My i/cs just arrived today. One of the metal "collar springs" was not on the i/c but somehow came off but was in the packaging. I hooked it back on and it doesn't seem as snug as the other ones (it doesn't look broken). What does this do? I hope it won't be a problem to install with it.

 

Take a pic if you can.....give us a look.

 

you should be fine, give it a squeeze and then pop it back on. It's a retaining clip that butts up against a tab and holds the hoses in. You'll feel it click into place when you install the hoses, just make sure you hear/feel 2 clicks for each hose. Its normal for them to sit a little loose without the hoses in there.

 

Thanks Earl. It's just odd b/c the other 3 clips are quite snugly on there and just the one is not. I'm having them installed for me at a place that is very familiar with P cars and other German cars.

Paul, I see you found the other i/c thread (Earl's thread), here is a link to the pictures of the i/c. The retaining clips can be seen in the third picture of post 157:

https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...ml#post3120809

 

Is a pressure test for i/cs something any good shop should be able to do? Is it done before the i/cs go on or once they are on the car?

 

You'd need to point it out on the pic. I see there are 4 metal bend tabs on the side plates on sides of core and, a sprung push lock clip for the IC hosing on the outlet/inlet of the tanks but thats it. On the pressure testing im pretty sure the quality control process would check that before packaging. Probably no sense re inventng the wheel on that. The company making these coolers has been in business for a hell of a long time. Did you see their site? If this is their area of expertise no wonder the coolers are as good as they are although in saying that they would have been manufactured in accordance with PAG's specifications. And we all know with their engineering and racing history they ought to know whats suitable for their new 1.6 boosted 3.8 RS engine. Although evidently there are still some here that think P needs a few lessons on flow .

 

The pressure testing should be done before they leave the factory/shop. My set were pressure tested at 36 psi if I remember correctly.

 

One would think but based on the .1 ICs, one could say that P skipped class on thermal efficiency.

 

True TT but in saying that one should not forget that .1 was an entirely new Turbo platform using VTG' technology so as a first attempt it more than satisfied most on the day. Then GTR appeared on the scene and shook the foundations of 997tt's performance credentials and since then attention has been paid to lift the game in a number of areas. .2 being evidence of that. Prior too there really wasn't any incentive.

Needless to say based on some of the findings in earls thread where certain AM coolers supposedly couldnt even match the flow (least of all the fundamental thermals) of the .1 oem units i don't think it could be totally said P was asleep on that job. AM performance component manufacturers must at least be able to match the OEMs components in terms of performance or why bother. Relying on bling and fancy talk may get a lot of people to part with their money but at one point the facts are going to come out as what is the case here. I'm sure youve also heard it said; "BS may be able to get you in the front door but it wont keep you there for long" .

P, as good as they are aren't likely to give up all they know in the first offering, so there should always be some room left for improvement for an AM performance manufacturer to take advantage of. But there is no evidence at this stage that would even suggest they have the OEM even as a basic benchmark....and that is a worry. And getting caught up in bling and end tank materials and the like is really not addressing the issue.

 

the turbo intake is better for high horsepower then the gt2 intake

 

It's the sprung push lock clip I'm referring to.

Ah, I didn't realize that the i/cs were pressure tested already. I just read about some people who were having leaks doing some testing on their i/cs.

 

Speed, Not sure I buy the new turbo platform argument. They been dealing with turbos for 40 years. In terms of leaving room for improvement, that reasoning can be also applied to the .2 ICs as well, no? The competition certainly raises the bar.

 

Nothing to buy or sell TT. The point here is simple to explain. Its called evolution. I imagine if P knew how to build a 997tt 40 years ago we may be all driving around in spaceships today. Future and R and D is always based upon the best they could build on the day. If P had the known what they now know with the .2 back when they created the .1, then they would have given us the point 2 to begin with and they'd be then on to devolping the .3 whilst being subjected to the same critisism why they didnt give us the .3 to begin with.....and so it goes round..

On the topic of intercoolers, im sure 991 will have better ones again....no doubt about that . And I dont see P resting on their laurels. So, understanding that to be a likely scenario, ask yourself what are the Aftermarket boys doing about it??? I mean really,.. based on their current track record its not looking good at all . Even using a very recent example where i read Tom asking (on his own CMS intercooler thread) members for advice on whether or not a .2tt cooler is the same as a .2ttrs tt cooler. Mindblowing!! To not even know the most basic of basics with regard to their own benchmark??...i mean, c'mon!!. With all due respect to Tom and CMS, why/how is it they dont even know what the oem is making?? I mean.. the oem is "the benchmark"....end of story. Why even bother building anything if you dont even know what you are meant to be bettering??? So without knowing what the latest oem product is, least of all achieveing, why bother going to market with a new product that is meant to be superior if you dont even know whether it really is superior?? OK, It may well be superior to something thats not as good as the oem cooler so i guess thats something, but thats not what is about here as the product is substantially more expensive. Which comes to the pricing. An aftermarket product should never be more expensive than the OEM product unless it is shown clearly to be better in every solitary way. Else where is the incentive for the consumer to buy it?? I am aware of many aftermarket products that are cheaper alternatives to the oem product equivalent but thats usually because the products are of an inferior quality, and lesser performing, not as durable etc etc. Not saying they wont work....but just not on the same level as the OEM product .
I could go on...

 

No disagreement there. You can say the same thing about all the AM ICs on this board but does that make them inferior to the .2 ICs? It depends on the application. For instance, Karim uses TPC/Proto ICs even for his stock vtgs. Why? Because they are better than the .2s. The same could hold true for CMS. I'm sure they know what they are dealing with when it comes to comparing .2 ICs. They were even willing to test TPCs ICs regarding the HP claims that had been made.

 

Not to stir the hornets nest but has this actually been proven (like IAT logs)? IIRC, Karim changed a bunch of things at once (EP exhaust, intercoolers, flash) and the car actually slowed down. After some softronic wizardry with the very new .2 DME, it picked back up. Don't get me wrong, as I'd love to see the data to plan my next round of mods, but I'm curious what contribution these ICs are making to the overall effort.