I just wanted to put all the GRS information in one place to better analyze








On the drag strip

 

Here is another thing to add to the GRS IC. I heard rumor that Graham at GRS was in the process if testing a new up-rated version of his current model intercooler. So, being the "I have to know what's up" kinda guy I am, I sent Graham an email.

Very nice fellow, very helpful and informative! He actually called me from across the pond to respond to my questions personally! After speaking with him for awhile about his intercooler, he offered to send me some prototype images from the current version he has in testing.

As you can see in the attached images, he is working to increase the efficiency of his IC by smoothing out the internal air path. I believe this change will allow for a much smoother transition into the intercooler. I'm pretty excited about this change myself just looking at it.

Like I said this is a prototype design he currently has in testing. He has offered to do this same modification on my friends IC if we send it back to him. I believe my friend is going to take Graham up on that offer. When we get it back well run some tests of our own on it and see how much its improved. We actually have two GRS intercoolers in our club, so we will be able to do some before and after comparatives.

Here are the images:

CORE BEFORE CHANGE:


CORE AFTER CHANGE:

 

just curious how much weight that adds to the intercooler because once it's hot it takes longer to cool down

are we trading tit for tat?

we will soon find out

I like it that people are still innovating!

 

As far as weight goes I can't imagine it will be much but some yes. the "diffusers" or half round will only be added to the intake side not both. The heat would be retained on the hot side at least. Probably minimal... we shall see

I'm with you! I love seeing people love what they do enough to continually improve designs !

 

while it's a step in the right direction, there are still bad transitions there. The half round should lie on top of the leading edge of the extruded tube so that the airflow is smooth.

Testing will tell for sure.

Matt

 

the configuration of the tubes is also different.

the top and bottom are more squared and the "minor" fins are shorter. Shooting for less pressure drop?

 

I believe that might not be the exact core we use. He is trying testing this configuration to see if flow is increased.

I agree with the good doctors assessment that the transitions could be smoother. BUT, this is not the final version, just a prototype. I'm not sure what the final version will look like.

Interesting thing about pressure drop, like the good Dr.O posted earlier that the GP IC has a 6.5% pressure drop. The GRS has a .5% pressure drop (from the Webb testing)

 

Could be wrong but that picture with the modified bits is a core for a different car Ill ask him but 99.99% sure its from the Porsche intercooler he did not to long ago Same core he is using for the front mount intercooler

As for the extra weight, those tubes are actually hollow and not very thick so should add very little in terms of heat soak

And Yes Graham is a very nice chap (in a none homo-erotic way )

 

LOL Speak of the devil he just phoned me about coilovers lol

That picture is of a Porsche Core (as said same as front mount hes working on) so is literaly just as an example.

He did say he hope it doesn't make a difference as its a right PITA to do

 

.5% I thought it was .5PSI? (could be wrong though)

 

While every bit you can get out of the intercooler is great, you are fighting a much bigger battle. The temp-averaging of the T-MAP, the ECU's reaction to the T-MAP, the heat latency of the outlet horn and manifold once hot etc. are all combining to kill the cars power. It really needs to be looked at as a system, the intercooler alone is a minor piece of the puzzle. I can tell you from looking at the data, mine and Intense's, that the intercooler alone is only one piece of the puzzle.

 

stop giving away the secret info

 

hmmm...front mount?

 

Yes you are correct Damo, may apologies people. The modification pictured was done on a intercooler made for a porsche 968.

 

I was trying to clarify this but the link to Webbs evaluation isn't working..

 

Both the weight and heat soak should be minimal and negligible, so much so its proabably difficult to measure. I think its a nice detail. The best design thou is still the stocker on this detail.

 

Really, most of this stuff is just "secret" to those who won't read anything other than interet forums. (Don't get me wrong, I like internet forums, it's just that they aren't very good sources of "best of breed" information on any subject. For a good start, one should always go to some experts for the basics. Sadly, I have yet to find an internet forum that fits the bill.)The time response (a ghastly 10 sec or so) of the temp sensor in the T-MAP can be found from the data sheets from the manufacturer or from manufacturers of other like sensors (BTW, the pressure part has a time response of about 20 ms! 500x faster! Just think about what that does to the speed-density engine managment algorithms!) This means that most pressure changes (fast or not) are resolved but quick temp changes are not.

The fact that it's a whole system that has to be studied is really obvious if one takes any time at all to think about it. Best power and drivability is made from well matched component selection, including the tune. This is true for pretty much everything in the world that has more than one part.

Matt

 

Meanwhile the chicken, that I started baking on the IC, is almost done.....

Air flow, thermal efficency, loss of boost, heat management & more have been discussed on this site with who knows how many posts. Partsman & Dr Phil have come up with solutions for the DFIC. They have also gathered the data that, IMO, support these solutions.

As Dr O says, "drivability is made from well matched components". BMW did a pretty good job with the "S", as it is, out of the box. I would not buy 1 if they didn't do some homework. Even people walk better when wearing a left & right shoe, not so while wearing 2 left shoes.

A big player, that is not thought of as much as should be, is air quality. How much water is in it? What non contributing gasses are present? What altitude are you? Ambient temp? If you're on the LA free way at rush hour, on a hot heavy day, do you think 5 gallons of C16 in in the tank help you, with an OE or aftermarket IC ( I'm sure it will somewhat )? Are any of these questions relivant? Maybe not for an IC but they will sway the result.

Intense, you guys have done a great job with collecting useable data for all to read. All these ICs, you tested, have merit, some more than others. 2 of the 5 tested ( 1 of which I also tested ) did not do as well as the other 3 for my taste, however on long haul highway driving it matched or did better than the best of the 3 top mounts. On the other hand the OE is best suited for the DD under most conditions including high performance mods. The Forge offers a few more options for me & the temps are reliable. The GRS would offer the same, I don't own 1, never tested 1 ( infact I have never seen 1 in person ), I know someone who does ( a few states away ). I was suprised to see an extruded core.
The local Subaru service manager was a good friend ( he moved to NC last fall ) - after using many, I mean many , in the 10s, of FMICs for his 550whp STI ( + a 200 shot ), he convinced me to get the Forge. We're not kids at 58 & 63, we expect result....... Testing must have repeatable results over a long period of time. In the end, Longboard has the best & no mater how we try to come up with numbers, Longboard wins. It's a complete project, not finished ( they never are ), reengineered to make big HP.

Back to the chicken. 0 to 100 at WOT - the inlet temp can reach 350f on a hot day ( 94 for this test 2+ years back ). I'm afraid of what the EGT looked like. Last Sunday morning, 58f, 72% @ 6:10am ) to 100 @ WOT Inlet temp 274f w/Forge, not enough to bake the chicken......

16 % pulley used since 2005 before testing.

 

Jeff Perrin,

I sent you an email on Aug 21 stating that I would love to take you up on your offer made in post 161 of this thread (Quoted above). I'm not sure if you overlooked that or ignored it or if your trying to figure out if its a good idea or not. I sent another email asking if I could use the equipment on the 25th. Still no reply from you... I see you actively posting on NAM so I know your not without internet and email.

I'm going to ask the same question here since I'm not getting an email response from you.

Can I use your equipment or not?

I'm not exactly sure when I would be able to get the tests run again. It might not be for awhile as were still trying to gather everything needed. BUT! We do want to run them again, and having the equipment available when were ready to is a big part of it. If your unwilling to lend it I will look for some to buy or borrow elsewhere.

Rob

EDIT: Actually I get you and Adam confused... he's been more actively posting than you. Looks like you last posted on the 26th. Anyway, the question still stands

 

Did you give Jeff a call?

 

I've left one voice mail

 

From memory Randy Webbs testing was done at altitude, pretty sure I remember people commenting on how low the boost pressures were even though a reduced size pulley was being used.

 

If memory serves me from the posts on MINI2 he tested it against Alta's intercooler (V1) and the GRS came out the best.

 

Yes - but if the testing was done at altitude the 0.5 PSI figure quoted as pressure drop across the core is probably low.

 

Test was done at 6000ft