Thanks for your ideas, they are well thought out, but i'm thinking I am flogging a dead horse here. I've trawled and Googled many forums for any evidence on this product and have found none which give any tests on it, all I can find is people (notably the Mitsi forum) who show pics of it fitted, but when asked how it faired mysteriously clam up and vanish...
http://www.lancerregister.com/showthread...7&highlight=PWR

The problem with a video is are you now trying to show this as definitive evidence? If you actually turned off the pump in a system you could make the inlet and outlet temp rise like that in tandem, simply as only the water in the core is heating, not either side of the core, and hence why the air temps could rise. Im not saying yours is, but all its showing is 'something' is wrong..

What you have there is symptoms of air in the core. Your air temp rate of rise never flattens off, it simply keeps rising. If a core was inefficient and didnt extract heat from the charge, then it would simply rise very quickly all of a sudden, but your inlet temps simply rise with the water temps. This looks either air in the water, or insufficient water cooling. Or is your core so close to the turbo/exhaust that it is getting an external influence.

If you took it for a test last night, can you post up a picture of your installation, as it must be still fitted to the car?

As for the GTAs, they have a rear mounted intecooler which has no horizontal airflow, it works as a radiator on the back of the car. If you look at the statement from Simon, the original air temps rise to 70 from the top of third (takes about 10 seconds from a standing start) and this is on a normal day, and then takes well over 30 seconds to recover back to normal temperatures (off boost), as the intercooler core is heat saturated, and as it has no airflow through the core on this particular vehicle, radiation is the only way it can cool. With the CC core fitted before it, peak temps were 40c, on a tested 26c degree day last Summer. The fact that the recovery temps were nigh on instantaneous when backing off the throttle shows that the CC is doing nigh on all of the cooling, as the intercooler after the core isnt being saturated in anyway as the CC has removed all the heat from the charge. We have tested the same car with a U bend from CC to inlet, and the chargetemps were less than 40c at the same boost, but this was also on a cooler day. Unfortunately, its hard to replicate temps when you have taken it on a one off very hot day. The reason why they retain the OEM intercooler is for safety sake, and if you run a U bend, its hits the rear glass hatch due to the height of the top of the engine, so we have to keep this open for testing / run without out it.

Either way, we saw less than 40c without the intercooler (on a cooler day though) but not as cool a day as your video which is at 0c and you were seeing over 60degrees peak charge temps at the same boost, on the same type of turbo.

I can't really comment much more on it. I have customers with MR2's which are running far more boost, and still not hitting the temps you have. One of them is at 2bar, 550bhp, an still no where near 60 degrees.

Cheers

Dave

The problem with trying to look for a test, is who's opinion do you take, and how do you know its testing was valid. As components is 25% of the battle, and installtion 75% the rest, then its very difficult to judge what it right..

I live in the comfort though that I have seen low, stable temps, and likewise customers that have followed my guidelines, so when I see any comments that they havent acheived what they should have, I just point them in the direction of someone that has, and simply say, 'if they can do it, so can you'.

End of the day, I know I keep going back to the high end cars on my site, but if that Orange EVO running 900bhp and 9 second quarters and happened to have chargetemps that were way high in doing so (say 60+), wouldnt you think that he would simply try and rectify this fact by switching to a FMIC if this was going to solve it.

Like I said, you don't make 900bhp without knowing what you are doing, and chargetemps are an obvious factor of it. Logically, I don't think you could make 900bhp if your chargetemps were high in the first place.

Cheers

Dave

Just a minor point -
if you still have the OE ecu then you shouldn't melt a piston even with high inlet charge temps. The ECU progressively backs off the ignition advance the higher the charge temps get. Even with 100C inlet charge you shouldn't melt anything.
The other mechanism the coupe has is that it will back the boost off to fail-safe (base boost) UNLESS you have disconnected the EBV. Not sure what the temp shreshold is for this but believe me it does happen.

How do you know you are running the same turbo and boost as me? You have no idea, boost pressure is no dictator of temp either, to do the test properly you must measure what it actually is. A small turbo creating large boost pressure will create more heat than a large one creating the same.

bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

Im not saying your twisting the results. But you have put up a video saying this is fact, believe. Which its not.

And as for your point of drag cars, your point it irrelevant, as no matter what the car is used for in the end, for 900bhp, its going to be on a dyno for hours, if not days. So YOUR point of it only running for 11 seconds is irrelevant. Do you think they map it while its chargetemps are sky high on the rollers, or have actually managed to keep them down.

And if you happen to look at the particular EVO I am talking about, it runs a traditional rad. There is no ice cooler header tank.

Im running a 60 Trim T3, at 1 bar of boost, with far higher inlet temps to the turbo than you. My engine bay temps are far higher, my saturation levels are far higher, so every aspect is far worse than you have. I don't really need to know much more.

The problem is you are so adamant to slate the product, with disregard to any other claims that it is fine, from numerous people, even other Coupe owner's on this same thread, and that you will NEVER take on board you MAY have had an installation error, and you even go to the point of taking a video, an hosting it to try and PROVE your point, and now you are verbally abusing me, that it just seems you have a hidden agenda.

You still havent posted any pics of your install.

Cheers

Dave

You are very contradictory. So what are you saying now. That my charge temps are lower as I have a better turbo, which means that you are running a small turbo maxed out and overheating the charge?

Then I repeat as I always have done, how is that the fault of the core?. If you want to run a turbo flat out and make it work like a hairdryer, then how do you expect your chargetemps to be low???

Your actually arguing against yourself now. Like I said before, you can't have it both ways.

Cheers

David

Something for you to chew over..

Compressor efficiency is a measure of how well the compressor wheel uses its kinetic energy to compress air (the remainder of the energy is turned into heat in the compressed charge). In an ideal system, compression of the input fluid would raises its temperature adiabatically. This is never the case in the real world, so all calculations must take the compressor efficiency into account.

In order to calculate compressor outlet temperature, you must know compressor efficiency, pressure ratio and ambient temperature.

(PR^0.283 - 1) * Tambient
Trise = ---------------------------
Ec

Trise = increase in temperature
PR = pressure ratio
Tambient = ambient temperature (in an absolute scale, Kelvin or Rankine)
Ec = Efficiency of the compressorThe exponent of the pressure ratio arises from the molecular structure of the gas. Diatomic gasses (like N2 and O2) have seven degrees of freedom, five of which are excitable at STP. Thus gamma = 7/5 in the equation P(V^gamma) = constant, and we can derive an exponent of 1 - (1/gamma) = 0.285. For real air, containing non-diatomic molecules like CO2, a better value is 0.283. For more on this, see the gas thermodynamics section of Nuclear Weapons FAQ (!) (scan down to section 3.1.6).

So, for example, my Garrett T04E compressor running at PR of 2.5, Ec of 0.75 in the good old summer time with a temperature of 27 degrees Celsius (300 Kelvin) produces:

(2.5^0.283 - 1) 300
Trise = ---------------------
0.75

= 118°

Basically, in laymans terms, if you had 0c outside temps, at 1 bar and within nominal efficiency (say 70-75%) you should only see compressor output temps at around 78 degrees.

You have said you have output temps at 110-120 (and we have no proof of this though, as its not on the vid, but Ill take your word on it)

This means you are pushing your turbo way beyond its efficiency and overheating the charge. Also, 80-120 degrees is 40 degrees difference.

Your peak temps were 60 recorded, take away the extra 40degrees, and you have 20 degrees total temps.

On my site I claim 15-20 degrees above ambient. You ambient temps were 0, and your proper chargetemps should be around 20, hell why not say 30 to give you some leeway...

So, I apologise, your installtion probably is fine, but its not the cores fault why your chargetemps are high...

Cheers

Dave

Guys - this thread has been very informative, but is degenerating into a stand-off. It will be locked if there's no point in continuing with it.

I have a suggestion - its ONLY a suggestion, but hey, nothing ventured......

David - why not offer to (physically) look at the car? If the installation is faulty, you will have been vindicated and confidence will have been restored in your product. if it turns out that for some reason there is a problem with the product, Gralecoupe will be vindicated and David should seek to sort out whatever the issue is (assuming its something to do with the CC or ancilliaries).

From the many posts, I reckon that neither of you are wrong, but neither of you are entirely right - you're actually both having slightly different arguments.

However, one fact remains - this car isn't benefiting enough from its CC installation and SOMEONE needs to rectify the situation.

If you can both accept the possibility of being in the wrong, you will have taken the first step

Otherwise, we're going to carry on going in circles

Up to you.......

I am not saying your turbo charge temps are low, I am saying your comparison of boost A Versus boost B is no accurate way of looking at things, we are talking temps here, not boost pressures - it is you who brought boost pressure into it, not me - it's irrelevant.
The charge temp comparison is on Youtube, it's posted earlier on in this thread, here it is again:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mYEyAaqBbd4

Same kind of car, same engine, 100% same turbo, only (and this rules in the favour of the CC) it is running more boost at 1.5 bar so it is actually hotter, the weather is hotter too by 15'c. The one we are talking about runs 1.2 bar, it is not overstretched, some people run them at 1.7.

Spec here:

Garrett TBO385
Comp. A/R = .60
Comp. Trim = 50
Turbo A/R = .48
Turbo Trim = 68

You do the maths....

Can I nip this in the bud now.

What power is your car running?

And are you definately telling me you are running a 50trim T3?

Cheers

David

As far as I know these are standard turbo specs yes, why do you ask?

Power? Dunno exactly, I V-maxed it at just over 300bhp on a hot day. It was live mapped and as I can't get this CC to work I haven't had it RRd yet (I haven't run the air-air cooler since it was modded) When I can get a good inlet temp I'll have it done.