I found this link on ebay and I want to know from someone with experience or knowledge of air to water intercoolers, are they more efficient? It would seem to me that water is better at cooling air than air is. I would guess it would absorb more heat but you tell me.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAP...&category=33741

Would something like this be more efficient then something like what onpol was getting? I think his intercooler was like 30x10x3. Just wondering. Thanks ahead of time for your input.

 

air to water coolers can be more efficient, but they usually dont
end up working that way. Water can exchange heat faster
then air, but there are some tradeoffs.

Because you're cooling the air with the water, the water is going to
rise in temperature.
to cool the water down, you then have to pump
it through its own radiator, lots more plumbing.

sweet if you're on the highway all the time, nice big airflow through
the rad, but city driving, you're rad will end up soaking up the engine
bay temperatures, and then transfering that to your intake air, or,
if its still lower, becoming less useful.
you cant cool below your exchange medium (be it ambient air, or water in an air to water intercooler)

Its almost like adding another step.
With an air to air cooler, you have intake air exchanging with
ambient air.
With an air to water, you have intake air exchanging with
intercooler water, and then intercooler water exchanging with
ambient air and vica versa.

That said, you have a little more control over the inital temperature
of your limited exchange medium (the water).
You can chill it or ice it up for a strip run.

[ April 04, 2003, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: bryfx ]

 

Well I found someone that makes CO2 sprayers for intercoolers etc. so being in the city won't be such a big deal. Also when you take into consideration that I would mount the rad below the engine the hot air won't soak it quite as much (mount it where I'd normally mount an air to air intercooler). I just wanted to know if the air to water COULD be more efficient then air to air. Taking into consideration that they were both at their close to peak performance such as on the freeway or what not. I appreciate the input and would like any that anyone else has to offer.

 

The water-based intercooler system is a good alternative to air-air when space is limited under the hood. As the air-air is bigger in size it is less complex to the air-water intercooler for which water is circulated by an electric pump. One huge advantage is the greater heat transfer coefficient betwen water and aluminum than between air and aluminum. THis advantage can only be valued if all the heat transfer barriers can be optimized. This would pressent a system that exceeds 100% for thermal efficiency. But unless your draging its nothin more than an equivalent to air-air intercooler.

 

I find it VERY hard to believe that the intercooler offered in that auction is very useful.

It is a straight through design. The air would spent very little time in the intercooler, and the surface area is VERY limited (just the outter diameter of the air pipe).

I doubt this cooler would do much to cool even with icewater running through it!

 

Its very similar to Jackson Racing's miata water-air IC, which is a VERY effective intercooler. Also, because of water's higher rate of temperature transfer you can use a much smaller core.

 

Has anyone heard anything good or bad about Alpine's air to water intercooler? That's probably the one I'd go with if I chose this route. Some of the readouts on Alpine's site looked very promising.