Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

yeh i have, no problems at all once you send them the money. took a week from when i send the money to when i got the intercooler, if you want the hybrid 660 300 75 then its the best price at the moment. if you look at www.powerdigger.com.au then you will see what it normally sells for.

Did you go through the Ebay secure thingy to pay them or did you just Direct deposit or credit card it? cos for me, that's a lot of money if they decide not to send the cooler.... if you know what I mean.

As for the price from power digger, I have seen them here in Adelaide for the same price in AutoBahn.....

i went to the buy now tab thinking (pay by credit card)but no they will e-mail you with payment details once they get the order or reply from ebay. i got feed up and ended up sending them a money order for 720 postage and handling.

I know its hard to say how much better theyd be, especially considering the vested interest that ARE have in the explanation of their cores and end tanks on their site. However ARE have spent alot of time and money researching their end tanks and own the mouldings for their unique castings. And alot of what they say does make sense. Its good reading, honest :)

I don't wanna diss the Hybrids, theyre still bloody good value. In fact ill take back my comment above :D However most people might not be aware that ARE's previously expensive pricing compared to the Hybrids has recently been revised.

Might be another option for people to consider.

Red17

I know that size isn't everything but....

ARE: 520 x 300 x 75 for $878

Hybrid: 660 x 300 x 75 for $690

Not that I have anything against ARE, I've heard that they are really good coolers, but for a stock turbo, it's not like the cooler is going to get pushed to its limits...

A.R.E are good cooler thats a given but i bought the hybrid super monster cooler (600x300x76) off flyn perfornamce direct very very good to deal with indeed answered any questions i had sytraight away...... the cooler on my car is supporting boost up to about 1.5 bar (22psi roughly) and had helped me make 275 rwhp with a shitty standard ecu with air fuels all over the place easilly be tuned to over 300rwhp at like 16 psi...... overall i reccomend these coolers and also reccomend flying performance aswell....

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...