Water cool or intercool? for supercharger application
03-12-2004, 07:31 AM
#23
Registered User
Almost sorry I added in my comment 
I was going for the more 10,000 foot view. An A/W will be more efficient up to the point of heatsoak in the water...add a bigger radiator (i.e., more water), the longer you have until heatsoak. After heatsoak, the A/A will have the advantage. As mentioned earlier, the benefits/disadvantages should be taken into account based upon the application. Since the A/W will take longer to heatsoak, you have a much longer window to play with, but it will also take a correspondingly long time to cool below the heatsoak level. Just the opposite for A/A...it soaks quickly, but it will also cool off more quickly.
Oh, and just being nit-picky, BB, but I cringe just a bit with your pool cooling effect example above. While it's true that gas temps can fluctuate much faster than fluid temps can, it's more reasonable to say the pool retains its temp due to the sheer mass and surface area. If you were to spread that pools contents over a square mile, it would pretty much follow ambient temps.
I was going for the more 10,000 foot view. An A/W will be more efficient up to the point of heatsoak in the water...add a bigger radiator (i.e., more water), the longer you have until heatsoak. After heatsoak, the A/A will have the advantage. As mentioned earlier, the benefits/disadvantages should be taken into account based upon the application. Since the A/W will take longer to heatsoak, you have a much longer window to play with, but it will also take a correspondingly long time to cool below the heatsoak level. Just the opposite for A/A...it soaks quickly, but it will also cool off more quickly.
Oh, and just being nit-picky, BB, but I cringe just a bit with your pool cooling effect example above. While it's true that gas temps can fluctuate much faster than fluid temps can, it's more reasonable to say the pool retains its temp due to the sheer mass and surface area. If you were to spread that pools contents over a square mile, it would pretty much follow ambient temps.
03-12-2004, 07:40 AM
#24
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Big Ben, that was a hell of an explanation. Currently Im stock Comptech SC. I will be adding very soon smaller pulley(10PSI), E-Manage,550 injectors(only missing the injectors right now so if you have a comment on the size of the injectors feel free to to tell me). My goal 330RWD reliable Ponies. So Im considering using WA with the radiator upgrade. I don't want to experiment what diameter of pulley to buy with the AA in order to get 10PSI so anyway Im will be moving toward the WA.
PS- Don't get mad or insulted with my comments they werent ment as insults Ok?
Thank you anyway
PS- Don't get mad or insulted with my comments they werent ment as insults Ok?
Thank you anyway
03-12-2004, 07:55 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Addison, TX
Posts: 1,557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not mad or insulted. I think AUS2000 took some undue offence to my original post though. I have no idea why. I don't take anything anyone says on a forum to heart. Because it's no big deal.
I have no idea what size injectors to use on this car. But there is plenty of info out there already for you to use.
When I do finally buy a SC, I'll more than likely use an air/air intercooler and either have it top mounted with a custom hood, or mounted near the bottom of the engine bay and create a fiberglass duct to grab oncomming air from the bottom of the car. Which I think is a much better and more efficient method of cooling the intake charge.
Mac: I do see what you are saying. But in order to make water cool or heat as quickly as air, you woule have to make the layer of water infinitly thin. For most people using the SC systems on the S2000, a W/A is their best bet. But I will continue to disagree that it is more efficient than A/A. The W/A is only better to use in this application because the length of piping needs to stay short since the amount of boost and CFM flow at low rpm is very, very minimal.
I have no idea what size injectors to use on this car. But there is plenty of info out there already for you to use.
When I do finally buy a SC, I'll more than likely use an air/air intercooler and either have it top mounted with a custom hood, or mounted near the bottom of the engine bay and create a fiberglass duct to grab oncomming air from the bottom of the car. Which I think is a much better and more efficient method of cooling the intake charge.
Mac: I do see what you are saying. But in order to make water cool or heat as quickly as air, you woule have to make the layer of water infinitly thin. For most people using the SC systems on the S2000, a W/A is their best bet. But I will continue to disagree that it is more efficient than A/A. The W/A is only better to use in this application because the length of piping needs to stay short since the amount of boost and CFM flow at low rpm is very, very minimal.
03-12-2004, 10:53 AM
#27
Registered User
BB,
I look at it from this standpoint...for a single instant in time (i.e., disregarding heatsoak time), what would I rather have cooling the plates in the radiator, water or air? I would choose whatever would cool the plate the fastest, and that's water. If I have 200 degree charge air on the top of the plate, I want 20 degree water rather than 20 degree air on the bottom side since the water is going to cool off the plate (and therefore the charge air above the plate) significantly faster.
Granted, it's a lot easier to replace the "cooling" side of the plate with ambient temp air rather than ambient temp water since the water is in a closed system and will heat to above ambient temps after a while (heatsoak), but for the time the water is not above ambient it's more efficient at cooling the charge air.
I look at it from this standpoint...for a single instant in time (i.e., disregarding heatsoak time), what would I rather have cooling the plates in the radiator, water or air? I would choose whatever would cool the plate the fastest, and that's water. If I have 200 degree charge air on the top of the plate, I want 20 degree water rather than 20 degree air on the bottom side since the water is going to cool off the plate (and therefore the charge air above the plate) significantly faster.
Granted, it's a lot easier to replace the "cooling" side of the plate with ambient temp air rather than ambient temp water since the water is in a closed system and will heat to above ambient temps after a while (heatsoak), but for the time the water is not above ambient it's more efficient at cooling the charge air.
03-12-2004, 02:30 PM
#28
Originally posted by Big Ben
I think AUS2000 took some undue offence to my original post though. I have no idea why.
I think AUS2000 took some undue offence to my original post though. I have no idea why.
You are applying your ideas about charge cooling in general to a question which, to me at least, obviously relates to charge cooling an S2000 with a Comptech or Vortech SC.
And as for your 'Keep it simple' philosophy, how come you are now cutting bonnets?
To summarise: AW is the more efficient/better solution for charge cooling on an S2000 with Comptech/Paxton or Vortech supercharger because, although it has a few more moving parts than an AA, it meets the very minimal cooling requirements of the said SC's without introducing lag or the requirements for extra boost to compensate for this lag such as smaller pulleys, extra engine management, larger injectors, revised FPR, extra tuning or, god forbid, taking to your bonnet with a bloody great can opener.
Now whether or not you agree with that conclusion you have to agree with the points that lead me to it as many of them (including the bonnet cutting) come from your posts. So how about we let the SC owners decide whether to just add an AW, or start down the other path....
As someone who has been there (and I mean specifically there: S2000, SC, injectors, E-manage etc) I know which way I'm going.
03-12-2004, 02:38 PM
#29
Originally posted by Big Ben
Do these kits have a fan for the radiator they come with? And where does it mount?
Do these kits have a fan for the radiator they come with? And where does it mount?
It worries me that you have such a strong opinion on this but aren't actually familiar with the product.
By your own admission the AW kits from Comptech and Vortech are sufficient for the boost levels of the stock kits so there is no requirement for an extra fan. Infact you mentioned that a more 'efficient' AA system is only really required when you up the boost! But why did you up the boost? That's right! To compensate for the loss due to long piping to install an AA!!
