The first intercooler has more surface area for the air to hit, so it will cool a lot quicker where as the smaller one would be useful if space is so confined with no other options, I would recommend a high pressure pump to run the first cooler as it would need to push the coolant a lot higher than the smaller one, resulting in more pressure on the pump.

 

Definitely the first one for total BTU capacity. 24x12x1. Definitely the second one for coolest water output temps and greater system capacity. I would choose #1 every time though.

Frontal area is typically much more important than thickness because the temperature differential diminishes tremendously with depth. The more core area exposed to the lowest temperature air, the more heat it can dissipate. Length of the water passages (width of the exchanger) allows more cooling time, but also poses a greater restriction to flow. Generally the longer cooling path will get you a greater temperature drop across the core, but less total BTU dissipation capacity. The second one is a dual pass so the water path is actually double that width, or 52 inches long with a 3.5"x 3.5" flow path. The first one appears to be parallel flow single pass. The big efficiency advantage there comes from exposing the water at its absolute hottest to the biggest surface area possible. The hot water is going into 24" of fresh air at 1" thick of that core at essentially the same time, vs the 3.5" of fresh air x 3.5" thick section that it first sees entering the second core. Core efficiency is directly dependent on temperature differential between the air and the fluid being cooled so the longer it spends in the core, the less efficient the core becomes (but the cooler the water will ultimately be IF you don't have cooling requirements in excess of your heat exchanger's capability...but you will).

Basically the second core is really only as thick as it is trying to compensate for its lack of frontal area/efficiency, and to give the water a wider flow path so the pressure drop isn't as bad. The first core will do a better job cooling your intercooler water and will have less of a detrimental effect on your other heat exchangers as well.

 

The math actually disagrees with this. The water lift might be higher (not much at 12" vs 7"), but it will be a much lower restriction core, it has twice the flow path and less than 1/4 the tube length, and no u-turn. The entry/exit tanks on #1 are 24x1"=24 square inches and the flow path is only 12" long. The second core entry and exit tanks are 3.5x3.5" = 12.25 square inches and the flow path is 52 inches long. Granted, the internal flow paths are going to be much less than this, and there will be differences since we're looking at a more tube and fin/hybrid style vs a bar and plate core. But it's still a relatively valid comparison.

 

lol getting all technical. When adding any extra cooler its always going to create pressure drop (less flow of coolant) so adding a stronger or extra pump is only going to make the flow better, and increase the pump longevity. This my friend doesn't need math, just common sense

 

OK so I will add #1 heat exchanger the tall narrow one with EMP WP29 pump witch has GPM rate of 25 gallons per minute and I will keep oem H.E I am monitoring intake temps with bluetooth obd scanner and torque pro. my intake temps go as high as 90c when engine is hot and car is stopped it drops to 56c when car is cruisin at 50mph while ambiet air temp is 25c . I am looking forward for intake temps go below 40c at least .
My Intake cooling mods list
EMP WP29 Pump
24x12x1 HE + OEM H.E
Water Mehtanol AEM (signal from MAP sensor)
Trunk ICE tank ( gonna use dry ice inside )
Also I need 1 more advice from you guys there is a custom shop here in my country who did quad intercooler setup for 1 guy with cl65 amg . I am thinking is quad IC will have a big difference in IAT temps are it will cause a pressure drop? what do you guys think is quad ICs work on 600s stock turbos?

 

You could use Quad, or just one big cooler. Only difference would be why would you go guad if you could just use one and not have to have so many hoses/clamps, and possible leaks, and more mounting brackets to fabricate. Easier to just use one big one the size of the Air Con condenser.

 

I will need air to liquid intercooler core then and I dont know and cannot find wich size I will need to make 1 big intercooler
Please see this link wich intercooler would be easyiest fit? what do u think?
http://www.votionspeed.com/category-s/134.htm

 

I don't disagree with the notion of extra or more powerful pumps. Just with the statement that core #1 would require one more so than #2.

 

Sorry I misunderstood you sorry, I thought you were talking about heat exchangers for the pump, if the your talking about inter cooler I would use something that will fit under your bonnet, same size as stock but thicker to allow more air to pass and larger surface area, check out speed drivens water to air intercooler a sizes and go for that. Wow them prices are pretty good compared to what speed driven asks for theres. Quad would be awesome if you could make it work but where would you place them ? The v12 engine bay is so full already and running long pipes to the front of the car will drop boost big time and won't spoil up quick

 

I am doing quad on my S600. They will be in series, and on separate loops. The first stage will be on the ambient heat exchanger loop and the second on a chilled reservoir (A/C and/or ice box). It's going to be a real ***** figuring out how to fit and plumb it all. Stacking them in series (just like with heat exchanger single pass vs dual pass) in the airpath results in a MUCH higher total inlet vs outlet temp efficiency (cooler charge air temps) but much less total capacity. Capacity isn't an issue on the intercoolers though because of such a high temperature differential compared to the front mount heat exchanger (like 200ish degrees vs maybe 20 degrees F).

 

Mine are basically going to replace the air filter boxes. It's going to be a tight fit.

 

As I mensiotned on earlier post today guys 1 guy did it here in my country at next level performance I will try to get photos of that quad IC setup ,engine bay and close up shots of custom pipes and relocations tomorrow and will post it here

 

Dry ice would be amazing, but there are several issues with it. First, obviously, is that it boils to gas so you have to have a vented reservoir. Which entails a separate container/heat exchanger for the dry ice unless you want to be leaking water out the vent as well. Secondly, it boils at -109 degrees F. This is a problem for multiple reasons.

Firstly, if that was your realistic coolant temperature then atmospheric moisture would condense and freeze inside your intercoolers, quickly obscuring your air flow path. So it's not realistic to intercool significantly below freezing unless atmospheric humidity is nearly zero. Being that -109 is pretty far from the realistic temperature that your system as a whole will be, you can't take advantage of the phase-change cooling during your run. Basically that stuff will all boil off just from the thermal mass of the coolant in your system so all the chilling will take place prior to the run and you'll just have the coolant left to soak up heat.

The real advantage of ice is the phase change cooling, not the starting temperature. With water ice, you get 144x the BTU absorption capability @ 32 degrees as you would if you had liquid coolant the same mass. If you want the temps in your circuit to be colder than that, I would suggest you make ice cubes out of a water/antifreeze mix. The key to maintaining temps is starting the run with as much ice left as possible...and the "colder" ice you use the less you'll have. The other reason for a liquid based ice is that when it melts, it contributes to your water/coolant capacity, so the thermal mass is still useful even after melting whereas dry ice would just boil and be gone.

 

Also, it goes without saying that you probably want a shut-off/bypass for your heat exchanger for when you put ice in the system, otherwise the heat exchanger is actually working against you and helping to melt your ice.

 

didnot knew that man Im just learning this intercooling stuff so when I turn on ice tank pump I should shut off HE pump and hoses?

 

Or if you have quads, just have them on separate cooling loops like I'm planning on. Basically if your coolant is cooler than the air outside then yes, your heat exchanger will work backwards. The ambient air will put heat into the system. The other advantage to having them in series is that you will probably be dumping 75% of the thermal load into the ambient heat exchanger system that way, and the chilled system can focus on getting that air really cold as opposed to just keeping it from getting too hot like the stock system. Split systems in series on the air side will make your ice go a lot further and keep your final IATs cooler. But then of course you need two pumps.

 

this is too far to drive a mercedes , "ice-cubes?, Eskies in the boot? air conditioner ? methanol? " I wanna drive my dam car , not turn it into a science project lol. If it really bugs you guys that bad why not buy some spray nitrogen and pull over on side of road and spray your intercoolers to cool them down hahahah , jokes

 

Lol. The ice box is pretty much just for at the track. You'd have to have a trailer full of ice for it last long enough for driving around town. The A/C setups somewhat accomplish the same thing in a regenerative fashion...just have really poor duty cycle and can't take advantage of phase change cooling (well, they can to an extent if you get really tricky).

I'm kind of with you though, the Benz is the daily. I don't want it to get to be too much of a pain in the ***...which is why I've been moving slow on the extra intercoolers project. The *almost direct port* water/meth spraybar and E85 conversion are done though, so the intercooler system is next on my list.

 

DD when you tuning engine Intercooler and HEs and getting griddy I wanna cool it down to max as it can be cooled without NOS

 

is there a thread on e85? i wanted to do this but was told by tuner "not to"???

 

Yeah. Funny you should mention nitrous...I was about to suggest it.

The thing that kind of sucks on a max-effort stock turbo build though is that we're still limited by air density at the turbo inlet. Theoretically, it doesn't matter what the temps are in the intake manifold if we aren't knock-limited (if you're on a high octane fuel and have reasonable charge temps so the computer isn't pulling timing/boost), the turbo is still only going to deliver a certain airmass, and that airmass is directly dependent on air density at the compressor inlet. It would probably actually be possible to make more power out of these cars if we focused that sub-ambient cooling on pre-turbo air. But the density increase from cooling would most likely be offset by the pressure drop through the intercooler anyway so you wouldn't gain as much as calculated. The size of the intercooler would have to be huge to avoid that pressure drop, because you can't tolerate any pressure loss there since you're only working with 14.7psi absolute or so to start with (whereas you can tolerate a bit of pressure loss just fine on post-turbo compressed air since you're operating at a much higher absolute pressure). That's why we're most likely limited to chemical intercooling/latent heat of vaporization for pre-turbo, such as water/meth injection.

The problem with that then, is that while you may gain the benefits of wet compression and better air density and therefore mass flow through the compressor, that water is going to have to be condensed back out of the air in the intercoolers at great energy cost so there's no net cooling from injecting it like there is when injected post-intercooler. Also, it takes a ridiculous injection amount to see a significant benefit and by artificially increasing the humidity of the air, you exacerbate the icing/puddling problem in your intercoolers if they are at freezing or other relatively cool temps.

Nitrous pre-turbo would be a different story since it's not going to condense on even a freezing intercooler...but realistically, cooling from nitrous is a very, very small amount. ok, so I was super wrong about this, and I'll bold the corrections...it's easy to do when you're doing a bunch of unit conversions and then scaling them. Nitrous is 161 BTU/lb vs 970 BTU/lb for water. I mean even a 200 shot of nitrous is only 1.6 lbs if you were spraying over an entire 10-second 1/4 mile run. You're going to get something like not 12.8 degrees, 77.28 degrees is correct of cooling at peak power from that. Crazy insignificant compared to the 200hp worth of oxidizer coarsing through your engine not so much as it turns out. an 80 degree drop from ambient is a 14% density increase...84.5 horsepower on 600. The equivalent cooling in water is a 2gph nozzle. Very small. Or closer to 3gph with 50/50 water/meth. Of course that's in flow and most nozzles are rated at 100psi, most systems put out north of 200psi these days so you actually end up putting out a lot more than rated. In any case, it takes a lot of either to make a significant difference I'm glad this thread happened, I've been making this error in my math for quite some time and it has changed my perspective on nitrous in particular realizing this..

Can you guys tell I'm bored today, or what?

 

lol , i think you need to get gunpowder and nix it with ethanol and put it into your intake manifold and press the gas pedal lol, "SO TECHNICAL" but hey at least your brains ticking away at something. How are people running duel heat exchangers and dual cooler pumps, i know its best to be done in series but would that mean i have to run hose all the way from one end of the cooler back to pump number two? that would be a very sharp turn to go back one would assume

 

I don't know that there's a thread on it, but I've run it in dozens of my cars over the years, some of them much older vehicles and run very long-term with no ill effects. On the vehicles I've personally tuned it's night and day the difference in what you can get away with. The safety margin of E85 is tremendous compared to gasoline. I have yet to flow-test the fuel pump to find out if the stock pump is going to provide enough flow for E85, and I need to do that before I flash in the race gas tune and give it a shot.

The downside is that from what Jerry told me, he has no control over global injector sizing in these computers. So I just had to pick some relatively appropriately oversized injectors that were "close enough", and just let the computer think it's still running gasoline. I must have done a pretty good job because the computer hasn't complained about being rich or lean or anything. I haven't evaluated MPG yet, but I usually expect around 25-30% worse highway economy on E85. I ended up going with 450cc injectors from fiveomotorsports. These are the style you need https://www.fiveomotorsport.com/blac...es-standard-x8

The wireless adapters do not clear the intercoolers, so you would want the wired ones. They have a little 4" pigtail which doesn't make for quite as clean looking an install compared to the wireless ones (which sit directly on the injector as one piece) but allows you to route the wiring such that it doesn't interfere with anything. If you do decide to go that route, you might want to shoot them an email first...they are used to selling in sets of 4-8 injectors so you might be able to squeeze a discount out of them for buying 12.

E85 has 3.29 times the latent vaporization cooling of gasoline at best power AFRs, and a much higher octane rating. Assuming 12:1 AFR, E85 has the capability to drop your intake temps by 164 degrees F vs gasoline's 50 degrees F. Granted, much of that probably is used up cooling the intake ports and valves, and in the chamber...but just looking at the raw cooling potential should paint a pretty good picture of how much better a fuel it is. It's high oxygen content and greater BTU potential at best power AFRs should make more power on an identical tune as well without even factoring in the cooling or that you can go with a more aggressive tune. Great stuff.

 

Have you run nitrous on a water to air intercoolered car before? I have, and the gains were phenomenal. A "50" shot picking up 75whp. IAT temps post intercooler going from 30 above ambient to 20 BELOW during the course of a pull.

I only have to find a local shop to remove my cats, then i'm tuning the car and hitting it with a small shot. For my use (drag/street racing), it's all the cooling I will ever need.

 

Are you talking two exchangers with two pumps, with the two stock intercoolers? There are lots of ways to do it depending on where you think the biggest deficiency in the system is. I can't really say for sure. The intercoolers should definitely be run in parallel on the water side, or you'll have different cooling results on each side, which would probably cause a vortex at the Y pipe when the two different temps of air meet. As far as the heat exchangers, parallel will give you higher total system cooling capacity and less pressure loss, but series will give you colder water outlet temps in a single pass with higher pressure loss. So if your pumps are in series then you can tolerate the higher pressure loss and run the exchangers in series, but your heat exchangers will have less total BTU dissipation capacity.

There's probably a lot better and more information about improving the ambient heat exchange/stock intercooler setup in Nick's thread than I could ever come up with. My knowledge relates more to the refrigerated/alternative cooling side of things.