GOLFMK8
GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV

FMIC questions

Chogokin

Autocross Newbie
Location
So Cal
Car(s)
GTI Sport | Audi A3
I posted that link because it looks like they did a pretty detailed job a testing the three intercoolers. I'm not trying to sell anyone on the ECS one. Regarding the ARM...I'm willing to bet that you'll have to trim the inside of your Golf bumper the same way my friend had to trim his to get the NS IS38 one to fit.. They all pretty much install the same way. The GTI has a bunch of room behind the front bumper...the Golf may not have the same amount of clearance.
 

jimlloyd40

Autocross Champion
Location
Phoenix
Car(s)
2018 SE DSG
I was looking more at the IATs from the logs over ambient than the flow test. I feel i'd have to determine how restrictive the small overhang over my front plate is (bought used, already drilled and not a fan of bumper plugs) and if I have different dimensions for stock opens on upper and lower grill vs GTI/R - Which would require way more reading than i've done and would probably only serve to make things all more fuzzy again.

I'll read over the ECS, the issue I have with the GSW 1.8T is the ECS isn't a direct fit. I've read I would potentially need to shave the bumper and other things. Which why not just get a majesty if I'm modifying? For the price of a FMIC from what i've read i'd go with the ARM FMIC as it claims to be a no modification fit and I haven't read anything to the contrary. https://www.armmotorsports.com/products/mk7-fmic-kit

That link is for the GTI.
 

StorableComa

Autocross Champion
Location
Long Beach, USA
Car(s)
17 GSW S
That link is for the GTI.
Which one? The ARM One? The website states:
HIGHLIGHTS
• Gain up to 24whp/26wtq
• 74% Increase in Cooling Efficiency
• True Front Mount Design
• 100% Bolt-On Installation
• No Cutting or Drilling Required


If you scroll to the bottom the 1.8T GSW is listed in the fitment guide.
I posted that link because it looks like they did a pretty detailed job a testing the three intercoolers. I'm not trying to sell anyone on the ECS one. Regarding the ARM...I'm willing to bet that you'll have to trim the inside of your Golf bumper the same way my friend had to trim his to get the NS IS38 one to fit.. They all pretty much install the same way. The GTI has a bunch of room behind the front bumper...the Golf may not have the same amount of clearance.

From what i've seen, granted there is not much as this seems to be a newer kit - It doesn't require any modification.
 

jimlloyd40

Autocross Champion
Location
Phoenix
Car(s)
2018 SE DSG
Which one? The ARM One? The website states:
HIGHLIGHTS
• Gain up to 24whp/26wtq
• 74% Increase in Cooling Efficiency
• True Front Mount Design
• 100% Bolt-On Installation
• No Cutting or Drilling Required


If you scroll to the bottom the 1.8T GSW is listed in the fitment guide.


From what i've seen, granted there is not much as this seems to be a newer kit - It doesn't require any modification.

You're right I didn't scroll far enough. It's bar and plate also which is much better for a true FMIC because bar and plate is less susceptible to damage from road debris like rocks.
 

StorableComa

Autocross Champion
Location
Long Beach, USA
Car(s)
17 GSW S
You're right I didn't scroll far enough. It's bar and plate also which is much better for a true FMIC because bar and plate is less susceptible to damage from road debris like rocks.
Good point, I didn't even consider that aspect. I've read a few people like FMIC's for the AC condenser protection. Though at that price point, I fall back to the BMS stock location replacement. Yeah it's more work, but I gain more frontal area and potentially maybe a little more volume. Unless everything i've been reading isn't clicking right, that would be a pro, right?
 

IanCH

Autocross Champion
Location
MA
Car(s)
'20 GTI
It's more work twice unless you sell the car modded.

I think I already mentioned it in this thread but I've lost the AC condenser to a rock on my golf r. Not a fun issue to deal with although it can be protected with aluminum screen as an alternative.
 

StorableComa

Autocross Champion
Location
Long Beach, USA
Car(s)
17 GSW S
Plan to drive it until it blows up, and even then some maybe. This car isn't going anywhere, at least in my case. So IC will live and die in the car unless I find a new DD and decide to just go IS38 balls to the wall with it.

I know there was a stock IC delete kit for the MK6 that seemed kinda pointless, but are there recommendations for what to do with the dead weight in the heat sandwich if you run a FMIC? Pull it and plug in a slightly bigger radiator, or run a twintercooler setup? Read a bit on those, but admittedly I just assumed if they were more effective than either FMIC/TMIC they'd be more popular.
 
Last edited:

StorableComa

Autocross Champion
Location
Long Beach, USA
Car(s)
17 GSW S
The OEM intercooler holds both the radiator and the AC condenser, so it’s not just a remove it kinda job.
I'm aware all three clip in together to make up the main cooling core. Just curious if anyone had come up with a kit/diy for making use of the extra space.
The stock intercooler is 7.4 lbs. I would think the weight is pretty negligible.
I agree, and being FWD a little extra weight over the nose is good for traction. Just curious as I know there was a lot of talk about leaving a dead heat exchange in the stack and air flow yadda yadda yadda FMIC's make AC run worse, no wait better. I know someone earlier had mentioned someone might be looking at Oil/Tranny cooler kit in the location?

When I had my Mk6 R I know a lot of people liked to go FMIC and larger radiator. iMOD comes to mind off the top of my head, granted that was a crazier build than I plan.
 

GTI Jake

Autocross Champion
Location
Charlotte, NC
I'm aware all three clip in together to make up the main cooling core. Just curious if anyone had come up with a kit/diy for making use of the extra space.

I agree, and being FWD a little extra weight over the nose is good for traction. Just curious as I know there was a lot of talk about leaving a dead heat exchange in the stack and air flow yadda yadda yadda FMIC's make AC run worse, no wait better. I know someone earlier had mentioned someone might be looking at Oil/Tranny cooler kit in the location?

When I had my Mk6 R I know a lot of people liked to go FMIC and larger radiator. iMOD comes to mind off the top of my head, granted that was a crazier build than I plan.

https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/index.php?threads/the-ultimate-mk7-cooling-solution.371514/
 

git_fan

Go Kart Newbie
Location
Virginia
Car(s)
2016 GTI
Sure go shop the explanation you got from a mechanical engineer who concentrated in thermal fluids and has years of practical design and implementation experience with the marketing people and mechanics at the suppliers. I'm sure they won't lie to you to boost their product.

I don't have any reason to lie to you and everything I said is independently verifiable if you go get an engineering degree or maybe even a thermals textbook if you're motivated...

The idea that somebody like BMS or Unitronic can sell a lower cost B&P that is supposedly an all around superior performing product, while suppliers like Wagner, whom I've had an IC from previously that was B&P, would choose for this application to use T&F, leads me to think that it there may be other considerations, and not simply cost.

Sure they have some bias, but they also have options to sell either design and they picked a T&F. I don't think you're lying, but I also don't take what you say as the last word on intercooler design.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the Wager FAQ. They let you configure your own custom IC and have both B&P and T&F as options.

"The fundamental difference between performance on the one hand and competition on the other lies in the structure of the intercooler net. In the area of performance, it is a bar & plate net, while we use a tube fin net for our charge air coolers from the competition area.

The bar & plate net originally comes from simple industrial production and has been used as a charge air cooler network for a long time, because it can be produced cheaply in any version. The basic structure of this network, however, ensures a higher weight or an increased proportion of material, which leads to the storage of the heat from the charge air if the load continues. The production of a tube fin net is more complex and therefore more expensive due to the necessary use of special tools. This type of net has a significantly lower proportion of material - and therefore less weight -, which means that the tube fin net can better dissipate the high temperatures to the environment and thus work even more efficiently.
"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply from do88:

This is a topic that always seems to be a subject that causes discussions in the car tuning world. I will try to give some input to help out here!

First of all the most important thing is that you can make both tube&fin and bar&plate cores with many different specifications so there are no way to predicte the performance by the type of core.

So there are no such things that one of the design have more internal than external surf contact area. That is correct if you have a core with empty internal channels which can be made with both core types.

The weight (mass) in the intercooler only affects cooling in the beginning but as soon as the mass have been heated it does not help cooling any more but it do takes a bit longer to cool it down afterwards. So the b&p core are a bit slower in temperature changes compares to t&f, both up and down.

So if you design a b&p and a t&f core with the same internal and external fins, the same internal tube width and the same width/height they will be very very close to each other when it comes to heat dissipation. We have done a lot of tests, including the one just described.

The type of tube and fin core we use in our intercooler is not cheaper to make than a bar&plate, at least not in small series as we do. If you go to vehicle manufacturer production volumes it will probably cheaper.

If you look at the intercooler core type used in WRC cars for example you will see that tube&fin cores works well.

So the reason we choose tube&fin in our intercooler is simply that the performance is the same but the weight is much less.
But it costs more to start a production of a tube&fin core so it is not possible to do this in all cases. The bar&plate is much easier and cheaper to adapt in size for small series productions.

Just ask if anything is unclear!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply from Pro Alloy

The best way to draw comparisons between the two core types is to look at how they operate based on their construction, and in the format below I have listed their key differences:

Tube & Fin Cores:

These units are of brazed construction and feature tube and turbulator construction of much thinner gauge, allowing better thermal conductivity. The finished units weigh roughly 30% less than a bar & plate equivalent and offer much better recovery rates. These cores are more expensive to produce as they have to be brazed in a very closely monitored process, and each core we build is totally hand-made and pressure tested to over 30 psi.

Bar & Plate

These cores are of welded construction using heavy gauge materials. They are cheap because they are simple to produce, so these are the cores you will find in all the ebay type intercoolers / mass produced Chinese units. They are generally 30% heavier but the real issue with them is their poor ability to disperse heat once they have heat-soaked. They do give a rather false result during rolling road testing, as the units act as a large heat sink due to their thermal mass. This means that they perform quite well from cold, as the unit is absorbing heat, not dispersing it. However this is misleading, as during a dyno session they don't get the opportunity to get up to full temperature. If you take the car on track during hot weather, the unit will keep absorbing heat, making the inlet temps steadily rise as you do not get the same recovery rate as a tube and fin core.

A simple consideration to make here is to look at the units we build for the BTCC teams - none of them are using bar & plate cores. These teams spend fortunes on year-round testing, and the simple facts are a few horsepower in this arena can make the difference of 1st place or 10th in a race environment. We only build tube and fin cores as they offer the best overall results in terms of thermal efficiency.

I hope this has proved both interesting and useful, if you need anything further please let me know.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply from PWR U.S. Distributor

I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. Thanks very much for reaching out about this.

Tube and fin vs bar and plate is relevant for both air to air and air to water intercoolers. Here at C&R we use tube and fin for the majority of our aftermarket air to air intercoolers to ensure we have a lightweight, unrestrictive cooler that is not going to restrict or heat the airflow to the engine radiator and condenser typically located behind the intercooler in an OEM application and also to not add a massive heat sink to the system which will hurt performance in certain situations.

We can produce this unit as a bar and plate if you are interested in a custom build but our bar and plate is tailored mostly for aerospace and supercharger brick use, and uses very thin bars and plates which make manufacturing much more difficult and expensive.

Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns and we will be more than happy to answer them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:

git_fan

Go Kart Newbie
Location
Virginia
Car(s)
2016 GTI
Here is ECS's test data. They compared stock, to a stock location aftermarket one, and their own FMIC. It looks pretty detailed. For some of the tests they tapped the end tanks so they can get data from the inlet and outlet. Looks like a pretty detailed test. A lot more than that "flow test".

http://bd8ba3c866c8cbc330ab-7b26c6f...7_Front_Mount_Intercooler_Testing_Results.pdf

They show a 0.5 psi difference in pressure drop across the three products tested while the IC inlet temperature has a 60 degree difference. That much pressure difference should not produce a temperature change as great as what they show.
 

Hollywood0220

Go Kart Newbie
Location
NW
Car(s)
German/Japanese
They show a 0.5 psi difference in pressure drop across the three products tested while the IC inlet temperature has a 60 degree difference. That much pressure difference should not produce a temperature change as great as what they show.
The Inlet Temp in the second graph should be close to equal with the others - unless the engine wasn’t run as long, on a different boost, or on a different turbo.
And
You need to question why pressure drop is measured at 6250rpm; since boost has already steadily tapered down by then. Besides, pressure drop doesn’t soley stem from an intercooler - it begins all the way back from the intake itself and through the entire path into the manifold.
Pressure drop can be measured from the Hot side and Cold side and determining the differential in pressure.

OE fitment is the all around winner by a long shot. Can’t beat the “surface area & volume”.
 
Last edited:
Top