I have been planning on upgrading my factory S intercooler to a water-air unit, either the unit Randy at webbmotorsports.com offers, or the new unit George at Mini-madness.com is working on releasing for sale. the confusion I am having came when I read an article on altaminiperformance at: http://www.altaminiperformance.com/p...tercooler.html

... which said basically that the water-air option is an inferior choice in nearly all situations. my question to everyone who has some insight (especially anyone from Alta, webbmotorsports or mini-madness) is: what is the honest deal? I don't want to start a big fight over who I should buy from. I just want to know what type of unit would work best for street performance and reliability. I know the water-air units are have more parts, however as long as they are of top build quality this is not a definite downside.

 

From what I saw at autocross with Randy, water to air is a much more efficient way to keep the intercooler cool run after run. In addition, if you are going to ice the intercooler between runs, the water to air system is better because there is more direct surface area for the ice to be in contact with (rather than just the end of the veins in the air to air system).

Based on what I was able to see, if I were doing it, I would go with the water to air system from Randy. He's had both systems and the water to air system is the one that has stayed installed on his MINI (tell you something right there).

Dave

 

i have a great deal of faith in Randy and that is helpful, however what do you think of the Alta link? also, how would I ice the water-air system? just pour ice on it? would a system like the intercooler system be of any use on a water-air system? thanks again.

 

i meant the Ntercooler nitrous system that sprays CO2 or NO2 onto the intercooler, not the intercooler system above.

 

With the air to air system the ice is best put on the intercooler inlet and outlet. The top of the air to air system isn't the most effective spot for ice since it's just the very end of a think column. Ice is only good when it's in contact, thus air-to-air has a lot less contact area for the ice when placed on top. You can do this with the stock intercooler to BTW, and it's a little more effective to get access to the outlet side if you remove the top cover off the intercooler (the black plastic piece).

With water to air, you place the ice on the inlet and outlet just like above, but now you can also place ice on the water core of the intercooler. That water is then circulated to the larger radiator of the water to air system. Again the water gets cooled by the larger surface area of that radiator. So in both instances (back at the intercooler and out at the secondary radiator) the water to air system has advantages for being able to be cooled down quickly between runs with ice.

Another important factor to remember is that water has a much much greater capacity (compared to air) to transport heat away from the intercooler.

Also, while driving, the water to air system has a front mounted radiator so it gets direct air being pushed through it. The air to air system has air being pushed over the end, with the engine below blockin the exit from the airflow. So the air to air system wouldn't have nearly as good of an airflow compared to the water to air.

As for dyno numbers, remember that it's important not just that you get power but that you can maintain the power. I think the water to air system would be less prone to heat soak during driving because it has better airflow through the secondary radiator.

 

FYI, Eric @ Helix is working with RDR (?) on the development of an air-to-air system that (he says) will be cheaper and just as effective as the water-to-air system. See his note to me below:

"Yes, the water/air intercooler would be a good solution [to the extra heat from the 19% pulley I'm thinking about installing], although there
are cheaper ones that work just as well. Specifically RDR is coming out with
a larger air/air intercooler which will be much less expensive and will do
the job at least as well if not better. I would be happy to install
whatever parts you want. I don't have the proper dyno tests
complete...when I do, I'll publish them."

Eric Savage
Helix Minisports
215 739 8800
http://www.helix13.com

 

>>my question to everyone who has some insight (especially anyone from Alta, webbmotorsports or mini-madness) is: what is the honest deal?

According to Randy, the air-air unit is better at ambient temps above 86 F or roadracing applications

 

>>Another important factor to remember is that water has a much much greater capacity (compared to air) to transport heat away from the intercooler.

But then you're back to relying on air cooling to get the heat out of the water... you've added another step, a lot more mass, and a lot more complexity. The mass (capacity) of the system slows the transient response of the sytem so it still has some cooling abilities at slow speeds, which is just the mass of water absorbing heat without it be disapated.
But it works the other way too.... Once the water/air system is heated up there is signifigantly more mass that needs to be cooled compared to the air/air system and the majority of that cooling has to be done via the radiator in the water-air system.

The best thing about water/air is how you can package it compared to air/air. W/A intercoolers can be smaller and out of the way (or even integrated into the manifold), whereas A/A are usually big honkin in your face applications.

 

it appears that in this case however that the water-air unit takes up more space. also, has anyone looked at the new pics and info on the mini-madness.com water-air unit, they went up yesterday. i have been playing phone tag with George and hope to gain more info. from what I see you can get two radiators to cool the unit. one is standard with the kit, with a second additional unit as an added cost option.

 

why not use a thermostatically controlled electric fan for the A/W radiator to maintain a more steady state water temp, not so dependent on vehicle speed?

 

Randy Webb's car hasn't had a water-to-air in some time. He's had the Alta air-to-air for months.

 

Why not do the same for the A/A intercooler?



6.5" SPAL Intercooler fans, 2" Thick and they push or pull 330 CFM.

 

I'd considered it, but good luck fitting these 2" thick babies under the hood...maybe with some creative hood scoop mods...otherwise, it's the way to go. air-to-air with fans, yum!

 

I spent a great deal of time trying to make this work...no dice. There simply is not a way to fit them without getting radical.

 

Hmmm. Well a fan shroud is basically a duct, so you can ditch the underhood one. While everyone is busy making FATTER intercoolers, why not make a skinnier one with a larger cross section? Assuming this is a viable alternative.

--
Cheese

 

Charge Coolers(English term) or water to air units are only efficient up to 14 psi. The problem with a charge cooler is that heat sock is experienced when stopped in traffic, once on the move it takes about 4-5 miles for the water in the system to cool down, where as with a intercooler the charge air is been cooled instantly and of course its less complicated i.e. nothing to go wrong. When cars run high boost the water can't be cooled down quick enough because of high ACT's, this is why you don’t see rally cars using them! I personally think its best to keep things simple and have an uprated intercooler - the cost is a lot less

 

I agree about the simplicity of air to air, but they suffer the same heat soak problem...they just recover faster. Point is, you might be able to get electric fans to eliminate heat soak when not moving but not so easily fot the stock intercooler location with the limited room under the hood. the water unit has the primary advantage of a better radiator location; so would a front mount air-to-air.

 

while a fm or a water ic may prove to be better, but there's also cost... alot of people just isn't willing to pay randy about 2.5 grand for a fmic conversion

if only there's some way to get the fmic from randy, then just manufacture some sort of tusk in rubber or some sort of plastic like fiberglass that isn't as expensive as carbon fiber.. i might see that price drop a bit

 

http://www.turbocalculator.com/view-...ct=005-001-001

http://www.automotivebuzz.com/Automo...p?media1Id=297

 

It is not just the CF that hold the expense on Randy's IC. The entire redesigned bumper reinforcement comes with the unit.

 

what about a intercooler that is connected to the A/C line in the car? the only problem is that the A/C has to be on to cool the intercooler. but it would always be cold so the power it takes form the engine it would put back in with colder air. has anyone thought about making the intake for the engine inside the car for reason that the air is the car is cooler than out side? is it posable to make a (charged air-water-air) like every other channel would be water and the other one be air.

Black is the passage way for the charged air
blue is the channel for the water to cool
red is the channel for the air to cool

sorry for the crappy paint job hope it makes sense