Corky Bell

Time to think on as to the best method for the turbo rebuild ..................
Four options as far as I see it .
Corky say's ............................ ' Never plumb in series and wherever poss air to air

Time to think on as to the best method for the turbo rebuild ..................
Four options as far as I see it .
Corky say's ............................ ' Never plumb in series and wherever poss air to air

Coincedence. Me and Steve were talking about the same point in his book today...

Bit of a cockerel up there on his part......

Is Corky correct though ?
And it's Steve and I

:lol:

Is Corky correct though ?
And it's Steve and I

Air to air is better than water if you can put it at the front of a car, in an application with maximum airflow, but the intercooler has to be adequately sized (ie big as possible - he is talking about very large intercoolers in his book) He doesnt go into the fact that water has 4 times the specific heat content of air so hence why the units can be so small and do 90% of of the job of air to air..

He also doesnt mention that charge temps out of the core on a chargecooler system are more stable and constant even though ambient (outside) temperatures can fluctuate, simply because water takes a certain time to raise and lower in temperature..

As for putting cores in series (the book does cover alot of subjects, but isnt specific in some areas) all he is going on about it pressure drop. Putting two cores in series is no different to running an intercooler twice as long, and you may have really efficient intercoolers in series so there is no noticable pressure drop. If your inlet is flowing 300cfm, and you have two cores capable of flowing 500 each, then you'll still not get any problems..

He doesnt mention that some intercoolers are actually 'twin pass'..ie, they have the inlet and outlet at one end, so the air tract is double the length of the whole unit (the core is split in two), so again this is no different to putting two intercoolers in 'series'. I think his wording of 'never' is a bit misplaced, but then he does talk about drag racing alot, with intercoolers that can bend under boost, reinforced end tanks, so maybe he is talking about the extremes of forced induction, ie 40psi + etc...

And pressure drop figures are always very low on most cores, lower than 1psi, so you may increase this by 25% by adding another core, though youve just gained a damn sight more cooling efficiency by having twice as much core for cooling..

As for running the CC and the standard intercooler after, the good thing about this is if you ever get an air lock, or for some reason a leak, or the pump stops flowing, you still have the fallback of the original inter'warmer' (still better than nothing...)

Hopefully Spryboy will comment... He has fitted his CC system, and Ive heard that straight away he has noticed a big difference, and holds boost longer and stronger, and all on a standard V6 turbo.

Ahhhhh so Corky's wrong then

Ahhhhh so Corky's wrong then

No, he just hasnt shown every angle...

Don't talk to me about angles Not after today
I always intended to fit the CC direct to the TB ,can't see any benefit of two coolers in line More weight aside
Will a CC fit in the intercooler space ????

Hmm see what i mean. Taken from Bell Intercoolers website.. (owned by Corky Bell) http://www.bellintercoolers.com/pages/t ... html#FAQ_5

How can an air-to-air intercooler be more efficient than a water based intercooler?
There is an overwhelming quantity of ambient air available to cool an air-to-air core relative to the charge air thru the inside of the intercooler (The iced down water intercooler is the only exception to this argument.). At just 60 mph, with a 300 bhp engine at full tilt, the ambient air available to cool the intercooler is about ten times the amount of charge air needed to make the 300 hp. Whereas the water intercooler largely stores the heat in the water until off throttle allows a reverse exchange. Some heat is expelled from a front water cooler, but the temperature difference between the water and ambient air is not large enough to drive out much heat. Another way to view the situation is that ultimately the heat removed from the air charge must go into the atmosphere regardless of whether it's from an air intercooler or a water based intercooler. The problem with the water intercooler is that the heat has more barriers to cross to reach the atmosphere than the air intercooler. Like it or not, each barrier represents a resistance to the transfer of heat. The net result; more barriers, less heat transfer.

What ranges of efficiency can be expected from an intercooler?
A typical air-to-air intercooler for a street application achieves between 60% and 70% efficiency, an excellent/optimum design for road racing can approach close to 90% efficiency, but requires an adequate "budget!”

Typically, a liquid-to-air intercooler achieves higher efficiencies than an air-to-air intercooler, starting at 75% efficiency and reaching peaks of 95% efficiency. Another advantage is the optional use of ice as a coolant, which is the only way to reduce the charge-air temperature below the ambient air temperature.

Que?

Don't talk to me about angles Not after today
I always intended to fit the CC direct to the TB ,can't see any benefit of two coolers in line More weight aside
Will a CC fit in the intercooler space ????

Hmm, if you did some chopping. It would be easier to put the CC where we usually do and use a nice wide 180 degree silicon bend.

Two coolers in line?, well the original intercooler does something..more than no intercooler at all....Its going to do more than a piece of pipe...

maybe you should look at axel ress solutiion, having an air to air intercooler fitted to the rear spoiler (f40 style, about 30 cm in height). this is good up to 300 hp i reckon.

Don't talk to me about angles Not after today
I always intended to fit the CC direct to the TB ,can't see any benefit of two coolers in line More weight aside
Will a CC fit in the intercooler space ????

Hmm, if you did some chopping. It would be easier to put the CC where we usually do and use a nice wide 180 degree silicon bend.

I was thinking an Ali donut .....I'd post a pic but GT would have a "bonking" wee

maybe you should look at axel ress solutiion, having an air to air intercooler fitted to the rear spoiler (f40 style, about 30 cm in height). this is good up to 300 hp i reckon.

That is a good idea, but it does look very very silly.

maybe you should look at axel ress solutiion, having an air to air intercooler fitted to the rear spoiler (f40 style, about 30 cm in height). this is good up to 300 hp i reckon.

That is a good idea, but it does look very very silly.

It would be the best option but it ruins the looks and more importantly silouette

maybe you should look at axel ress solutiion, having an air to air intercooler fitted to the rear spoiler (f40 style, about 30 cm in height). this is good up to 300 hp i reckon.

That is a good idea, but it does look very very silly.

It would be the best option but it ruins the looks and more importantly silouette

And fook knows what the drag is on at high speed....sky anchor...

I don not think there is much drag after about 60mph, mind you there is not much air flow either. I know that if you do not clip the rear glass hatch down, when you hit 60-70 the glass pops upwards and stays horizontal. A clear indication to me that the std intercooler and rear spoiler probably do not work very effieciently and the air flow just runs off the roof horizontally backwards.

As soon as you sloiw down to about 30-40 the glass drops down and clips itself in.

Does any one have access to any aerodymanics modeling software, it would be good to see what really happens as the cars speed increases.

(Lee, how is my grammer?)