[DamnitDavid]

i guess you can say that because it is blocking some of the radiator.

[jam0321]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

I agree, the efficiencies of the stock IC should be tested. But the point was that these 3 intercoolers are all larger than stock and claim less of a pressure drop. This would seem to counter the blanket statement that increasing the size will increase pressure drop. It also calls into question that, using an upgraded IC, the turbo would necessarily have to work harder to produce more boost to maintain target pressure.

The Spearco IC is not a "large" front mount intercooler. Most larger than stock IC do induce some amount of boost drop. However, the Spearco core is far more efficient than stock and our testing along with independent test show reduced outlet pressure drop vs stock.

If an IC blocks airflow to the radiator then yes, it can produce slightly negative effects on the car's cooling system. But not as significant as as placing a piece of cardboard on the front of the car.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by 2ABRUPT

How do you know he's producing more power? He never measure his power output before or after the intercooler.

It is a valid assumption that, within the range we're talking about, cooler temps = more power. It's more dense air being fed into the cylinder. Something would have to be broken for power to not increase.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by jam0321

The Spearco IC is not a "large" front mount intercooler. Most larger than stock IC do induce some amount of boost drop. However, the Spearco core is far more efficient than stock and our testing along with independent test show reduced outlet pressure drop vs stock.

I believe it.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by sg335

So we would not generate more heat from more boost pressure over stock and I would agree that more boost pressure (11 - 14 psi) than stock will generate more heat regardless of whether or not you installed an aftermarket FMIC.

This is true because you can only remove so much heat with an IC. However, the colder you can make the charge, the safer it is to run a certain boost level. So an aftermarket IC capable of reducing temps 40F over stock could very well save an engine that runs hard.

Originally Posted by sg335

So with stock psi, cooler/denser air will generate a more complete combustion and allow the car to run closer to max stock boost pressure (?).

I think you'll get to a certain pressure sooner with more dense air, so the turbos do not have to work as hard to achieve a desired boost pressure.

Originally Posted by sg335

Does this more efficient combustion create more heat in the engine and therefore raise the oil and coolant temps?

When I think of efficient combustion, I think of running lean. You should be able to run a little leaner if you are providing more dense (colder) air. That alone will produce more power.

With lower intake temps, you're reducing the overall work your engine is required to do to produce the same amount of HP. So more power available at lower RPM. This should reduce engine operating temps and prolong its life, and the life of everything else that is affected by heat in your engine bay.

[sg335]

So the score is tied. Both arguments make sense. The answers we have so far are: yes it will, and no it won't. I guess I should just by an FMIC and find out. The Spearco unit is the only one that does not block any of the surface area of the stock radiator as it sits below the radiator in the stock location. I believe it is only deeper, sitting closer to the grill, and if taller, it sits lower than stock. I still believe that a more efficient radiator or oil cooler will product drastically more efficient cooling for my problem than an FMIC. I have already switched to RedLine 5W30 oil and distilled water with RedLine Water Wetter which I hope will prove to drop temps by at least 10 degrees on each system. The goal is to run below 280 degrees oil temps and 235 degree coolant temps after a 30 minute track session of high RPM driving. Lower than that of course is better. I just don't know how much cooling benefit I will receive from an FMIC in relationship to oil and coolant temps assuming that an FMIC does not increase engine heat.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

Ok one more thing: The accepted logic is that cooler IATs allow more fuel to be added to the combustion cycle.

Apparently, cooler IATs allow either less fuel, or higher cylinder pressure too - both can produce more power.

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

Given that the burning of fuel will result in one of two products (1) motion (2) heat aka inefficiencies, would it not be reasonable to assume that the additional fuel burned with an upgraded FMIC (over stock) would be less than 100% efficient?

I think that is always reasonable.

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

That would imply more heat.

Seems that if there is some more heat in the combustion process, it's being easily countered by the lower charge temp.

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Seems that if there is some more heat in the combustion process, it's being easily countered by the lower charge temp.

I find that very difficult to follow logically. Any decrease in charge temps is less than 50 degrees.

It does not matter if more or fuel is used. For a unit of additional power, assuming less than 100% efficient internal combustion - there will be additional heat.

That is, unless the additional power is PURELY a reduction in prior inefficiencies. And given the laws of thermodynamics, I sincerely doubt that is the case.

[jam0321]

EGT is an indication of how hot the combustion process is in the cylinder. EGT are also directly related to the air/fuel ratio. The cooler the air is entering the combustion chamber, the more dense it is. The more dense, the more O2 molecules enter the chamber which creates a more complete burn. The more complete the burn, the lower the EGT's. EGT's are also an indication of thermal load. The lower the EGT's, the lower the thermal load on the engine and the cooling system.

So...a more efficient IC, even though providing more power, does not significantly increase engine heat.

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by jam0321

EGT is an indication of how hot the combustion process is in the cylinder. EGT are also directly related to the air/fuel ratio. The cooler the air is entering the combustion chamber, the more dense it is. The more dense, the more O2 molecules enter the chamber which creates a more complete burn. The more complete the burn, the lower the EGT's. EGT's are also an indication of thermal load. The lower the EGT's, the lower the thermal load on the engine and the cooling system.

So...a more efficient IC, even though providing more power, does not significantly increase engine heat.

That, I do not follow either. Perhaps I am reading this wrong but you are saying that cooler air (which I agree that your "better" FMIC will provide) will induce a lean operating condition, which you call a "more complete burn".

Your statement is logically unsound for two reasons. First, you are assuming that the engine will not increase fuel delivery as a result of lower intake air temps. Is the argument that Spearco is telling you to push?

Secondly, EGT isn't so easy to correlate to "more complete burn" aka lean operating conditions. Let's set aside, for the moment ,your argument that the car will run leaner with cooler intake temps. Maximum EGT occurs at stoichiometric, aka 14.7/1 air to fuel. EGT decreases whether you go richer or leaner than that. Deviate from stoich and EGT decreases!

Now, presuming the engine runs richer than that in non-upgraded FMIC form and your argument that the FMIC results in a lean operating condition (which I disagree with, but I'll indulge you), but leaning out the mixture, you are DECREASING the EGT, but so would richening it.

Now looking at the facts of how engines work, I'm lost when I read your argument. Perhaps I'm just misinterpreting what you're saying?

[hotrod2448]

Originally Posted by sg335

The goal is to run below 280 degrees oil temps and 235 degree coolant temps after a 30 minute track session of high RPM driving.

I wouldn't rely on an IC to lower engine fluid temps. Address the issue directly as you said with either a radiator or oil cooler upgrade.

One other thing to consider and I don't know if it's possible yet is to try removing the oil cooler thermostat or replace it with a lower temp unit. It's probably the cheapest route.

[HP Autosport]

Originally Posted by sg335

So the score is tied. Both arguments make sense. The answers we have so far are: yes it will, and no it won't. I guess I should just by an FMIC and find out. The Spearco unit is the only one that does not block any of the surface area of the stock radiator as it sits below the radiator in the stock location. I believe it is only deeper, sitting closer to the grill, and if taller, it sits lower than stock. I still believe that a more efficient radiator or oil cooler will product drastically more efficient cooling for my problem than an FMIC. I have already switched to RedLine 5W30 oil and distilled water with RedLine Water Wetter which I hope will prove to drop temps by at least 10 degrees on each system. The goal is to run below 280 degrees oil temps and 235 degree coolant temps after a 30 minute track session of high RPM driving. Lower than that of course is better. I just don't know how much cooling benefit I will receive from an FMIC in relationship to oil and coolant temps assuming that an FMIC does not increase engine heat.

In our experience with the Spearco/Turbonetic FMIC on the 335 we have not seen much difference in oil temperatures. And it shouldn't affect the coolant temperature either at its location.

[2ABRUPT]

Originally Posted by HP Autowerks

In our experience with the Spearco/Turbonetic FMIC on the 335 we have not seen much difference in oil temperatures. And it shouldn't affect the coolant temperature either at its location.

Thanks for that clarification! Whew.. I hope some people understand this.

[Vince@ V K Motorwerks]

Damn, Im learning alot

[HP Autosport]

Originally Posted by DamnitDavid

i guess you can say that because it is blocking some of the radiator.

Just want to clarify that the Turbonetics FMIC does not, in anyway, block the airflow to the radiator. It is mounted below it.

[jam0321]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

That, I do not follow either. Perhaps I am reading this wrong but you are saying that cooler air (which I agree that your "better" FMIC will provide) will induce a lean operating condition, which you call a "more complete burn".

Your statement is logically unsound for two reasons. First, you are assuming that the engine will not increase fuel delivery as a result of lower intake air temps. Is the argument that Spearco is telling you to push?

Secondly, EGT isn't so easy to correlate to "more complete burn" aka lean operating conditions. Let's set aside, for the moment ,your argument that the car will run leaner with cooler intake temps. Maximum EGT occurs at stoichiometric, aka 14.7/1 air to fuel. EGT decreases whether you go richer or leaner than that. Deviate from stoich and EGT decreases!

Now, presuming the engine runs richer than that in non-upgraded FMIC form and your argument that the FMIC results in a lean operating condition (which I disagree with, but I'll indulge you), but leaning out the mixture, you are DECREASING the EGT, but so would richening it.

Now looking at the facts of how engines work, I'm lost when I read your argument. Perhaps I'm just misinterpreting what you're saying?

no worries, i'll try to explain it better...

In generic (non mech engineer speak) terms the amount of air (air/fuel ratio) is not affected by the temperature of the incoming air. Meaning wether the intake air is 140 deg or 120 deg, if the tune requires a 11/1 air/fuel then that is what it will create. However,the denser, cooler air, allows for a "cleaner" and more efficient combustion becauce of the added o2 molecules. Because the burn is more complete, less fuel leaves the chamber creating less of an "afterburn". The lesser the afterburn the lower the EGT's, thus indicating how efficient the engine is running. And like I explained earlier, EGT's indicate the amount of thermal load on the engine. Less EGT's=less thermal load="less engine heat"

I hope this helps. Maybe I'm not understanding the original question. I guess "FMIC causes increase in engine heat" needs to be explained. External temp? Internal temp? Underhood temp?...

[sg335]

I meant internal heat in the block and head which in turn would cause the oil and coolant to heat up as well. There is no doubt that under hood temps are vastly higher than a NA 330i car.

[tintivilus]

Originally Posted by ilia@industry

Unfortunately, there's no free lunch. If you look at the ideal gas law, it prohibits any kind of free temperature reduction. Lowering flow velocity will decrease temperature while decreasing pressure. Raising flow velocity increases temperature and pressure. So on and so forth.

I'll follow the first part of this (lowering temperature reduced the volume of a given mass of gas, so the velocity/pressure of the gas will decrease) but how do you get an increase in temperature from an increase in velocity? If that's going to happen, it's friction, not ideal gas law.

Originally Posted by ilia@industry

A bigger core could still operate at a lower pressure differential than stock, if the internal fin design is more aerodynamically efficient. Assuming you're using a fantastic core, you could maintain the same or higher flow velocity through the core, in order to maintain the same or lower pressure drop as stock. This is assuming the stock intercooler is not particularly efficient, which is something that'd need to be tested.

Again, there's no escaping physics, and no free lunch. If you're reducing temperature, you're reducing velocity. If you're reducing velocity, you're lowering pressure.

There's more to gas->solid->gas heat transfer than aerodynamics. I'll accept your final statement as a reasonable summary but i think you're attributing too much intercooler analysis to the idea gas law and neglecting the other factors at work.

[jam0321]

Originally Posted by sg335

I meant internal heat in the block and head which in turn would cause the oil and coolant to heat up as well. There is no doubt that under hood temps are vastly higher than a NA 330i car.

ok, so the only way to measure this heat would be with a pyrometer located in the exhaust manifold just after the block. This would measure EGT's. So, the lower the EGT's, the less internal heat there is. Hence, no- an upgraded FMIC will not increase engine heat.

[jam0321]

Originally Posted by HP Autowerks

Just want to clarify that the Turbonetics FMIC does not, in anyway, block the airflow to the radiator. It is mounted below it.

thanks Harold,
BTW, how is the build coming?

sorry, I jacked the thread, won't happen again...

[sg335]

Originally Posted by jam0321

ok, so the only way to measure this heat would be with a pyrometer located in the exhaust manifold just after the block. This would measure EGT's. So, the lower the EGT's, the less internal heat there is. Hence, no- an upgraded FMIC will not increase engine heat.

Makes sense to me. Has anyone taken these temps before and after FMIC?

[IND-Distribution]

Originally Posted by tintivilus

I'll follow the first part of this (lowering temperature reduced the volume of a given mass of gas, so the velocity/pressure of the gas will decrease) but how do you get an increase in temperature from an increase in velocity?

It's simply the inverse of the same equation. Take a gas like air, and assume it's sitting in a jar.

Heating the gas inside the jar will cause an increase in pressure, and an increase in velocity if there's an outlet for the gas to flow. Cooling the air inside the jar will cause a decrease in pressure, and a decrease in the velocity of the gas.

Playing with any of the other variables produces a similar relationship. Compress the gas in the jar in some way, and you'll see an increase in temperature. Decrease pressure, and temps drop accordingly.

The ideal gas law, therefore suggests that if you're cooling the gas, you're reducing it's pressure. That means that adding any intercooler to a car where there was none before will produce a pressure drop.

The other thing it means is that assuming the same core type and design (an apples to apples comparison), if you've got one intercooler, and it gives you 1 unit of cooling, and you change that intercooler for another that provides 1.5 units of cooling with the same core design and efficiency, you're going to have a pressure drop over the first cooler.

It is more complicated than that because the aftermarket intercoolers offered by spearco and others could easily have a higher quality, more expensive core design of a higher efficiency. A temperature drop from adding an aftermarket cooler will therefore not necessarily yield a pressure drop, because of the potential for superior core design. Empirical testing could answer that question once and for all.


With regard to your statement about friction, it's essentially negligible. Although any fluid traveling over a surface will produce intermolecular friction, the gas velocities and distances we're talking about are not significant enough to produce a noticeable boundary layer. Even if there was a serious boundary layer inside the piping (which is not something we have to concern ourselves with), the heat added from intermolecular friction due to the existence of this boundary layer would be negligible.



We're digressing, however. Pressure drop aside, the key issue here is tuning. Can adding a charge cooler make a car run hotter? Maybe, if the tuning is then off enough to where the combustion temps change significantly, and then heat the oil and coolant.

Although I haven't invested time into extensive analysis of the 335's ECU, I'm willing to bet it's powerful enough to compensate for intake air temperatures and EGTs, and will adjust timing/fueling accordingly. I'd be surprised if just adding an intercooler netted any serious difference in the negative or positive direction in the car's coolant and oil temps.