Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hi guys,

my brains being doing some fothat thinking stuff over the l;ast few days (wife is now complaining of a burning smell in house)

i know that an intercooler on a turbo car serves a perpose inthat it cools the air charge that has been heated by the compression of the turbo....

BUT...

would a small intercooler on an NA be beneficial? as the colder the air inthe more power we get potentially. but eventually there would come a point where the restriction in air flow negates any benefits in cooling the air charge? so where might this occur? is it just pointless puting an intercooler on or would it actually do something?

thoughts and suggestions please.... not sure if this is a stupid idea or not......and no one over this side of the pond to ask ....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/197926-intercooler-theory/
Share on other sites

an intercooler on a NA will make it lose power, as the temp it would cool it to is the same as it was when it entered, although if you had the cooler as a front mount it would actually soak in a touch of heat from the radiator while you are sitting in traffic so it could heat the air up.

basically all it would do is add restriction.

the reason they work on a turbo car is that the act of compressing air heats it up, plus the heat radiationg through the turbo heats it up a bit too. so the air coming out of the turbo is up close to 100 degrees at times.

yeah it would restrict the flow as the air have further to travel (Depending on intercooler set up) if anything on an N/A possibly heat wrap the induction pipe? stop it heating up from surrounding systems in the engine bay. just my 2 bobs..

hame

Yeah only good for forced induction, If you also built a ramflow or fan to draw the air through the system it would be a benefit, but that kind of setup would still work better without the ic restricting flow.

Fresh air will always be cooler than anything that goes through an ic. Unless ofcourse it's a dry ice setup obviously.

Edited by madbung

look in the sticky of how to get power out on an N/A there is good info in there, let go of the idea about running an intercooler on a n/a it a good thought but there is better mods out there for you hesh!

IT WILL SLOW UR CARR MAN, lol i tried it at the drags one time as i turboed my na but before i did i mounted the intercooler as trial fit then i was going to heathcote so i figured y not, and yeh i lost a sec and a half on time slips with it on, wont help any, done and dusted

cheers guys i guess thats a definitive no then1lol

i was kinda leaning that way but like i say you ask a question like that over here and ya get "why dont you have a turbo ....etc etc ..." so thanks again . the Intercooler idea has left the building.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...