Notices

Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-04-2009, 08:27 AM
  #1  
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
 
PURP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Anyone ever A/B test their turbo setup with/without an intercooler?

I am going to have to do ALOT of modifications to put in an intercooler when I add the turbo, so I'm just wondering if its worth the trouble.

Of course I know that its an improvement, but just how much of an improvement?
Old 11-04-2009, 08:31 AM
  #2  
Honda-Tech Member
 
azandford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

The guy i bought my car from did dyno runs with and without and there was about a 20hp increase with the intercooler on. Intercooler = Longevity...some kits such as greddy do not come with one but imo its necessary
Old 11-04-2009, 08:39 AM
  #3  
Unceasing Measure
 
Archidictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 13,087
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Pretty sure the piping and intercooler kits you can get now come pre-bent and made specifically so you don't have to do a lot of modifications to get them to fit right. At least the last ten or so I've done have been that way
Old 11-04-2009, 08:59 AM
  #4  
The Grumpiest
iTrader: (4)
 
grumblemarc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Oak Ridge, TN, USA
Posts: 28,333
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 15 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

What kind of mods? That front bumper of that bodykit might be one of them.
Old 11-04-2009, 09:05 AM
  #5  
Honda-Tech Member
 
j.packsb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

wat kind of front end mods on a eg/ek wouldnt allow u to fit even a small fmic? u should be able to make it work unless u have a body kit. unless its a BYS front bumper then u deserve to be slow anyway..
Old 11-04-2009, 09:05 AM
  #6  
The Grumpiest
iTrader: (4)
 
grumblemarc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Oak Ridge, TN, USA
Posts: 28,333
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 15 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Get a sidemounted IC.
Old 11-04-2009, 09:17 AM
  #7  
Honda-Tech Member
 
j.packsb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

^^^ or this... if your going to go through the trouble of boosting, get an intercooler. no point in not getting one. itl take more boost to make the same poswer without one. be efficient and get one
Old 11-04-2009, 09:17 AM
  #8  
Honda-Tech Member
 
azandford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by grumblemarc
Get a sidemounted IC.
^^^ x2 unless you got all kinds of stuff on the side 2
Old 11-04-2009, 10:11 AM
  #9  
Honda-Tech Member
 
93egSLEEPER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seahawks WA, USA
Posts: 7,637
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

lose the body kit and add an intercooler... or have less power. up to you
Old 11-04-2009, 10:13 AM
  #10  
Honda-Tech Member
 
alphalanos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: nigeria
Posts: 2,756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

you should be able to fit a skinny intercooler. If not you just have to do whatever it takes to make it work. function>form. I wouldnt run any turbo setup without IC.
Old 11-04-2009, 10:18 AM
  #11  
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
 
PURP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by 93egSLEEPER
lose the body kit and add an intercooler... or have less power. up to you
Hence the reason for my original question...

How MUCH power???
Old 11-04-2009, 10:28 AM
  #12  
Honda-Tech Member
 
93egSLEEPER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seahawks WA, USA
Posts: 7,637
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

ill bet its a good 20-30hp if its a decent setup
Old 11-05-2009, 04:10 AM
  #13  
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
 
PURP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by 93egSLEEPER
ill bet its a good 20-30hp if its a decent setup
OK, but what kind of percentage numbers are we talking?
Not to be a stickler, but 20-30 off of 200 (10-15%) is CONSIDERABLY more relevant than 20-30 off of 600. (3-5%)...
Old 11-05-2009, 06:12 AM
  #14  
Honda-Tech Member
 
mattyfo0z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: the garage, socal
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Just get an intercooler, and take off those stupid HIDs that you probably have in halogen housings without a retrofit, in addition to horn mounts - are you using Hella horns, or something?
Old 11-05-2009, 06:33 AM
  #15  
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
 
PURP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by .mattyz_
Just get an intercooler, and take off those stupid HIDs that you probably have in halogen housings without a retrofit, in addition to horn mounts - are you using Hella horns, or something?
Actually, the HID's are in a proper TYC HID projector housing, and that has nothing to do with my question.... but please feel free to voice your presumptuous opinions on unrelated topics.
Old 11-05-2009, 06:47 AM
  #16  
Honda-Tech Member
 
infinitypro12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Nuclear City
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

If you don't want to actually run better forced induction use an intercooler. The is a reason they are used and aren't just for show, cooler air means better results.
Old 11-05-2009, 07:28 AM
  #17  
The Grumpiest
iTrader: (4)
 
grumblemarc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Oak Ridge, TN, USA
Posts: 28,333
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 15 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

With a little fab you could probably get something like this working. I don't know what your setup is so this may/may not be adequate. I wouldn't run with out one.
Old 11-05-2009, 09:36 AM
  #18  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Unseen Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Fontana, Ca, United States
Posts: 3,163
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

post in the correct forum.

this belongs in the F/I forum.

thread has been reported to Mods
Old 11-05-2009, 10:01 AM
  #19  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Hill4589's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southwest, PA
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by Unseen Racer
post in the correct forum.

this belongs in the F/I forum.

thread has been reported to Mods
It's a hybrid thread so I don't see why you reported it..

Anyways just weigh your options, is that body kit worth keeping or would you like to make more hp but go back to oem?
Old 11-05-2009, 10:02 AM
  #20  
Honda-Tech Member
 
j.packsb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

who in the world would rather have a body kit and horns over an intercooler for their turbo??..
Old 11-05-2009, 10:44 AM
  #21  
JHP
Honda-Tech Member
 
JHP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Diego, Ca, Usa
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Its all going to depend on your set up. No one is going to know unless you dyno your car with the FMIC and dyno it without. I looked around a little bit and some volvos had optional intercoolers on their turbo cars. The difference between the ones with them and the ones without was about 15-20 horsepower. Hope that helps.
Old 11-05-2009, 10:48 AM
  #22  
Honda-Tech Member
Thread Starter
 
PURP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by JHP
Its all going to depend on your set up. No one is going to know unless you dyno your car with the FMIC and dyno it without. I looked around a little bit and some volvos had optional intercoolers on their turbo cars. The difference between the ones with them and the ones without was about 15-20 horsepower. Hope that helps.
Thanks. It would be even more helpful if you could tell me the actual HP's of the two... If you know what I mean... 200/220? or 140/160? or 930/950?etc...
Old 11-05-2009, 01:27 PM
  #23  
Honda-Tech Member
 
SOHC_MShue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Richmond, Va, usa
Posts: 11,440
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

There are way too many variables to give you an answer. For small amount of boost you can get by with without an intercooler I wouldn't even bother wasting the money to boost the car.
Old 11-05-2009, 01:33 PM
  #24  
Honda-Tech Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Turbo-LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South, Texas
Posts: 12,903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Runnign a non-intercooled setup is ok for about 7 psi of boost on an average sized turbo. boost = hot compressed air. Hot air = useless in an engine. if you start cranking the boost up the intake temps will get very high and kill power and make the engine extremely prone to detonation aka kaboom grenade your block.

stop being retarded about your body kit and some rewiring and put a damn intercooler on the car or dont boost it its that simple

its either that or invest in an air to water intercooler setup
Old 11-05-2009, 02:47 PM
  #25  
Make mine whatever you want
 
GT35R_EF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....

Originally Posted by Turbo-LS
Runnign a non-intercooled setup is ok for about 7 psi of boost on an average sized turbo. boost = hot compressed air. Hot air = useless in an engine. if you start cranking the boost up the intake temps will get very high and kill power and make the engine extremely prone to detonation aka kaboom grenade your block.

stop being retarded about your body kit and some rewiring and put a damn intercooler on the car or dont boost it its that simple

its either that or invest in an air to water intercooler setup
^^THIS

You think you're getting the same answer on here for no reason??? LISTEN. No one here can tell the future, no one knows the % of power you will lose, it is strictly dependent to every setup. Let the body kit go, it's 2009. There is no "weighing" options, I'll do it all for you. The intercooler is going to benefit you far more than any body kit will. It really is that simple, I promise.


Quick Reply: Intercooler vs. non-intercooler....



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:43 AM.