[proTUNING Freaks]

Hey guys, wanted to share some data on our recently announced intercooler. Testing was completed on the dyno at a tuner shop in Europe, their comments below...

Background on intercooler/design:

There are many aspects during mechanical engineering and CFD that are taken into account when designing any mechanical part. In the case of our intercooler we wanted a balance between flow and IAT control. Designing for either one of these on its own is not possible as you end up with either high pressure drop (i.e. intercooler doesn't flow well at all but cools well, very high fin count) or you end up with one that flows really well but it isn't a great heat exchanger (i.e. poor IAT control due to very low fin count). There are a number of other details but that is the gist of it when it comes to the core itself.

Start to finish it has taken a full year to develop with full CFD (computational fluid dynamics analysis), 3D printing end tanks, test fitting, flow testing, manufacture our custom designed end tank molds (custom in terms of internal volume, angles, and the hot side having a built-in vane for flow direction). This vane that has been added works out great in the case of our design. We experimented adding more than 1 and it'd impose more restrictions then it was worth adding.

Our outer core spec is 12.7 FPI (fins per inch). Internal FPI spec is different from the outer core.

Lastly, designing intercoolers is a fine balance especially when working within fixed OEM space constraints. Increasing fin count without changing frontal surface area, results in increased wastegate duty cycle (more work for the turbo) and higher pressure drop, which in turn reduces peak power potential due to reduced airflow through the core. Increasing depth on our intercooler design did not provide measurable advantages in IAT. What really matters is the frontal surface area of the intercooler core in this case and the relationship between front surface area and the depth of the intercooler is a non-linear one. In short, choosing a core is based on power goals (i.e. airflow, pressure drop) and there is no single intercooler in the world that checks off all the boxes in one design. We feel we've designed an intercooler that works great for well past what built N55 motors can put down with turbo upgrades of various sorts and one that works very well on stock turbo applications as shown in the data below.

Happy to discuss all aspects around our design, data and dynos shared below:

=============

We did our tests within 30 minutes of each other on the dyno. So dynoruns -> upgrade intercooler -> dynoruns again to have as similar conditions as possible before and after the upgrade.

The testcar was our in house BMW M135i (N55-EWG) with 326PS/450NM stock, the car is bone stock and has the bootmod3 Stage 1 93 octane OTS map flashed.



During dynoruns it was clear to see a huge improvement on intake temperature throughout the pulls. The biggest delta on intake temperature but also power on the dyno was when we did some multigear pulls.

Datalogs showing huge improvement on intake temps:

Stock intercooler:

https://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=614b...729b7e99770ad3



PTF intercooler:

https://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=614b...729b7f195af9a7



Moreover, dynoruns provide a great visual of what a good intercooler is about:



The intercooler is overall very easy to install and was done by our mechanic in less than 30 minutes

[mike@x-ph.com]

Thank you for sharing

Looks like the IAT delta is 34 whp on high RPM

[proTUNING Freaks]

Originally Posted by mike@x-ph.com

Thank you for sharing

Looks like the IAT delta is 34 whp on high RPM

Thank you

[Mollyran]

Very good results. Thanks for posting.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by Mollyran

Very good results. Thanks for posting.

FYI, the real world testing of this IC shows that it is not very good....

[n55david]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

FYI, the real world testing of this IC shows that it is not very good....

What's even weirder is that the guy doesn't even have an n55..

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

FYI, the real world testing of this IC shows that it is not very good....

^^

[MTWO]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

FYI, the real world testing of this IC shows that it is not very good....

That’s far from true. I have had multiple track days and this FMIC did the job really well for me.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by MTWO

That’s far from true. I have had multiple track days and this FMIC did the job really well for me.

I'll wait for those logs you promised. From what we do have, it performs worse than the CFS intercooler, and is likely on par with a 5" core.

Edt: Worse.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by MTWO

That’s far from true. I have had multiple track days and this FMIC did the job really well for me.

I've looked at the logs myself. johnung had the IC installed as a tested upgrade from his 5''. Why don't you go ahead and show me the data that proves otherwise.

Hey Jeremy

I grabbed a couple of logs after having real Dorch2 and BM3 FMIC installed. Ambient temperature was 27 degrees Fahrenheit. Tune was FlexFuel MultiMap Stage2 set at 93 Octane with E45 in the tank and xHP Stage3 installed.

1st -> 4th log for IATs

https://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=61da...0b434c7e40624e

4th Gear log

https://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=61da...90c630d62f97b5

IATs rise 30F in a 1-4 pull and 12F in a 4th gear pull..............

[johnung]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

I've looked at the logs myself. johnung had the IC installed as a tested upgrade from his 5''. Why don't you go ahead and show me the data that proves otherwise.

IATs rise 30F in a 1-4 pull and 12F in a 4th gear pull..............

I'm curious if anyone has tested the new Mishimoto intercooler yet. I saw it at the Kies Car Show last week. It has an interesting angled top. Mishimoto must be convinced that it provides an advantage since it must be more costly to manufacture. Some photos attached.

https://www.mishimoto.com/search-sim...drive?id=14917

[AmuroRay]

From their build page on the intercooler, it doesn’t do much of anything but make their intercooler look different. The area where the core is angled, is dead space that doesn’t have any rows.

So far, in the most absolute sense, nothing does better than the VRSF Race.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by johnung

I'm curious if anyone has tested the new Mishimoto intercooler yet. I saw it at the Kies Car Show last week. It has an interesting angled top. Mishimoto must be convinced that it provides an advantage since it must be more costly to manufacture. Some photos attached.

https://www.mishimoto.com/search-sim...drive?id=14917

Some guy mentioned it in one of the recent IC "debate" threads, i asked for datalogs, dont think i ever got a response.

I suspect the design is to force air from going through instead of over the top of the IC. Similar to old RX-7 "V" radiator/IC setups. I need to look at the front of the car again, but i think if you have a race IC (or any taller one), the air can't really go anywhere else? But need to look again. Either way, i'm sure they did it for that reason

[MTWO]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

I'll wait for those logs you promised. From what we do have, it performs worse than the CFS intercooler, and is likely on par with a 5" core.

Edt: Worse.

You have to be working for some FMIC manufacturer or retailer. No way you’ll post nonsense every time someone mentions this intercooler LMAO I don’t owe you anything. Get it for yourself and get all the data you need. Its way bigger than the CSF as well, smoother end tank design, get your facts straight. I bought it, I’m happy with it, it works perfect, you can run whatever makes you feel happy.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by MTWO

You have to be working for some FMIC manufacturer or retailer. No way you’ll post nonsense every time someone mentions this intercooler LMAO I don’t owe you anything. Get it for yourself and get all the data you need. Its way bigger than the CSF as well, smoother end tank design, get your facts straight. I bought it, I’m happy with it, it works perfect, you can run whatever makes you feel happy.

I mean... we have the data. "bigger" and "smoother end tank design" have nothing to do with IAT control. It's fine if you don't post any data, and it's fine if you are happy with it, but objectively speaking based on the data we have available this IC does not perform well at its primary purpose - controlling IATs.

[MTWO]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

I mean... we have the data. "bigger" and "smoother end tank design" have nothing to do with IAT control. It's fine if you don't post any data, and it's fine if you are happy with it, but objectively speaking based on the data we have available this IC does not perform well at its primary purpose - controlling IATs.

I fully disagree, also as per data posted by others. Anyways, run what you like. None of you either have a flow bench or do testing under controlled conditions so all arguments on this are baseless and utterly childish.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

Some guy mentioned it in one of the recent IC "debate" threads, i asked for datalogs, dont think i ever got a response.

I suspect the design is to force air from going through instead of over the top of the IC. Similar to old RX-7 "V" radiator/IC setups. I need to look at the front of the car again, but i think if you have a race IC (or any taller one), the air can't really go anywhere else? But need to look again. Either way, i'm sure they did it for that reason

Here's a link to the Mishimoto Engineering Report on their intercooler.

https://cdn.mishimoto.com/media/prod...ringReport.pdf

Also here's a video from the Mishimoto design engineer...

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by MTWO

I fully disagree, also as per data posted by others. Anyways, run what you like. None of you either have a flow bench or do testing under controlled conditions so all arguments on this are baseless and utterly childish.

Jeez, no need to be so aggressive. I merely presented the data I have available. I'm happy to look at data posted by others, or collected by yourself, although it sounds like you don't want to provide that. So if anything, i would have to say that your claims are baseless?

Anyways, I don't see how you can call real-world data collected on a car with this IC installed baseless or utterly childish. I mean, you can even look at the datalog posted by PTF in the OP.... We originally posted on that, then the thread was delete, this new one was started, and here we are again. There was the whole "oh its on a dyno" argument, that's why we looked at the data from the IC installed and ran on a car doing pulls on the road.

I don't understand why you are so adamantly defending the IC and attacking those of us who, based on the data available, make conclusions about its performance related to IAT control. I dont care what brand of IC it is - the data shows what it shows.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by johnung

Here's a link to the Mishimoto Engineering Report on their intercooler.

https://cdn.mishimoto.com/media/prod...ringReport.pdf

Also here's a video from the Mishimoto design engineer...

Love a good engineering report! I just read through it quickly. I did see this - "Adding a slight forward angle to the intercooler allowed for better mixing of clean cool air entering the radiator from the top grille and warmer air leaving the top of the intercooler". In the video he basically said its for not affecting the rest of the cooling system. I am not sure that actually makes a tangible difference though as ive never seen the stock cooling system pushed to its limits. Its definitely a distinguishing characteristic though that could help sell ICs.

In the video he also says they tested different diverter plates inside the end tanks, and they concluded the IC actually flows better without them. Doesnt the BM3 IC have such a plate? ("built-in vane for flow direction").

The conclusion about the shrouding is interesting, but would need to know more about how they tested that to comment.

One thing i noticed in the report is that the IAT rise during the dyno pulls actually looks pretty high... its kindof hard to see with the Y axis scale but it looks like around 15F rise during a pull. A datalog from a car would be helpful, but that seems higher than i would expect.

[MTWO]

Looks like they copied design ideas on the endtank from PTF FMIC, and tilted the core which I’ve never seen.

[AmuroRay]

https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show...ht=Intercooler


PTF logs - not impressive.

[n55david]

Originally Posted by MTWO

I fully disagree, also as per data posted by others. Anyways, run what you like. None of you either have a flow bench or do testing under controlled conditions so all arguments on this are baseless and utterly childish.

Unless you're willing to share the data you have to prove otherwise, the existing data doesn't paint the ptf in a very good light man. Thats facts, not opinion. You could simply post some logs and shut everyone up, you know? Has nothing to with a flow bench as that has nothing to do with intake air temps and entirely different conversion.