[s-cars] RE: Dawson's Dreadnaught and FMIC Testing (and fire sale)

[Lewis, Gary M]

I knew you guys would take my questions the wrong way.  I wasn't
slamming, I was impressed...
 
 > Gary, Gary, Gary

 > What are we going to have to do to convince you here.

 > In a message dated 11/9/04 12:45:45 PM, gary.m.lewis2 at boeing.com
writes:




	 >> Howintheheck(tm) do you test that?   
	 
	 > Using a readily available infared pyrometer, of the type used
to measure tire temps, the APR boys had empirical datat that they had a
major hot spot and that the  > entire I/C was not being used. When they
added the vanes, they had a much more even flow. Who cares if the
restriction was increased when you get full use of  > the core? 

 
Geez I'm a dunce.  I have an IR pyrometer (at the winery), will do the
same.  On the restriction thing, if the IC is big enough (or the turbo),
yes, it doesn't matter.  I'll give it a try, get back to everyone who is
either watching this thread, or wishing it would go away.  :^)  What a
great idea.  Good way to test my caster end tanks.
 
BTW, did you guys check the IC efficiency and loss pre and post vanes
for cooling and flow?  I am wondering at the gain as a percentage of
total input...


	
	> I think that side to side is still the way to go because it
allows the
	
	> largest cross section to be mounted given the limitations on
top to
	bottom 
	> dimension. The end tanks on top to bottom designs is lost core
cross
	section. You know 
	> aht they say about opinions? They're like belly buttons,
everyone has
	one.
	
	IMHBBO (IMHBellyButtonO), the RayT bumper solution really
reduces this
	issue to a nit, as you can easily run a 21 x 6 x 3 (as he has
done), or
	converting that to horizontal, something VERY similar to your
IC, with
	at least a 12 in high core.  Either is more than adequate for
+500 hp.
	


 > Using your dimensions for Ray's core, I come up with 378 cubic
inches. According to the Garrett I/C core spec sheet that I have that's
only good for about 250hp as I  > interpolate using 3" deep cores as a
comparison. My core comes out to 960 cubic inches and that's good for
about 500hp. Now this data is for Garrett cores that  > use bar-plate
construction. As Dave Jones, Mike Pederson and I investigated various
cores there was a significant diffence in quality and construction. Some
of  > the fin and tube designs would obviously flow better but did
little to apparently cool the charge air. The Garretts were
significantly heavier with all the extra cooling  > fins inside the hot
flow tracks as well as outside. 
 
Agreed on the tube and fin based on the latest data I've seen.  They
FLOW, but don't seem to cool.  Too bad, I thought it was a free lunch...
 
Your Garrett core chart doesn't work for vertical flow (if it is the
same one I looked at a few months ago), and also doesn't work for
different IC manufacturers.  Spearco rated my IC at 1000 hp, which
included actual bench flow and drag data on a 1/4 mile Supra.  But I'm
willing to toss the charts and claims in the trash.  I have hard data on
my car.  Above 85%  efficiency, below .5 lbs pressure loss.  At Cody
Payne/Dave Dawson ala RS2 HP level, which is quite a bit above 250hp.  I
can't get better granularity on the pressure due to my instrumentation.
This tells me that your Garrett core spec sheet is not accurate with
respect to my IC core or end tanks.  I really believe the Garrett IC's
were originally designed for small aircraft in mind, meaning a shrouded
configuration, so internal heat transfer was at a premium at the expense
of flow.  Their hp numbers seem really low to me given the sizes.  But
size for size they cool the best in the business.  You just need a BIG
one, which really fits nicely into this discussion, which bigger is
better, no??


	
	I'm dying to see the CO boys IC test results, see how
	accurate/inaccurate MY belly button is.  :^)
	


 > More to follow. Dave's PBMAF should be ready to mount up sometime
next week which will dovetail nicely with the completetion by Mr Stone
of Will Griffin's side to  > side, STS(tm) FMIC. 
 
Should be fun.  And I ain't slammin', I'm trying to understand, and even
help if I can.  Quick recap of my opinion:
Vanes = cool idea (no pun intended)
vertical IC vs. horiz IC = more testing/concrete data needed (but soon
to come, no?  Put this one to bed)
Tube and fin = don't cool well enough.  might not be as good as water
injection by itself.
Garrett flow charts don't work for Spearco cores
Bigger is always better.
 
As always, I appreciate your willingness to share...
 
Gary Lewis 

 FOR SALE $14,000

 1995.5 S6 Avant, Green/Ecru, RS2 MAF, RS2 Exhaust Manifold, RS2
Injectors, Custom Turbo (K26 Turbine, Factory K26 Cold side (Audi Works
'999' P/N) with 50mm intake and custom Innovative Turbo compressor
wheel), Spearco 18x6x3.5 vertical FMIC, Stromung RSS-4+, TurboXS Type 25
Bypass Valve, Bilsteins, Eibachs, Big Reds, Spec II Clutch.

 

Hap, wit moh dahkine than anyman should have in Evahboost, Maguire