GOLFMK8
GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV

Intercooler performance

Hollywood0220

Go Kart Newbie
Location
NW
Car(s)
German/Japanese
ICs can vary in heat dissipation from varying turbo sizes, their air flow ability, ambient temps, and boost level. This well known of course.
Bar/Plates are great for drag applications and power numbers, but not really daily or extended track use.
The pressure loss is greater and the turbo is working harder than it should.
@Ed @ EQT more likely chose the AMS because of its differentiated Louvered Fins that promote just as much cooling as a Bar/Plate would. That, and the fact it has an incredibly low pressure drop and provides “consistancy” all the time.
It may not be the optimum of cooling, but it will be consistantly cooler when it is demanded.
@Jovian
 

Navi

Autocross Champion
Location
BK/NYC/Hamptons
You have it partially correct. Tube and fin cores are used on stock intercoolers and are not commonly used for aftermarket units. These coolers are far lighter than bar and plate, and are also less expensive to manufacture but the number one reason why tube and fin cores are ditched on aftermarket coolers is heat dissipation. The bar and plate design is a bit heavier than tube and fin, but this is actually advantageous. The core acts as a heat sink. Its ability to soak up more heat is especially useful in stop-and-go traffic. It keeps the charge relatively cool, then is able to dissipate the heat once the vehicle is in motion. Tube-and-fin units can't pull this off. A bar and plate core can typically tolerate far more abuse with repeated heating without becoming inefficient. This is especially helpful for vehicles seeing track duty that will be in boost for the better part of longer-duration track lapping. On top of that, bar and plate cores are more efficient in transferring heat in general. The design of the bar and plate allows for a significantly thinner material containing the airflow, which aids in producing greater heat transfer.

Tube and fin cores have a larger leakage rate compared to bar and plate cores. Furthermore, tube and fin cores are more susceptible to road damage from rocks and debris than bar and plate cores; the oval tubes are extruded from thin-wall material and any sort of extreme pressure can cause these tubes to 'balloon.' For a high percentage of folks paying close attention to intercooler choice, a bar and plate design is the go-to and will provide better performance in nearly all applications.

I'm impressed that you were able to explain that without taking into consideration how the placement/location of an intercooler is affected by ambient airflow. Such as front mount vs sandwiched between an ac condenser and radiator. Which Google article did you use? I want to read more about it.
 

El_bigote_AJ

Autocross Champion
Location
Las Vegas
Car(s)
2019 GTI bunny
I'm impressed that you were able to explain that without taking into consideration how the placement/location of an intercooler is affected by ambient airflow. Such as front mount vs sandwiched between an ac condenser and radiator. Which Google article did you use? I want to read more about it.
Oh so I wasn’t alone in seeing the copy n paste technique 😂.
 

JerseyDrew77

Autocross Champion
Location
Virginia & NC
Car(s)
2016 TR GTI S 6MT
I'm impressed that you were able to explain that without taking into consideration how the placement/location of an intercooler is affected by ambient airflow. Such as front mount vs sandwiched between an ac condenser and radiator. Which Google article did you use? I want to read more about it.

The FMIC are more prone to damage than the stock location and as far as airflow and ambient temps, being located in the stock location has minimal effect to its performance, despite what you think. I have a CTS stock location IC and it has zero issues with cooling and keeping my IATs within 10 degrees or lower to the outside temps.

Oh so I wasn’t alone in seeing the copy n paste technique 😂.

So researching the topic, in the past, and having general knowledge on it and passing along what I have found is consider a copy and paste technique? If that's the case, then everybody and anybody is guilty of that in here.
 

GTIfan99

Autocross Champion
Location
FL
ICs can vary in heat dissipation from varying turbo sizes, their air flow ability, ambient temps, and boost level. This well known of course.
Bar/Plates are great for drag applications and power numbers, but not really daily or extended track use.
The pressure loss is greater and the turbo is working harder than it should.
@Ed @ EQT more likely chose the AMS because of its differentiated Louvered Fins that promote just as much cooling as a Bar/Plate would. That, and the fact it has an incredibly low pressure drop and provides “consistancy” all the time.
It may not be the optimum of cooling, but it will be consistantly cooler when it is demanded.
@Jovian

Also, if you're going to do a triple pass radiator, Mini7 has confirmed the AMS fits without interference. That's why I'll likely end up with the AMS.
 

GTI_Owner

Go Kart Champion
Location
USA
Car(s)
2016 GTI
ICs can vary in heat dissipation from varying turbo sizes, their air flow ability, ambient temps, and boost level. This well known of course.
Bar/Plates are great for drag applications and power numbers, but not really daily or extended track use.
The pressure loss is greater and the turbo is working harder than it should.
@Ed @ EQT more likely chose the AMS because of its differentiated Louvered Fins that promote just as much cooling as a Bar/Plate would. That, and the fact it has an incredibly low pressure drop and provides “consistancy” all the time.
It may not be the optimum of cooling, but it will be consistantly cooler when it is demanded.
@Jovian

That's different from the flow test result I saw. Where did you see a comparison showing an incredibly low pressure drop? Another T&F design from do88 flowed very well, but AMS was similar to, or slightly less, than a number of B&P designs. It would seem there is more to how they perform than just whether they are B&P or T&F.
 

Navi

Autocross Champion
Location
BK/NYC/Hamptons
The FMIC are more prone to damage than the stock location and as far as airflow and ambient temps, being located in the stock location has minimal effect to its performance, despite what you think. I have a CTS stock location IC and it has zero issues with cooling and keeping my IATs within 10 degrees or lower to the outside temps.

I wasn't talking specifically about stock location having minimal effect on its performance. What I mean, broadly speaking, is that different designs are better for different locations and then you also have to take into account how much air the turbo is pushing. True, bar and plate will not heat soak as quickly, but they can heat soak, and when they do, they take longer to cool down than a tube/fin. A tube/fin will always cool down quicker bc it allows more ambient air flow across it. You can't just say one intercooler is better than another based only on tube/fin vs bar/plate. It's a balance of airflow vs cooling capacity. Also a proper intercooler discussion would touch on transfer area, internal flow area and internal volume. We don't have all that info for turbos or intercoolers for this platform, so who is to say which is the best?

I found the 2003 superstreet article you copy and pasted from: http://www.superstreetonline.com/how-to/engine/0304-turp-intercooler Spearco only makes bar and plate coolers and seems biased.

I think people going with a tune on is20 or is38 can go with literally any intercooler. Big turbo... probably gonna have to research it and reach out to tuners and people with similar setups to see what's working and what's not. Anything else is mickey mouse guessing.
 
Last edited:

Gvazquez

Go Kart Champion
Location
North Carolina
I've also realized that people advertising how big their intercooler is, does not mean its the best. I have a unitronic ic which is arguably the smallest option and even at my power level it has no problem with cooling to near ambient Temps on pulls at least.
 

Navi

Autocross Champion
Location
BK/NYC/Hamptons
And yet I’ve seen a Uni IC look like a hair dryer on a standard housing Vortex. I would live to know the reasoning behind such massive variability.

@Quebster touched it
 

Hollywood0220

Go Kart Newbie
Location
NW
Car(s)
German/Japanese
That's different from the flow test result I saw. Where did you see a comparison showing an incredibly low pressure drop? Another T&F design from do88 flowed very well, but AMS was similar to, or slightly less, than a number of B&P designs. It would seem there is more to how they perform than just whether they are B&P or T&F.
The CFM benchflow you may have seen measures @28" H20, which equates to just over 1psi. The quality of Air Flow as opposed to the quantity is what counts.
I have no doubt that the do88 (which is a B&P) has excellent cooling properties and you are correct about "more than meets the eye" performance of B&P vs T&F; since, we are referrencing AMS' design.

Explanation:
A plain T&F has less pressure drop, but charged air doesn't linger around long enough to cool. AMS found the "median" of effectiveness in cooling & flow for a T&F type intercooler. The dense louvered fins of the AMS makes it very unique - just call it a "Hybrid T&F", as that is what it is. It is that FIN Density that is slowing the channel of charged air so that it has optimum time to cool - that doesn't equate to Pressure Loss though (not at 1psi or 28" H20). Engine vaccum is greater than that, so it's soley not a definitive measure of pressure loss.
A standard B&P (in the stock location) would appear to have more flow, however - that additional flow is being wasted in transitioning the warmer air out as you increase boost pressure.
- It doesn’t necessarily represent the true airflow into an engine, because the actual pressure differentials from Ambient, through the Intake, through the charge pipe, through the intercooler, and out and into what the throttle body is demanding are quite different than what can be generated with a flowbench. It is a tool of measurement for CFM flow of components - but not turbulence or actual engine dynamics.

With regard to our VWs; if you can achieve the torque target with <less boost than the target - your intercooler is performing superbly or it is hella cold ;)

Many have admittedly stated that just about any upgraded IC outbests the stock. Really, all of this comes down to choice.
Is this the "FlowBench" you may have been referring to @git_fan ?
Like I mentioned above, don't look at the overall flow of the AMS - but look at how it matches that of the Stock IC. Then couple that with the 22 Fins (Louvered) per square inch and you have the same low pressure drop of the stock BUT with better cooling.
1599153720331.png

@Jovian
 
Last edited:

Navi

Autocross Champion
Location
BK/NYC/Hamptons
The CFM benchflow you may have seen measures @28" H20, which equates to just over 1psi. The quality of Air Flow as opposed to the quantity is what counts.
I have no doubt that the do88 (which is a B&P) has excellent cooling properties and you are correct about "more than meets the eye" performance of B&P vs T&F; since, we are referrencing AMS' design.

Explanation:
A plain T&F has less pressure drop, but charged air doesn't linger around long enough to cool. AMS found the "median" of effectiveness in cooling & flow for a T&F type intercooler. The dense louvered fins of the AMS makes it very unique - just call it a "Hybrid T&F", as that is what it is. It is that FIN Density that is slowing the channel of charged air so that it has optimum time to cool - that doesn't equate to Pressure Loss though (not at 1psi or 28" H20). Engine vaccum is greater than that, so it's soley not a definitive measure of pressure loss.
A standard B&P (in the stock location) would appear to have more flow, however - that additional flow is being wasted in transitioning the warmer air out as you increase boost pressure.
- It doesn’t necessarily represent the true airflow into an engine, because the actual pressure differentials from Ambient, through the Intake, through the charge pipe, through the intercooler, and out and into what the throttle body is demanding are quite different than what can be generated with a flowbench. It is a tool of measurement for CFM flow of components - but not turbulence or actual engine dynamics.

With regard to our VWs; if you can achieve the torque target with <less boost than the target - your intercooler is performing superbly or it is hella cold ;)

Many have admittedly stated that just about any upgraded IC outbests the stock. Really, all of this comes down to choice.
Is this the "FlowBench" you may have been referring to @git_fan ?
Like I mentioned above, don't look at the overall flow of the AMS - but look at how it matches that of the Stock IC. Then couple that with the 22 Fins (Louvered) per square inch and you have the same low pressure drop of the stock BUT with better cooling.
View attachment 184828
@Jovian

Are these the graphs from that blokes blog? The dude that does the scooby doo half ass testing?
 

Hollywood0220

Go Kart Newbie
Location
NW
Car(s)
German/Japanese
Are these the graphs from that blokes blog? The dude that does the scooby doo half ass testing?
Was from 'mygolfmk7'
I was simply trying to find the possible "pressure drop" of the AMS that was mentioned - and that's the only thing I could find in regard to anything.
Thus, my evaluation of CFM vs Pressure Drop
 

JerseyDrew77

Autocross Champion
Location
Virginia & NC
Car(s)
2016 TR GTI S 6MT
I wasn't talking specifically about stock location having minimal effect on its performance. What I mean, broadly speaking, is that different designs are better for different locations and then you also have to take into account how much air the turbo is pushing. True, bar and plate will not heat soak as quickly, but they can heat soak, and when they do, they take longer to cool down than a tube/fin. A tube/fin will always cool down quicker bc it allows more ambient air flow across it. You can't just say one intercooler is better than another based only on tube/fin vs bar/plate. It's a balance of airflow vs cooling capacity. Also a proper intercooler discussion would touch on transfer area, internal flow area and internal volume. We don't have all that info for turbos or intercoolers for this platform, so who is to say which is the best?

I found the 2003 superstreet article you copy and pasted from: http://www.superstreetonline.com/how-to/engine/0304-turp-intercooler Spearco only makes bar and plate coolers and seems biased.

I think people going with a tune on is20 or is38 can go with literally any intercooler. Big turbo... probably gonna have to research it and reach out to tuners and people with similar setups to see what's working and what's not. Anything else is mickey mouse guessing.

A T&F doesn't allow more, it just allows the air to flow easier because of the curvature of the tubes. You're right, you can't just base it off of T&F vs B&P but you should use that as the foundation. Then you want to compare the fins and size and volume, etc... Our platform is still relatively too new to have a good comparison so I think looking at the big companies that have been around since the beginning, like Spearco, Greddy, AMS, and others, should be a good starting point.

That is one of the articles. There were a few more that I looked in to. I went with the stock location CTS IC because of it's design and ability to support high hp cars and it gets the job done.
 
Top