There is so much info out there regarding what "should" make x core better than y, but it doesn't, at least to me, seem like there is one brand that dominates the intercooler market. I have everything else on my turbo list finalized but this. I emphasize "cores" because I'm likely going to go crazy and order something fairly custom.





What are your favorite intercooler cores? Why?

 

Question: how bespoke is your setup going to be, and how much heat rejection are you going to need? How much airflow will get to the core, and how will it get there? Will there be a diffuser before or after the core, or both? And most importantly, how much surface area at the front bar will be made available for the passage of clean air? I ask because different cores, with different fin designs tend to act differently. What will the application be, street, drag or circuit(drift is a strange animal; you may need to over-spec the core since the vehicle will mostly be in yaw...)



"Who makes the best cores" is a bit difficult to answer. "Who makes the best cores for X application," that's much easier.

 

The system I'm designing is for street use, any track use will be limited and noncompetitive. The FMIC i'm going to choose will tuck behind the stock RD2 bumper (sans grille) with slight material removal as needed to fit. I'm fairly sold on the vertical design over the standard horiz.



Manifold: Custom top mount

Turbo: GT-k 600 (F1-54, .63 a/r, w/ h2o)

2.5-3" restrictor after FMIC

Plenum: Custom 3" inlet w/ short runners

Head: Ferrea valve train + PnP









(Note: Registering in an emissions free county so will be running cat-less)

 

OMG ITS MECH!!!



SUP MANG!!!!

 

Hi Faith, long time! Check your PM's, I'll update you. Been an interesting time.



Tibbi, what psi ballpark for a street setup, on what fuel, and on what compression? Are you going to be using the stock cams, and what are you doing for fuel management/air metering? Has anything been done to the engine? Also, for a street/non-competitive circuit setup you'd want to focus more on maximizing the area under the curve so that the drivability of the car is not compromised(especially if the redline will not be increased) I assume "+H2o" means some form of water spray or injection?



Everything plays a part in the core selection, especially if you're looking to have things 3/4 of the way optimized right off the bat.

 

Everything is tuned to pump swill (93), and despite the better wishes of most I'm without a power or pressure goal. I'm building this motor from the ground up to be as rugged as possible and will see how things pan from there. If you want the parts rundown: Beta2 diy blueprinted block, WCP and cryoed (stock) crank, Cryoed bearings, Forged rods (still sourcing, but a must), Weisco 9.0 comp Pistons (also sent for cryo with pins), block girdle, Beta 1 head with aforementioned mods, 1.8L intake cams, and adjustable cam gear. Fuel delivery via Walbro 255, Lindsey FPR, Billet Fuel Rail, and Siemens High-Z Fuel Injectors (63 lb/hr). Management I'm still deciding, its either going to go balls to the wall megasquirt or the seemly popular option, AEM FIC. I've also come into possession of Bee*R wired or 4 cyl universal, and might try to implement that as well depending on the above. Of course an AEM UEGO wideband will be in use, and an AEM TruBoost for boost reading and control. Equally I'm pondering trying the Lindesy Boost Enhancer valve once the system is setup, for now boost control will be done by a Tial external wastegate and HKS SSQV BOV. My previous h2o statement was regarding the turbo cooling specifically but a water/meth kit has been pondered. For liquid cooling I picked up a Civic style Mishmoto X-line. Also I'll be running catless, as I can file the Tib in an emissions free county.



Lag will be pretty hard core in 1st, but with the aid of the Bee*R 2-5th should be gravy.

Also, since its not a track car I like the option of running off boost if desired. The exterior is stock, so it'll be a nice sleeper with a big toothy grin.







As for the original goal of the post, give us some examples of exemplary cores, what make them so, and (since you brought it up) the desired application?

 

Afaik the heat rejection and pressure drop that you get from a the core itself is mainly a function of tube and fin density, core thickness, number of tubes, and also the turbulator density. Short of manufacturing flaws, I wouldn't say that one core would necessarily be better than another, rather, you're just looking at a big tradeoff between pressure drop and heat rejection - limited by packaging requirements.



All that aside, I think the best way to go about it would be to look at some cores that are available to you, that are installed on actual cars. Measure the temp before and after, measure the pressure before and after. They won't all adhere strictly to a rule due to differing end tank designs, and different days of the week, but you can get an idea of the 'heat rejection density' tradeoff that you are looking at, then size your intercooler to suit.



Also what mechanix said.

 

Depending upon the application the intercooler design can make a world of differences, hence what he was saying prior and why I ask. There's no point in dropping as much money as I am/have been/will be and then cheaping out on one of the more vital components. A cheap or poorly designed intercooler won't be as efficient, could cause pressure drop, even fail resulting in any number of horrid scenarios.



Obviously we're talking specifically about air=>air types. But there are also materials, finishes, fin designs, etc; all above the basic fin/tube density that will affect the efficiency of the core. The basis of the question is simply to determine what advantages (on paper) does one core have over another, specific to our applications. That said, no all top tier manufactures list the specific physical densities of their products, because by-and-large the vast majority of consumers won't research to this depth and just buy a premade horizontal intercooler from x or y source based on name, reputation or price alone.



The reason readings won't do me any good is because building a custom vertical fmic, my readings will be worlds apart from those taken from another cooler. That and I just want to be armed with the best info possible before I buy.

 

Agreed.



Alas, I can't help you with specific core information because I simply haven't dealt with that many. I agree that vertical tubes are more efficient for a given area, but that is a very broad assumption. It surely wouldn't hurt to e-mail a couple of leading manufacturers and ask for some data. For all we know, there may be an industry standard of measuring different heat exchangers. I imagine that the good manufacturers would like a way to measure the performance of their own product vs their competitors' items.

 

I have been reading a lot about ICs and what people dis/like about them. Spearco seems to come out of top most of the time so I was fairly sold on that core. But I'll add this token into the mix:



Searco core = $562

Bell core = $408

Garrett core = $285 (only avail as horiz)



(based on the core avail closest to the desired dimensions)



Based on cost alone, I'm having a hard time justifying the Spearco, but for an extra $100 I can justify the Bell presuming it will provide sufficient gains over the Garrett and horizontal designs. However, if the Bell has a shitty fin density, I can easily see myself waiting a bit longer for the Spearco.



Opinions/input?