Subject	Why complicate things with a single >>>
Posted by	VECTOR on April 08, 2003 at 10:43 AM
	This message has been viewed 132 times.
In Reply To	Intercoolers, single vs dual? posted by MyOtherCarisaCBR on April 08, 2003 at 03:32 AM
Message	For most applications, dual side mounts are better due to: * Do not block the oilcooler, radiator, AC condenser, Intakes * Already present piping makes install a snap (almost) * Easier to protect in everyday driving (if you DD your car on hwy, front mount will look like crap in about 6 months unless you put a mesh on top of it, which noone does because of the looks) * Preserves the cross flow turbocharging design in the VG (meaning you don't have one turbo overspooling itself since it pumps air to the opposite bank, and that makes the other one work as hard, most aftermarket frontmounts eliminate this, which I think is vital for a long lasting, smooth running engine) * High Pressure Drop with Front Mounts, which means more lag ( I haven't seen too many numbers but I do believe that Sillen's SM IC's have the most area and the least pressure drop, ie almost same as stock) It depends on what you are building, high HP monster or a reliable daily driver supercar :) Again those are my opinions, feel free to correct me I'm wrong on anything. Regards, George
Follow Ups	Intercoolers, single vs dual? - MyOtherCarisaCBR 03:32:17 04/08/03 dual ICs wont restrict airflow to the radiator - ZEngineer 03:37:09 04/08/03 don't listen to him, he doesn't know what he's talking about - Scotts94z32 03:40:56 04/08/03 You're on my "To Smack" list once I get to Cali =) (n/m) - ZEngineer 03:51:43 04/08/03 isn't the bumper actually aluminum? ;-) (n/m) - boileralum 08:45:35 04/08/03 It is aluminum and it does not run the length of the car - Chip(GinnMotorsports) 10:32:51 04/08/03 Re: dual ICs wont restrict airflow to the radiator - dragemperor 10:51:04 04/08/03 depends what you want to do with the car >>> - Scotts94z32 03:38:54 04/08/03 Some one needs to do this test; (i already have) - niXit 08:46:05 04/08/03 like we discussed off the forum...someone needs to dyno - NR98 (Ohio) 10:26:19 04/08/03 On a dyno... - degradated 15:31:25 04/08/03 plus the UAS and Apollo ICs are very inefficent. - down5hift 11:34:36 04/08/03 Thats 2x with nothing to back it up - Chip(GinnMotorsports) 11:54:21 04/08/03 According to Corky Bell.... - down5hift 12:26:08 04/08/03 "real world" not theoretical, I am not making any arguements - Chip(GinnMotorsports) 13:09:59 04/08/03 Viceversa, you did? (n/m) - Arturo C. 10:44:18 04/09/03 Why complicate things with a single >>> - VECTOR 10:43:31 04/08/03 ****YOu GET POST OF THE DAY AWARD!!! - niXit 11:17:15 04/08/03 *applause* (n/m) - Spee 12:49:39 04/08/03 I agree with everything you said accept the pressure drop -> - Z-Jay (Edmonton, AB) 12:52:17 04/08/03 Why disagree with no proof? (n/m) - MugenRacer 13:04:24 04/08/03 I have experience with heat exchanger design, I just haven't - Z-Jay (Edmonton, AB) 13:25:57 04/08/03 except...___I'm a dick, but seriously, I was thinking.. - BigTDogg 13:12:46 04/08/03 But then your radiator and oil cooler see less. - down5hift 13:15:22 04/08/03 True, but..(and I'm sure we could go on for days here) - BigTDogg 15:44:16 04/08/03 its almost impossible to do a realistic comparative dyno - niXit 15:46:27 04/08/03 Or you could baseline 2 completely stock cars - BigTDogg 15:58:46 04/08/03 Nice. (n/m) - YugoBernie (NoVA) 13:17:26 04/08/03
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.