T-II vs T-IV intercooler

[Directconnection]

I had been working on a car of my friend's ('90 vnt Shadow) up to the point that it ust needed the engine dropped in and working out the bugs, but he decided to sell it to a couple of good friends here in Maine. Well, one of them just so happens to own a speed shop with a chassis dyno (Gearheads).

The car is a CB 2.2 w/cast crank and Mahles. Ported stock valve swirl head that I did and 1-piece intake. S60 turbo, 3" exhaust and '89 T-I roller cam. FWD stage 5 cal with +40s.

2 weeks ago, the car pulled 243 whp on 20 psi and this was on the stock VNT intercooler. I mentioned the reported low flowing properties of the T-IV cooler vs the T-II and they switched and picked up 16whp with no other changes. Now... the weather was a bit cooler here over the past few weeks... but I believe his weather station should be working. He noted that the T-II cooler heatsoaked vs the T-IV. This is expected as the T-IV has more internal fins vs the T-II. Hopfully this weekend, he may install the large NPR and see what will happen next.

BTW...the car made 271whp on 20psi from the stock intercooler swap and then later dropping the FP down a few psi.

So... 16whp increase!?! Even 8 whp makes it worth the swap.

[turbovanman²]

Thats impressive and shows Gary's info is bang on, :partywoot:

[Directconnection]

Thats impressive and shows Gary's info is bang on, :partywoot:

It's actually 5digits info:eyebrows:

I just called my friend about 5 minutes ago to get a better perspective. 12:1 a/f at peak hp. It's leaning out as the revs come up, but ok at this point.

He said even on the dyno with th big fan, the T-IV never got hot, yet the
T-II did last night in the even cooler air.


One weird issue... only 1150 egts. I think the egt setup is faulty. It's in the exhaust manifold between #3 and #4 so it's not as close as others have.

I am guessing once the stock T-II cooler is ditched next week in favor of the large NPR, and 2-3 more psi, this essentially stock 2.2 will make over 300whp.

[Directconnection]

I want them to run a pressure test of both coolers (and then the NPR) with before and after pressure readings. What is the proper way to setup the port? He wants to use the port in the compressor for one pressure test area, but I seem to recall that this port is an area that was designed for cruise control to have some vacuum if engaged and going up hills which would cause a loss of vacuum, and instead give a few psi boost which wouldn't work with the cruise. So, this port was develoepd..

We want this test to not be skewed. If we angle the test port away from the direction of the intake charge, you will have created a venturi effect. 90 degrees to the charge like the turbo's port, or angle it slightly?

[turbovanman²]

To test pressure loss, use one of the compressor nipples and hook up to a boost guage, then compare to the boost guage hooked up already. Its that simple. Don't use the stocker of course, lol! I did this with my small Mazda one then my new one and holy shiat, what a difference.

[Directconnection]

I'm concerned about that port if it is there to induce vacuum while under some boost. I seem to recall Gus years ago talking about how he did his test and didn't use the compressor.

[Birddog]

WOW!! Can I ask a dumb question???
How do you ID a T-IV IC ?
I have 2 mopar ICs and I thought they were the same but the tanks are totally different.

[turbovanman²]

I'm concerned about that port if it is there to induce vacuum while under some boost. I seem to recall Gus years ago talking about how he did his test and didn't use the compressor.

Thats what Frank told me to do and it really does work, :thumb:

Theres no venturi effect because you have a guage hooked up, so there is no flow past the point of connection.

[BadAssPerformance]

WOW!! Can I ask a dumb question???
How do you ID a T-IV IC ?
I have 2 mopar ICs and I thought they were the same but the tanks are totally different.

Got pics?

The different body (G, P, L) T2 cars has different ones... and there should be early and late G-body too.

[BadAssPerformance]

2 weeks ago, ... Now... the weather was a bit cooler here over the past few weeks... but I believe his weather station should be working. ... Hopfully this weekend, he may install the large NPR and see what will happen next.

Need to do back to back to back on the SAME day to be sure. At least post the air temp and barometer with each of your HP measurements.

[Directconnection]

Yes. But... not going to be a 16 whp change unless drastic weather differences. Not quite apples to apples, but pretty close. Same dyno same car same boost same everything. Just 2 weeks apart.

[puppet]

Steve, if you want to measure pressure loss across each IC you should probably tap into the in/out tanks. Otherwise your measuring total piping losses too.

[BadAssPerformance]

Yes. But... not going to be a 16 whp change unless drastic weather differences. Not quite apples to apples, but pretty close. Same dyno same car same boost same everything. Just 2 weeks apart.

I'd put money on my shadow making 20+ more whp this week than 2 weeks ago.

If BOTH temperature and barometer are almost the same then it might be 'pretty close'

EDIT: by my post I am in no way saying that you didn't find some good info, we all just need to back everything we do up :thumb:

[johnl]

Steve, if you want to measure pressure loss across each IC you should probably tap into the in/out tanks. Otherwise your measuring total piping losses too.

Ditto that. Except, to avoid damage to the tanks, fab up two close nipples of IC pipe - each with a port for its respective vacumm barb/gauge. Put the nipples just before the inlet and outlet of the IC. As Simon says, there should be no venturi affect as there is no flow through the barb/gauge. To the extent that there is such an effect, then its cancelled/offsetting - the same for both tests.

[puppet]

I still think that that will mess up the test though John. If Steve & Co. want to measure pressure loss across the core, the tap should be in the tanks.
.. maybe it won't matter all that much but that's where I'd put them.
They won't mess the tanks up. Should be as simple as tapping for the gauge vacuum nipple and then plugging it after the test. Are you thinking it might induce a crack or leak(?) shouldn't .. wouldn't think so anyway.