Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Recently I performed some intake temperature tests. They are not dead acurate but are atleast an indication of when heat soak is affecting your engine. I used some digital thremometers from jaycar for the tests.

The car: 1993 R33 GTSt, 3" turbo back exhaust, 8psi (stock) boost, stock intercooler, pod filter with cold air partition (95deg neoprene heat shield).

Ambient temperature: 17degC

1st Test: Cruising at 110km/h

Pod = 15deg

AFM = 15deg

Engine Bay = 35deg

2nd Test: Stuck in traffic (45km/h max.) (heat soak had set in)

Pod = 35deg

AFM = 37deg

Engine Bay = 55deg

3rd Test: On boost hill climb and high speeds

Pod = 14deg

AFM = 12deg

Engine Bay = 33deg

4th Test: Heat Soak

After pulling up at a set of lights from cruising at 110km/h, it took 3 minutes to reach full heat soak as shown in the 2nd test. It took 7 minutes of driving at 110km/h again to fully get rid of it.....

5th Test: After idle for 3 mins

Pod = 40deg

AFM = 43deg

Engine Bay = 60deg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/21359-r33-gtst-intake-temperature-tests/
Share on other sites

pod filter with cold air partition (95deg neoprene heat shield).

rb25 - do u have a cold air intake?? e.g. a tube rigged from somewhere front of your car to feed your partition steady supply of cold air? Of course, not much use at idle.

*Very* interesting results, about time somebody got scientific on this :P

Those that take their skyline to the strip should take note. Obviously sitting there idling as you wait to get your run (can be 20mins), gradually moving forward - its just like traffic unfortunately. Even if u regularly turn your engine on and off heat soak is going to set in and its going to effect your times.

A suggestion: Can u at all do plenum temperatures? Obviously you've got some good before intake results, but the most important thing is the actual temps going into your engine..

Interesting results...

Now all u need to do is *borrow* someones carbon fibre bonnet with the vents in it and see how much of a difference it makes (obviously weather and traffic conditions would be hard to keep accurate).

Interesting. The people driving around with pod filters but without partitions should take note of the air temps they are sucking in.

What thermometer model did you use?

I tried to buy thermometers from Jaycar 2 weeks ago to perform similar testing with my own partition (http://www.endusk.com/skyline/caip/caip.html) but the dumbasses couldn't find where in the shop they put them.....

When I get some I will add some notes on the temp differences between using just neoprene and using aluminium + neoprene stuff + sealing rubbers.

I forgot to mention that without a duct forcing air into the partitioned area the heatsoak reduced at 60km/h and above, even in traffic.

predator666: I dont have a duct rigged up to it at the moment. I will do some plenum temps very soon (end of this week/early next week)

Sil8ty: I got the heatshield from Century Foam and Rubber. It's about 8mm thick, sort of like neoprene and has a reflective foil on one side. My partition cost 2 hours of time and 4 dollars.

kjb_r33: I've been informed that the clutch fan on the engine from the factory is excellent in its efficiency and i think that at high engine speeds it pulls alot more fresh air int the engine bay thus making it cooler.

sewid: boxhead has a similar partition (made from metal) and it gets red hot. Metal partitions in my opinion suffer from heat soak and would lengthen the times to get the intake temps down.

I've posted a pic of my setup below. I know its rough, but it seals to the bonnet and the top of the wheel arch and right up to the back of the headlight and it works really well.

Originally posted by rb25

sewid: boxhead has a similar partition (made from metal) and it gets red hot. Metal partitions in my opinion suffer from heat soak and would lengthen the times to get the intake temps down.

I have thought about that as well. Now the aluminium is insulated with foam it gets warm but never hot/red hot/too hot to touch.

To solve the problem of getting the heat out of the aluminium i was thinking of thermal epoxying on some aluminium heatsinks on the cold side.

I dont know if this would worsen the problem of heatsoak however in the long term or increase the effective heatsoak time to beyond average lenght of time spent stopped thereby negating it.... Only way to find out is to experiment.

Or could just remove the headlight and poke the pod out the front :D

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

    • 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...