..
There is a thread here on the installation somewhere..
My information is from a Member here who did the install.
I believe Paul (Speed21) also has a lot of installation information on the GT2 RS IC's..
There is a thread here on the installation somewhere..
Also I checked that IPD silicone hose and it has little lips on the inside of the hose so I'm thinking it's a new design because it's hard to pull off without a clamp.