No intercooler. What do you think?

[blueroo]

Hey all,
I've been thinking lately about intercoolers and such for turbos. There's air to air and liquid styles of course. What about running no intercooler?
I read in a magazine about Squire Turbo Systems making a rear mount turbo kit. It has a few advantages from what I understand..

1) Less weight as there's no intercooler
2) Since the turbo is in back, there's less heat generated in the engine compartment.
3) Also from the turbo being in the back, there's more room in the engine compartment.
4) Once more since the turbo is in back, the piping running from the back to the front acts as an intercooler, supposedly cooling the air temp as much as 40 degrees.

I have no experience with turbos much less this type of system so I don't know if this is all true or not. Does anybody have an understanding of this system and whether or not it truly works. Also, if it does, how hard is to fabricate one for our sixes?

 

[Anonymous]

the only problem is that the heat energy generated to spin the turbo is also lost due to the distance it must go.

An intercooler is worth the little exta weight added as a good efficient intercooler can drop intake temps up to 100 degrees or more. The colder the air, the more boost can be run, the more power.

the weight may also equal out by the time you add in the extra piping to and fro mthe compessor. The filtering systems and bracket would have to be mounted, adding weight as well. Overall, its a cheapers and easier way to gain a little more power, but probably nothing that would make you happy.

We are never happy, darn...why us!

 

[Anonymous]

You actually don't NEED an intercooler to run a turbo. Many cars that come stock with a turbo don't not have an intercooler. Intercoolers are just a way to run more boost without causing pinging. It really all depends on how much boost you want to run.

 

[XFlow_Fairlane]

I am not running one right now

once I get the IC done then I get to turn up the boost more

 

[kirkallen143]

There's folks I've heard of that have run up to 18-19psi w/out an intercooler. It all depends on how you set your engine up to run with it. I am not going to have one. We will see how far you can go without one, I'll give it a try.

Kirk
ps. not to steal the thread, but I finally got my head back from the machinist yesterday (after 5 months...lazy @#$%^!) give me a month or so and I will have turbo. That's if I can remember what I was going to do in the first place.

 

[blueroo]

ok, so basically the only "advantage" to a rear mounted turbo would be having something different.

Kirk,
I know what you mean. I made the mistake of telling the machinist who did a lot of the advanced engine work (stuff i don't have the tools for) that there's no rush. I think it took close to a year for everything to get done :roll: . I will say he did a good job and was very thorough.

 

[Anonymous]

Here in Salt Lake City, we have the guy/company that inovated the rear mount torbo for the LS1 Camero. I have run up against this " factory stock" 8) LOOKING Ls1 with my '92 Daytona IROC/RT, that I had modified and it would run 12.8s with a 2.2 60/ft time. So I was making pretty good power for a twin cam 2.2L(301 to the wheels on the Mustang wheel dyno). The LS1 and I went from about 25mph roll and I thought I was about to imbarass ANOTHER LS1. Well as it turns out, he has run into the 10s with this NON I/C set up. I have spoken to one of the guys that helped develop this MONSTER in plain clothes and ALL of the data they have aquired showes that this set up is NOT AN IDEAL setup. BUT because of the LACK of under hood room, The turbo is mounted under the rear bumper. The weight is slightly more for this rear mount setup because of the added scavenge oil pump and related hardware to return the oil to the pan. He also told me that on small displacement engines and low torque producing engines that the rear mount set up is a bad idea. On the LS1 it works well because it is a TORQUE MONSTER to start with.
Hope this info is helpful!

 

[Anonymous]

what if you are only runing 8psi...would you need a intercooler?

 

[Anonymous]

At 8lb of boost and stock CR you will most likely be just fine with no intercooler. My turbo dodge friend is running 15 lb of boost with no intercooler... 'course he also has to run 90-92 octane.

 

[66Sprint6]

The shop workin on my stang has done a tone of STS rear mounts. He has one on his LT1 camaro and itll freakin FLY.

Im not gonna run an intercooler at first, but will step up as soon as I can. My SVO runs a puny top mount interheater and it still pushed 25psi no problem (on accident). Every little bit helps.
Matt

 

[hasa68mustang]

mine seems fine at 9 psi or so, I dont want to be misleading or anything, If I had the money I would have one... infact I believe thats what Im saving for now...

 

[sefus]

There are 302 fox body guys running 8.90's with no intercoolers...

Power can be made without them or more power can be made with them. If its not in your time, budget, whatever then hit a dyno and get your tune down and dont worry about it, imho.

Edit: oh yeah and if I was a smart man I would have bought stock in STS 6 months ago.

 

[sefus]

... 'course he also has to run 90-92 octane.

Any turbo car should be running the highest pump octane avalible.

 

[Anonymous]

There are some misconceptions running in this thread that I would like to try and deal with.

First the STS kits. The main reason these were invented (by what I have seen) is space. Anyone that has looked underneath the hood of a LT or a LS F-body knows there is NO space for a bolt on turbo kit. Any kit made for those cars is a PAIN to install and or fabricate. The kit is NOT ideal, we all know this. However something that people fail to realize is that heat is not theh main contributing factor to spooling a turbo, exhaust flow is. The heat does contribute alot to spool but it is secondary. The STS uses a differnt A/R ratio to make up for the lack of the heat expansion, thats why they have excellent spool characteristics.
As far as most of the STS kits not having intercoolers. There are two main reasons for this, again this is by my research of the system. First is the dramatically reduced temps to begin with, the exhaust system nor the underhood temps are adding to the temperature of the charged air. This alone is a major factor in not needing an intercooler. The second reason is just the sheer length of the piping. All that length serves as the intercooler of the system. It does the same thing as an air to air intercooler.

All of the people saying you can run X psi on your system need to be careful. Psi is NOT the characteristic that should be used. A small turbo will only flow say 100 cfm at 5 psi, a medium one might flow 200 and a big one could flow around 300 cfm. Now they all would make 5 psi, but where 100 cfm would be fine on a stock engine. 200 would be pushing it. 300 would be blowing stuff up. Tell us your turbo and we can make a more educated guess. Comparing different cars doesn't help either. Turbo Dodges can make alot of power with the stock turbo. However they come with beefier rods, pistons, better heads, etc, etc. The engine was designed to be turbo'd from the factory, it was designed to run without an intercooler. Running X psi on that engine means nothing to a 200 six.

Also to the guy that mentioned a buddy running 8's non intercooled, ask I'm sure hes running something other than gasoline as fuel.

As far as intercooling goes it is quite simple. You should always intercool with a turbo, you also can almost never get too big of a intercooler. Yes it is very possible to make big power on a non intercooled setup. It is also very possible to get such a massive intercooler that it will hurt you. The reason that someone should always run an intercooler is simple. Lower intake temperatures means more power. If you lower the intake temperatures with an intercooler you can safely run more boost and make more power yet. A decently made intercooler with only have 1-2 psi drop across it, possibly less. There are lots of cars that come stock with intercoolers. Volvo's, Evo's, Wrx's, Srt-4's, and DSM's are just a few. (anyone tell I'm also an import guy? ) Out of those Evo's and Srt's both have front mounts that are very effective. An Srt front mount can be had here for anywhere between 80 and 150 dollars. The main thing with those intercoolers is to just find the best deal. Evo intercoolers can be had for less simply because the outlets are put at a kinda goofy angle. If your just looking for a cheap intercooler both of these are excellent choices.

There are many companies out there also if your looking to buy a new front mount intercooler, you can choose exactly what size you want with the exact outlet size and directions you want. Most of these can be had fairly cheaply too.

If you would like I can try to get you some links to cheaper front mount intercoolers.

Any more information just ask and I would love to help out.

Todd

 

[sefus]

Also to the guy that mentioned a buddy running 8's non intercooled, ask I'm sure hes running something other than gasoline as fuel.
Todd

Maybe a hit of methenol or alcohol under boost but read on:
http://www.turbomustangs.com/smf/index.php?board=13.0

 

[Anonymous]

Also to the guy that mentioned a buddy running 8's non intercooled, ask I'm sure hes running something other than gasoline as fuel.
Todd

Maybe a hit of methenol or alcohol under boost but read on:
http://www.turbomustangs.com/smf/index.php?board=13.0

Don't have time to read a whole forum. Either of those under boost is a chemical intercooler and they are basically running something other than gas. To run those speeds you also run a really high octane usually leaded gas.

Methenol, alcohol, or water injection is a form of intercooling so if they are running nay of them during a run they are not non intercooled.

I stand by my statement. 8)

 

[sefus]

And I stand by, if you dont have the cash or resources to intercool right now, then dont.