TMIC Opinions - Page 2 - Perth-WRX.com

rexwaggon · #11 31-07-2007, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kato

Mmmm china crap...

One of the best TMIC is the STi one or the Spec C one. Other than that, a lot of the aftermarket ones do not provide enough benefits to warrant the cost.

pretty sure the 'crap' china one will at the very least perform the same as the sti top mount for around half the price.

happy to provide one if some1 wants to do a back to back comparo between process west/my top mount/stock sti top mount

American Dave · #12 31-07-2007, 03:23 PM

[QUOTE=stinga]Almost sleeper spec, and no heat soak in summer

oh yea sleeper alright but get those hose clams/ blue foam sorted Al - need to be black!!

feral · #13 31-07-2007, 04:18 PM

Hmmm process west sleeper spec , well at least it blends in ha ha

Shot with [URL=http://profile.imageshack.us/camerabuy.php?model=FinePix+Z3&make=

Mister Two · #14 31-07-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichX

Bigger TMIC, waterspray, Some IC Tilt perhaps and a CAI to reduce your charge temps even more?

And add a snug fitting air splitter and you wont need a FMIC.

feral · #15 31-07-2007, 04:30 PM

seen one of these air splitters on a site last night pretty cheap , ill have a look

Kato · #16 01-08-2007, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rexwaggon

pretty sure the 'crap' china one will at the very least perform the same as the sti top mount for around half the price.

happy to provide one if some1 wants to do a back to back comparo between process west/my top mount/stock sti top mount

Happy to prove you wrong.

A fin and tube exchanger like the STi one will always be more efficient than a bar and plate. Also having the thickest core known to man kind does not make the intercooler any better. It's all to do with maximising the surface area for heat transfer.

Most top mount intercoolers do not perform any better than the STi one. If the process west one performed significantly better than the STi one, surely there would have been some results back by now.

BOMB3R · #17 01-08-2007, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kato

A fin and tube exchanger like the STi one will always be more efficient than a bar and plate.

Can I see some graphs to verify this claim John...........

tuna · #18 01-08-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PIGSTi

Can I see some graphs to verify this claim John...........

its a known fact. the only advantage bar and plate have is the extra weight provides more heat-soak and becomes significantly cheaper due to a simpler construction of the core.

there are plenty of comparisons out on the net.

Kato · #19 01-08-2007, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PIGSTi

Can I see some graphs to verify this claim John...........

I've got hundreds of journal articles at home on heat exchanger processes, if you wanna read them feel free. I am looking purely at the efficiency of the exchanger. Bar and plate is good but never as efficient as a tube and fin. T&F also costs a shite load more to produce which is why you see a lot more B&P types.

P.S. If you read them, feel like writing me up a literature review?

BOMB3R · #20 01-08-2007, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kato

I've got hundreds of journal articles at home on heat exchanger processes, if you wanna read them feel free. I am looking purely at the efficiency of the exchanger. Bar and plate is good but never as efficient as a tube and fin. T&F also costs a shite load more to produce which is why you see a lot more B&P types.

P.S. If you read them, feel like writing me up a literature review?

Wouldn't mind seeing some comparisons, as far as I understand/read the difference between the 2 is negligible and each have their pros and cons.

I have no journals to back up my claims its all just he said she said.

Whats a literature review? Sounds fun