Freaking IC failed AGAIN!
11-15-2014, 08:58 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Freaking IC failed AGAIN!
My IC which I just replaced last year has failed on me again! UGGGGH!
Going with Rudy's IC this time which shouldn't fail. Too bad his came out after I got my last one. Woulda saved me $2000. At least it looks like a quality piece of work.
http://www.crossfireforum.org/forum/725007-post109.html
Going with Rudy's IC this time which shouldn't fail. Too bad his came out after I got my last one. Woulda saved me $2000. At least it looks like a quality piece of work.
http://www.crossfireforum.org/forum/725007-post109.html
11-16-2014, 01:58 PM
#2
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02 C32 S203
You are running a split cooling system? The pressure from the engine cooling system can cause damage to the inter cooler.
I do agree that Rudy's replacement might be better in regards to build quality but eventually it will not help with the heat problem.
We had a long discussion on this on our national forums. We came up with couple of solutions.
1. You would need more area for heat to dissipate. Pansu has done this with his car since he has one extra heat exchanger in the front and two extra besides intake manifolds.
2. You would require more mass (more fluid) to absorb all the heat. This could be easily achieved with a trunk tank. You could easily fit at least 20 liters of liquid in our tank. Mated with the right pump heat soaking could be reduced dramatically.
I am doing the latter one during next summer and we will see what the benefits are. Last WOT I did in the dyno showed 65 C after four consecutive runs.
I do agree that Rudy's replacement might be better in regards to build quality but eventually it will not help with the heat problem.
We had a long discussion on this on our national forums. We came up with couple of solutions.
1. You would need more area for heat to dissipate. Pansu has done this with his car since he has one extra heat exchanger in the front and two extra besides intake manifolds.
2. You would require more mass (more fluid) to absorb all the heat. This could be easily achieved with a trunk tank. You could easily fit at least 20 liters of liquid in our tank. Mated with the right pump heat soaking could be reduced dramatically.
I am doing the latter one during next summer and we will see what the benefits are. Last WOT I did in the dyno showed 65 C after four consecutive runs.
11-18-2014, 08:05 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Isla Verde, Puerto Rico
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
SRT-6
I'm on my second one too. When and if my current one starts leaking Rudy gets my business. As a point of interest, my supercharger to intercooler gasket blew out 1-1/2 hours from home. The result was IAT's at 165º at cruise in addition to an idle speed of 4000 rpm. At WOT IAT's fell to 120º in seconds. The temperatures in the lifter valley seem to hover around 165º. Air enters under the pulley and exits under the Y pipe. If there was a way to force more air under the pulley into the lifter valley less hot air would heat the underside of the intercooler. My theory. Right or wrong.
Les
Les
