Prioritize Dp or IC

jimlloyd40 said:

The intercooler was way bigger than the stock one. Prior to the IC the car had a maximum of 26 lbs of boost. After the IC it was 22 lbs of boost.

Click to expand...

Hard for me to comment on parts that I don't have information about. I was just trying to address your question about adding the bi-cooler to the GTI.

jimlloyd40 said:

The intercooler was way bigger than the stock one. Prior to the IC the car had a maximum of 26 lbs of boost. After the IC it was 22 lbs of boost.

Click to expand...

This IC was on off brand i bet, not a well known and proven brand? I ask because there should not be that much of a drop in pressure and i have also never heard having to retune the car for an aftermarket IC. Size shouldnt cause a pressure drop.

Stija said:

This IC was on off brand i bet, not a well known and proven brand? I ask because there should not be that much of a drop in pressure and i have also never heard having to retune the car for an aftermarket IC. Size shouldnt cause a pressure drop.

Click to expand...

It was a proven brand. And I don't know about the pressure drop I can only tell you the dyno results from DynoComp in Scottsdale.

jimlloyd40 said:

It was a proven brand. And I don't know about the pressure drop I can only tell you the dyno results from DynoComp in Scottsdale.

Click to expand...

I was referring to the drop in boost pressure. Never knew that changing an ic could require a tune.

Is it performing well after the tune?

Stija said:

I was referring to the drop in boost pressure. Never knew that changing an ic could require a tune.

Is it performing well after the tune?

Click to expand...

Yes it was but I sold it and got my 18 SE. And I didn't think that it would require a tune either but after it was installed I could tell that the power was down.

I do believe the hypothsis of pressure drop costing hp in some instances.

Back in the day when the guys with the mk4 TDIs were switching from their small stock SMICs to large FMICs, I do recall a great number of people being concerned about pressure drop due to all the extra volume of IC and all the extra length and volume of hoses.

There was one local-ish guy who brought his car to a "custom euro shop" for a prototype Fmic, which they never really got right and had his car in various states of disassembly for something like 3 months (It got really ugly: he had to lawyer up just to get his car back and the shop tried to argue that this guy should be paying their shop rate for their guesstimate of how many hours they messed up his car... I mean, worked on his car for... they were throwing around 5 figure numbers for an IC that they didn't complete properly- cut up his bumper cover in multiple spots and also cut up crash bar really bad, couldn't mount securely and properly)

Made sense that you were more than doubling the volume of pipe and ic while adding twists and turns in a tight engine bay that it would impact airflow.

I opted for a larger pancake pipe and larger SMIC on mine.

There's definitely something to be said for people sharing their experiences online. I especially appreciate when a fellow enthusiast puts up impartial test results of multiple parts for all to see. Knowledge is power, and without it, enthusiasts are more likely to have to trust their cars to hack chop shops.

I appreciate the efforts and info mygolfmk7

On the mk7, I've got to vote for the IC first. On a car that's driven in anger, it's going to be the limiting factor before the exhaust flow.

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

MyGolfMk7 said:

1) I'd like to hear your suggestions for improving the tests.



2) Perhaps you can also describe the R&D at actual performance companies.



3) The IC graph is a summation of datalogs contributed by members of this forum, it wasn't a test.

Click to expand...

1a.) Buy all brands and test all brands using the same car, under the same conditions. You’ll need a Dyno to do the “under same conditions” part accurately. (Indoor temperature is much easier to control than outdoor)

1b.) Testing an IC (a cheap Chinese knockoff at that, which is probably stamped) by puttering around town is useless, this was the reason for my comment. Most aftermarket ICs will perform worse than stock when you do this. This is not their intended application/use. An air-to-air performance system is very efficient; however, it does rely on airflow (from vehicle speed) to generate the needed cooling. Since the OP was debating between DP (Stage 2) or an IC, he clearly isn’t going to be puttering around town, obeying speed limits and driving like Ms. Daisy is in his back seat. If he was, remaining stock would be his best choice IMO.

1c.) Do you happen to know if you introduced any boost lag with this setup? How did you determine this? (If you did determine this)

2.) Do you really want me to compile the ways each performance company performs their engineering/development/testing as posted on their respective websites? What does that do for either of us? I can tell you that the equipment they are using to develop/test is way more complete, precise and telltale than what you’re doing.

3.) I understand that, but that doesn’t mean anything. Posting it or compiling it is not helpful, it’s confusing. So many different variables from all of those results including methods of retrieving the data. People that don’t know any better will look at that and make very poor assumptions.


Is that forum member who keeps flexing/coming to your defense your friend? He doesn’t seem very intelligent. I’m not trolling you, I don’t want people making poor assumptions on data that isn’t complete.

Also, for the record, I don’t think everyone should go APR, not sure when I said anything of the sort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not sure that testing ICs inside on a dyno is the best method. You cant replicate airflow at 40mph let alone higher speeds and that is how ICs work, airflow over the core.

launchd said:

1a.) Buy all brands and test all brands using the same car, under the same conditions. You’ll need a Dyno to do the “under same conditions” part accurately. (Indoor temperature is much easier to control than outdoor)

Click to expand...

I like the idea of testing every brand with the same conditions. In order to accomplish your plan I'd need to purchase over $14,000 worth of merchandise. There will be around $2,000 spent on the dyno and over 115 hours of labor just swapping parts, estimate about $5,500 in labor.

Are you willing to cover the estimated $21,000 in costs for your proposed improvements to the testing?

launchd said:

1b.) Testing an IC (a cheap Chinese knockoff at that, which is probably stamped) by puttering around town is useless, this was the reason for my comment. Most aftermarket ICs will perform worse than stock when you do this. This is not their intended application/use. An air-to-air performance system is very efficient; however, it does rely on airflow (from vehicle speed) to generate the needed cooling. Since the OP was debating between DP (Stage 2) or an IC, he clearly isn’t going to be puttering around town, obeying speed limits and driving like Ms. Daisy is in his back seat. If he was, remaining stock would be his best choice IMO.

Click to expand...

The data about puttering around town was in response to this statement:

Gti jake said:

Log your daily commute in July. It’s not as you’re assuming at all

Click to expand...

It was the specific topic being addressed, if you take issue with the topic I suggest responding to that person, not me.

launchd said:

1c.) Do you happen to know if you introduced any boost lag with this setup? How did you determine this? (If you did determine this)

Click to expand...

I have not been able to detect any through logs of boost onset. The JB4 only records about 10 samples per second so it's not very high resolution data, but based on the trend I am seeing if there is boost lag it would seem to be small.

launchd said:

2.) Do you really want me to compile the ways each performance company performs their engineering/development/testing as posted on their respective websites? What does that do for either of us? I can tell you that the equipment they are using to develop/test is way more complete, precise and telltale than what you’re doing.

Click to expand...

Yes please do, you said about the testing: "tests are garbage/half ass'd and don't hold up against R&D from actual performance companies."

There's a difference between performing a test in a sound manner and having material resources. If you can start to describe what equipment these companies are using and how they are going about testing we can establish what the differences are with what I am doing.

launchd said:

3.) I understand that, but that doesn’t mean anything.

Click to expand...

You made a statement immediately followed by an example, if you didn't intend to have the example act as support for the claim you may want to rephrase what you were trying to say.

launchd said:

Posting it or compiling it is not helpful, it’s confusing. So many different variables from all of those results including methods of retrieving the data. People that don’t know any better will look at that and make very poor assumptions.

Click to expand...

The goal is to take advantage of the law of large numbers.

So now it's back to the first point, your $21,000 proposal for getting better data. Between having next to nothing to base a decision upon, and a very costly plan that is unlikely to ever be put into action, I've decided that compiling data and applying some filtering criteria to it can provide useful information. If you have something better please post it up, pissing and moaning about what others are doing isn't helping to generate better data.

launchd said:

Is that forum member who keeps flexing/coming to your defense your friend? He doesn’t seem very intelligent. I’m not trolling you, I don’t want people making poor assumptions on data that isn’t complete.

Click to expand...

Nope, don't know them, perhaps they disagree with you?

Stija said:

I am not sure that testing ICs inside on a dyno is the best method. You cant replicate airflow at 40mph let alone higher speeds and that is how ICs work, airflow over the core.

Click to expand...

You know that when running on a dyno they use pretty high powered fans blowing air at the IC don't you?

MyGolfMk7 said:

I like the idea of testing every brand with the same conditions. In order to accomplish your plan I'd need to purchase over $14,000 worth of merchandise. There will be around $2,000 spent on the dyno and over 115 hours of labor just swapping parts, estimate about $5,500 in labor.

Are you willing to cover the estimated $21,000 in costs for your proposed improvements to the testing?



The data about puttering around town was in response to this statement:



It was the specific topic being addressed, if you take issue with the topic I suggest responding to that person, not me.



I have not been able to detect any through logs of boost onset. The JB4 only records about 10 samples per second so it's not very high resolution data, but based on the trend I am seeing if there is boost lag it would seem to be small.



Yes please do, you said about the testing: "tests are garbage/half ass'd and don't hold up against R&D from actual performance companies."

There's a difference between performing a test in a sound manner and having material resources. If you can start to describe what equipment these companies are using and how they are going about testing we can establish what the differences are with what I am doing.



You made a statement immediately followed by an example, if you didn't intend to have the example act as support for the claim you may want to rephrase what you were trying to say.



The goal is to take advantage of the law of large numbers.

So now it's back to the first point, your $21,000 proposal for getting better data. Between having next to nothing to base a decision upon, and a very costly plan that is unlikely to ever be put into action, I've decided that compiling data and applying some filtering criteria to it can provide useful information. If you have something better please post it up, pissing and moaning about what others are doing isn't helping to generate better data.



Nope, don't know them, perhaps they disagree with you?

Click to expand...

Somebody get the popcorn. Here we go again.

jimlloyd40 said:

You know that when running on a dyno they use pretty high powered fans blowing air at the IC don't you?

Click to expand...

Yes but the fans are not moving nearly as much air as driving 40-60mph does. Nor is it representative of real world forces or how the IC may perform in real driving conditions.

Stija said:

Yes but the fans are not moving nearly as much air as driving 40-60mph does. Nor is it representative of real world forces or how the IC may perform in real driving conditions.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that. Regardless it isn't going to be a significant difference.

MyGolfMk7 said:

Yes please do, you said about the testing: "tests are garbage/half ass'd and don't hold up against R&D from actual performance companies."

There's a difference between performing a test in a sound manner and having material resources. If you can start to describe what equipment these companies are using and how they are going about testing we can establish what the differences are with what I am doing.

Click to expand...

Are you using thermocouples and pressure transducers in your tests? (Nope)

How/where are you reading data from? (JB4 log)

Are you using a dyno to simulate an ideal test environment? (Nope)

Do you know the relevance of fin density? (Maybe if I google it)

Do you understand the balance between core effectiveness and pressure drop? (Maybe if I google it)

Do you know how to measure and account for it? (Nope)

Can you confirm or deny if that Chinese piece of shit is stamped? (It is)

Do you know why that matters? (Nope)

Do you know what pressurized CFD flow analysis is? Have you somehow tested for this on your own? (I know the answer to this... uhhhh, NO)

Here is a popular company that performs tests for a number of aftermarket performance companies (along with just about every other industry that deals with mechanical engineering):

https://www.simutechgroup.com/

You can read about all the magical equipment they use to ACCURATELY determine key factors.

I'm done arguing with you and your flawed tests. Simply put, you aren't a good source of data for people to trust. I do appreciate your dedication to it though, everyone needs a hobby.

Stija said:

Yes but the fans are not moving nearly as much air as driving 40-60mph does. Nor is it representative of real world forces or how the IC may perform in real driving conditions.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is exactly what it does/simulates in a controlled environment.