What size intercooler charge piping should I run at my HP level?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 лют 2021
- As soon as I finished recording I realized I should have just multiplied bhp by .83 to get rwhp based on 17% drivetrain loss average. Oops. Doesn't effect final numbers much though still within 1-2 hp. So rule of thumb rwhp to pipe size numbers are good to go.
Great video currently upgrading my pipe form 3” to 3.5 and this video gave me some great info 👍🏻
Awesome, glad it helped.
Easy to understand. Thanks for the video.
Appreciate the info.
Okay so coming across this video now I calculated 522bhp for 2.25” intercooler piping (looking at an AWD application that equates to 440 and I’m only looking at 400whp) now I just wanted to know would that size piping be the size coming off the turbo outlet or from intercooler core to throttle body
Throughout but you can get away with a step smaller from turbo to intercooler as mentioned. If I was plumbing the described setup I'd probably do 2" turbo to intercooler and 2.5" intercooler to tb. Just as those are more common size pipes and couplers.
I was just doing some more research and are your numbers based off 1 bar of boost? How do these numbers correlate if I go to 2 bars of boost?
I made it more like a constant for the volumetric efficiency. So whatever pressure ratio gets you to that power level that's the best pipe size to have. Same for factors like temp, humidity, etc. The efficiencey of the power adder is what your adding to the equation. The smaller pipe would get you a tad further if your compressor outlet temps were lower and lower DA etc. On the flipside if you had significantly hotter temps from driving past blower speed and efficiencey you may want to step up size sooner. These are good rules of thumb for wide variety of setups essentially, whether it took you 10psi or 30psi to get to said power level.
Great video! Will intercooler sides matter too? I have 2.5 intercooler pipes but my Intercooler sides are 3”, turbo is 59mm compressor. I want to achieve between 370-400 Hp
That's fine intercooler inlet outlet should match pipe size at a minimum if it's a step bigger that's fine but wouldn't want it smaller.
@@lightblade543 thanks for the quick response. I appreciate it!
Are you going to get back into turbo kits for the 2005-10 S197's?
Most likely not. :( . If I do it will be custom stuff and not brand specific kits.
If i have a precision 6266 turbo and the oitlet is 2.5"! Should i put 2.5 intake pipe instead of 3”? The way i have mine is 2.5 from the turbo to the intercooler and then from the intercooler to the throttle body is 3” also the intercooler is 3” in and outlet with a reducer 3” to 2.5
If you stepped up from turbo outlet with a 2.5" to 3" coupler and ran 3" pipe the whole way that would be better to support what your 62mm compressor is capable of. Next step better is up sizing from intercooler to tb to 3.5". (you want to modify the intercooler end tank outlet to that size vice stepping up with a coupler out of the intercooler this is a critical area in the system where you dont want to loose density and put heat back in the air charge)Your kit or charge system would then be capable of more than the turbo which in turn means you can run that 6266 as hard as you want and still get efficient flow because the system can support a bigger turbo. No real downside. You would make the same power as controlled by your wastegate at a lower compressor speed and lower iat's, the other part is your getting air mass to the engine easier/quicker, that means more mass in the exhaust, which is more energy to drive the turbine. You would likely see more lowend torque more response and peak boost at a lower rpm as well.
Nice video. What would be the max for 2" pipe? i got 342 with your formula and i'm making 300 so that should be fine i guess😁
Thanks. Yeah that sounds about right, around 350 wheel hp for 2".
@@lightblade543 i have been running 2.5" the whole time til i came across your video. in volume from the intercooler the 2" would be 35% less so i'm going to finish it up and see how the spool difference is on the dyno... i can send you an almost current graph if you give me an email, my hope is for 500rpm earlier spool and same power results probably dyno this weekend and do a before and after graph with the 2.5 and the 2"
@@glanzaturbo I think your results may surprise you. I Don't think you will see any noticeable difference going smaller. That's a common exaggerated myth that piping size has a noticeable effect on transient response and spool time. The thought is the more volume in larger charge pipes slows response down because more volume has to initially fill and pressurize. It is actually negligible and often the opposite. Your charge piping isn't empty and doesn't need to "fill" to build boost. Vacuum is only in the manifold on the engine side of the throttle body. The charge piping is full of moving air even at idle and cruise. It is volume of air and mass that goes into the engine and then becomes exhaust to drive the turbine. So it's the hotside that is critical for good response and spool. Not the cold side. That said you may feel a little better engine or throttle response with the smaller pipe as the air speed or velocity is higher. So as the throttle cracks open you perceive it as more torque or more peppy. But that alone doesn't have a noticeable effect on turbine spool. It's air density and mass in the exhaust that drives the turbine. So the easier you can get cooler denser air into the motor that will promote spool in the hotside. It does vary with application though and power level. On v8 stuff I see faster spool often when stepping up coldside pipe size. Especially when it's restricting flow from being too small. Had a guy who upgraded his 500hp turbo kit to a 76mm and wanted to make 750hp. He had 2.5" pipe still and it struggle to make 650hp and had 200+ degree iat's. We changed it to 3" pipe and an intercooler that was twice as big. It picked up 100hp and 150tq at the same boost level. Iats were 5 degrees of ambient and it spooled faster. Even though his charge piping and intercooler size now had over twice the volume. He was making more boost in 1st gear as well. It's because denser air was getting into the motor easier and faster so there was more exhaust mass and pressure to accelerate the turbine quicker. In your case at 300hp going to 2.5" to 2" pipe you might measure a tad better response but it's really not tied to the volume change like people think. Basically that's a lot of words lol for saying coldside volume doesn't correlate directly to spool and the thought that less volume is always better is not actually true. Alot more factors to consider. But yeah always like to see results feel free to email it. Sandh_performance@yahoo.com
@@lightblade543 Thanks for your detailed response. i'm going to try it anyway and see if there is any measurable difference since i already built the new charge pipe. i took care of the hot side already so the spool is pretty quicker now. my IAT are also just over ambient so i'm also going to check if they go higher with the smaller pipes. thanks again for the info... at least i wont be too disappointed. now if the change is insignificant, look out for my email in a minute .cheers bro...
@@glanzaturbo sounds good! Still think it's valid testing and smaller pipe for your power level shouldn't hurt either way. Had a lot of fun building and testing different stuff like this over the years. I do believe it's more critical on smaller displacement higher revving turbo motors. So you will probably like the feel of the 2" for sure.
Interesting idea but assigning a speed to mach without knowing pressure doesn't work because the speed of sound in air changes at different air pressure.
Looking at the formulas in his book he used it at 14.7psi so sea level standard atmospheric pressure/temp. You could absolutely adjust for your intended pressure and charge temps to be more accurate for your setup.
@@lightblade543 Thanks for clearing that up
So how would this apply if im running.. lets say like two twins into a single 2inch all the way to the intercooler and then from there I run 4inch into the throttle body. And lets say NA the engine makes 500 crank hp. Would something like this work or would it choke the system?.. Since the up pipe is only one 2inch pipe coming from two smallish turbos
Would you put a single 2" intake tube on a 500hp na motor? Shoot even 300-350hp na setups usually has a 70-90mm tb and 3" + air intake from the factory. So while yes the turbos are speeding up air and can move more air through that single 2" pipe you mention, its doing it inefficiently. Lots of pumping loss and additionally heat and its diminishing returns, because now the turbos have to spin faster and work harder to deliver that air to the motor which in turn creates more heat and pushes the compressor to a less efficient pressure ratio on its given compressor map. You want to step up pipe size at merges. The pipe sizes are based on your power goal and what you can fit for the setup. The twin kit I did I wanted to support 1000rwhp efficiently. (turns out it was capable of alot more because it was so efficient and iat's were so low) My t3 turbos had 2" outlets at the compressor covers, I stepped up to 2.25" pipe immediately at the exit of each turbo (this also improves turbo pressure ratio) then the two 2.25" pipes merged in a Y to 3" and then ran 3" pipe up to my intercooler (4" core A2a) and I ran 3.5" pipe from intercooler to tb. Our IAT's at 1000rwhp were within 10 degrees of ambient on a 350hp na motor. I dont know the power goal in your scenario but yes a single 2 inch from both turbos to the intercooler would be terribley inefficient I would wager your leaving 70-100hp on the table at 1000hp of flow. The 4" from the intercooler to the tb sounds great. Even better than what I did, if you ran two 2" pipes from each turbo to the intercooler inlet separately that would make a huge difference. Obviously you have to work with the setup. If its race setup make it fit. In my case I was designing a kit for customers who would want an easy install and that do different styles of driving. So there is always give and take on kit design. I love designing kits for race applications because you just cut and move stuff and make them extremely efficient. I was tired of seeing big name companies putting out lacking kits lol
@@lightblade543 Holy!! that's a hell of a reply bro thank so much lol. I'm currently figuring out my future setup which is why I commented my original question just to gain some knowledge. My current plan is to do twins and 2inch cold side charge pipes is exactly what I was planning to run its a ls3 that probably makes around 530ish crank hp so I'm not too worried about spooling two gt3582's or any similar turbo but I just don't want a choked-out system. For 700-800hp crank hp max I should be fine. I've been seeing people say to ditch the long tubes and 3inch exhaust so I'm currently researching all the facts Mainly im thinking should I keep my NA setup setup exhaust and use it for the hot side or swap over to the Stock manifolds which is all 2.5 inch.
My NA setup is 1 7/8" headers that turns into 3 inch longtubes through the xpipe and then there is a merge to the stock exhaust thats 2.5inch Im just going to cut the mufflers off and run the 2.5inch pipes to each turbo (Yes, remote mount lol)
Haven't seen it done but I'm curious how it might be with the hot side wrapped.
@Dookamonnnn stock cast stuff holds heat better. I run stock manifolds whenever I can. I like to coat which is better at protecting the pipe and keeping heat inside. Wrap is better at protecting things nearby but can fatigue the metal and hold in moisture. If I use wrap I like to hi temp coat first best of both worlds.
can i make my turbo muffler hole bigger since everything was ported except that ?
Not 100% sure what your describing but if we are talking post turbine exhuast size, as long as exhuast is 25% bigger than turbine wheel diameter for 25% of the length of the exhuast leaving the turbine before split, reduction dump etc. You are good. Anything larger than that is only needed when your probably at too high of a pressure ratio causing excessive back pressure.
@@lightblade543 I was referring to the turbo hole that connects to the pipe that also connects to the intercooler, I think they call it turbo muffler delete. So In that area I want it to see if the hole can be made bigger
@@rankmeuptoday2119 ahh. Compressor outlet volute size. You can get different sizes but it's often matched to compressor size. They are usually cast and thick so you could port the inside. Would be like a maximum effort type thing.
@@lightblade543 cool thanks a lot!!!
Which one the the combo would be best on street use 600whp 3.4 2jz?
1. 2.5"-turbo to intercooler and 3" intercooler to tb.
2. 2.75" -- 3"
3. 2.5" -- 2.75"
If you go with sizes that are just above your power goal your system will remain efficient. Without experience on that specific motor setup I would be leaning towards 1. or just 3" the whole way, 2.75 is an odd size to order parts for. Also knowing that gearheads always like to turn up the dial I always like to make it capable of more. My single kit for the 4.6 v8 was designed to support 1000hp even if the customer was only going to run low boost and select a smaller turbo to run 500-600hp, iat's were ambient.
Too complicated and inaccurate. Intercooling piping is calculated off engine displacement and rpm. You are calculating intercooler piping for a naturally aspirated engine. A 2 litre engine at 6000 rpm is 6000 litres a minute, or 100 litres/s. 1000decimetres2/s divide by 100m/s (30% of the speed of sound) gives you 10. 10 divide pie, square root, times 2= 3.57cm diameter pipe. If you run that engine at boost, the pipe diameter does not change, as the velocity does not.