Mikegyver, part 9, pics.
#1
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,515
Likes: 242
From: Suburban Chicago
I made the compressor-to-intercooler tube today. This intercooler is going to work so well, I've already put my Snow Boost Cooler up for sale. (Check the classifieds)
http://homepage.mac.com/michaeldritz/PhotoAlbum12.html
http://homepage.mac.com/michaeldritz/PhotoAlbum12.html
#6
How close are you to finishing? I am very interrested to hear of your results with this.
Me and a few other people discussed this, in what turned into a multi-page thread, over at PPE's forum a few years back. The guy who was doing it bought all the parts but never did come around to starting the fabrication. This was on a 5.7L Vortec.
The front-mount intercooler is almost impossible to heat-soak like an air-to-water one is since effective air-flow over it and heat exchange increases as MPH does unlike a water-cooled unit where capacity is fixed by the GPH rating of the pump.
The only one concern we ever did come up with was the discrepencies that would arrise between MAF and MAP during throttle transitions. For example, closing the throttle after WOT. MAF would drop faster than MAP. It could go lean right there. The flip side is stabbing the trottle from idle, MAF will rise sharply and MAP will lag behind slightly as the I/C and plumbing build pressure. This could make it lean right there. We tried to calculate it in various different ways but could not come up with any solid figures of what to expect. One possibility is locating the MAF/IAT sensor in between the intercooler and the throttle body flange on the intake manifold. They do work under boost and having the temp sensor right there has the additional benefit of letting you tune in maximum advance with temperature-compensated retard because you will have the exact charge temp to tune for.
I've got a decision to make with my own setup. I have a little 1.6L compressor and it's too small for the 383. I can only get 7psi out of it with a 2.5" pulley. I figure if I'm going to the trouble of custom adapting a 2.3L compressor to this I should just as well figure out how to intercool it. I already know that a air-water adaptation works but if your setup works well I'll be leaning that way!
(EDITED for missing verbage)
Thanks
Me and a few other people discussed this, in what turned into a multi-page thread, over at PPE's forum a few years back. The guy who was doing it bought all the parts but never did come around to starting the fabrication. This was on a 5.7L Vortec.
The front-mount intercooler is almost impossible to heat-soak like an air-to-water one is since effective air-flow over it and heat exchange increases as MPH does unlike a water-cooled unit where capacity is fixed by the GPH rating of the pump.
The only one concern we ever did come up with was the discrepencies that would arrise between MAF and MAP during throttle transitions. For example, closing the throttle after WOT. MAF would drop faster than MAP. It could go lean right there. The flip side is stabbing the trottle from idle, MAF will rise sharply and MAP will lag behind slightly as the I/C and plumbing build pressure. This could make it lean right there. We tried to calculate it in various different ways but could not come up with any solid figures of what to expect. One possibility is locating the MAF/IAT sensor in between the intercooler and the throttle body flange on the intake manifold. They do work under boost and having the temp sensor right there has the additional benefit of letting you tune in maximum advance with temperature-compensated retard because you will have the exact charge temp to tune for.
I've got a decision to make with my own setup. I have a little 1.6L compressor and it's too small for the 383. I can only get 7psi out of it with a 2.5" pulley. I figure if I'm going to the trouble of custom adapting a 2.3L compressor to this I should just as well figure out how to intercool it. I already know that a air-water adaptation works but if your setup works well I'll be leaning that way!
(EDITED for missing verbage)
Thanks
Last edited by James B.; May 28, 2006 at 11:17 PM.
#7
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,515
Likes: 242
From: Suburban Chicago
I only have a full day or so left, so sometime before July, LOL.
I think that you think that my throttle is after the intercooler. As it is now, if I were to locate the MAF/IAT in between the throttle and I/C, it would be reading the hot air from the compressor. Or is this what you want? I have already relocated the IAT to the manifold, after I run it with the I/C, I might have to move it to the cold air pipe. I don't want to read the compressor discharge air, it will retard the timing. So are you suggesting to move the MAF to the hot air tube, which is down stream of the throttle, or between the I/C and the engine?
EDIT: I reread your post and I think you're saying to put the MAF as close to the MAP as possible, which would be between the I/C and engine.
Do you really think that there will be that much lag?
I think that you think that my throttle is after the intercooler. As it is now, if I were to locate the MAF/IAT in between the throttle and I/C, it would be reading the hot air from the compressor. Or is this what you want? I have already relocated the IAT to the manifold, after I run it with the I/C, I might have to move it to the cold air pipe. I don't want to read the compressor discharge air, it will retard the timing. So are you suggesting to move the MAF to the hot air tube, which is down stream of the throttle, or between the I/C and the engine?
EDIT: I reread your post and I think you're saying to put the MAF as close to the MAP as possible, which would be between the I/C and engine.
Do you really think that there will be that much lag?
Trending Topics
#9
As far as the MAF I was thinking of putting mine between the intercooler and the intake manifold. Currently it is between the air filter and the blower ( Basically stock position however I feel that the best place with the intercooler on would be between the intercooler and the engine. Does this sound correct, I see no reason why it wouldnt?







