holy #@$!! 326 HP 196 TQ
03-03-2003, 03:53 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Occoquan
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of notes and thoughts...
The avg I have seen for AIT on S2000s (both NA and FI) has been in the 115 - 130 F range with ambient being in the 65 F range. This being said, Vortech's aftercooler is not showing 15 - 30 F AITs. The Vortech unit will likely* yield AITs in the 60 - 70 F range with the same conditions. This is also on a Dyno. That being said, my AIT was in the 80 - 85 F range with my air / air intercooler. In "real world" conditions, ie driving on the road / track as opposed to the dyno, the AIT for your (generally speaking) air / water cooler will probably benefit another 15 - 20 F depending on your % of coolant / water in your mix. I on the other hand having an air / air will and have benefitted an additional 30 F. Am I claiming that an air / air is more efficient than an air / water? No. The hotter the ambient temp the more of an "edge" the air / water will have however 80% more efficient? Not a chance. For supercharged applications I have to agree that given the nature of the linear boost you don't want to be dropping 2+ psi to intercooler piping so the more likely route would be the air / water. But for turbo apps like mine, assuming you have an efficient enough turbo you can easily compensate by adding boost. As for loosing room in the engine bay... I haven't lost any. I have a front mount intercooler and the piping goes below pretty much everything else. As for the statement that the Vortech unit is "much nicer put together"... how do you figure that? You a) bought an off the shelf unit, b) had someone else do the install and c) took someone else's research as "good to go". Yours may be a "match set" because the colors and finish are all the same but the unit that was mentioned in the other thread is actually very inventive. It is yielding the same (if not better*) functionality at what I would gather is half the weight. All that aside, I would be willing to wager that both your and SGATE's cars wouldn't even put down 280 rwhp on the Mustang dyno. Not to start trouble but I'd be willing to bet the cost of the dyno session on that fact.
-BS2KT
The avg I have seen for AIT on S2000s (both NA and FI) has been in the 115 - 130 F range with ambient being in the 65 F range. This being said, Vortech's aftercooler is not showing 15 - 30 F AITs. The Vortech unit will likely* yield AITs in the 60 - 70 F range with the same conditions. This is also on a Dyno. That being said, my AIT was in the 80 - 85 F range with my air / air intercooler. In "real world" conditions, ie driving on the road / track as opposed to the dyno, the AIT for your (generally speaking) air / water cooler will probably benefit another 15 - 20 F depending on your % of coolant / water in your mix. I on the other hand having an air / air will and have benefitted an additional 30 F. Am I claiming that an air / air is more efficient than an air / water? No. The hotter the ambient temp the more of an "edge" the air / water will have however 80% more efficient? Not a chance. For supercharged applications I have to agree that given the nature of the linear boost you don't want to be dropping 2+ psi to intercooler piping so the more likely route would be the air / water. But for turbo apps like mine, assuming you have an efficient enough turbo you can easily compensate by adding boost. As for loosing room in the engine bay... I haven't lost any. I have a front mount intercooler and the piping goes below pretty much everything else. As for the statement that the Vortech unit is "much nicer put together"... how do you figure that? You a) bought an off the shelf unit, b) had someone else do the install and c) took someone else's research as "good to go". Yours may be a "match set" because the colors and finish are all the same but the unit that was mentioned in the other thread is actually very inventive. It is yielding the same (if not better*) functionality at what I would gather is half the weight. All that aside, I would be willing to wager that both your and SGATE's cars wouldn't even put down 280 rwhp on the Mustang dyno. Not to start trouble but I'd be willing to bet the cost of the dyno session on that fact.
-BS2KT
03-03-2003, 04:07 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SW
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not going to bother arguing on the internet with you about the pros/cons of air/water vs air/air, but I will say this about 280rwhp on a mustang dyno.
A) A mustang dyno reads much lower than a dynojet(you already knew this) I'd expect something in the 260rwhp range on a mustang dyno
B) You can't compare the two setups because his is a comptech with air water intercooler(fair to compare to Vortech) BUT he has a smaller pulley(thus the 290rwhp he put down on the mustang dyno).
C) If you wanna pay for my dyno time to tune my car with my smaller pulley this spring I would be more than happy to take you up on that, and I would refund you the money should I be unable to break 280rwhp...that should be pretty easy
A) A mustang dyno reads much lower than a dynojet(you already knew this) I'd expect something in the 260rwhp range on a mustang dyno
B) You can't compare the two setups because his is a comptech with air water intercooler(fair to compare to Vortech) BUT he has a smaller pulley(thus the 290rwhp he put down on the mustang dyno).
C) If you wanna pay for my dyno time to tune my car with my smaller pulley this spring I would be more than happy to take you up on that, and I would refund you the money should I be unable to break 280rwhp...that should be pretty easy
03-03-2003, 04:09 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SW
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by SGATE21
Jenner what kind of spark plugs are you using?
Jenner what kind of spark plugs are you using?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dongerguy
S2000 Under The Hood
75
07-13-2002 09:40 AM