[M&M]

Originally Posted by O-cha

Like I said in that "other" forum. 8 celsius (about 50 F) over a cold ambient is pretty high, can't really make any conclusions with other similar data to compare it to. But if it were 8 degrees over these ambients http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...6&postcount=19
you would be running hotter at idle then WOT.

At WOT I was 55 deg C in that graph, and 30 deg C today? How do you work that out.

Anyway, I think you mixing your absolutes with the delta. A delta of 8 deg C is equal to a delta of 14 deg F. But that has nothing to do with the cones. The car with the stock airbox also idles about 14 deg F higher than ambient. I have logged many times. No car has IATS close to ambient at idle.

Just a quick question. If you sitting around in traffic with the stock airbox. Its in the same place as the cones. So I assume it will get heated up the same. But of course its sealed and gets air from the duct in the grille. But wait. You sitting in traffic. You are barely moving. The front grille is not going to be sending much fresh cold air into the factory airbox. So why should the IATS be any cooler with the stock airbox in this situation?

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by M&M

A delta of 8 deg C is equal to a delta of 14 deg F.

I see what your saying, that's why I hate you metric people, always trying to quote C and kW.

14 degrees ain't bad at all. Still like to see WOT run comparisons though on temps and MPH. But I'll just do it myself so you don't explode my head with more metrics.

As for the stock airbox and sitting at a light yada yada. I make no real conclusions about that because it's just not a good empirical thing. To many unknown factors.

[M&M]

Originally Posted by O-cha

I see what your saying, that's why I hate you metric people, always trying to quote C and kW.

14 degrees ain't bad at all. Still like to see WOT run comparisons though on temps and MPH. But I'll just do it myself so you don't explode my head with more metrics.

As for the stock airbox and sitting at a light yada yada. I make no real conclusions about that because it's just not a good empirical thing. To many unknown factors.

Yeah I'll try to get some WOT runs tomorrow, but the IC is going to come into play then. So I think you right and we need a probe to log pre-IC temps.

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by M&M

Yeah I'll try to get some WOT runs tomorrow, but the IC is going to come into play then. So I think you right and we need a probe to log pre-IC temps.

Yea, I'm ordering some filters today, hopefully they will be here by the time I dyno. Have to see if I can extend the wires on this probe and have it still work too.

[grkm3]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm sorry but I haven't even seen this kind of dyno before. Let alone dyno'd a 335 on one, at 5500' altitude. Have you? I suspect not. So how can u be so sure that an Xede or v1 can make the same power? I don't understand why you are expressing yourself with such vehemence when you are so plainly wrong with your conclusions.

FWIW, a car running at 5500' will be very close to the limits of its turbo capacity. What this means is that v2 will not be worth as much (over v1) as it is on a car running closer to sea level. This is not hard to understand. If you want, I can explain in greater depth. Seriously, I will. Just let me know.

Shiv

Shiv Im not talking about this dyno Im talking about every other dyno that was done STD instead of SAE and you know well that SAE will put down lower numbers,you have basically convinced this board to accept std numbers.

You have posted dynos from back in the day using the xede making the same power your maps are making now with v2.Where are the 370-400whp numbers from back in the day when you hyped up v2 right as AA was showing there dynos?

On a side note Id like to see your 390whp 91oct run using sae instead of std.

My point was we were expecting 400whp with downpips from the v2 and basically brain washed everyone to think the the xede was no good,but it can make just as much power and has even with you tuning it.

Here is an AA car that just has there tune and exh,Its not that far off from V2 and it can make more now since everyone is convinced that the intakes make 17whp up top.

[M&M]

Ok I got a couple of WOT logs today (ambient 76 deg F). I actually did 3 sets of logs but this one seems to be the best. First thing to note is that the car was parked in the sun for over an hour before I started this log immediately after starting the car. Hence the log starts with an IAT of 105.

But note that as soon as you start driving the IAT's come down. After 28 seconds the IAT is down to 96 and continues to go down. Eventually it settles at 89 deg F (on a 76 deg day).

Then I did a WOT run in 3rd to just under 6000rpm, followed shortly after by a WOT run in 3rd to 7000rpm, and then into 4th gear up to around 6500. This is under some reasonable load as it was quite an incline.

The first thing to note is that the IAT's climb sharply at high rpm. But this is EXACTLY the same as with the stock airbox when I logged. It's normal for a small turbo car with the tiny turbines we have. It climbs from 81 to 106 on the single 3rd gear run. But note that it immediately comes down the moment you lift off. It takes all of 26 seconds to go from 106 back down to normal temps.

On the combined 3rd/4th run it goes from 93 to 116 during the run. The it takes all of 25 seconds to go back down to normal cruising temps. It's pretty evident there is no heat soak problem.



This can be compared to the runs with the stock airox I did a while back.

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...6&postcount=19

[ThomasMartin]

Originally Posted by M&M

Ok I got a couple of WOT logs today (ambient 76 deg F). I actually did 3 sets of logs but this one seems to be the best. First thing to note is that the car was parked in the sun for over an hour before I started this log immediately after starting the car. Hence the log starts with an IAT of 105.

But note that as soon as you start driving the IAT's come down. After 28 seconds the IAT is down to 96 and continues to go down. Eventually it settles at 89 deg F (on a 76 deg day).

Then I did a WOT run in 3rd to just under 6000rpm, followed shortly after by a WOT run in 3rd to 7000rpm, and then into 4th gear up to around 6500. This is under some reasonable load as it was quite an incline.

The first thing to note is that the IAT's climb sharply at high rpm. But this is EXACTLY the same as with the stock airbox when I logged. It's normal for a small turbo car with the tiny turbines we have. It climbs from 81 to 106 on the single 3rd gear run. But note that it immediately comes down the moment you lift off. It takes all of 26 seconds to go from 106 back down to normal temps.

On the combined 3rd/4th run it goes from 93 to 116 during the run. The it takes all of 25 seconds to go back down to normal cruising temps. It's pretty evident there is no heat soak problem.



This can be compared to the runs with the stock airox I did a while back.

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...6&postcount=19

Nice Logs M cant wait to do mine maybe we can install them tomorrow at Adeline if i get a chance to buy them during the day

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by M&M

The first thing to note is that the IAT's climb sharply at high rpm. But this is EXACTLY the same as with the stock airbox when I logged. It's normal for a small turbo car with the tiny turbines we have.

Actually it has nothing to do with the turbos being small, actually the fact that they are small (and that we run relatively low boost) would contribute to IATs climbing less the higher the RPM compared to say an evo boosting 25 PSI.

The reason they climb as RPMs go up is because you are compressing a much larger volume of air, when it's compressed It's heated and the intercooler removes the heat. But the intercooler has a fixed amount of energy it can remove at any given temperature delta. At higher RPMs where the volume of air (and energy) is over double over lower RPMs the intercooler is still removing the same amount of energy (heat) therefore the only thing that can happen is for the outlet temps to climb.

It has nothing to do with the stock airbox or the cone filters. And it's not saying something bad about either, either.




Also, the car being in the sun does not represent the sources of heat that are in the engine bay of a fully warmed up engine.

Ideally a comparison of the stock box vs cone filters with the same ambient on a fully warmed up engine is whats needed. And even if the cone filters don't show a significant increase, actual intake temps pre turbo are needed to.


Sorry to shoot all sorts of holes in your testing, I, and I'm sure many others appreciate it. I just want to see it done right. I'll do it right in a couple weeks so I'm not telling you you have to, just pointing out how do get more empirical data.





Also do you still have the aftermarket intercooler in?

[M&M]

Originally Posted by O-cha

Actually it has nothing to do with the turbos being small, actually the fact that they are small (and that we run relatively low boost) would contribute to IATs climbing less the higher the RPM compared to say an evo boosting 25 PSI.

I personally have logged VW/Audi cars with the comp wheel/turbine wheel swapped out and the IATS didn't climb as sharply at high rpm. Thew bigger wheels actually contributed to lower IATS in high rpm running. Probably due to the fact that the turbo was more efficient on the same boost with a bigger compressor wheel. The chipped cars tend to run slightly outside the optimum efficiency for the turbos, especially at altitude. We have a basic "altitude compensation" rule to make the cars run almost as efficiently as a sea-level car. Go one size bigger on the comp wheel and clip the turbine. Doesn't always work on all cars.

Originally Posted by O-cha

Ideally a comparison of the stock box vs cone filters with the same ambient on a fully warmed up engine is whats needed.

That's what I've just done. The ambients were about 24 deg on both days.

Originally Posted by O-cha

And even if the cone filters don't show a significant increase, actual intake temps pre turbo are needed to.

I don't have access to that equipment. There is no heat soak as recorded by the IAT's. The intercooler is operating just as efficiently as before. It removes the same about of heat from the intake charge as before, if you look at the drop when you lift off the throttle.

I even got out the car twice, popped the hood and felt the cones after WOT runs to 7000rpm. They were not hot at all, nor was the area around them.

Originally Posted by O-cha

Also do you still have the aftermarket intercooler in?

Yeah conditions were the same as the last test. Even the same road, and started testing at the same marker.

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by M&M

I personally have logged VW/Audi cars with the comp wheel/turbine wheel swapped out and the IATS didn't climb as sharply at high rpm. Thew bigger wheels actually contributed to lower IATS in high rpm running. Probably due to the fact that the turbo was more efficient on the same boost with a bigger compressor wheel. The chipped cars tend to run slightly outside the optimum efficiency for the turbos, especially at altitude. We have a basic "altitude compensation" rule to make the cars run almost as efficiently as a sea-level car. Go one size bigger on the comp wheel and clip the turbine. Doesn't always work on all cars.

A bigger turbo may be more efficient, that does not change the fact that the main reason temps climb is exactly as I detailed. When I said small turbos I simply meant relatively low boost, as I clarified RIGHT after I said small turbos.

Originally Posted by M&M

I even got out the car twice, popped the hood and felt the cones after WOT runs to 7000rpm. They were not hot at all, nor was the area around them.

That's the whole point, make a log when the cars heated and the area is hot. You have effectively taken all the negative of the intake out of the equation.

[M&M]

Originally Posted by O-cha

That's the whole point, make a log when the cars heated and the area is hot.

I drove for 2 hours. Then stopped for an hour. Then I drove for another hour and a half. The car was plenty heated. I got logs for almost the whole 1.5 hour drive. I didn't post them because the car got colder and colder the more I drove. I was on the highway doing about 60-70, and I would go WOT in 3rd and 4th to 7000rpm every time I got a chance. But whenever you go back to cruise the temps stabilise inside 30 seconds.

So I tried to get logs of a hot engine bay but I failed miserably.

Maybe someone with a probe would be a better bet, I don't think I can do any better.

[ThomasMartin]

Originally Posted by M&M

I drove for 2 hours. Then stopped for an hour. Then I drove for another hour and a half. The car was plenty heated. I got logs for almost the whole 1.5 hour drive. I didn't post them because the car got colder and colder the more I drove. I was on the highway doing about 60-70, and I would go WOT in 3rd and 4th to 7000rpm every time I got a chance. But whenever you go back to cruise the temps stabilise inside 30 seconds.

So I tried to get logs of a hot engine bay but I failed miserably.

Maybe someone with a probe would be a better bet, I don't think I can do any better.

I think you both have to agree the following,
1) The performance of the car is not effected in any negative way due to perceived hot air being taken in by the cones as the intake temperatures are the same as the standard air box. What we do know as FACT is that a) performance increased on the dyno due to the cones b) intake temps stayed the same or less as standard as the graphs showed.

2) We dont know the increased working load on the intercooler as we did not measure intake temp before it entered the intercooler. BUT lets all be serious if we were all so worried as to argue so much about the stress of our engine components would we all install piggy back units that almost double boost and stress almost ever component of the vehicle? Id say a BIG nooooo so maybe we putting more stress on the intercooler, yes but FACT you increasing HP and everything you do to the engine to increase HP will in some way stress some component more. So lets get used to the idea, more HP = More component stress if you the type of person who worries about it than dont install the cones

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by M&M

I drove for 2 hours. Then stopped for an hour. Then I drove for another hour and a half. The car was plenty heated. I got logs for almost the whole 1.5 hour drive. I didn't post them because the car got colder and colder the more I drove. I was on the highway doing about 60-70, and I would go WOT in 3rd and 4th to 7000rpm every time I got a chance. But whenever you go back to cruise the temps stabilise inside 30 seconds.

So I tried to get logs of a hot engine bay but I failed miserably.

Maybe someone with a probe would be a better bet, I don't think I can do any better.

If so then that's great, but the way you said things in your post made me think the log was the very first run you did heading out.