In https://hondaswap.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=38180 this flamefest, we managed to establish a few things and waste huge amounts of bandwidth on bullshit. I'd like to try to get the unresolved technical issues addressed in a manner that doesn't involve 4 pages of ppl callin each other names and other such fucking garbage. If you aren't positive you have something to contribute, you probably don't so shut the fuck up.
Things that we will assume are true and not argue over:
1. Intercooler efficiency is a big deal. It makes a big difference to a quality turbo system.
2. Pressure drop across an intercooler is a big deal because it makes a turbo push a higher pressure (and work harder) to make the same pressure inside the plenum, unnecessarily raising intake air temperatures.
3. Once an air-air intercooler has absorbed enough heat to be at the same temperature as the air the turbocharger is putting out, it will cease to be of benefit to the car and will instead be a flow restriction. Flow restrictions make the turbo work harder, leading to more detonation sooner.
Things that we will assume are true in this thread so we don't have to argue over them again:
4. Johnnyracecar's intercoolers have a large pressure drop, which makes for poor intercooler efficiency. There is a better choice for $200.
So, to quote myself from the previous flamefest:
Engineering is about compromise. You can't always get titanium beams to build your bridge out of so you use steel and reinforce them more. If you sleeve a motor, the sleeves can sometimes crowd the coolant jackets surrounding them, leading to a motor that has a tendency to overheat easier. If you make a rod more lightweight by removing material, you reduce its strength. Why do I bring this up? The statement that "budget" and "turbo" don't belong together does not reflect the existence of compromise in design. By this logic, junkyard / DIY turbo people that use OEM turbo car parts that are obviously substandard are guaranteed to blow up their motors. How do companies like Subaru, Saab, Mitsubishi and Volvo that have a lot of turbo cars as a part of their line manage to avoid going bankrupt from warranty replacement when they use so many substandard parts? I'll tell you the answer, and it is one word: compromise.
With that out of the way, there is a legimate problem at hand here. There are lots of people on limited budgets that will find a way to have a turbocharged car. I have around $4000 in my B18B turbo CRX (car, mounts, swap, turbo, ic, piping, injectors, exhaust, management, bigger brakes front+back, fiberglass hood, cripsy 91 Si seats... ), and I've already broken some shit... (and beat many "fast" cars.) I will not argue at all that reliability is certainly harder to achieve than speed. Why don't we focus on trying to solve the more difficult problem of "reliable turbo on a budget" rather than dismissing it? Compromises will be key, but learning to make good choices on what to compromise on is not easy.
I'm going to be looking at replacing my starion IC with a more capable IC. I paid $50 for the starion IC, and welded new tanks on it. I wasn't planning on running more than 7psi of boost initially. It seemed like an acceptable compromise at the time even with its CRAP efficiency and high pressure drop. It doesn't now, as I'm looking at different goals.
I looked hard at both the johnnyracecar and customcoach intercoolers when I was piecing my setup together, and I was nervous about pressure drop and efficiency. I'd really like to hear more about how you tested Locohonkey. I don't have a manometer, but I was wondering if that's the only method to make measurements? Could i run my WG directly off the turbo and then run the WG off the manifold and compare peak boost levels to get an approximate idea of the pressure drop of an intercooler/charge pipe setup? What tangible, practical criteria can the average person use to evaluate intercoolers?
$200 is a decent price mark. It's enough money to be able to buy someting. It's not enough money to be a HUGE investment. If all you had to spend was $200, what would you do and WHY? If you wouldn't get anything at all, WHY? Would you save for an air-water? Would you save for a more expensive air-air?
Because I'm good with electronics and I could build an injector controller pretty easily, I've also looked at getting a 8 injector JG manifold and running 4 injectors for fuel and 4 injectors for water/methanol mix. Water injection is a whole different can of worms than air-air intercoolers. You lose combustion mixture heat heating water present, you lose combustion mixture temperature because of the heat of vaporization as liquid droplets turn into vapor, you gain (at a micromolecular level) a buffer by decreasing the statistical probability that a fuel molecule will collide with an oxygen atom with enough energy to overcome the activation energy of combustion and start a spontaneous combustion event (detonation). If you put hot air in, you will have issues. How does water injection compare to intercooling in terms of efficiency, effectiveness in varying conditions and ability to scale to "hotter" situations?
Lets try to keep this discussion back on track. All the hateful, personal attacks in the forced induction forum lately have really started to hurt the signal/noise ratio of this place. Everyone will benefit from grounded, rational discussion. Everyone will benefit from learning how to discern effective parts from hyped parts. Everyone will benefit from learning how to solve a difficult problem within a tight budget. And everyone will benefit from learning to exchange ideas without insults...
Things that we will assume are true and not argue over:
1. Intercooler efficiency is a big deal. It makes a big difference to a quality turbo system.
2. Pressure drop across an intercooler is a big deal because it makes a turbo push a higher pressure (and work harder) to make the same pressure inside the plenum, unnecessarily raising intake air temperatures.
3. Once an air-air intercooler has absorbed enough heat to be at the same temperature as the air the turbocharger is putting out, it will cease to be of benefit to the car and will instead be a flow restriction. Flow restrictions make the turbo work harder, leading to more detonation sooner.
Things that we will assume are true in this thread so we don't have to argue over them again:
4. Johnnyracecar's intercoolers have a large pressure drop, which makes for poor intercooler efficiency. There is a better choice for $200.
So, to quote myself from the previous flamefest:
Engineering is about compromise. You can't always get titanium beams to build your bridge out of so you use steel and reinforce them more. If you sleeve a motor, the sleeves can sometimes crowd the coolant jackets surrounding them, leading to a motor that has a tendency to overheat easier. If you make a rod more lightweight by removing material, you reduce its strength. Why do I bring this up? The statement that "budget" and "turbo" don't belong together does not reflect the existence of compromise in design. By this logic, junkyard / DIY turbo people that use OEM turbo car parts that are obviously substandard are guaranteed to blow up their motors. How do companies like Subaru, Saab, Mitsubishi and Volvo that have a lot of turbo cars as a part of their line manage to avoid going bankrupt from warranty replacement when they use so many substandard parts? I'll tell you the answer, and it is one word: compromise.
With that out of the way, there is a legimate problem at hand here. There are lots of people on limited budgets that will find a way to have a turbocharged car. I have around $4000 in my B18B turbo CRX (car, mounts, swap, turbo, ic, piping, injectors, exhaust, management, bigger brakes front+back, fiberglass hood, cripsy 91 Si seats... ), and I've already broken some shit... (and beat many "fast" cars.) I will not argue at all that reliability is certainly harder to achieve than speed. Why don't we focus on trying to solve the more difficult problem of "reliable turbo on a budget" rather than dismissing it? Compromises will be key, but learning to make good choices on what to compromise on is not easy.
I'm going to be looking at replacing my starion IC with a more capable IC. I paid $50 for the starion IC, and welded new tanks on it. I wasn't planning on running more than 7psi of boost initially. It seemed like an acceptable compromise at the time even with its CRAP efficiency and high pressure drop. It doesn't now, as I'm looking at different goals.
I looked hard at both the johnnyracecar and customcoach intercoolers when I was piecing my setup together, and I was nervous about pressure drop and efficiency. I'd really like to hear more about how you tested Locohonkey. I don't have a manometer, but I was wondering if that's the only method to make measurements? Could i run my WG directly off the turbo and then run the WG off the manifold and compare peak boost levels to get an approximate idea of the pressure drop of an intercooler/charge pipe setup? What tangible, practical criteria can the average person use to evaluate intercoolers?
$200 is a decent price mark. It's enough money to be able to buy someting. It's not enough money to be a HUGE investment. If all you had to spend was $200, what would you do and WHY? If you wouldn't get anything at all, WHY? Would you save for an air-water? Would you save for a more expensive air-air?
Because I'm good with electronics and I could build an injector controller pretty easily, I've also looked at getting a 8 injector JG manifold and running 4 injectors for fuel and 4 injectors for water/methanol mix. Water injection is a whole different can of worms than air-air intercoolers. You lose combustion mixture heat heating water present, you lose combustion mixture temperature because of the heat of vaporization as liquid droplets turn into vapor, you gain (at a micromolecular level) a buffer by decreasing the statistical probability that a fuel molecule will collide with an oxygen atom with enough energy to overcome the activation energy of combustion and start a spontaneous combustion event (detonation). If you put hot air in, you will have issues. How does water injection compare to intercooling in terms of efficiency, effectiveness in varying conditions and ability to scale to "hotter" situations?
Lets try to keep this discussion back on track. All the hateful, personal attacks in the forced induction forum lately have really started to hurt the signal/noise ratio of this place. Everyone will benefit from grounded, rational discussion. Everyone will benefit from learning how to discern effective parts from hyped parts. Everyone will benefit from learning how to solve a difficult problem within a tight budget. And everyone will benefit from learning to exchange ideas without insults...