|
[QUOTE=de_dust;533599]i've googled this concern before... essentially you have to consider the difference between the air to air cooler of GTM and Stillen's water to air cooler to decide which would be more effective for your use...
check out these links... or google "air to air vs liquid to air intercooler" .. Bell Intercoolers - Technology and FAQs or ProCharger Intercooling essentially most everyone would say air to air is more effective for daily use... the only time a liquid to air IC kit would be more effective is if they have installed a huge enough heat exchanger to cool the liquid (but with that thought, ull have additional weight) or use unicorn blood as coolant... thats why i still dont understand why ppl have placed deposits for the stillen kit w/o seeing or getting more info on this particular part of their kit..[/QUOTE] :iagree: |
Quote:
|
just to clarify... its not impossible for stillen to have developed a more effective h2o to air IC for daily use... my point was 1) there isnt any info on it 2) does an estimated 15% to 25% more efficient cooling outweigh weight penalties, higher cost, and risk of a more complicated tuning...
|
Lets also take into account that the Stillen charger looks like it belongs on a american muscle car. It has mustang DNA all over it. Power is always the most important thing but hell it does not look like it belongs on the JDM VQ37. Spending high dollar everything should be on point....including asthetics. If water cooling was the way to go, wouldnt everyone be doing it???
GTM SAM: Any video updates?? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
e was talking about the look not where it was made.
"Russian space station American space station. ALL MADE IN TAIWAN" |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Air vs Water For automotive street applications, air-to-air technology is easy to install, highly effective, extremely reliable since it has no moving parts, and requires no maintenance. Air-to-water intercooler systems, on the other hand, are much more difficult to install as they contain an intercooler, a separate radiator to cool the water, a water tank, and a pump. But probably the biggest drawback to air-to-water on the street is that this technology requires the addition of ice to match the efficiency of air-to-air technology. Additionally, the requirement of ice and the possibility of pump failure or leakage means that air-to-water is also inherently less reliable. For race-only applications, air-to-water works well since the need to add ice at the track prior to each run is not a big drawback. The other issues are the same as listed above for street applications, and efficiency will be comparable with the use of ice. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Not trying to start and argument, as that would be pointless in the GTM SC thread, but I did want to add some perspective. I think a lot of the merits of an air to air cooler have been mentioned and I’m not disputing these. As for the air to water cooling, you do not need to add ice to match the efficiency of an air to air cooler. Water is a more efficient to draw out heat, think about it, how many air cooled engines are there today? The possibility of adding ice is just an added benefit of this type of system as by doing so you can cool the intake air below ambient, something that is impossible to do with an air to air cooler. In reality this is only useful when you’re for instance doing a drag race. An additional benefit is that typically an air to water cooling will have a lower pressure drop compared to an air to air cooler, based on their design. Which as a result means the your SC can be used more efficiently for engine performance. Another benefit is that you have more freedom where you place the intercooler with and air to water cooler then you have with an air to air cooler. So you can for instance avoid putting it in front of your radiator and not have air that has been heated up from your intercooler going into your radiator and making your engine cooling less effiecient. Which in the VQ engine is a welcome benefit) And finally there is the fact that an air to water cooler has less trouble with heat soaking. When your car is standing still, either before an autox run or just in traffic, your air to air cooler isn’t cooling. However the pump on the air to water cooling is still running and will keep the temperature spikes from such a heat soak in control. |
The big issue for me is reliability. A air-water intercooler failure would be no fun at all.
|
One of the reason for me going SC over TT is that I wanted more reliability without having to constantly tweak things here and there. And from what I have heard SCs are more low maintenance than turbos. So with the IC, and Ive had FMICs before and I know they are tried and tested and true, the less moving parts and the less parts are a a major advantage for me.
|
Quote:
Quote:
One thing to keep in mind though is although annoying if the air to water cooler system would break, you won't blow your engine right away. Additionally almost every car now a days has water cooling for the engine, so the principle is pretty tried and tested. I wouldn’t be too concerned about the charge air cooling method for system reliability. There are more important items, such as a quality charger, a good pulley set up (stable and belt wrap), a good integration into the car as to not restrict other components functions and many others. In the end I’m sure both systems will proof to be reliable systems as they both seem to have covered their basis. I’m sure you’ll be more then happy with either system. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2