Intake Comparison

[cncBilly]

Think I've decided to go the Ingen route.

You won't be disappointed!!

 

[xot1]

I love this thread.

 

[Secondchance]

Prevention is better than cure. If you lower the "atmospheric temperature" by reducing heat from the engine by the use of an effective CAI, you have less performance drop to counter.



The transfer of heat from the hot side of the turbo to the cold side is pretty insignificant (sub 20%, as already noted). The time that the intake air gets to spend in contact with the compressor blades is so tiny as to impart only a small part of the overall temperature intake. Think of the airflow required to produce 370hp, and given the small size of a turbo compressor, exactly how long it gets to spend in contact with the compressor blades and thus absorb heat from them - not very long, at all. The vast majority of temperature increase for intake in a turbo is the effects of compression on the air itself.

Nobody is denying that an inter-cooler helps. Not at all - a better inter-cooler helps, end of story - as I quoted in another thread on a similar topic, there's evidence quoted recently where an inter-cooler meant the difference between 146hp and 176hp on an otherwise stock vehicle (the manufacturer added an inter-cooler to the revision after the 146hp model).

But you stated that having cooler air into the turbo doesn't help at all. I quote:



And that's wrong. Airbox intake temperature isn't the only thing to make a difference, but it very much does make some difference. Less heat in equals less heat out. End of story. Lower air intake temperatures and intercooling are complimentary, not exclusionary.

From this page, as an example (it's one of many, it just has a good explanation as to the issue here):



You get more efficiency (and thus less heat produced by the turbo) when air intake temperatures before the turbo are cooler (before the turbo - not after it, where the intercooler is). This results in overall lower intake temperatures into the combustion chamber (the inter-cooler can only remove so much heat - if you start with less into the inter-cooler, then you end up with less heat out of it and thus into the combustion chamber).



Don't be like that. Argue the point, not the man.

I wouldn't like to argue if I would you either, given that you spew the same meaningless garb over and over.

Science 1 - you still 0

The tempurature rise due to compression is:

(Pr^0.283 - 1)*(Tin + 273.15)/n

this is the formula used to calculate the transfer at its most basic value. It does not take into account wear and tare or slight fluctuations in materials. Since you're so convinced this formula tells the entire tale, lets use its math ( which you are now required to agree with ) to prove how irrelevant the intake is.

Using that, at 10psi, you would gain about 15-25*F. If the ambient tempt you take in is 100*F , the post turbo is around 125*F. Do you want calculations on how small an intercooler is needed to bring that back down to ambient or below ? Our stock intercooler is more than capable when the vehicle is in motion, and an upgraded intercooler (as i stated) makes it irrelevant.

My favorite part of you linked info is that only 1 of the 7 suggested ways to lower the temps thus reducing heat soak was about bringing in colder air. The others all focused around the assumption you would already have the appropriate cooling solution, and either suggest a larger intake ( more air, which is still warm if we're to believe you theory ), a larger turbo that would compress more air ( which would also still be hotter thus also against your theory ) and water meth injection which I've already touched on its cooling benefits. I can only imagine how stunted you felt reading how evaporating water in a water meth mixture cools the intake air temps.. lmao

 

[spacedawg]

Is the phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" not a thing in Canada???

 

[Secondchance]

Is the phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" not a thing in Canada???

Not entirely sure if that's an actual attempt at humor or not... solid effort though?

 

[spacedawg]

Not entirely sure if that's an actual attempt at humor or not... solid effort though?

It's an understated way of saying you've gone to such lengths to prove you're technically correct that all you've actually done is made yourself look like a tool. Note I said look like one, I don't know you and haven't seen enough posts to make a final judgement. I've got no dog in the intake temps fight, just seems like your energy would best be spent doing something else.

 

[Secondchance]

It's an understated way of saying you've gone to such lengths to prove you're technically correct that all you've actually done is made yourself look like a tool. Note I said look like one, I don't know you and haven't seen enough posts to make a final judgement. I've got no dog in the intake temps fight, just seems like your energy would best be spent doing something else.

Not a biased point of view what so ever. I guess you are impartial to linking multiple threads and posts that directly prove the person I'm quoting correct?! At any rate, its not all that surprising that owners new to the turbo charged world hang on to the first piece of information they read on a given topic, regardless of its validity. Same thing happened in the EVOx and Nasioc worlds when their platforms were brand new.

 

[spacedawg]

Did you hear that woosh? That was the point going over your head. I don't care who is right, for all I know you might be. You just seem overtly hostile about being correct, which would only hurt your case. I'm just saying being a little more chill might make your points more easy to agree with.

 

[Manaz]

I am glad you went and googled PV=nRT. But I don't think you applied it correctly.

Let's say the inlet air temperature to a turbo is 20 °C and the boost pressure is 14psi (1.0 Bar - reasonable for a stock Stinger), giving a pressure ratio = 2.0) the theoretical outlet temperature will be about 84°C - an increase of 64°C.

That's before you consider the efficiency of the turbo. 70% is great (and assumes you're in the peak efficiency area of the turbo's capabilities). Work that in, and you end up with an outlet temperature increase of about 91°C. Seems a little different to your answer?

You'll notice it has nothing to do with adding heat due to proximity of the compressor side of the turbo to the exhaust housing (which copes with exhaust temps up to the ~1000°C mark).

Do you want calculations on how small an intercooler is needed to bring that back down to ambient or below ?

Yes please.

Do provide us with a calculation on how I can use ambient air flowing through an air-to-air intercooler to lower intake charge temps to below ambient temperatures.

While we're at it - if compression is only responsible for such a tiny increase in temps - why do we have intercooler's on supercharged engines?

Another quote for you - this time the intercooler page on Wikipedia.

As well as allowing a greater mass of air to be admitted to an engine, intercoolers have a key role in controlling the internal temperatures in a turbocharged engine. When fitted with a turbo (as with any form of supercharging), the engine's specific power is increased, leading to higher combustion and exhaust temperatures. The exhaust gases passing through the turbine section of the turbocharger are usually around 450 °C (840 °F), but can be as high as 1000 °C (1830 °F) under extreme conditions. This heat passes through the turbocharger unit and contributes to the heating of the air being compressed in the compressor section of the turbo. If left uncooled, this hot air enters the engine, further increasing internal temperatures. This leads to a build-up of heat that will eventually stabilise, but this may be at temperatures in excess of the engine's design limits- 'hot spots' at the piston crown or exhaust valve can cause warping or cracking of these components. High air charge temperatures will also increase the possibility of pre-ignition or detonation. Detonation causes damaging pressure spikes in the engine's cylinders, which can quickly damage an engine. These effects are especially found in modified or tuned engines running at very high specific power outputs. An efficient intercooler removes heat from the air in the induction system, preventing the cyclic heat build-up via the turbocharger, allowing higher power outputs to be achieved without damage.

Compression by the turbocharger causes the intake air to heat up and heat is added due to compressor inefficiencies (adiabatic efficiency). This is actually the greater cause of the increase in air temperature in an air charge.

The bolding is mine.

 

[Matt77]

I am glad you went and googled PV=nRT.

You'll notice it has nothing to do with adding heat due to proximity of the compressor side of the turbo to the exhaust housing (which coped with exhaust temps somewhere near the 1000°C mark).



Yes please.

Do provide us with a calculation on how I can use ambient air flowing through an air-to-air intercooler to lower intake charge temps to below ambient temperatures.

You beat me to it in regards to cooling below ambient with an air to air intercooler lol. I'd give up, some people can't be helped.

 

[Manaz]

Here's a great calculator.

turbo boost temperature with inter-cooler calculator - racingcalcs

Input 68°F (20°C as the intake temp, assume an intercooler efficiency of 85% (amazing for an air-to-air intercooler), your quoted 10psi boost (seems low to me but let's go best case for your argument here), you end up with a pre-intercooler temp of 186°F (seems higher than a 15-25°F increase to me) or 86°C, and pre-intercooler temps of 86°F/30°C - an overall increase of 18°F/10°C.

Now change intake temps to 104°F/40°C. Turbo outlet temps climb to 230°F/110°C (increases of 44°F/70°C, and, with an 85% efficient intercooler, post intercooler temps of 123°F/51°C - increases of 19°F/11°C.

Change to intake temps of 140°F/60°C (not uncommon as an IAT with no CAI) and overall temps after the 85% efficient intercooler are 160°F/72°C - That's WAY HOTTER than ambient.

So, do we STILL believe that pre-turbo intake temperatures don't matter?

I am glad you went and googled PV=nRT. But I don't think you applied it correctly.

I wonder if you ignored/forgot to calculate turbo efficiency, or rather assumed 100%?

So, do we STILL believe that pre-turbo intake temperatures don't matter?

BTW, using a more realistic 75% efficiency value for the intercooler (probably still high for the stock cooler) only makes the intake temperatures MORE important - changing nothing else for that last calculation I did, and post-intercooler temps are now at 174°F/79°C. Go back to our 104°F/40°C IAT, and the post-intercooler temps are now 136°F/58°C - 13°F/6°C hotter than before.

Even with an IAT OF 68°C/20°C, we're ending up with post-intercooler temps of 97°F/36°C. Still hotter than ambient.

Are we sure that intake temps don't matter?

And then play with increased boost (12-14psi is apparently more common on the Stinger)...

 

[Thomas Carota]

Here is the information that I have gleaned from the forum. Any additional information would be great.

I'm not sure how to really add air temperature. Are there enough people that actually know?

Edit: I added Jonny Tig.

View attachment 13170

you need to add gas milage gain to the chart

 

[StungBlueGT2]

you need to add gas milage gain to the chart

You must mean losses since it’s next to impossible not to enjoy that turbo spool & blowoff sound once you get an intake. Yes in theory they would increase efficiency and provide minimal mpg gains, but the extra heavy right foot will negate improvements in general.

 

[JP's_Stinger]

I had the K&N Drop-Ins filter on for about 6 weeks now. Can't say I feel a difference at the wheel, except when flooring it at high speed (50+mph/80+kmh). In that situation the car feels a bit more "capable", now. I do hear a bit more turbo spooling than before, but it's light. I'm satisfied with it, exactly what I was looking for. They do have about 15 to 20% more surface area than the stock panel filters, so even if it's not that much noticeable, there definitely is an increase in air flow.

 

[SteveCo]

They do have about 15 to 20% more surface area than the stock panel filters, so even if it's not that much noticeable, there definitely is an increase in air flow.

Not necessarily - being a sealed system, it depends on the flow capacity of the air conduit that goes from the filter air boxes through the radiator support and intake housings on the front side. There may be excess capacity there, but it's not a given - a limiting factor may be the size of the two rectangular pass through openings in the rad support.

 

[Revvdmedia]

Not necessarily - being a sealed system, it depends on the flow capacity of the air conduit that goes from the filter air boxes through the radiator support and intake housings on the front side. There may be excess capacity there, but it's not a given - a limiting factor may be the size of the two rectangular pass through openings in the rad support.

Terry from BMS had noted he feels the biggest restriction in the factory intake box system is the upper half of the box (likely the tubing connected to it), so the panel filters, even if having more surface area, do not necessarily remedy this restriction. Gains may be minimal at best.

 

[JP's_Stinger]

Terry from BMS had noted he feels the biggest restriction in the factory intake box system is the upper half of the box (likely the tubing connected to it), so the panel filters, even if having more surface area, do not necessarily remedy this restriction. Gains may be minimal at best.

What if one would simply swap that said tubing and keep the box itself. Would that help in any way? I can't keep a CAI all year long because of our freakingly harsh winters and I'm certainly not swapping factory box to CAI twice a year...

 

[Revvdmedia]

What if one would simply swap that said tubing and keep the box itself. Would that help in any way? I can't keep a CAI all year long because of our freakingly harsh winters and I'm certainly not swapping factory box to CAI twice a year...

I'll eventually get around to devising a heat shield, but my current plan is adding a heat shield to my custom intake elbows with filters sitting in the lower half of the box. My plan is to design the heat shield to use the existing clips on the box on the heat shield. Currently it takes a whole 5 minutes at most to swap from the factory top half of the box to the custom intakes. 4 bolts (braces), 4 clips on each box, undo 2 hose clamps, put on filters and re-tighten hose clamps. Quite literally a 5 minute swap.

 

[NIL8GM]

I can't keep a CAI all year long because of our freakingly harsh winters

Care to elaborate?

 

[General_Vodka]

Not sure if this on topic or not but I have had Injun for another car and let me tell you: best money I spent for a shiny aluminum tube. Transformed my car from sounding like a prius. It may have been the smallest engine I had yet it sounded louder then both our Audi A4 v6 and g37, both had aftermarket intakes.