so what intercooler now???

**noone** · 28-08-2012, 08:49 AM

That was what I was thinking, the temps dont relate to the engines doing the same thing, the high intake temps show the engine working much harder.

We really need to show the temp vs torque curve.

Guy, are you able to provide data from the Dyno runs that goes into the printouts? I started manipulating data last night, but got lazy and intoxicated...

I still don't think we can say a lot at this time, I see the CC'd cars are pushing a more aggressive tune and regardless of the IC, It makes sense that the Forge core is extracting more heat, but what I don't get is where we see the flow restriction of the forge core.

I still stand by what I said earlier, if you are happy with 135ATW, a forge cooler, APR V2 stage 1 and PD160 is really all you need. If you want more, well there are plenty of options there and hopefully some good ideas and data from this testing.

**Sharkie** · 28-08-2012, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by VWindahouse

Nice one Kenny! Guys I think there is a direct correlation better torque figures, requested boost levels and intake temps. Look at Eddy's, Jason and my torque figures

Jason 366nm End intake temp 49
Eddy 358nm End intake temp 44
My 348nm End intake temp 45

All had higher intake temps

Look at the the cars with a lot less torque, Leitch, Sharkie

Sharkie 312nm End intake temp 40
Leitch 303nm End intake temp 32

Intake temps are clearly not robbing any of the top 3 of power and especially torque. Also look at the requested boost figures from Sams graphs. The turbos are not working any where near as hard on Sharkies and Leitchs cars.

So what other proof do we have now thanks to Kenny. Both a k03s and K04 polo increased by 6 and 7kw atw when changing from a forge intercooler as a result of better boost pressure from the new intercoolers.

I mostly agree Anthony, the higher intake temps are a direct result of the turbos working harder. The increased torque numbers are not from the increased temps though, but a direct result of the higher boost the top 3 are running.

**clicht** · 28-08-2012, 09:15 AM

Do we have any info on what the temp going INTO the ic was. We can then see what percentage it drops temp by?
Also, i agree with noone, where can we see the flow restriction of the forge. The actual boost is very close to the reqd boost?
Also, out of curiosity, has anyone ever discussed the flow issues with forge themselves?

**Sharkie** · 28-08-2012, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by noone

That was what I was thinking, the temps dont relate to the engines doing the same thing, the high intake temps show the engine working much harder.

We really need to show the temp vs torque curve.

Guy, are you able to provide data from the Dyno runs that goes into the printouts? I started manipulating data last night, but got lazy and intoxicated...

I still don't think we can say a lot at this time, I see the CC'd cars are pushing a more aggressive tune and regardless of the IC, It makes sense that the Forge core is extracting more heat, but what I don't get is where we see the flow restriction of the forge core.

I still stand by what I said earlier, if you are happy with 135ATW, a forge cooler, APR V2 stage 1 and PD160 is really all you need. If you want more, well there are plenty of options there and hopefully some good ideas and data from this testing.

Well for me this was very educational all up. Now we in reality know the limits of the K03. Jason and Anthony have pushed them about as hard as you can with lots of extra bits. The only way to extract more power from the Polo's is to go bigger with the turbo. Any turbo ....

I personally don't see the value in chasing a few extra kws by changing every little piece of hardware along the way at a fairly great expense for 5kw and 30NM. I'd rather save my money from my fairly std stage2 tune and go bigger with the turbo to chase lots of extra power.

If you are happy with about 150kw 310NM at the hub, a fairly standard Stg2 package of FMIC, dowpipe, intake bits (TIP, filter, PD160) and pretty much any tune will get you there.

BTW ... Still waiting on those costs for your extra's guys ....

**VWindahouse** · 28-08-2012, 09:36 AM

So here are the charts from a dyno day years ago where Eddy, Kenny and myself ran. The chart shows Kenny with a K04 and the Forge FMIC - Red line.

Look at the difference in boost between Eddy - Blue line and Kenny

It clearly shows a major loss in boost levels.

Now look at the difference in torque. Remember same APR tune so same requested boost.

I honestly don't know why anyone would purchase the Forge intercooler after seeing all these comparisons.

**noone** · 28-08-2012, 10:08 AM

Good, seems we are getting somewhere.

I'm not saying the K04 and Franken don't do good numbers, but I think I'd want more than they offer. Also, by the time you do the injectors, fuel reg, tune, etc, I'd be wanting a medium output BT setup.

For me, anything beyond the K04 would need a LSD, and even my toy could use one of those.

I'm now at the point where I either commit to a $500 exercise of changing my IC or replacing my cat with a sports one (maybe $300). Both of these would only yield small gains, still deliberating... Still considering a retune, thinking I'd like to do one or both of these prior, but then its a decent outlay for small gains.

Lots of options...

**Guy_H** · 28-08-2012, 10:25 AM

Couple of notes on intercoolers:

Data on the day: there was 5 degrees ambient difference when the Polo's were run so splitting differences of 5 - 10 degrees is pretty pointless. The obvious differences were what you see on the stock cars & heatsoak with the big temps.

On the dyno we only pull a 13 second power run (with a 4 second lead time), this does not stress the cars too much. If we wanted to really give the cars a workout, then we could do set / hold runs which emulate climbing a very big hill at full boost. We use this for different tuning / calibration methods, but it's very hard on the cars.

With some of the K03's pushing well over 20 PSI of boost, this would generate a huge amount of heat, even with the 100mph fan. Mind you, it would be closer to a race track type pull. This might show up some bigger intercooler differences, but it takes a lot more time, but it's really hard on the cars (and the clutch too).

On the requested vs actual boost, I wouldn't expect that to vary a huge amount on this test, one thing that is not in the data (I don't think so) is the wastegate duty cycle, and how hard the turbo is being pushed to make that requested boost.

Traditionally we try to hold WG Duty cycle to a nice, safe (for the hardware) ~ 75%. We can certainly make a file that pushes it a lot harder, but you sacrifice component life ultimately - there is no free ride to the top

.

**clicht** · 28-08-2012, 02:40 PM

noone, you are right, now we are gettng somewhere.
Also thanks Guy for the above info.
Ant, thanks for those graphs they do indeed highlight the pressure issue.
I think, and this is my opinion, that for my car...which will eventually go the fraken route, a THS intercooler would be best. Same design s a Seat one, but bigeer core ?
Views ?
Thanks