V-mount intercooler...Sounds retarted to me
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
V-mount intercooler...Sounds retarted to me
I’ve read many arguments on this v-mount setup and it sounds like bullshit to me. I’m wondering if anybody can come up with a plausible explanation for its superiority because I’m just not convinced.
I’m graduating from OSU this may with my bachelors in Mechanical Engineering
Technology and I will be happy to back up any statements I make with technical data.
I’m graduating from OSU this may with my bachelors in Mechanical Engineering
Technology and I will be happy to back up any statements I make with technical data.
Last edited by Sleeper69; 04-04-06 at 01:31 AM.
#2
I am 2Furious
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: NJ / Philly
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my understanding of the v-mount is that it's a compromise. A top mount with a radiator will give you better radiator performance at the expense of intercooler performance. A front mount will give you better intercooler performance at the expense of radiator performance. What point is it exactly that you disagree with? You disagree with it being superior? Superior in what sense?
#3
Goes *round*round*round*
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why don't you start with what points you don't think jive?
IMO, just from a strictly legal and cost perspective, it's better that it's set so far back that less people (including cops) are likely to see it and think "Hey, maybe he has something worth stealing (or illegal) under the hood." Also, if you're in a front end accident, it's less likely to be as damaged as a front mount.
IMO, just from a strictly legal and cost perspective, it's better that it's set so far back that less people (including cops) are likely to see it and think "Hey, maybe he has something worth stealing (or illegal) under the hood." Also, if you're in a front end accident, it's less likely to be as damaged as a front mount.
#5
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DragonRx7
Why don't you start with what points you don't think jive?
Originally Posted by DragonRx7
IMO, just from a strictly legal and cost perspective, it's better that it's set so far back that less people (including cops) are likely to see it and think "Hey, maybe he has something worth stealing (or illegal) under the hood." Also, if you're in a front end accident, it's less likely to be as damaged as a front mount.
Last edited by Sleeper69; 04-04-06 at 01:58 AM.
#6
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gingenhagen
my understanding of the v-mount is that it's a compromise. A top mount with a radiator will give you better radiator performance at the expense of intercooler performance. A front mount will give you better intercooler performance at the expense of radiator performance. What point is it exactly that you disagree with? You disagree with it being superior? Superior in what sense?
Heat transfers based on a temperature difference and the difference between air from the turbo and ambient air isn't that large when compared to the difference between ambient air and engine coolant. Not to mention that engine coolant cools better than the intercooler air. That is to say that it ejects its heat quicker into the outside air than intercooler air can.
The heat you inject into the air after the intercooler vs. ambient temperature would be the difference between a cool day and a warm day. Either of which your cooling system is able to maintain its temperature at a constant value with a controlled flow rate that is obviously operating under maximum capacity most of the time.
Last edited by Sleeper69; 04-04-06 at 01:55 AM.
#7
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by First gen man
Reduces turbo lag (shorter tubing).
Trending Topics
#8
yessir
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sebring FL
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
That’s a point but it’s really relative to individual vehicle setup and I’ve seen these and all different model vehicles.
I like the concept of a V that the air is rushing into, kinda makes more of a parachute
for the air, instead of a big wall for it to hit. (yes I understand there's holes in an intercooler)
With some good ducting, I think it can use the air actually coming into the air damn more efficently than an average FMIC.
#9
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by First gen man
Well on almost any vehicle, v-mount's make it so you can use shorter intercooler tubing.
I like the concept of a V that the air is rushing into, kinda makes more of a parachute
for the air, instead of a big wall for it to hit. (yes I understand there's holes in an intercooler)
With some good ducting, I think it can use the air actually coming into the air damn more efficently than an average FMIC.
I like the concept of a V that the air is rushing into, kinda makes more of a parachute
for the air, instead of a big wall for it to hit. (yes I understand there's holes in an intercooler)
With some good ducting, I think it can use the air actually coming into the air damn more efficently than an average FMIC.
I still dont think the Vmount would be any more efficient. I think it would be less actually without being shrouded as well. When you make a 3 dimensional shape out of two heat exchangers you need to block the other two exits at the ends as well and make sure they seal well at the their tops.
Last edited by Sleeper69; 04-04-06 at 02:10 AM.
#10
yessir
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sebring FL
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
I’ve very seldom seen a front mount with a good shroud on the intercooler. I think it has to do with space. A good shroud actually has the shape of a trapezoid so that when some of the air deflects off the intercooler at anything other than a perpendicular angle it will be caught by the shroud and make a second or third trip.
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
I still dont think the Vmount would be any more efficient. I think it would be less actually without being shrouded as well. When you make a 3 dimensional shape out of two heat exchangers you need to block the other two exits at the ends as well and make sure they seal well at the their tops.
#11
yessir
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sebring FL
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the real purpose of a v-mount is, like I stated before, to even distribute the incoming air between the radiator and the intercooler. And in my opinion, there is no better way to do so.
#12
Play Well
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
Posts: 4,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
arnt you supposed to run some kind of vented hood with a v mount. I am sorry my knowlegde on them is little.
As far as the trapzoid thing. Isnt it like you dont want to funnel the air but spread it across the surface of the IC. In simple keyboard pictures like this \ / instead of this / \ front of car is the bottom of the page.
As far as the trapzoid thing. Isnt it like you dont want to funnel the air but spread it across the surface of the IC. In simple keyboard pictures like this \ / instead of this / \ front of car is the bottom of the page.
#13
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by First gen man
I think the real purpose of a v-mount is, like I stated before, to even distribute the incoming air between the radiator and the intercooler. And in my opinion, there is no better way to do so.
#15
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fcdrifter13
arnt you supposed to run some kind of vented hood with a v mount. I am sorry my knowlegde on them is little.
As far as the trapzoid thing. Isnt it like you dont want to funnel the air but spread it across the surface of the IC. In simple keyboard pictures like this \ / instead of this / \ front of car is the bottom of the page.
As far as the trapzoid thing. Isnt it like you dont want to funnel the air but spread it across the surface of the IC. In simple keyboard pictures like this \ / instead of this / \ front of car is the bottom of the page.
Perhaps the V-mount is used because space is short for a proper shroud.
#16
Goes *round*round*round*
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
I’ve read a couple of thread on the 240 forums speaking of nonsense about static and dynamic pressure. As far as I know there is only one kind of pressure and it’s static. I guess I want to see what people thinks makes it better than a good shroud.
As far as pressure goes, the static pressure that enters the front of the car would normally flow through the rad and IC and then kinda swirl around the bay and then out the bottom of the car = turbulence. With the V shape and sealed ducting and a reverse scoop in the hood, it creates a negative pressure behind the rad and the IC. The rad's neg. pressure zone being under the car and the IC's zone being above the IC and out the hood scoop.
The way I'm understanding it is that it's essentially like a funnel. The air comes enters at speed A and due to the neg. pressure (vacuum) leaves the area from behind the rad and IC at speed B (B being a faster speed than A)
All this in conjunction should allow it to work better than shrouding from a FMIC to the radiator because the air will still create the turbulance after the IC and before the rad and also after the rad until it swirls around and leaves from the bay.
#17
yessir
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sebring FL
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
I pointed out that realistically, distributing the air is unnecessary because of the temperature differences between the turbocharged air and the engine coolant are large enough that the little temperature the intercooler puts into the air before the radiator doesn't affect it. The radiator isn't even cooling at its full capacity under normal circumstances so the added temperature is of little importance.
It's decently common to need a bigger radiator when you front mount any car.
#18
yessir
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sebring FL
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fcdrifter13
arnt you supposed to run some kind of vented hood with a v mount. I am sorry my knowlegde on them is little.
#19
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DragonRx7
As far as pressure goes, the static pressure that enters the front of the car would normally flow through the rad and IC and then kinda swirl around the bay and then out the bottom of the car = turbulence. With the V shape and sealed ducting and a reverse scoop in the hood, it creates a negative pressure behind the rad and the IC. The rad's neg. pressure zone being under the car and the IC's zone being above the IC and out the hood scoop.
The way I'm understanding it is that it's essentially like a funnel. The air comes enters at speed A and due to the neg. pressure (vacuum) leaves the area from behind the rad and IC at speed B (B being a faster speed than A)
All this in conjunction should allow it to work better than shrouding from a FMIC to the radiator because the air will still create the turbulance after the IC and before the rad and also after the rad until it swirls around and leaves from the bay.
The way I'm understanding it is that it's essentially like a funnel. The air comes enters at speed A and due to the neg. pressure (vacuum) leaves the area from behind the rad and IC at speed B (B being a faster speed than A)
All this in conjunction should allow it to work better than shrouding from a FMIC to the radiator because the air will still create the turbulance after the IC and before the rad and also after the rad until it swirls around and leaves from the bay.
For the air to do what is suggested above the entire system would have to be very stream lined and wind tunnel tested to prove its abilities. You could check the efficiency of a V-mount vs. front mount but it would not be conclusive because the different setup changes so much about the heat exchanger orientation that there we be little certainty as to the cause.
Air flows through a heat exchanger such as an intercooler better than it is given credit for. The majority of the air that hits the intercooler passes through it. When you shroud you are scavenging to add efficiency.
Last edited by Sleeper69; 04-04-06 at 03:10 AM.
#20
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by First gen man
Even if the intercooler was at ambient temperature, it would still block air, and defiantly scramble what actually goes through the air.
It's decently common to need a bigger radiator when you front mount any car.
It's decently common to need a bigger radiator when you front mount any car.
#22
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Monkman33
Front mount + rocks = uhoh
but i really have nothing useful to add.
but i really have nothing useful to add.
#23
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So far the only verifiable reasons to run a V-mount that I can see are those of simple practicality. Nothing wrong with that but I just wanted to see if anyone could convince me on the technical aspect. I still think its just one big steaming pile of speculation.
#24
Crash Auto?Fix Auto.
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by Sleeper69
I pointed out that realistically, distributing the air is unnecessary because of the temperature differences between the turbocharged air and the engine coolant are large enough that the little temperature the intercooler puts into the air before the radiator doesn't affect it. The radiator isn't even cooling at its full capacity under normal circumstances so the added temperature is of little importance.
If your a mechanical engineer and you can't see ANY possible benefits then, well Im at a loss for words...
The BIGGEST point (temperature differential aside) is that the intercooler while out fron disrupts the flow of air to the rad, that is obvious and indisputable, it IS blocking the rad - barnone, even if air flows through it and remains relatively cool, it still IS being blocked to a certain extent. The V mount cures this.
And obviously, I mean come on - you are a mechanical engineer, you should know that running one setup over the other isn't going to produce magical differences in power, turbo lag or anything else (unless one setup is done COMPLETELY hacked) so this entire argument is moot and a waste of space in this section since the argument is had monthly anyways
And be honest, this thread is not so yo can research the benefits, you are looking for people to make points you can chop down with your degree. If you were truly interested you would have two cars with different setups and go do a bunch of windtunnell testing and report back with your results, not listen to a bunch MORE sepculation and leave your opinion up to it alone.
Last edited by classicauto; 04-04-06 at 08:06 AM.
#25
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stillwater, Ok
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by classicauto
Temperature difference - temperature schmiference, that isn't the point
If your a mechanical engineer and you can't see ANY possible benefits then, well Im at a loss for words...
The BIGGEST point (temperature differential aside) is that the intercooler while out fron disrupts the flow of air to the rad, that is obvious and indisputable, it IS blocking the rad - barnone, even if air flows through it and remains relatively cool, it still IS being blocked to a certain extent. The V mount cures this.
If your a mechanical engineer and you can't see ANY possible benefits then, well Im at a loss for words...
The BIGGEST point (temperature differential aside) is that the intercooler while out fron disrupts the flow of air to the rad, that is obvious and indisputable, it IS blocking the rad - barnone, even if air flows through it and remains relatively cool, it still IS being blocked to a certain extent. The V mount cures this.
Originally Posted by classicauto
And obviously, I mean come on - you are a mechanical engineer, you should know that running one setup over the other isn't going to produce magical differences in power, turbo lag or anything else (unless one setup is done COMPLETELY hacked) so this entire argument is moot and a waste of space in this section since the argument is had monthly anyways.
As for the purpose of this thread; I thought maybe I could have something to add to it or maybe give something for others to think about.
Originally Posted by classicauto
And be honest, this thread is not so yo can research the benefits, you are looking for people to make points you can chop down with your degree. If you were truly interested you would have two cars with different setups and go do a bunch of windtunnell testing and report back with your results, not listen to a bunch MORE sepculation and leave your opinion up to it alone.
I’m not up to date on the subject and I have read about it in other forums and the rx7 crowd is usually more intelligent so I thought I could get real evidence here.