Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm almost done with my 2.75L stroker single-tubo build. I am planning on breaking in and tuning the initial setup with 3" mandrel exhaust (I had a lot of the stuff already and NONE for 3.5"), and the factory FMIC. I'm pretty sure I'll be past the 500 whp mark on pump gas and will be running before and after IAT sensors in the intercooler just to check to see how it handles the boost / temps of the EFR 8374 turbo. My setup is based around response and for now will be limited to pumpgas and only 21 psi boost. I am thinking that the stock FMIC will keep up with this demand with such an efficient turbo especially plumbed in single (ie - less radiant and conductive heat on piping, etc).

That being said, I will need an upgrade because this turbo is capable of 750-800 HP later at higher boost. What is available to BOLT IN and fit up in the factory location for piping and which is the best for the money? I'm in the USA.

Patrick

I have this one http://www.arc-brazing.co.jp/intercooler.html (M079) runs at Suzuka 2 hours nonstop (well once to refuel) and it keeps IAT perfect.

The 100mm ones may take away from response a tiny bit, probably overkill. I removed a Trust 100mm drag IC and response improved and temps were the same. HKS make good ones too.

I am in the middle of fitting a 8374IWG like you from 5s on a 2.8 stroker and it should be easily adequate.

:cheers:

Edited by Meathead

I have this one http://www.arc-brazing.co.jp/intercooler.html (M073) runs at Suzuka 2 hours nonstop (well once to refuel) and it keeps IAT perfect.

The thicker one 100mm may take away from response a tiny bit, probably overkill. HKS make good ones to.

I am in the middle of fitting a 8374IWG like you from 5s on a 2.8 stroker and it should be easily adequate.

:cheers:

It baffles me why ARC don't make the M109 anymore for the 32-34 GTR's.
  • Like 1

It baffles me why ARC don't make the M109 anymore for the 32-34 GTR's.

Thought they had gone bust...

OK I see they have been resurrected:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1487145

as much as I like PWR radiators and oil coolers (I use their radiator).. I'm not a fan of their Intercoolers.. just look at those end tanks.... basic bro science says it doesn't flow that well in terms of efficiently/equally

as much as I like PWR radiators and oil coolers (I use their radiator).. I'm not a fan of their Intercoolers.. just look at those end tanks.... basic bro science says it doesn't flow that well in terms of efficiently/equally

My untrained and non qualified eye agrees with you. I'm interested what GTSboy has to say.

The GTR coolers they do are probably not terrible. At least the tanks are relatively large and have some shape. They probably look a lot worse than they really are.

The top and bottom tank cooler for R32-3 GTSt is just yucky. Those are a bad idea at any time, let alone when not executed well. Will not bang.

The return flow thingo for R34 GTT is possibly worse. Whilst the return flow idea is better than the top-bottom idea of the R32-3.....the execution is just ridiculously amateurish. Just horrible. The driver's side tank is an abomination of epic proportions

Having said that....I had to build (get built) a new intercooler for my car after the original truck cored one (built last century) was destroyed by an elderly Greek f**ker in an EB Falcon. I got a PWR core. The cores are good. I just got the (return flow) tanks made locally to the same basic pattern as my original.

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...