Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm looking for a front mount intercooler kit for a R32 that uses the side mount pipes.

As i can't find any kits available new or second hand i'm looking at alternative options.

(If anyone has one for sale or knows of one for sale please PM me)

I found this XR6 cooler upgrade, i could probably fit something like this in and just get some pipes

made up to suit.

Opinions on XR6 cooler?

post-20679-1146357009.jpg

This is the type if after but can't find:-

post-20679-1146361333.jpg

Edited by lows_13
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/115505-front-mount-for-r32/
Share on other sites

there was a thread recently about modifying an R34 gtt side mount cooler to fit R32 gtst stock cooler spot.

that might be an option for you.

Sydney kid posted a few points in there.. says it flows and cools well for 220 rwkw on his RB20det powered R32... and that is a track car. which is used only for thrashing constantly at the track.

might be comething to consider since they cost about $150 and an aluminium welding place could modify the end tank to be same as R32 stock cooler (SK said he paid $50) and you could bolt it straight in it's place.

so..

I have this idea about a "return inercooler".

I still have this idea about a "return intercooler".

rather than getting a 600 X 300 intercooler, getting 2 600 X 150 intercoolers and mounting them one on top of the other.

then you loop sone side back to itself.

You now have a 600 X 300 intercooler with inlet / outlet on the same side.

This is only an idea, so some comments, criticisms, etc would be greatly appreciated. I'd like to do it, if only to be different.

I figure it will save a little piping, too.

a mate of mine (member on this forums) got defected for "unengineered modification to chassis" for cutting the hole under the washer botle in the side sil.. $600 for engineering later...

those ARC 180 degree bend ones arent THAT bad..

I have this idea about a "return inercooler".

I still have this idea about a "return intercooler".

rather than getting a 600 X 300 intercooler, getting 2 600 X 150 intercoolers and mounting them one on top of the other.

then you loop sone side back to itself.

You now have a 600 X 300 intercooler with inlet / outlet on the same side.

This is only an idea, so some comments, criticisms, etc would be greatly appreciated. I'd like to do it, if only to be different.

I figure it will save a little piping, too.

air is now going through 2 intercoolers.. it would be too much of a restriction..

basically like air being pushed through 1200 x 150mm core.

a mate of mine (member on this forums) got defected for "unengineered modification to chassis" for cutting the hole under the washer botle in the side sil.. $600 for engineering later...

those ARC 180 degree bend ones arent THAT bad..

Just one of the reasons why i don't want to go down that path.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...