Turbo systems for X1/9's

Discussion in 'Discussion Forum' started by Dr.Jeff, Jun 22, 2018.

  1. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    I agree that the goals for each project's engine will be different, requiring different injector needs. I hope it did not sound like I was implying that my solution was best for everyone. ;) Those 440cc EV1 injectors should be perfect for yours. It allows a little extra capacity if needed yet still allows the ECU to function at a good duty cycle. If I do it all again (maybe for another turbo engine some day), I will likely go that direction. Combined with proper turbo pistons it will allow for more boost and higher performance levels (compared to my current conservative project).

    About the injector calculator I linked. I also agree that 80% duty cycle is what I've seen elsewhere. The higher % in the linked calculator was stated as the maximum, but it defaults to that so it's misleading. However there is the option to change the percent and I also used 80% for my calculations.

    I really like your new setup, nice job. It seems much improved from the earlier version and I think will work better for you. I also like the way you assembled it to the stock fuel rail, looks professional like it came that way. :)

    Lately I've been focusing on rebuilding my engines (I'm doing three at the same time). So my turbo system hasn't progressed in a while.
     
  2. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    Lately I've been rebuilding engines for various project vehicles. But today I took a little break from that and did something completely unnecessary for a change of pace.

    For the turbo engine one of several thermal management techniques will be the use of ceramic coating on the exhaust manifold, turbo housing, intake manifold (with runners), fuel rail, and the coolant return pipe (for starters). I have a ceramic coating product that can be done without a oven to cure it. It is referred to as a "air cure" product, because exposure to the moisture in the air causes the curing reaction rather than heat. The preparation requires a freshly sandblasted and cleaned surface. And the product is applied with a small detail gun or even airbrush (depending on the size of objects to be coated). Therefore I can do this at my shop.

    I collected the parts to be coated, made sure all other work on them had been completed, disassembled everything and began the sandblasting process. Only to discover my blast cabinet is in need of some servicing. So this will be deferred to another day. But in the process I noticed the intake manifold had a number of poor looking areas; battle scars, poor casting, unneeded bosses, etc. I had already drilled and tapped all of the holes for the aftermarket EFI fittings, and plugged the unnecessary ones. But cosmetically it was in need of some sprucing up.

    One change was to remove all of the casting on one end of the plenum for the cold start valve and other attachments. Cutting and grinding all of it off and finishing the surface to hide it's prior existence. I also removed the "Fiat" logo on the top; this is a Uno Turbo manifold so it said "Fiat Turbo I.E." originally. I retained the Turbo IE portion and will add my custom logo in place of the Fiat one. The majority of the remaining work today was just cleaning things up. None of this was really necessary and has no functional effect (other than the coating, still to be done). And I had to fight the usual urge to go full custom on it.

    I'll still need to blast it, along with the rest of the parts to be ceramic coated. But here is a little look at how I wasted an afternoon:

    Modified logo. I'll highlight the lettering in red after the ceramic coating and my logo are added (at the red arrow)...
    001.JPG

    Removed cold start boss and other fixtures at the end of the plenum (blue arrow), only leaving one vacuum port...
    002.JPG

    More general clean up from another angle. As you can see in all of the pics I did not attempt to completely shave it or make it show quality. I've done that on other project cars, but this one is more about function than show...
    003.JPG

    There are three ports remaining, all 1/4" NPT threaded; one for the blow-off valve, one for the MAP sensor, and one for the aftermarket adjustable fuel pressure regulator. The blasting process will give it a uniform finish and the coating will make the surface look consistent. I'm using a "titanium" color ceramic to give a little contrast to the bright aluminum color that's going on the whole engine (head, block, major accessories). Brackets and mounts will be black and a few red accents added for a touch of bling. The runners and manifold have already been port matched and lightly ported to clean up the internal passages. But being a boosted engine it isn't worth doing a lot of big porting other than make things flow smoothly.

    The exhaust manifold and turbo have already been through the same treatments and are ready for coating. The fuel rail was also trimmed (no longer using the stock FPR and fittings) and cleaned up. The weather here is finally getting bearable outside (just dropping into the 80's this week), so I'll be able to do some spraying of finishes on certain items. Tons of other work to be done and I move at a glacial pace.
     
  3. Bjorn Nilson

    Bjorn Nilson Daily Driver

    Location:
    Sandared, Sweden
    Chosing a turbo for the UT engine is not easy. The standard IHI VL2 is not good for more than 140hp and I want more, something more powerful, 200-240hp with a minimum of lag, and not too expensive. Basically I found two options:
    -Upgrading the existing IHI VL2
    -Garrett 2554R
    They are both relatively small (fast spin up) and good for 240-260hp. The IHi is bolt on so no adapter is needed between manifold and turbo. However, no "map" is available so this turbo is upgraded/built by "best practices" which I find a little bit risky. The Garrett is very modern with ceramic bearings and provides very high rpm's but requires an adapter. They both cost around 750 USD. I more or less decided to go for the Garrett when a third alternative suddenly turned up. -The Mitsubishi TD04HL T14. This turbo was used on Volvo Mk1 1.9l S/V40 T4 that produced 200hp, but definitely good for 260hp.
    I couldn't resist this baby as it was brand new and cost me as little as 350 USD. Got some help with laser cutting an adapter to fit the UT manifold. It is not as modern as the Garrett but fast spooling so I expect a minimum of lag.
    Compared to the IHI the Mitsubishi (to the left) is slightly bigger:
    upload_2019-11-1_19-9-37.png

    Anyone with experience with this turbo on an UT engine? What can I expect from it?
     
  4. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    I can only add that typically TD04 turbos are in the right size range and can have good maps for our applications. Although I'm not familiar with this specific one, you shouldn't be far off. Certainly looks to be a upgrade from the IHI unit, looking at the overall dimensions. What exhaust inlet flange does this one come with, the standard TD04 3 bolt or is that a 4 bolt I see peeking half way out?
    If it has the usual 5 bolt outlet, there are some neat adaptors that convert from it to a V-band mount for your downpipe. Not at all expensive either. Makes designing the exhaust much easier because it can be clocked anyway you want.
    I'd suggest rebuilding it if it is second hand. Easy to do, kits are readily available (not expensive), and good insurance.

    I was just looking at turbo options with a T25 flange for the tube-type manifolds that fit our engines. They tend to be the same general size as a TD04, so very close to what you got. Most of the aftermarket T25 units are too big (.60/.64 AR's), but there are smaller ones that would be a good fit, and a mild upgrade from the stock turbo. If my cast iron manifold does not work out (it has crack repairs on it), then I might go that route. Of course then I'd want to switch to turbo specific pistons and other internal upgrades so I can increase the boost a bit more. Just keeps getting exponentially more involved and costly as you go. ;)

    For my VW engine (another project vehicle that I've been considering a turbo package for), the turbo manifolds are a T3 flange. So lots of choices. But again, the aftermarket tends to go really big (too big for normal street applications). However that configuration has so many choices that you can get anything you want and at reasonable prices.

    That Mitsu unit should be a fun upgrade. Keep us updated on the install.
     
  5. Bjorn Nilson

    Bjorn Nilson Daily Driver

    Location:
    Sandared, Sweden
    Some time ago I forgot to close the bonnet properly. At around 35 MPH it opened fully and that must mean that a low pressure is created behind the rear window that sucks up the bonnet if not closed properly, and/or that air from under the car is flowing upwards through the engine compartment. As I am thinking about a good place for the Uno Turbo Oil Cooler the open bonnet incident gave me an idea.
    Would it be a good idea to place the oil cooler like this? (Don't care about hoses etc. It's just a trial fit.)
    upload_2019-11-13_22-5-48.png
    The airflow from the right side intake can also be rerouted to blow cold air upwards trough the cooler. There is even space for a sucking fan on top of the cooler that can be activated when needed. Or is there a better location for the oil cooler?
    (On the other hand, why did Abarth put a snorkel on the X1/9? I've heard they did it to deliver cold air to the oil cooler. If so, the snorkel must be working against the hot airflow (leaving trough the ventilated bonnet) so it doesn't make sense. Or is the Abarth snorkel just a normal "cold air intake"?)
     
  6. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    This is a good topic. There have been several discussions on it and I believe the general consensus is as follows. In a stock configuration, and moving around 40+ MPH, the air tends to flow from the bottom of the car up through the engine bay and out the somewhat low pressure area behind the rear glass. The side vents seem to add a very small amount of air to that. However just how much that air flow is - in terms of volume and velocity, or how much it differs at various speeds, isn't well known (that I've seen demonstrated so far). Furthermore I think if you do any modifications to the bodywork things may change, but it's difficult to know exactly how it would change. For example if the side scoops were replaced with larger ones and the passage from them into the engine bay opened up, then they should contribute more air into the engine bay. But just how that would affect the movement of air from bottom to top or top to bottom or front to rear really isn't known. Same for altering the floorpan and shields, or the engine lid, or the bulkhead between the engine bay and the rear trunk, or a rear spoiler or front air dam, etc. And naturally adding electric fans could completely change all of it.

    Exactly what the Abarth snorkel was designed to do (in terms of aerodynamic flow through the bay) and how it affects the stock airflow is something I haven't seen studied. It would be interesting to experiment and gather some actual data on this.

    In my opinion mounting the oil cooler where you suggested seems about as good as any. And I would add a electric fan to it (possibly mounted under it, blowing up, so it's not sucking hot air across the fan's motor). Similarly I've decided to locate my intercooler flat across the upper portion of the engine bay as well (but on the other side, over the area between the fuel tank and transmission). However in contrast, I am going to use a large (Spal) fan on it to blow downward, from top to bottom. This is to enable a flow of air through the intercooler, the oil cooler mounted just under the intercooler, and then directed (with a deflector) toward the rear of the bay (over the top of the transmission) toward the open bulkhead (I've removed the partition between the engine bay and the rear truck). This is in combination with a completely open engine lid, larger side scoops/openings, a modified undercarriage for the engine bay, and a open rear panel between the taillights (with a rear grill). Plus I'm adding front and rear spoilers that should have some effect on overall flow by reducing the pressure under the car and at the rear taillight panel. The idea is to change the air flow from stock and have it move from the top, through the bay, and to the rear where it exits. Hopefully that will draw the hot turbo air out the back rather than let it heat up the engine bay.

    It wouldn't be difficult to use a couple temp probes and alter the air flow by opening/closing various areas, and/or reversing the electric fan, to see how temps change. But I'm a long way from the car being anywhere near that point.
     
  7. Bjorn Nilson

    Bjorn Nilson Daily Driver

    Location:
    Sandared, Sweden
    Yes it would be interresting to have a couple of temp probes to find out the best solution for keeping the engine bay as cool as possible. I doubt that Bertone studied this in depth during the design process of X1/9. -This happened a long time before todays computer aided simulations.
    My approach to solve the problem differs from yours. I work with the natural air flow rather than having a fan working against it. On the UT engine there is a heat shield (purple on schematic drawing) between the exhaust manifold/turbo and the intake manifold. The heat shield also works as a deflector, redirecting the hot air trough the openings on the rear panel. -At least in theory. I am also planning to have a small muffler right behind the turbo with a pipe or (or two) trough the rear grille.
    I hope the heat flow will work similar to this :
    upload_2019-11-15_14-16-14.png

    I decided to not go for an Air IC. IMO it would take up a lot of space, and would not cool the intake air very efficient. Instead I will go for a Water to Air IC. Even if it is adding cost and complexity it is a better solution on a mid-engined car I think.
     
  8. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    I totally agree. In some of the prior discussions about this topic it has been mentioned that the car was designed specifically with intended air flow....bla, bla, bla. I seriously doubt that, and have never seen any evidence to support it. As you say, the technology in those days wasn't conducive to such tasks - at least not efficiently. But that really isn't the point.

    I also agree that the natural tendency would likely be for the air to flow upward; in part due to it being hotter air that wants to rise, and in part due to the pressure differences below and above. I have gone back and forth on it for my specific application. As mentioned, for now I'm intending to make the air go in the reverse direction (sort of). This is more for the benefit of how the components are arranged in my engine bay and what their functions are in the whole system. In other words, in my situation it would benefit things if the air flowed from top to bottom. So to assist that I'll try changing the pressures below and above and add the fan. We'll see how it works, and it can always be reversed easily.

    I think in my case the changes in the bodywork may cause the natural air flow to be very different from a stock engine bay. I'll use your image to try and illustrate what I'm thinking, please tell me to what extent you think it may be true.

    14-16-14.png

    Color by numbers:
    The yellow line represents a undercarriage tray to block air from below.
    The green circles indicate large openings in the bulkhead and rear (taillight) panels, opening up the engine bay to the rear of the car.
    The red lines represent the front air dam and rear tail spoiler.
    Hopefully all of these combined will make the area at the rear of the car (purple box) a lower pressure area than the area above the engine bay (grey box), and below the engine bay (yellow line). I did not include it on the drawing, but the side scoops will also be opened up considerably and larger scoops installed, which should help feed more air into the bay. But I don't think that will alter the up - down direction much, as it will be coming in from the sides. If anything it may serve to increase the overall pressure in the bay, making the air flow toward whatever is the lowest pressure area (hopefully the purple box).

    In addition to the bodywork changes listed, the large fan will be located where the light blue circle is, blowing downward. The idea is the air will travel opposite to your brown (burgundy?) arrowheads, and the same as your bright red ones, so from the top to the rear. I'm also opening up the lid over the bay to allow the air to move past it more easily - whichever direction it goes.
     
  9. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    Regarding intercoolers. I've read mixed information about air to air (AA) vs air to water (AW). Some sources say for extended uses (like a circuit race car or street driven car) a AW system may not be able to keep up enough heat exchange over time, but in short durations (like drag racing) they are more efficient. Other sources say differently. I think it all depends on the set-up; the sizes of the heat exchangers, the amount of water (or air) circulation, the plumbing, etc.

    For the X1/9 a AW system is much more complex for the same reason as for the regular cooling system - mid engine and front radiator. I think you will need a very large volume water pump to circulate enough water through that long route. And the electric pumps I looked at tended to be one of two things; large enough capacity ones were very expensive, and the rest were too small capacity. Added to the cost of a AW charger and the second front radiator, and for me it was too expensive (compared to a AA intercooler). However if you can do it, then the AW system should be better packaging in the engine bay. As you stated, my AA intercooler is large and required me to mount it pretty much above the engine. One that would fit completely within the bay wasn't large enough capacity for the temperature exchange I wanted. Although I had another issue. I am retaining the air condition system (I know, odd for a turbo car), so I already have a large condenser in front of the regular radiator. That made adding a second radiator for the AW system too much to fit up front. I guess six of one, half a dozen of the other. Basically I choose the less expensive and simpler choice - AA.

    But I can see either working well, depending on the rest of your build constraints. I'll be interested to see how you design your system. I've seen some AW systems installed in the X1/9 that I think were under capacity and too complex, but it certainly does not have to be. Vice versa I 've seen AA systems in the X1/9 that were also under capacity (and overly complex). I've mocked my system up and made the brackets, plumbing, etc, but did not take any photos. Once I get it all assembled again I'll post how I'm doing it.
     
  10. Bjorn Nilson

    Bjorn Nilson Daily Driver

    Location:
    Sandared, Sweden
    Very interesting discussion. By blocking the underneath air flow you change the game completely I think. The low pressure behind the rear glass will still be there, but it won't be able to suck the hot air from the engine bay. However, you are going to push air from this "vacuum" with a fan instead, so once again you are fighting against nature? The "yellow air blocker" will help, but will not remove the low pressure above the engine. This means you must trust the fan and "purple low pressure" to win this fight. --This could be the reason why Abarth put a snorkel on the car. The Abarth was made for Rally and all rally cars have a "slithering plate" (not sure what it is called in English) to protect the oil pan similar to your "yellow air blocker". With a closed bottom, the only way for hot air to escape is trough the rear openings in the engine bay and rear grill(s).

    I will post photos on my progress. Currently I am very busy finishing the engine build. I am struggling with having a new clutch that will handle the torque, but otherwise I am pretty much done with the drivetrain. I am preparing to paint the front and rear (after conversion to bumper less), and will respray the engine bay at the same time. -The new UT engine is shining so it deserves a clean and proper host.
     
    Dr.Jeff and myronx19 like this.
  11. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    I posted this in the "non Fiat" part of the forum about the recent SEMA Show, but figured it really fits better here. So I'll just copy my other post:

    I've finally had a chance to start going through the literature/notes from the show. The ECU products that I referenced earlier are from "Emtron". They've been in Australia for a few years but are looking to make more of a presence here in the US. Their products seem to be pretty high end and offer some features that I haven't found in most of the competitors stuff. The entry level ECU for a four cylinder engine starts at $1600, so it's not cheap. But that is still less than other high end ECUs. Might be worth a look if you are shopping for a system:
    https://emtron.world/

    On the topic of ECU's, there is a US company that has some interesting items: Performance Electronics. Although they have been around for quite awhile, they are not well known because their primary emphasis has been to design/engineer and build products for other companies. Several other brands of ECUs are actually made by them. What's interesting is they are a fairly small company and the engineers are typical gear heads like us. So they welcome any interest in odd or unusual applications and will create custom items at reasonable prices (I guess that might be relative). They have a small ECU ("PE3 SP") that is very similar to MegaSquirt's "MicroSquirt"; originally designed for things like 4-cyl motorcycles, it can be used on basic 4-cyl car engines like the SOHC. While this particular item isn't as full featured as their bigger products, it is a more affordable ($750) than many others out there (except for the MicroSquirt - hard to beat it for price).
     
  12. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    Another topic that I revisited at this year's SEMA Show was knock (detonation, pre-ignition, ping) detection/sensor/control for use with aftermarket ECU tuning. As I came across various tuning experts from several companies I asked their take on it, again.

    In the past I've pretty much been given the impression that the reality is the existing knock detection technology isn't accurate enough to bother with. For one thing it can miss a lot of detonation, particularly due to its inability to read pinging that is "subthreshold". This can result in engine damage, especially when the ECU has been tuned for higher performance levels. For another thing it tends to give a lot of false positives by reading other noises as ping. This will hurt performance by the ECU retarding spark thinking the noise is detonation - when it isn't. So the usual advice from most tuners has been to tune a bit conservatively and avoid knock in the first place, rather than rely on sensors to detect it and correct things after the fact.

    The feedback I got this year was a little different. It seems some areas of the technology have advanced some; not the sensor aspect, but how the information (signal) is processed. Some developers are refining the electronic filters, parameters, definitions, etc, to reduce noise and select signals based on the real time position of the crankshaft (for each cylinder), RPM, load, etc. So its mostly software stuff in the processing step we're talking about. However it wasn't clear just which equipment has that capability and to what extent. One ECU maker says they have it incorporated into their ECU, another tuning device maker says they have it in their equipment, [references below*]. But frankly they were all rather vague when pushed for more info, giving me the very familiar feeling I have when I'm being sold a sales pitch. I can't say for sure if that is the case, but the general advice wasn't too different from before: unless you are building a very specific race engine that needs every last bit of performance, then tune conservatively to avoid knock, in addition to using this latest technology to control it when it's detected (that last part being what is different now).

    *The particular examples that I came across (I'm sure there are others) for existing devices that supposedly have the better knock detection/control systems are: the previously mentioned "Emtron" ECU maker (on their better units - which are quite expensive), and "Plex" in their monitoring devices (also rather costly). But I do not have any evidence to support these claims and cannot endorse either of them without further proof.
    EDIT: A third company I heard about is "Phormula". They make devices to monitor for knock and to help tune your ECU to control it. Supposedly they also incorporate some better technologies. Same comments about not having any evidence or proof.

    Another suggestion I was given, for a much more economical approach to this, was for a more traditional device. It is along the lines of the "listening" units that you temporarily hook up to your engine and 'listen' for knock sounds while on the dyno or on-road testing. But the level of sophistication has improved. Rather than just relying on your hearing to detect the existence of detonation, it includes analysis software (for your laptop) to help give better results. This is similar to the improvements described above for the better technologies - with data recording and other analysis parameters to help determine actual knock under various conditions. The one that was specified as being fairly effective and still affordable is the "Knock Monitor Pro V2" by Tuner Nerd, at about $300. One benefit is the fact it can be used on pretty much any engine/vehicle, over and over (it is a temporary tuning aid, not a fixed onboard ECU feedback loop). So if you want to tune multiple vehicles with various engines and management systems, and reuse it in the future, then it makes for a more affordable investment. Anyone know about this particular device?

    Along the lines of these "listening" devices, I have read where the signal from a knock sensor can be fed through your laptop, and use common sound processing software that musicians use to filter and refine it. Thus allowing it to be used as a tuning device (similar to the one above). Has anyone ever tried something like this?

    Something that I heard about in the past as the up-and-coming new technology that would replace everything we ever knew about knock sensing, was some sort of "ion sensing" at the spark plug (or something to that effect). A year ago there were a couple companies developing it for the aftermarket, but it was still in the development stage. Well, it seems they no longer exist (that I could tell). When I asked around about it the response was it proved to be too costly, too involved, for a aftermarket device. Apparently some of the world's major automakers are working on it, with their virtually unlimited budgets, for specific applications. But that's the problem, it must be developed as part of each particular engine design. So it isn't practical as a 'universal' device. At least that's what I was told.

    So, does anyone have more information to add? Any ideas about good knock detection devices, strategies, tuning approaches? Tried any of the products/approaches I've mentioned? Thanks in advance for all feedback.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2019
    speedy fiat likes this.
  13. Simon Oaten

    Simon Oaten Daily Driver

    Jeff

    the "cheapest" is a piece of copper tube, squished at one end (bolted to the block), and a styrophone cup at the other.........

    the "good" electronic systems:

    1. define an "angular" window (degrees of crank rotation), and offset for each cylinder
    2. use a separate noise (frequency sprectrum) analysis to "pinpoint" the frequency (s)
    3. the tuner then isolates the best "signal to noise" ratio
    4. the tuner then sets the "levels" (number of knock events) (and offset for each cyl.......some use multiple sensors)
    5. the tuner then determines "how much" retard is reqd
    6. the tuner then estimates "how long" the event is controlled for
    7. the tuner then works out additional fuel / boost reduction / rpm limit / egt's / IAT's / ect to prevent damage during an event....
    8. the thing is then tested - to ensure it works !
    9. the ignition can then be optimised at max torque for every rpm / MAP point......


    with "noisy" engines - this can be difficult. you have to actually make the engine "knock", identify this, and then use the ecu software to control. it aint a 5 min job !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the Tuner MUST BE AN EXPERIENCED EXPERT.........

    rgds
    Simon
     
    Dr.Jeff likes this.
  14. speedy fiat

    speedy fiat Daily Driver

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    There will be a lot of guess work if you don't have a inlet temperature probe to quantify your results. I ditched the AA intercooler for various reasons and bought a small PWR AW cooler linked to a 12v Bosch water pump (from the heating system of some Ford or other) connected via flexible tubing and copper pipes with a Land Rover heater cabin heater matrix at the front. The choices were definitely not as a result of in depth knowledge, but surprisingly it works. The inlet temps will slowly creep up if stationary, but if I then turn on the rad fan (standard part) they will just about stay steady. When moving (even under competition stresses) the temperature rapidly drops to an acceptable level and stays there.
     
    myronx19, dllubin and Dr.Jeff like this.
  15. myronx19

    myronx19 True Classic

    Location:
    Toronto, ON Canada
    Nice - that's what I bought (not cheap! - but worth every penny - Australian made!). I also bought a Bosch 12V intercooler water pump, and a fairly sizable front mount heat exchanger.

    Putting the temp probes right into the induction air is critical of course for good measurement. I will do that when my engine is finally done..
     
  16. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    When I considered a air/water intercooler I researched the electric pumps available for circulating the coolant supply. I was surprised at how little volume/flow they have. I discussed this with people from Bosch and a couple of other pump manufacturers. Even the largest one (if I recall it was for a Cobra Mustang or such) wasn't that much flow. To put it into perspective, most of the little pumps used for boat bilge water removal have a greater flow rate (I actually thought about using one of them, and they are also much less expensive). Naturally the assumption is that it will be enough if it works on those factory boosted applications. However keep in mind those applications do not have to circulate the coolant from one end of the vehicle to the other, they don't have the engine and intercooler crammed into a tiny "hot box" mid-engine bay, their frontal air flow and fan air flow is much greater, they are very low boost systems, and they have significantly better cooling systems for the rest of the powertrain. Also consider that one of the first upgrades made to the factory boosted systems is to increase the intercooler system's capacity; I've seen aftermarket solutions that use two of those pumps. So I wasn't certain the available pumps would be sufficient. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying don't do it or it won't work. I'm only relaying a concern I had. I understand someone here has done it and it seems to work for him, so I'm sure it is o.k. but it bothered me - just one more factor in my decision equation.

    Another factor for me was the available configurations of the intercooler itself. I wanted a particular overall size with the inlet and outlet nozzles aimed a certain way. I could not find exactly what I wanted without going to a custom built unit. But this will differ greatly for each application and component arrangement. Again, just another thought on the subject. To be honest, when it came down to it for my low cost project the cost of a air/water system was too much to warrant it.
     
  17. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    I assume a basic temp probe and simple display would be sufficient for testing purposes? Perhaps along the lines of those remote digital refrigerator thermometers or similar?
    digital-thermometer.jpg
     
  18. lookforjoe

    lookforjoe True Classic

    I did that early on when testing IAT's (on my old Volvo) pre-logging. Just clamp the probe inside the TB hose - even better if you get one of those little 'ramp' things that the probe can nestle in, allowing the hose clamp to seal without extra work - or JB weld into a 1/8 NPT barb & fit that to the plenum
     
  19. Dr.Jeff

    Dr.Jeff True Classic

    Location:
    Sin City
    Thanks, exactly what I was thinking. I also noticed there are dual ones with two probes and readouts. Might be fun to get the inlet temp at the air filter at the same time as the charge air temp going into the intake manifold, for a differential.

    Those digital thermostats are incredibly inexpensive, so may even get a couple and read general engine bay temps - like around the turbo region, or even the temp of certain components (by strapping the probe directly to the item). For example it would be nice to see just how hot the alternator gets, considering its proximity to the turbo. I'd really only be interested in some initial test measurements; once everything is known to be safe then I wouldn't be that interested in monitoring such temps.
     
    myronx19 likes this.
  20. myronx19

    myronx19 True Classic

    Location:
    Toronto, ON Canada
    I would have to say no - it won't rise/fall fast enough.

    I use these bead type thermocouples at work (from Omega). I have some very small diameter wire ones (they're less than 1mm!) and they can slip into the hose and into the airstream with no problem. They respond quickly. These cheaper ones should work fine as well.

    All you need is a cheap meter like the one below (this one has dual inputs). I have a datalogger at work, heh - would be fun to hook up and get RPM, boost, IN/OUT temps, EGT, etc.. and map it out. but I also have a meter like this. The response needs to be fast (this meter doesn't have the best reviews for sampling rate. The temps will go up and down fairly quickly, so how fast it updates the measurement is very important).

    upload_2019-11-21_15-49-41.png


    Here's the cheap meter - just need to boil some water and see if it's accurate, and ideally one with a faster sample rate would be best.

    https://www.amazon.ca/LiNKFOR-Thermocouple-Thermometer-Dual-channel-Thermocouples/dp/B07FY6ZXVP

    upload_2019-11-21_15-51-48.png
     
    Dr.Jeff likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice