Has anyone done an Intercooler Comparison?

[nacdale]

I did a lot of searching but cant seem to find a good comparison of all of the intercoolers that are available.

Anyone have any information?

Thanks

 

[UNBROKEN]

They’re pretty much all the same…you’re not gonna be able to tell a difference between any of them. I’d buy whatever is on sale at the time. lol

 

[techmattNC]

I really thought and expected the performance upgrades for these cars to have more dyno testing and proof. Performance upgrades for this car are… … strange.

How much power do downpipes add? No idea.

The most popular intake has an air box. It’s like a fancy factory intake haha.

I guess I’m used to seeing dyno graphs to back up power claims, rather than just blindly believing that power will be added


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TMac]

I really thought and expected the performance upgrades for these cars to have more dyno testing and proof. Performance upgrades for this car are… … strange.

How much power do downpipes add? No idea.

The most popular intake has an air box. It’s like a fancy factory intake haha.

I guess I’m used to seeing dyno graphs to back up power claims, rather than just blindly believing that power will be added


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How are they " ... strange"? Nothing seems any different than any other vehicle where some vendors post questionable dyno claims and others post none at all.

For example, a larger intercooler won't necessarily give you better dyno results, but it will make your intake air temps more consistent, help with gas mileage while towing, and decrease the amount of spark and boost retard. Only if the existing intercooler was massively restrictive would there be any appreciable gains.

For a stock, non-tuned ST, the ecu is the ultimate arbiter of how much torque (and therefore HP) the engine will make. An exhaust won't make any difference, an intake won't make any difference, downpipes won't make any difference. Why? Because none of those are impediments on this vehicle at the stock HP levels. In fact, as I've posted countless times before, a completely stock ST with just a tune on 93 octane gas can add nearly 100HP.

This is documented and proven. One should be extremely skeptical of any vendor showing results on a stock vehicle of HP or (especially) gas mileage increases.

Now, if you're planning on going beyond those numbers, then you will need other mods to get there.

 

[sadams930]

How are they " ... strange"? Nothing seems any different than any other vehicle where some vendors post questionable dyno claims and others post none at all.

For example, a larger intercooler won't necessarily give you better dyno results, but it will make your intake air temps more consistent, help with gas mileage while towing, and decrease the amount of spark and boost retard. Only if the existing intercooler was massively restrictive would there be any appreciable gains.

For a stock, non-tuned ST, the ecu is the ultimate arbiter of how much torque (and therefore HP) the engine will make. An exhaust won't make any difference, an intake won't make any difference, downpipes won't make any difference. Why? Because none of those are impediments on this vehicle at the stock HP levels. In fact, as I've posted countless times before, a completely stock ST with just a tune on 93 octane gas can add nearly 100HP.

This is documented and proven. One should be extremely skeptical of any vendor showing results on a stock vehicle of HP or (especially) gas mileage increases.

Now, if you're planning on going beyond those numbers, then you will need other mods to get there.

I'm relatively new to this forum, but have been lurking around quite a bit over the last 2 months. My 21 is going into the shop on Monday to have a bunch of stuff put on it. I've already done the ZFG tune and that was quite the eye opener in terms of performance increase. I absolutely love it. Now in all my digging around here, I haven't really seen any numbers behind adding the usual upgrades and then tuning again, and what kind of gains you make with the go-fast goodies after tuning for them. I have seen dyno number for various tunes on various octanes and fuel types. But as you said, none of the replaced items were bottlenecks to power, so I'm wondering what kind of gains over just the 93 Octane ZFG tune I can expect after adding the following and then having Adam re-tune it?

CVF Intercooler
Woosh Downpipes
aFe Intake
FenfabCold side charge pipe
Thermal 2.5 inch mid-pipes and cat-back
Ruthenium plugs

I'm doing the other usual suspects that aren't engine related (steeda springs and bars, ID diff brace, fenfab rear toe links, catch can, etc.) but I'm just curious how much of an improvement over the base tune this stuff will give me. I'm sure it's not going to be the jump that was made from stock to tuned, but I'm hoping for a bit more oomph. I know you and Unbroken have been expert contributors on here for years, figured if anybody knew where to find that kind of info it would be you. Thanks!

 

[TMac]

Certainly the jump in HP won't be as extreme, and ZFG would be the best person to ask about what kinds of gains to expect with your mod list. I'd certainly buy the intercooler, even at your current setup. Good insurance, and far more resistant to heat-soak than the stocker. I'm going to assume you're staying with 93 gasoline. But, you're basically out of turbo.

My "stage 2" would be the aFe intake and the stage 5 turbos with the downpipes (save on labor to do both at same time). You can't do any better in the way of bolt-ons unless you're going to run ethanol. And if you eventually want ethanol, you haven't wasted any money. That's just my opinion.

 

[jwuonog]

I haven't done a ton of in depth research on the options out there, but they all seem sufficient for any amount of heat the stock turbos can put out. The cores all look very similarly sized. I would bet that they are even sufficient for bigger turbos too. It just seems like a matter of preference and price.

I bet if someone did an ambient air vs charge air temp comparison across all the ICs, they would come back with pretty similar results.

 

[jwuonog]

I really thought and expected the performance upgrades for these cars to have more dyno testing and proof. Performance upgrades for this car are… … strange.

How much power do downpipes add? No idea.

The most popular intake has an air box. It’s like a fancy factory intake haha.

I guess I’m used to seeing dyno graphs to back up power claims, rather than just blindly believing that power will be added


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ecoboosts use a torque targeting strategy to make power. Older cars didn't use this strategy, and if it flowed better, more power was made. These cars are a little more complex in that regard. The tune is what limits the power. The car is configured to produce the stock level of power based on the stock parts.

An aftermarket tune can account for upgraded parts, and can safely raise those torque targets to maximize the potential of any upgraded parts. It's hard for a company to put an advertised number on a part since it is dependent on a 3rd party to tune it.

Here are some articles about the torque targets:
https://www.stratifiedauto.com/blog...-turn-your-throttle-input-into-torque-output/

https://www.motorsport-developments.co.uk/Understanding_Ford_Ecoboost_Torque_Control.html

 

[Toadster]

why yes! at least from specs

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Exwv_oYWYYJ7MaD5rURt0K6tae2moSNJBS8hyjNj1x0/edit?usp=sharing

 

[TMac]

why yes! at least from specs

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Exwv_oYWYYJ7MaD5rURt0K6tae2moSNJBS8hyjNj1x0/edit?usp=sharing

I can appreciate someone putting this info together, but it's in no way a scientific comparison. I'm more than a bit skeptical of those specs, and what they mean.

For example, how is volume measured? The only practical way would be to buy each intercooler and measure via liquid the actual volume. I doubt that was done. The other is surface area- how is it measured? It looks like it is measured directly by the length/width/depth measurement. That is patently wrong. Surface area would have to account for the external fin density and distance between the "plates". Calculation of volume has the same problem, since there are internal fins in each plate to transfer heat to the plate surfaces. One intercooler might have no internal fins, which would make it less optimal than one including fins.

As far as the "tuned" results- means nothing. Same with "Charge Air Temp" drops- absolutely meaningless without a very controlled environment.

Truth is, all of the larger intercoolers are going to be better than the OEM version. But using this kind of flawed math and logic is pointless.

 

[Toadster]

loose framing for volume measurement H x W x D but doesn't really account for the inner guts of the intercooler, I've read some recommendations that you take 70% of total volume as the remainder is piping, etc. of course there are different designs for fins, flow, etc.

agreed on all measurements, they came from each vendor

I don't think it's pointless, shows that the installations can be different, and time to install ranges from 2-5 hours, also some require removing the grill shutters, and others dont

 

[TMac]

Not picking on you, but the most relevant info in that comparison are required modifications (as you suggest), and the price!

In reality, surface area and volume are completely irrelevant in an intercooler comparison. A true measurement of each would require a highly controlled environment to see the actual temperature drop in order to calculate efficiency. A real comparison would also include a controlled test of pressure drop (restriction) through the intercooler which is not even addressed in that spreadsheet. There is also another quantity which relates to thermal mass- the amount of heat the intercooler can effectively hold. That is also not addressed.