[CSF Cooling]

Originally Posted by FaRKle!

You should link them. Aside from my comparison vs my stock IC, all I've seen are highly suspect tests where the results provided financial incentives for the tester or had manufacturer influcence. Everybody knows an aftermarket IC will do better than stock, but a question answered here is how do a couple aftermarket units compare against each other.



How much of that 33.1hp is due to the remap and how much is due to the IC? The 2.3hp increase at stock with just the IC is pretty much within the noise IMO. More importantly, how close does the airflow being sent through the IC on the dyno match that in real world driving (on the street and track)? That's a huge contributing factor. The dyno results really don't say anything about your IC compared to how much it promotes the remap.

Another independent dyno video from the UK
- showing about 15hp increase w/ no tune, and over 30hp with the tune.

Now over 500 pieces sold.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqYZLsQgY6g

[Enabled]

But on a diesel it doesn't work that way because there is not a fixed air to fuel ratio...

On a gas car, the extra air density as measured by MAF will increase fueling by closed loop control. However, on a diesel, being fuel throttled, there is much more variability in afr, it will not increase fueling when there's extra air, and it will still make roughly the same power.

[boerz]

Hi guys. I've accidently ordered a n55 intercooler for my n47 f31 320d. Will a n55 intercooler fit n47 with or without modifications? Suggestions are much appreciated. Thanks in advance.

[FaRKle!]

Originally Posted by boerz

Hi guys. I've accidently ordered a n55 intercooler for my n47 f31 320d. Will a n55 intercooler fit n47 with or without modifications? Suggestions are much appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Yes, the N55 intercooler will fit for N47. I've had the stock intercoolers of a 435i and my 328dx side by side and they're the same form factor. Like-wise I installed the Wagner EVO 2 Comp from this comparison in my friend's 435i without issues.

[boerz]

Originally Posted by FaRKle!

Yes, the N55 intercooler will fit for N47. I've had the stock intercoolers of a 435i and my 328dx side by side and they're the same form factor. Like-wise I installed the Wagner EVO 2 Comp from this comparison in my friend's 435i without issues.

Thanks

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by FaRKle!

I've been playing with intercoolers over the past half year, and at my last track day at Laguna Seca I ran the

View post on imgur.com

. This past weekend I ran ATM's intercooler along with Wagner's EVO 2 Comp at Thunderhill (east). Both days were pretty hot (~95F) and I was able to get some good sessions in that were very comparable. All of these intercoolers will work with both the N20/26, N55, and N47 engines, but you may need to be aware of slightly different inlet/outlet locations compared to the OE intercooler when using aftermarket turbo to intercooler and/or intercooler to intake pipes (in particular ATM and CSF).



I used the Torque pro app in conjunction with an OBDLink LX bluetooth OBDII reader to log data at 4Hz. The car only reports temperature in 1C (1.8F) increments. From the data read, the "charge air cooler temp" is the temperature of the air after the intercooler (sometimes seen as IAT elsewhere). This was compared to the ambient air temp to see how well the intercoolers were cooling the pressurized air.

The car is a '17 328dx wagon with JR Tuning's stage 2 flash. The turbo will boost up to 29-30PSI. The turbo to intercooler and intercooler to intake manifold pipes are stock, since both are of the flexible rubber hose type on the 328d, and it makes swapping intercoolers much quicker (I was able to do the swap in under 30min at the end of the first day).


Here's a plot showing the difference in performance between the intercoolers. The ATM is consistently lower than the Wagner by 7-11F. I was surprised at this result given the EVO 2 Competition's description. One thing I noticed that ATM does on their core is that they have rounded header bars inside the end tanks to make the flow into the core smoother.


Here's the raw temperature data showing the charge air temps and ambient air temps. These two sessions were really well matched ambient temperature wise.

Over the next week I'll be logging commute data with the Wagner (got the ATM's data last week) so I can do a comparison on performance in "every day" driving.
Daily Driving Performance Link

I ran across this thread the other night - Amazing. Please have this stickied or copied in your signature.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

OP, thanks for the great info.

One thing you misunderstood about the pressure loss - you can never measure it by post intercooler boost reading.

They always read the same boost, because that's what DME is targeting. Where it makes the difference is pre intercooler boost that you don't get to measure. Turbo would work harder for more boost to make up for what's lost going thru a bar and plate core, so the post intercooler boost target would be met.

In fact, the mpg reading you came up with is a very interesting and effective way of showing lag which ultimately means pressure loss. High mpg means more fuel gets burned, means more air goes thru IC and gets into cylinder.

Another point is that you compared them with a high boost car. Intercooler performs very differently to different boost level. There is actually such a thing as a too big IC for the boost you're looking to make. I'm not familiar with diesel engine and how diesel motor boost translates to flow rate lb/m and how hot they come out of turbo. Someone really needs to conduct similar tests with a N20 on 22-20psi or N55 on 18-17psi for a proper comparison. These boost level are what pump gas can support at top end at maximum. Above that, ethanol and meth are logical choice over enlarging your intercooler.

Thanks again for the great info.

Sean

I saw your comment about the N55 engine having a maximum of 17-18psi on pump gas. What octane rating are you assuming when you say pump gas? If you were assuming 91 octane, then what would the max boost number be for 93 octane? I notice for instance that BootMod3 has separate tunes depending on whether you run 91 octane or 93 octane. I'm lucky enough to live where 93 is readily available.

I'm curious to get your comments. In some recent discussions about the engine airflow on the N55, it seems like the airflow is limited at the stock plastic unpressurized pipe that is constricted to a 1.875" diameter where it connects to the turbocharger inlet. Pure Turbos has a replacement pipe that mates up perfectly to the turbo inlet so it can provide up to 42% more airflow. This is more than enough for higher capacity turbos that still inhabit the stock turbo housing. But the added airflow of the larger inlet pipe doesn't really generate more power with the stock turbo which is already sized correctly by the factory for the stock inlet pipe. In the discussions it was mentioned that around 20-22psi is the maximum boost available with the stock setup.

I appreciated your comments about pressure loss across the intercooler. Mike at X-PH first pointed it out to me. I wanted to modify my 2015 335i xDrive while limiting turbo lag as much as possible. My goal is a FUN street performance daily driver, not a high rpm track car. My car spends most of its time starting from 0. Mike suggested that I go with the high flow tube & fin Wagner, but he also recommended that it be the smaller Competition EVO1 (instead of EVO2) to minimize turbo lag as much as possible. It really works as advertised. Soon the exhaust will breathe as well as possible with a catted Fabspeed downpipe as well as a BootMod3 Stage2 93 octane tune.

Any additional comments on the above topics would be appreciated.

[Assassin]

Farkle...fantastic article, and great journal etc keep up the good work.

I'm based in the UK and have a 2019 335d F1 Xdrive.......previously had an E60 535d M Sport which was remapped to 350hp/700nm which ran 100k miles with no issues. Considered but never did upgrade the intercooler.

I am breaking in the new car for a few 000 miles before a similar remap which should make about 360-370hp/750nm and I am definitely going to do the IC this time. I had settled on a CSF due to ease of fitment and perceived performance improvements e.g. see this link from a renowned UK tuner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnX4xSK89K8&t=175s

Now use have me wondering as my car is a daily driver and some "spirited" backroad driving and any significant increased lag would be a PITA for me.

Our roads are much more twisty, full of potholes, often wet and temps probably much lower than yours.........any thoughts / recommendations as you have clearly done your homework?

[Watsey]

Hi FaRKle! - great review, and I like your objectivity and logging. Well done for taking the time to do it. I've revisited your thread several times as I do my research regarding ICs and whether the investment would be worth it for my 330d which is already mapped to ~350bhp and 525lbft.

The CSF and the ATM appear to be almost identical in terms of design (bar and plate) and dimensions. Interesting to see your graphs showing that the ATM outperformed the Wagner at almost every data point, and in terms of recovery from potential heat soak.

The Wagner unit for the 330d has 4 rows of bars and fins in the upper stepped IC core, whereas the CSG and ATM units both have 7. It could well be that the additional cooling rows are sufficient to offset the potential disadvantages of bar and plate and even to outperform the theoretical advantages of tube and fin i.e. faster heat dissipation and IAT recovery.

I'd be interested in your thoughts, and others who may be able to add their informed views on this.

I've asked CSF and ATM to verify the correct part number for the F3X 30D, just to make sure that they are both 100% compatible.

[FaRKle!]

Originally Posted by Assassin

Farkle...fantastic article, and great journal etc keep up the good work.

I'm based in the UK and have a 2019 335d F1 Xdrive.......previously had an E60 535d M Sport which was remapped to 350hp/700nm which ran 100k miles with no issues. Considered but never did upgrade the intercooler.

I am breaking in the new car for a few 000 miles before a similar remap which should make about 360-370hp/750nm and I am definitely going to do the IC this time. I had settled on a CSF due to ease of fitment and perceived performance improvements e.g. see this link from a renowned UK tuner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnX4xSK89K8&t=175s

Now use have me wondering as my car is a daily driver and some "spirited" backroad driving and any significant increased lag would be a PITA for me.

Our roads are much more twisty, full of potholes, often wet and temps probably much lower than yours.........any thoughts / recommendations as you have clearly done your homework?

When Evolve posted about using the CSF I asked them if they had noticed much lag. They replied that they didn't really notice, but it also sounded like they weren't paying much attention to it. Your 335d is a twin-turbo (big-little) setup I believe, so based on that it'll probably be less sensitive to lag than my N47, single-turbo setup. How high will your N57 boost to after tuning? My N47 boosts to 29psi.

Originally Posted by Watsey

Hi FaRKle! - great review, and I like your objectivity and logging. Well done for taking the time to do it. I've revisited your thread several times as I do my research regarding ICs and whether the investment would be worth it for my 330d which is already mapped to ~350bhp and 525lbft.

The CSF and the ATM appear to be almost identical in terms of design (bar and plate) and dimensions. Interesting to see your graphs showing that the ATM outperformed the Wagner at almost every data point, and in terms of recovery from potential heat soak.

The Wagner unit for the 330d has 4 rows of bars and fins in the upper stepped IC core, whereas the CSG and ATM units both have 7. It could well be that the additional cooling rows are sufficient to offset the potential disadvantages of bar and plate and even to outperform the theoretical advantages of tube and fin i.e. faster heat dissipation and IAT recovery.

I'd be interested in your thoughts, and others who may be able to add their informed views on this.

I've asked CSF and ATM to verify the correct part number for the F3X 30D, just to make sure that they are both 100% compatible.

Thanks!

It's very clear to me that CSF copied ATM's form factor. The dimensions are within a 1mm of the ATM. The main difference between their and ATM's ICs are that CSF uses two separate cores (upper and lower) vs ATM's single piece core. CSF's lower core has a higher fin density than ATM, which is also seen in the weight (theirs is 1.5-2lbs heavier). This should translate into a bit more thermal mass/heatsink capability, but it's significance isn't likely to be very high. If you look inside the end tanks of both units you'll see that ATM has rounded header bars (just like on the front of both units) on the inside as well to smooth the flow going into the fin packs. That plus the less restrictive fin pack is what made the noticeable difference in lag to me with the N47, single-turbo setup.

I was quite surprised at the ATM vs Wagner results when I reviewed the data. I realized after that, that the whole "tube & fin recovers significantly faster" was just marketing speak. It may be true for coolers of the exact same dimensions (haven't seen data on that), but like you mentioned, other bar and plate designs on the market may have features that negate that over the Evo 2 Comp.

The ATM and CSF will fit your N57. Evolve tuning put a CSF in a 435d. I also saw on FB that ATM is having a "tax return sale" April 15-30th. 15% off with code "APRIL2019."

[Watsey]

Originally Posted by FaRKle!

When Evolve posted about using the CSF I asked them if they had noticed much lag. They replied that they didn't really notice, but it also sounded like they weren't paying much attention to it. Your 335d is a twin-turbo (big-little) setup I believe, so based on that it'll probably be less sensitive to lag than my N47, single-turbo setup. How high will your N57 boost to after tuning? My N47 boosts to 29psi.

Thanks!

It's very clear to me that CSF copied ATM's form factor. The dimensions are within a 1mm of the ATM. The main difference between their and ATM's ICs are that CSF uses two separate cores (upper and lower) vs ATM's single piece core. CSF's lower core has a higher fin density than ATM, which is also seen in the weight (theirs is 1.5-2lbs heavier). This should translate into a bit more thermal mass/heatsink capability, but it's significance isn't likely to be very high. If you look inside the end tanks of both units you'll see that ATM has rounded header bars (just like on the front of both units) on the inside as well to smooth the flow going into the fin packs. That plus the less restrictive fin pack is what made the noticeable difference in lag to me with the N47, single-turbo setup.

I was quite surprised at the ATM vs Wagner results when I reviewed the data. I realized after that, that the whole "tube & fin recovers significantly faster" was just marketing speak. It may be true for coolers of the exact same dimensions (haven't seen data on that), but like you mentioned, other bar and plate designs on the market may have features that negate that over the Evo 2 Comp.

The ATM and CSF will fit your N57. Evolve tuning put a CSF in a 435d. I also saw on FB that ATM is having a "tax return sale" April 15-30th. 15% off with code "APRIL2019."

I didn't realise that the CSF unit has a higher internal fin density in the lower core - thanks for the info. As you say, it may be part of the reason for increased resistance and lag that you noticed.

I'd already watched the Evolve video of the 435d + CSF. It's a shame that they didn't run all the options, including remap + stock IC, as that would have completed the picture. What we can't see is how much of the result of the stage 1 map is purely down to the map and how much I due to the CSF IC's ability to support the full benefit of that remap.

Interesting to see the different design and approach of the ER IC : 'monobloc' (no step) and mounted much further forwards than other units. Also, their IAT graph is impressive ! Quite expensive though, especially for the fill kit including hard pipes.

If anyone here has direct experience of ER ICs I'd be interested to hear.

[kitchener]

Originally Posted by johnung

...My car spends most of its time starting from 0. Mike (x-ph) suggested that I go with the high flow tube & fin Wagner, but he also recommended that it be the smaller Competition EVO1 (instead of EVO2) to minimize turbo lag as much as possible.

I'm getting ready to upgrade my 15 335xi to FBO and the MHD Stage 2+ tune, and doing the inevitable research into which FMIC to go with (for me). Like johnung's comment in this old thread, it's my daily driver and will never be tracked, so it will be starting from 0 most of its time (I"m at sea level in the Mid-Atlantic). I know with the tune the lag might not be that noticeable unless I'm looking for it, but filtering my selection on the side of minimizing turbo lag as much as possible for my kind of driving seems like a winner. I'd been zeroing in on the Wagner Competition Evo 2 (and Mike suggested it to me, too), but I wonder (as Johnung mentions above) if I'd be better off with the EVO 1 if it's never going to see a track?

[johnung]

Originally Posted by kitchener

I'm getting ready to upgrade my 15 335xi to FBO and the MHD Stage 2+ tune, and doing the inevitable research into which FMIC to go with (for me). Like johnung's comment in this old thread, it's my daily driver and will never be tracked, so it will be starting from 0 most of its time (I"m at sea level in the Mid-Atlantic). I know with the tune the lag might not be that noticeable unless I'm looking for it, but filtering my selection on the side of minimizing turbo lag as much as possible for my kind of driving seems like a winner. I'd been zeroing in on the Wagner Competition Evo 2 (and Mike suggested it to me, too), but I wonder (as Johnung mentions above) if I'd be better off with the EVO 1 if it's never going to see a track?

That's a good question. I pretty much have my N55 EWG maxxed out as far as mods with the stock turbo.

I have not noticed any heat soak. I know what to look for. Before I installed the Wagner Competition EVO1, I could definitely induce heat soak. I would do successive standing start wide open throttle runs until I noticed the engine get sluggish. On a cold day it might take 5-6 runs. On a hot day maybe 3-4 runs.

Obviously, it requires logs to tell for sure. Heat soak should show up as ignition timing corrections and throttle cuts. On the other end of things, turbo lag would show up as intake pressure drops. Pressure drop causes a delay (turbo lag) until turbo boost builds back up.

My car is due for maintenance items over the next couple of weeks. After that, I intend to take a bunch of logs and possibly some dyno runs. Then I may have a better answer for you along with actual data concerning the Wagner Competition EVO1. If the temperatures remain this hot it would definitely be a strenuous test to attempt to induce heat soak.

Modding the N55 EWG without changing the turbo is supposed to max out at roughly 400hp-425hp. So it's a matter of choosing a larger FMIC that can effectively cool and flow that new larger amount of air.

An advantage of the Wagner Competition series is that they share the same quick flow, tube & fin technology as used by BMW in the F3x stock intercooler. Quicker flow across the intercooler helps to prevent intake pressure drop which causes turbo lag.

With the smaller Wagner Competition EVO1, turbo lag should not be an issue. The question is whether a heavily modded N55 EWG with stock turbo can induce heat soak?

With the larger Wagner Competition EVO2, heat soak should not be an issue. The question is whether that larger size causes slower flow and does it cause more turbo lag?

Remember that there is considerable overlap between the EVO1 and EVO2. Who knows? Maybe it could also be that they both handle this horsepower level without heat soak or turbo lag. If that turned out to be the case, then the current $210 price differential would be more of an insurance policy to have excess capacity in case of an exotic fueling upgrade or a turbo upgrade.

[kitchener]

Originally Posted by johnung

...With the larger Wagner Competition EVO2, heat soak should not be an issue. The question is whether that larger size causes slower flow and does it cause more turbo lag?

Remember that there is considerable overlap between the EVO1 and EVO2. Who knows? Maybe it could also be that they both handle this horsepower level without heat soak or turbo lag. If that turned out to be the case, then the current $210 price differential would be more of an insurance policy to have excess capacity in case of an exotic fueling upgrade or a turbo upgrade.

You put it pretty well -- I guess it's why I'm still considering $900 for the Evo 2 despite some well-regarded ICs (ATM) being a good bit less. The in-for-a-penny,-in-for-a-pound principle lol.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by kitchener

You put it pretty well -- I guess it's why I'm still considering $900 for the Evo 2 despite some well-regarded ICs (ATM) being a good bit less. The in-for-a-penny,-in-for-a-pound principle lol.

Also don't forget the used parts market means that you can always sell your part to upgrade again. I've done that already with other parts. I'm on my third brake caliper/rotor configuration. I've always been able to sell my previous parts for a reasonable price and put the money towards my new upgrade.

If I suddenly decided to upgrade my stock turbo I would also buy a Wagner Competition EVO2, and then sell my Wagner Competition EVO1.

Good luck!

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by kitchener

You put it pretty well -- I guess it's why I'm still considering $900 for the Evo 2 despite some well-regarded ICs (ATM) being a good bit less. The in-for-a-penny,-in-for-a-pound principle lol.

The EVO2 offers nothing over the ATM or the like in terms of tangible performance, and the EVO 1 is...Let's just say I'm not a fan.

These results are as black and white as they get, don't give Wagner extra $$$ because of marketing. There are more than enough reviews on this forum (including in this thread) that detail 90% of people don't experience any type of turbo lag regardless of what IC they get. The Evo 1 can't even make a multi gear pull before maxing out its thermal capacity, and is less suited for track duty than the already poor performing Evo 2.

Originally Posted by mikew2069

Well guys, I kind of screwed the pooch on my logs. Yesterday at 71.6* F, I did three back to back runs from 50-100mph. Believe it or not, we had identical weather today and when I went back out to do the comparison logs, it was also exactly 71.6* F. That's the good news.

The bad news is that I did three back to back runs from 50-100mph and the momentI was finished, I realized that I was in comfort mode when I was in Sport+ yesterday. So I then immediately put it in Sport+ and did it again. I am posting the comparison logs from the Comfort run and the Sport+ run. Although there are obvious gains here, I think the true story will be told when its hotter outside. As soon as it gets to 80* here, I'll post more logs....

Stock Sport+ vs Wagner Comfort

Wagner Comfort Log 72deg by mikew2069, on Flickr

Stock Sport+ vs Wagner Sport+ (Immediately after the Comfort runs)

Wagner Sport+ Log 72deg by mikew2069, on Flickr

One take away from this is the bigger the intercooler, the lower the average IATs. Note that as soon as the car hit (4th) Gear, the IATs shoot up on both the stock and Wagner Evo 1. The intercooler has reached it’s thermal capacity and it’s not any more effective at cooling than the stock unit.