FMIC under $800
Trending Topics
08-25-2001, 07:54 PM
#8
Elder Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 39,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
where did my post go?
I had a great post worked up, I thought I posted it. See the link below and the comments from Brett.
Basically, the tanks should be on the long ends, the intake and exhaust should be on opposite corners.
The FMIC you show basically won't use about half the intercooler because it isn't in the short path from intake to exhaust.<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/311643.phtml">https://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/311643.phtml</a</li></ul>
Basically, the tanks should be on the long ends, the intake and exhaust should be on opposite corners.
The FMIC you show basically won't use about half the intercooler because it isn't in the short path from intake to exhaust.<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/311643.phtml">https://forums.audiworld.com/tt/msgs/311643.phtml</a</li></ul>
08-25-2001, 08:50 PM
#9
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then most intercoolers must really suck....
since alot of them are designed with the tanks on the short ends.
$20 says you test both on the car/dyno/race/whatever, and you will get the same exact results.
Assuming, of course, the cores aren't junk.
Look at the APR IC, the air path contains two 90 degree bends. How is this not harmful to air flow? Do you really think that the first couple of rows are going to contain a lot of airflow?
$20 says you test both on the car/dyno/race/whatever, and you will get the same exact results.
Assuming, of course, the cores aren't junk.
Look at the APR IC, the air path contains two 90 degree bends. How is this not harmful to air flow? Do you really think that the first couple of rows are going to contain a lot of airflow?
08-26-2001, 12:04 AM
#10
Elder Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 39,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
two bends is the minimum anyway
There is no way the air can go through the intercooler without turning at each end anyway. That is, even if you enter at the center of each side, the air can only go down one of the runners without turning to get in. Since you have more than one runner you end up with air turning significantly to enter most of the runners no matter what you do. This design offers an equal length path through the FMIC from entry to exit through each runner. This helps distribute the air amongst all the runners. This is a good thing.
Do I think the first couple runners get significant airflow? Yes, I do. APR has vanes inside to direct a portion of the air at the first few runners. If they didn't, then as you say, the first few wouldn't get much air.
As to the flow resistance being the same either way, you are absolutely, positively wrong here. I'm sorry. A bigger pipe offers less resistance, and running down the core the short way with a large cross section offers a bigger pipe than running down the core the long way with a smaller cross section. So the air not only sees less resistance, it slows down more due to the larger cross section (still waters run deep), thus the air takes as long to go down the runners the short way as it would the long way and thus it dumps at least as much heat in its way through.
You are right that many FMICs suck. Many well regarded setups put the tanks on the short ends, like the Mitsu Evo series of cars. They have the typical horizontal FMIC with tanks on the short ends. This is done for space efficiency, not intercooler efficiency.
Do I think the first couple runners get significant airflow? Yes, I do. APR has vanes inside to direct a portion of the air at the first few runners. If they didn't, then as you say, the first few wouldn't get much air.
As to the flow resistance being the same either way, you are absolutely, positively wrong here. I'm sorry. A bigger pipe offers less resistance, and running down the core the short way with a large cross section offers a bigger pipe than running down the core the long way with a smaller cross section. So the air not only sees less resistance, it slows down more due to the larger cross section (still waters run deep), thus the air takes as long to go down the runners the short way as it would the long way and thus it dumps at least as much heat in its way through.
You are right that many FMICs suck. Many well regarded setups put the tanks on the short ends, like the Mitsu Evo series of cars. They have the typical horizontal FMIC with tanks on the short ends. This is done for space efficiency, not intercooler efficiency.