It might.
I came from the 300ZX world where FMIC was a goal. 300ZX has twin side IC in front of the wheels. When FMIC's were used it just raised the temp of the coolant. The ICs were on the side so as not to add more heat to the coolant. FMIC was a bad idea for those cars.

So, while everyone wants to try something new and improved (me included) the BMW people may have put the IC in the correct place.

 

WOW ! OK . First SID and I are MINI soul mates. Second thank you for taking interest in my posting responses. It makes me feel very good !

I think that at least in theory the ducted vent for the IC might have merits. Having not explored and tested it I reserve my opinion. Louvers although look nice in some visual tastes they do not have enough effect area to carry a volume of air needed to relief any noticeable heat decrease.And also in some case will raise the under hood temperature by pulling the hotter lower engine heat upward. To use a quick single example NASCAR cars do not vent from the hood ! Heat rises as it is when a engine and engine compartment becomes heatsaoked To relive this constant heat away from the engine compartment is the key to running cooler temperature everywhere. Because the MINI's engine compartment is packed this is a challenging task. The first and best place to start is utilizing the area behind the engine where the exhaust manifold or header is. If the air flow is allowed to increase in this area you will be moving more volume of hot air away from the engine instead of increasing the heat level towards the hood. For all of you who are still going to louver your hood it would help everybody if you would do a thermal reading before and after and print the results. I built AC Cobra Kits and experimented with louvering primarily for the customers personal taste and found increase heat problems and vapor lock on carbs. I had to isolate the carb and the scoop completely to resolve this problem. After that no more louvers !
In my MINI as I posted I found that by re locating the expansion tank and installing a temperature and RPM control fan it reduced under hood temperature greatly. (posting numbers are meaningless because of constantly changing variables) It was easy to get reductions in the 20 to 30 degree range.
The start in resolving the heat issue is constant and controlled flow drawing back and out the rear of the engine compartment.
Oh and I have run most of the IC's currently available at least up to January of this year. I have chosen at this time to use the ALTA 1 . Primarily because it worked best with my LP Augmentation System. Oh and yes removing the hood completely does not allow a controlled air flow but also read above.

 

I have posted many times about the statistical characteristics of my temperature data--the variance is extremely high making any statistically significant tests almost impossible. That said, I think that when people read that I observe a best case approach of 5F, I think they actually believe me (and Partsman). Anyway, when you say 20-30F lower, which temperature(s) are you referring to? IATs, water temps, oil temps, engine surface temps, general under-bonnet ambient temps? These vary considerably, with different means, so such a reduction is relevant by comparing it to the normal temperature of that part/area.
On the second point I quote above, this has become a mantra to some of us. It is all about air flow management. It's just very hard to do with the Mini.
Thanks for contributing to this thread, btw.

 

Nitrominis, love the post.
Under hood heat management is a key part of getting more performance. If you can get everything, under the hood, cooler there's more power to be had. Louvers? Yup, I had 140 of them on the hood & side pannels on my 39 Chevy. They worked well to let heat escape when the engine was shut off, however there was a large under hood area & air volume for this application to work. The small area & volume of air available an the Mini ( Cobra Kit ) will rise only to heat components that that you don't want to heat soak. This is why, as you point out, behind the engine is the most logical place to look first.
I tried to fence & direct heat out of the back of the engine. This seemed to work with the first experiment, however I wanted to make the fences pretty, more bling. While they were out of the car, no diverters, seals, no nothing, temps were lower. I'm not talking IATs ( been there, have no plan to visit again ), I'm talking in general. There is more space available for more air to do what air does. Re location of the expansion tank is a good idea. It's out of the way for more air to pass.
Removing the hood was fine in the 60s when you had 1 of the first 327s w/2 4s or 3 duces with some bling. However you make another good point, there's no control. None....
There are a couple of threads, here, that were about air flow. 1 of them was productive, had some very good input.

The ducting vent. It could work. I like the idea. For sure it will help the DFIC but at what cost to the rest of the system. If the scoop & the duct are sealed off & the DFIC performes better you should be making more power. More power makes more heat....
Cutting the hood is not something I would NOT recomend. The duct design would need to enhance the overall look and spirit of the car first. Once you cut it's hard to go back. To go back the best way, just buy a new hood, repaint the car so everything matches. There would, also, be somewhat of a commitment to the hardware the duct is built for. All in all, venting hot air with the available under hood is best.........

 

Hey Doc glad you saw this...... You spent a ton of time polishing this & posted an equal amount of good info.....

 

I had to look up the word MANTRA before posting.

Look, I have read many post by you and I must say my hat is off to you for the effort. I wish you and others were closer. Many heads and ideas get progress. I generalized my temperature findings in a overall number because I did not want to write a whole piece on my data over the last 3 years. Also it is not practical for most as a useful tool. I have done Automotive performance parts design since 1977 and I am always learning new things ! But Mini's to me are not that complicated and just need a little re designing to increase there level of performance without losing reliability as for many a Daley driver. For any of my current customers that have heat issues it is merely a exercise in how much they want to spend to get practical improvements. It is through many posting here on NAM over the years that helped me to avoid known things that would not work. So at a request of a member of NAM was ask to post a few helpful posts. Many of these comments on this thread have long been discussed in think tanks and many experiments done long before my postings. Let me tell you there were many failures before improvements. So I guess I am saying I am not posting to undermine anyone here merely try to help.

 

my IC was 100.... My IC piping was 75$... I did the work my self....

start crapping!

and I don't think she looks like a honda

 

I for one love your front mount and would be willing to hack the s$%t out of my car to get that. And no, it looks nothing like a Honda.

I think you did an awesome job and I wish you were here in SoCal. I for one would bug you to death to help me do the same for my car.

Longboard

 

well Hubie helped me with mine... I am pretty confident Jan would know how to get it done if you really wanted... it's not hard... just takes time...

 

Really cool.

 

Longboard -- I am a bit surprised that you would spend more in this area, since I gathered that the Rotrex essentially precludes the need for bigger, better, badder ICs? Has testing revealed that temps are STILL problematic with the Rotrex?

Nitrominis -- To where did you relocate the coolant expansion reservoir? Is a 30psi cap enough (aluminum reservoir and real pressure cap instead of the OEM crap)? Thanks.

Anyone -- I recently added m7's aerogel heat shield (over the exhaust manifold, NOT the DFIC special) and their CF piece that installs right under the hood closure in the very front (supposed to aid air flow). I am not convinced either has helped, but I wonder if anyone has measured results that prove better temps as a result of either or both of them?

Thanks to any and all!!

 

I know this was directed at Longboard.. I would just like to say.... there is always a reason to have a bigger and moreover better IC... no matter what cooler air is better... as long as it's not TOO big... and ofcourse.. a FRONT MOUNT is 100% better than a top mount any time... any day...

also I have the air plate diverter... not cause I believe it does anything... just cause it's a HOT CF PIECE!

 

I wouldn't take it off if it RAISED the temps!

 

Just a couple of comments…

Holes in the hood could accomplish quite a bit depending on how they were set up and where they are placed.

With the DFIC a hole in the hood behind the IC that includes a flow pan would give the incoming air a perfect place to escape the engine bay. Think about when it's a nice breezy day and you open the house windows. If you just open one in the front, it makes a small difference. If you open a second window at the back of the house you better make sure all the paper in the house is under something heavy.

Car engine bays work the same way. The EVO 9 has a big *** hole in the hood so that the incoming air from the radiator and IC has an exit. Otherwise the incoming air would just spin around inside the compartment keeping heat there. Yes it would eventually be forced out the bottom of the car by incoming air. The last place you want more air is under the car.

Ill bet (This is my bench physics talking here) that a MINI with a small set of cooling vents at the back of the hood would have noticeably lower ambient compartment temp as well as an improvement in TMIC performance. I'll admit that this is based on my experience dealing with SR20DET TMIC engines in Nissan 200 SX SE-Rs so it's not exactly comparing apples to apple. The basic principles of airflow still apply though.

BTW, I'm not talking about louvers. Even though they do have more old school cool than deep dish SSR wheels they just aren't that efficient. I'm thinking of something more like a reversed NACA duct. Except it doesn't taper inward as it approaches the hood line.

What's all this talk about "Looking like a Honda"? There is a huge difference between a truly tuned Japanese car and some idiot with stickers and a pep boys muffler. It's a shame that everyone notices just the idiots.

Tüls - Awesome work. Not all the answers are in high dollar kits…

 

I have subscriptions to Modified, Super Street and Siphon magazines just to name a few. There is nothing wrong with a well tunned Japanese car.

Longboard

 

BINGO!

Longboard

 

I'm a fan of Sport Compact Car. The tech articles are really good.

 

Yep, I get that as well.

Longboard

 

+1,

 

OK, variation on my previously posted design and sketches of a DFIC exit scoop. How about a duct at the back of the bonnet, in the center with ductwork coming from the rear of the DFIC, but with openings (shape and size still to be determined) on the floor pan, to draw hot air from the rear of the engine bay using the Bernoulli effect (a low pressure area is created at 90deg to the flow of air)? My idea being that you get a great flow of air into the scoop, through the DFIC and out the rear of the bonnet. In the process you use the air flow to draw hot air out of the engine bay.
Or not...

 

I get it too but it really be called "compact japanese cars" and Euro Tuner should be "VWs only"

 

Interesting concept. I like it!

 

For non-DFIC hoods, covering top-mount air-to-air ICs, what, then would be wrong with just a hole at the rear center of the hood, with a wire mesh or expanded galvanized sheet grille over it to keep big junk out (say 60-70% open space and measuring abourt 9" wide and 5-6" long). This would be positioned as far back toward the edge of the hood as possible and centered between the two enclosed cowl spaces, so it would be sized and positioned to minimize water falling on ignition parts. In fact, water that happens to enter would likely fall on either the coolant expansion reservoir and the aerogel barrier (as in my own current configuration) or onto the exhaust manifold heat shield (as it would if I moved the coolant reservoir and eliminated the aerogel barrier).

This is what I have been considering doing. If anyone thinks this would not likely improve temps (in an OEM or other top-mount air-to-air IC configuration) please say so and try to explain why.

On the other hand, encouragements would also be graciously accepted.

Thanks.

 

So the out the door kit for a MP45 car is, what?..... somewhere around $5 -600?

Nice job & NO, thank god, looks nothing like a Honda....

 

The company is called Dähler (www.daehler.com). It is a Swiss company. They are specialized in BMW and Wiesmann cars.