HPAs new intercooler

[xytbyk]

Guess it would be pointless to point out the coating dealio NOT being on the fins then huh?

Not pointless, but keep in mind that the coating is meant to affect emissivity in an environment with poor airflow. My best guess would be that it's due to a combination of three reasons:

1. The actual cooling element/heat exchange of the intercooler is exposed to relatively more airflow than the end tanks, so the gains from the coating could be minimal. While the end tanks don't do any cooling per se, they can certainly heat the air as it passes through. If they're cooler, they contribute less to the loss.
2. It's difficult to cleanly apply the coating to the intricate parts of an intercooler core.
3. The coating is expensive.

I don't know if that justifies their use of the coating, but to me it's a more satisfying explanation than them just trying to fool people with some black paint as other posts in this thread have suggested.

 

[ROOSTER1050]

i wish i could afford this:iono: it looks alright.

much like the FORGE twintercooler, no?? :iono:

 

[Stadpad]

much like the FORGE twintercooler, no?? :iono:

i thought the rai was not a twintercooler, just a fmic.:iono: so it might be better.:iono:

 

[ROOSTER1050]

i thought the rai was not a twintercooler, just a fmic.:iono: so it might be better.:iono:

yeah, got me.... look so similar I would have assumed same use/application....

 

[SkullV]

much like the FORGE twintercooler, no?? :iono:

That RAI unit is a much much much better choice. Better core, and doesnt suffer from the lag and restriction that come from still using the OEM FMIC.

Paired with something like these to remove the OEM unit the weight gains would be negligible as well.

http://www.neuspeed.com/481096-factory-intercooler-delete-kit.html

 

[ROOSTER1050]

That RAI unit is a much much much better choice. Better core, and doesnt suffer from the lag and restriction that come from still using the OEM FMIC.

Paired with something like these to remove the OEM unit the weight gains would be negligible as well.

http://www.neuspeed.com/481096-factory-intercooler-delete-kit.html

aaahhhh, ok -- that makes more sense.... damn, that's sweet then....

 

[Veracity]

Better core, and doesnt suffer from the lag and restriction that come from still using the OEM FMIC.

I haven't seen any evidence that a Twincooler setup creates any noticeable lag. I also haven't seen a FMIC alone that looks to be much larger or otherwise better enough in design to outperform the Twin setup.

Is the RAI core much bigger than Forge or Godspeed?

 

[SkullV]

I haven't seen any evidence that a Twincooler setup creates any noticeable lag. I also haven't seen a FMIC alone that looks to be much larger or otherwise better enough in design to outperform the Twin setup.

Is the RAI core much bigger than Forge or Godspeed?

Bronson@APR and the late Crew219 both have graphs showing lag on the twintercooler. Maybe they'll get recirculated.

The RAI has a much higher FPI than the Godspeed or The garbage tube and fin Twintercooler. Keep in mind as well that the issue isn't just a cooling issue. At any boost level above stock (and even stock) the OEM unit is an air flow restriction.

 

[Veracity]

Bronson@APR and the late Crew219 both have graphs showing lag on the twintercooler. Maybe they'll get recirculated.

The RAI has a much higher FPI than the Godspeed or The garbage tube and fin Twintercooler. Keep in mind as well that the issue isn't just a cooling issue. At any boost level above stock (and even stock) the OEM unit is an air flow restriction.

Wasn't it Bronson that showed or stated there was nearly immeasurable lag with the Twincooler, like in the milliseconds?

A higher FPI isn't always good as it will increase pressure drop. There's a balance.

The OEM unit is a flow restriction when used by itself but adding the additional core will greatly reduce the restriction. The air now has an additional path to follow.

I think if a FMIC alone can't be made significantly larger than the Forge or Godspeed cores it'll be very hard to beat the performance. The stock core has decent cooling capacity alone and adding a decent FMIC on top of that is a very good combination.

 

[A_Bowers]

Wasn't it Bronson that showed or stated there was nearly immeasurable lag with the Twincooler, like in the milliseconds?

A higher FPI isn't always good as it will increase pressure drop. There's a balance.

The OEM unit is a flow restriction when used by itself but adding the additional core will greatly reduce the restriction. The air now has an additional path to follow.

I think if a FMIC alone can't be made significantly larger than the Forge or Godspeed cores it'll be very hard to beat the performance. The stock core has decent cooling capacity alone and adding a decent FMIC on top of that is a very good combination.

The air will flow to the point of least resistance, same as electricity and hydraulics.

When you say the stock unit has decent capacity, are you referring to the OEM unit, because that unit is laughably undersized.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[raaalph]

 

[grambles423]

Not pointless, but keep in mind that the coating is meant to affect emissivity in an environment with poor airflow. My best guess would be that it's due to a combination of three reasons:

1. The actual cooling element/heat exchange of the intercooler is exposed to relatively more airflow than the end tanks, so the gains from the coating could be minimal. While the end tanks don't do any cooling per se, they can certainly heat the air as it passes through. If they're cooler, they contribute less to the loss.
2. It's difficult to cleanly apply the coating to the intricate parts of an intercooler core.
3. The coating is expensive.

I don't know if that justifies their use of the coating, but to me it's a more satisfying explanation than them just trying to fool people with some black paint as other posts in this thread have suggested.

If the radiator fins can be coated, I think the IC can.

Its a gimmick at this point to justify the upcharge in price.

If in fact the coating was a true negative resistance that PULLS heat out of the flow and expels the heat from the coating to the ambient, it would and SHOULD be on the fins. End tanks do not do ANYTHING for cooling.

In fact, the outlet end tank would actually need some sort of higher resistance coating to keep the heat from entering the flow again if that was the case. Again, if this is the true coating they're using, then you'll actually see a higher rate of heating of the outlet flow.

 

[Veracity]

The air will flow to the point of least resistance, same as electricity and hydraulics.

Exactly, that's a great way to look at it, just like electrical resistors.

When you say the stock unit has decent capacity, are you referring to the OEM unit, because that unit is laughably undersized.

I'm saying it doesn't make sense to remove 200 hp worth of cooling capacity to run only a FMIC that's about the same size as one of the Twin cores.

 

[A_Bowers]

Exactly, that's a great way to look at it, just like electrical resistors.



I'm saying it doesn't make sense to remove 200 hp worth of cooling capacity to run only a FMIC that's about the same size as one of the Twin cores.

the OEM one is not even rated for 200hp.
It is laughably and horribly undersized and underrated.

The S3 is barely able to keep up in warmer climates.

Lemme dig up a photo of the OEM I have from my install.

 

[Veracity]

In fact, the outlet end tank would actually need some sort of higher resistance coating to keep the heat from entering the flow again if that was the case. Again, if this is the true coating they're using, then you'll actually see a higher rate of heating of the outlet flow.

As long as the vehicle is in motion the charge air in the outlet end tank should still be at a higher temperature then the surrounding ambient air so some cooling will still take place.