OK, I just found my new IC's. Earl, would you please also post pictures about the installation & required mods??!
|
Originally Posted by pete95zhn
(Post 3001870)
OK, I just found my new IC's. Earl, would you please also post pictures about the installation & required mods??!
|
Originally Posted by earl3
(Post 3001873)
I plan to have one on the car for thermal performance testing this weekend, I'll certainly document the install as I go.
you should get two, one for each side :D They are certainly better than the 996 versions, but why still the plastic end tanks. |
great find. sonnen has an awesome price on these - Pelican is at 723$, Tischer at 623$ and Sonnen is 454$ a piece. cores look good to me and the end tanks really sell these to me :D
for 900 seems like a no brainer. i just hope they fit. keep us updated. |
Originally Posted by Prche951
(Post 3001957)
you should get two, one for each side :D
They are certainly better than the 996 versions, but why still the plastic end tanks. Not sure why there's so much disdain for the "plastic" end tank -they are made from PA 66 GA30 reinforced polymer, the same thing all your intake manifolds are made out of. I've only seen one failure, and that was from a massive backfire through the intake which would have blown the welds off of an aluminum tank just as well. |
I can see the differences with the stock units. I just hope they are significant enough to justify the trouble of putting them on...
|
Will you do a before and after dyno with the car warmed up? Or would that even be a factor? With the enlarged end tanks, they should make more power?
|
I'd like to see some test results but I'm still not feeling the stock end tanks. For a little more coin I'd go with 911 tuning units.
|
Originally Posted by NOLA911
(Post 3002027)
Will you do a before and after dyno with the car warmed up? Or would that even be a factor? With the enlarged end tanks, they should make more power?
|
I follow your goals, that's why I was asking if it would be a useful measurement to dyno. While cooling ability should obviously be the most important gain in intercooler performance, wouldn't air flow performance be a close second?
To expand on this idea, can anyone think of a way to test the ability of air to move through the intercooler without a dyno? A resistance test? Or would it suffice to say by design, there is a significant improvement. I think a few of us would be willing to shell out a few dollars towards the cost of a couple of dyno runs. It seems like a dyno would fill in the last piece of the puzzle and tie in the cooling performance with the air resistance qualities. Regarding plastic end tanks.... if they are good enough to withstand the pressure during rigorous testing of the beastly new 997s / GT2s, I'm sure it will be adequate for my lowly 450hp. |
Originally Posted by NOLA911
(Post 3002092)
I follow your goals, that's why I was asking if it would be a useful measurement to dyno. While cooling ability should obviously be the most important gain in intercooler performance, wouldn't air flow performance be a close second?
To expand on this idea, can anyone think of a way to test the ability of air to move through the intercooler without a dyno? A resistance test? Or would it suffice to say by design, there is a significant improvement. I think a few of us would be willing to shell out a few dollars towards the cost of a couple of dyno runs. It seems like a dyno would fill in the last piece of the puzzle and tie in the cooling performance with the air resistance qualities. Regarding plastic end tanks.... if they are good enough to withstand the pressure during rigorous testing of the beastly of the new 997s / GT2s, I'm sure it will be adequate for my lowly 450hp. ..really shutting up now 'til I get some data :) |
Originally Posted by MARKSKI@911tuning
(Post 3001704)
I found it strange how stock end tanks have a very narrow end tanks that do not push air across the whole core... lol finally they are using the complete IC across vs. just a little bitty neck in the middle... looks familiar?
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/763...stockvs911.jpg http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/7614/bottm4.jpg http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/6933/2ics3.jpg Porsche has done this for a specific reason in proportion to their cores and induction pressures being utilized. If a more efficient core is used, utilizing the same air flow science you will obtain an even more efficient IC. Putting the above aside, have any IC coated with the Swain heat dispersant coating and you will gain another 5-7% efficiency ............ which is hugh. :cool: BBE Heat Emitting Coating .... For parts where you want to get heat out of a part instead of holding it in a part, BBE coating is applied to help pull heat out of base metal. BBE is commonly used on intercoolers, air cooled cylinders, air cooled heads and brake calipers. Though the primary purpose of the coating is to improve cooling, the coating does offer a durable semi-gloss black finish. www.swaintech.com The above are just some of the reasons why Secan IC's are so efficient and expensive. It's not really a secret, they simply incorporate all the state of the art principles and you have to dig this out yourself because they are not going to share. :p |
Originally Posted by cjv
(Post 3002327)
It really is not strange. :) It has to do with air flow and equally using all the tubes so as to not overload the center tubes and decrease the center tubes efficiency. You can prove this by flowing testing and placing a Pton in the shell while flow testing to locate negative and reduced pressure areas. The purpose of the narrower ends is to force the air to the end tubes and thus utilizing them to their full capacity. When the necking is done correctly you will obtain more efficiecy from any core.
Porsche has done this for a specific reason in proportion to their cores and induction pressures being utilized. If a more efficient core is used, utilizing the same air flow science you will obtain an even more efficient IC. though I would think that they are sacrificing some ultimate flow potential for the sake of distribution (not necessarily a bad thing), then again, looks can be deceiving when it comes to airflow. CFD runs & testing, which these guys do lots of at great expense, doesn't lie. The monkey in the wrench is when you try to take a cooler designed for 420hp and start pushing way beyond that. enter the 620hp coolers and things get interesting...hopefully I love the vacuum cleaner analogy -now why do you think they shape attachments like that? :) yup, because that shape is optimal to distribute "sucking power" |
Originally Posted by earl3
(Post 3002599)
ding ding! winner
though I would think that they are sacrificing some ultimate flow potential for the sake of distribution (not necessarily a bad thing), then again, looks can be deceiving when it comes to airflow. CFD runs & testing, which these guys do lots of at great expense, doesn't lie. The monkey in the wrench is when you try to take a cooler designed for 420hp and start pushing way beyond that. enter the 620hp coolers and things get interesting...hopefully I love the vacuum cleaner analogy -now why do you think they shape attachments like that? :) yup, because that shape is optimal to distribute "sucking power" |
earl3,
Thanks for taking your time in showing us the step that Porsche has taken in improving their intercoolers. Very interesting. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:00 AM. |
© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands