The Quaife was the best single mod I've done to my car, period.

 

Thanks, that's what I was kind of thinking. With the traction light flashing at me from a 50ish mph roll, I frequently find myself wondering whether I'd be better off trying to maximize traction as opposed to looking for more top end. I think I will definitely put that on my to-do list.

 

Little update. I haven't driven the car much since getting the A/C recharged, but just drove it to work and outside temps are the hottest I've driven the car in since the Killer Chiller install. At a steady cruise of 50 mph after about 5 miles of my drive to work (about 1/2 of it freeway) in 71* weather, my oil temp was 204* and my IAT was 68*. Yep, below ambient, at a slow cruise even though I got into boost a little twice on the way and the A/C was blowing cold inside the car to combat the sweltering heat outside too.

 

Great news! You're making me want to tear my new setup back apart to add a chiller, lol.

 

I'm going to take some video on my IAT's during some runs this weekend to document how it works drag racing. If it works as well as I expect I'm sure Joe will sell a couple more units!

I've never seen IAT's on a hot engine lower than ambient in my CL. Typically at a slow/low RPM cruise like that I was looking at 40-50* above ambient. The hotter the day the worse it was as the A?C running always raised IAT's even more.

 

It would be great if these cars have enough A/C sytem capacity to consistently generate good temps with a decent duty cycle. I will definitely be looking forward to more data. Thanks for the updates!

 

Condensation on the intercoolers three different times in the staging lanes. I forgot my phone the time I was stuck waiting for about 30 minutes, that time they were literally ice coated all the way from the inlet to outlet hoses. Anyone getting that cold with a pump upgrade?

 

Very nice! Were your runs faster/more consistent?

 

More consistent, but slower. Not sure why. After deleting the cats, eliminating the "restrictor plate" between the TB & intake manifold, adding the killer chiller, widening my rear wheels from 8" to 9.5" and going from a 265/40-18 to a 285/40-18 rear tire, I lost 1.5 mph and dropped from a best of a 10.73 to a 10.80. I can't imagine how better air flow, better traction, and colder IAT's hurt my times.

 

That's pretty close timewise, I mean easily explainable by atmospheric conditions (temp, humidity, density altitude, etc).

If conditions were the same or better, then I just wonder about the top end IATs. Depending on what the actual system capacity is I still think there could be quite a large rise during that 10 seconds. I mean during a pass you're basically just heatsinking into the water and there's no active cooling taking place. Do you have IAT log data from the runs?

How was your 330 and 1/8 mile compared to before? If you're seeing improvements there but not overall then I would say you might just need to add some water mass to the system with a small reservoir somewhere. If you're not seeing improvements there either and/or you ARE watching the top end IATs then I don't know what to guess at as the cause. In any case the car is rocket anyway, lol.

 

Its nice to see the intercoolers getting that cold. I wonder if there would be any benefit from adding big chunks of aluminum to the top to act as a heat sink. It would simply take longer to bring the temp of the intercooler down on longer pulls.
On a different note and a silly question, has the Killer chiller been proven to pick up alot of time on the strip with other platforms? I can see it being a great addition for normal spirited driving, almost like a self replenishing ice tank.

As far as compromised performance, I'd say a difference of 20-30 degrees can add up to quite a bit of loss. I wouldn't be shocked if it cost you 2/10ths and a little MPH. Don't forget better 60 ft times also usually lead to slightly lower MPH. Another thing, who knows if the additional rotational mass of the heavier tire/rim combo along with a little more height had any affect. It may be negligible, but it's a negative not a positive.

I was wondering about the throttle body gasket. Do you think this is done for a reason to prevent turbulence at the TB? It may be a long shot, but how could something so simple be an oversight for a performance platform from a manufacturer that already makes a larger gasket? If not time for a 90MM and a little bit of grinding, hahaha.

Last thing, I agree with almost everything you share and see pretty much eye to eye with your thinking. However, 71 degrees is NOT sweltering heat!!!! LOL I was battling 90 degrees plus this past week. That would be the true test with the Killer Chiller for recovery time and maintaining cabin temps.

 

This could work but water has about twice the volumetric heat capacity of aluminum so it's probably easier and more effective to just figure out how to hold more water if heatsoak during a run is in fact an issue.

The intake manifold inlet is radiused all the way around, I don't see why they would put a sharp step right before that beautiful smooth bellmouth entry. Good point about the tires. Good point about the wheels/tires. I calculate 2.4% effective gear ratio reduction from the extra height. That could certainly come into play at the top end.

 

330 & 1/8 mile were a little off too.

DA was not great, but was not bad either. I'm pretty sure my 10.73 was at a DA of 330' or so. Most of this weekend it was between 600-1200. That could make a difference, but better exhaust and intake flow along with colder IAT's should have offset that.

Yes, the added weight of the widened wheels and tires are a detriment to ET & trap speed, especially since it is rotational weight, but again I was hoping that it would allow me to hit it harder on launch and drop my 60' enough to be a wash there. Maybe not.

I took some video of my IATs during a couple runs so once I take the SD card out of the camera and download it I'll post up the video. I saw IAT drop to 50 right after launching once, (75* ambient air) and climbed to 120 or so by the time I lifted. On a hot lap, where I ran a 10.80, it climbed to 140 something. So yes, they do climb quite a bit in 10 seconds. I'm thinking of adding temperature sending units to the hot and cold side lines to see if it is coolant temp climbing, or is there just not enough water flow with the wimpy CM-30 pump.

Next winter, the plan is to put phenolic spacers under the intercooler's, coat them with Llizard Skin, and add temp sending units. I will do some experimenting to see if I can squeeze the Meziere pump in there too. I may yet go ahead and remove the washer fluid tank and build a custom one that still holds some washer fluid and the pumps, but also holds some intercooler fluid. I think I can get about 1 gallon of extra capacity. Just not sure if I want to do that. Keeping IAT's below 100 might require it though.

 

Yeah, that's quite a rise during a pass. I don't think flow is the problem. If your system is basically just lines, the pump, the KC, and the intercoolers then I'd be surprised if there's more than a gallon of water in there. Let's say 1.25 gallons to make the math easier. That's 10 lbs of water. At let's say 680 HP (68 lb/min airflow) and 300 degree F turbo outlet temps (80 degrees underhood temp and 20psi at 70% compressor efficiency) you're talking about 250 degrees of temp drop at the start of the run to get to your 50 degrees. That's 68lb/min * .25 / 6 * 250 = 708 BTUs that are taking effect on that 10 lbs of water. 708/10 = 70.8 degrees F of temp rise in your water over the course of a 10-second run.

To clarify, the .25 is a round number for the btu/lb it takes to cool dry air (it's actually more like .24). Divided by 6 to knock the lb/min down to lb/10sec to match up closer with your 1/4 mile run. And multiplied by the 250 degree temp differential (which would become somewhat of a calculus problem to get more accurate due to a diminishing temp differential as the run progresses, but I didn't get into that).

Obviously it's rough math but is a good ballpark and actually matches up really closely with your real-world results. It would be relatively easy to double your system capacity since it's such a small amount of water to start off with. Twice the system water mass = half the temp rise. If you could find somewhere to stick another gallon to gallon and a half of water then you'd only be seeing maybe 30-35 degrees rise.

 

I think the lizard skin and spacers will help with getting the water to a colder starting temp, but I don't think it will make any difference whatsoever in the amount of temp rise during a run.

 

I would also say if you do add a reservoir, it might be good to leave room for ice in there. It really wouldn't take much of it to drop that heat rise to zero (under 5 lbs) and your chiller would mostly keep it from melting in the lanes.

I know you think it's kind of a pain, but it's hard to argue with 138x the volumetric heat capacity of water (144x the mass heat capacity).

 

Yes, I agree, it is more for driving around with the hood closed that I will see an improvement with the spacer/thermal barrier mods. I Just got tired of the icing the tank game, been there, done that. Plus with the Killer Chiller I have to have anti freeze in the system or the KC will actually freeze the water in it.

 

That's the biggest reason I am sticking with the chiller setup in my Buick. I've slushed 20% methanol on the evaporator core, so it does get sub zero (on propane). Much better potential cooling than 32+ degrees. But I also have to have 5+ gallons of liquid coolant to stay within the same ending temps on a pull as on ice. It's nice for it to be a full-time solution though as opposed to just another pain in the button consumable. I totally understand where you are coming from there, but I maintain the position that it would still benefit you a great deal at the track (and you wouldn't need nearly as much ice as you did on the lightning with such cool starting temps and active refrigeration while in the staging lanes). You would almost have to do a cool can type setup though...to keep the systems separate so you can drain and replenish the ice container without having to catch/contain the waste and worry about diluting your antifreeze ratio.

It just could be a much more energy dense solution space-wise compared to adding more water capacity.

 

I really wish I'd taken some video or datalogs of my IAT's before the killer chiller. Anyone ever data log it during a pass at the track? I think next time I'm going to hook up the laptop and get some real data. Looking at the video I took, temps climb to 120's or more during a run depending on how long I cool down or if I hot lap. I'm thinking I can get two of these adapters:

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/atm-2281

and two of these sensor kits (last one on the page)

http://www.aeroforcetech.com/products_sensors_temp.html

And I can see intercooler coolant inlet and outlet temps right on my existing Interceptor gauge in real time. A comparison of coolant vs. charge temps will tell me if I need more coolant reserve, or more coolant flow. If it is flow, I need to find a way to squeeze in my Meziere pump. If the coolant temps are the problem, I need more fluid.

In the videos I'll post later, you can see my IAT's DROP after I lift off the the throttle at the end of the 1/4. It makes me think it is a low coolant flow issue letting the IAT's climb more than a coolant temp issue.

 

That would be extremely valuable information to have. I was going to suggest you get 4 of the barbs and some plugs so you could swap sensor locations for other data like KC inlet/outlet temps...holy cow are those adapters expensive though for essentially a tapped barb, lol. I'm sure there are cheaper solutions out there, but those would make for a nice clean install.

The indicated IAT drop after getting off the throttle doesn't surprise me. When the throttle closes you get an immediate expansion of the air in the manifold. Rapid pressure drop/expansion like that results in cooling, much the opposite process of heating during turbo compression (except with near 100% efficiency). It's the same concept as the air conditioning system. When you throttle a fluid that has been compressed and then cooled, it creates a pressure differential and resulting expansion and cooling just past the restriction. Granted, it's not going to be near to the extent of a phase change operation like in your A/C system but there is still a definite cooling effect.

 

Yes they are expensive, but the clean install vs. a bunch of fittings would be worth it to me. Good point on the IAT drop. I normally see an immediate increase in IAT when lifting off the throttle during normal driving due to the reduction in cool air flow over the IAT sensor though. Maybe I'll try winding it up and lifting in a low gear when I know my intercooler fluid is cold and see what happens.

 

Yeah, I don't know. It probably varies with circumstances...when your intake temps are way cooler than the surface of the intake manifold then I could see false high readings when you get off the throttle due to the sensor being skewed more by the local temperature of the manifold. But when you're going from 20psi to -7psi or something rapidly there should be some pretty significant cooling. Like 120 degrees or something. But you've also got beans for air mass at that point and a lot of relative thermal mass in the intake manifold itself so who knows how it actually affects the sensor reading.

I find myself wondering, in light of my system flow tests I did tonight, if you might be right about flow being the issue though. The CM-30 has more or less been determined to be close to a stock equivalent replacement, correct? If I'm flowing 5 GPM through my system with one pump through the bypass, that should be similar to what you're doing. 12 seconds to flow a gallon. So you may be right, you might not even be flowing your entire sytem capacity through the intercoolers once during a pass. In which case more capacity probably wouldn't help a bit without additional flow. Unfortunately, I fear it might be a combination of both.

It also has me worried now. 7gpm isn't much better. I was initially pretty happy with that result, but the more I think about it, it's not enough. If I have say 1.5-2 gallons in the intercoolers/heat exchanger/lines, and plan to run half ice, half water in the tank then that's another 1.2 gallons. So let's call it 3 gallons system capacity (plus the ice that ends up eventually turning into water). It's going to take 30 seconds to flow the whole system capacity through the intercoolers...so my system capacity is overkill for my flow rate. Or to look at it another way, my flow rate is about 1/3 of what would be optimal. Ideally, I would like to flow the entire capacity during the 1/4 mile.

 

I've thought of just buying one fitting and sending unit and place it in the line. That would help, but pre vs post intercooler temps would truly tell the whole story. Cool fluid going in with hot leaving would indicate low flow as the culprit. If the fluid going in is hot that would confirm it is a capacity issue. I just hate spending $200 to figure it out.

 

If my math on the btus is even remotely close, then it's a capacity issue. But if you add capacity, it won't help unless you can flow it all through in that 10 seconds so it would become a flow problem. I think you're just kind of on the edge of both. Which is another way of saying your current setup is probably fairly well matched to itself flow/capacity wise.

 

Did you get an updated Eurocharged tune when you deleted your cats?

There are just so many variables when you are at the track. Density altitude, humidity, fuel, and headwind are huge factors that add up quickly. Run again to get a better baseline if you can.

From the pictures I see your airboxes are gone, what set up are you running? I can't tell from the pictures.

Thank you very much for sharing your expierences with us. I am very interested in what you think of the KC on the track, but especially on the street.