Yeah i agree also

__________________
MY02 WRX STi - sold :(
'12 Golf GTI

Too add more fuel to the fire...

Previously JMAX in another thread did say that there was no difference between the STI intercooler and STI Spec C intercooler.. Clearly there is....

The top tank has a cut out with a blanking plate.

To me the reason the blanking plate is there is to stop the charge from being sucked straight down the guts of the cooler (if you look at the cooler, the blanking plate is right opposite the throttle body hole), with the plate there you are only increasing the efficiency of the the cooler as the charge is forced to circulate the core.

Tube and Fin = way to go in my books.

If someone has a flow machine, we should get some results compiled up.

TUBE AND FIN
Benefits:
- low cost
- low weight

Disadvantages:
- "effective" lower efficiency compared to bar and plate
- can be poor quality dependant on supplier
- is a little more awkward to modify core size
- some brands are plastic sealed at ends and have limits on welding techniques

BAR AND PLATE
Benefits:
- 35% greater heat sink capability (meaning you effectively COULD have a SMALLER intercooler when compared to the tube and fin)
- generally known as the "better product"
- easy to modify size and re weld

Disadvantages:
- weight
- cost
- some limitation in sizes

The tube and fin is a common everyday upgrade due to its low cost.
The bar and plate is far superior BUT it costs more.

CONCLUSION
The hard part is that the core in both is available with a myriad of choices in INTERNAL "finning", however the sheer design of the bar and plate allows BETTER transfer of heat to the outside.

As you should know the internal finning is the BIG reason for pressure drop, and this relates also to the obvious cooling efficiency as well.

And lastly a air/water IC is better than air/air.

__________________
No more GC8, sad face.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Umm, where did you copy and paste that tripe from?

Obviously from someone who sells bar and plate exchangers?

__________________
[COLOR="Gray"]550Nm off a 2L... Just wish it was in the dak dak...[/COLOR]

I think i'd trust someone who's doing their phd on thermodynamics then some google copy and paste

My previous post was from MRT's website. And yes bar and plate is all they stock apparently. In addition I thought I put in where it was from but obviously I didn't. Made sure this post credit goes to it's author.

Haven't been able to find anywhere (yet) that says tube and fin has better efficiency. Feel free to point me in the right direction because I have spent many hours looking at different reviews, product comparisons, tests etc just as I have for all the different aspects of my car which I would like to modify at some stage, and are yet to find an article confirming your views.

Originally Posted by Hot Compact & Imports magazine
The tube and fin core design is the most economical to produce and therefore more affordable to consumers. The tube and fin intercooler is also relatively light in comparison to the bar and plate design (Like Kevin said), affording users a slight weight reduction. When the charge air enters the end tank, it travels through tubes in which the heat is transferred via fins where cooler ambient air passes over the tubes. This further removes heat from the air before exiting the opposite end tank en route to the engine. All in all, the tube and fin intercooler is perfect for the tuners building their first custom turbo systems on limited budgets. The disadvantages to the tube and fin intercooler is that its effective efficiency is lower when compared to a similar sized bar and plate intercooler.

Bar and plate intercooler cores function identically to the tube and fin core, with the exception that charge air travels through rectangular shaped passages that have more surface area, thus improving cooling of the air charge. The advantage to using this type of intercooler is that because the bar and plate core design affords up to 35% larger surface area for cooling, a physically smaller intercooler can be used and still retain the cooling characteristics (efficiency) of a larger tube and fin design. This is important for a builder who has a vehicle with a small opening in the front of it or where there are immovable obstructions present. There is a downside to this design, too, as it is generally more expensive due to the extent of fabrication that is involved in its construction. The bar and plate intercooler is also heavier due to the larger surface area and denser fin design. Simply put, it generally contains more material, thus the heavier weight.

__________________
No more GC8, sad face.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Well, hook me up with some actual data from your journals please Kato? Like I've said all I've found is contrary

__________________
No more GC8, sad face.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Unfortunately google searches will not work here.

In a TMIC application, air will flow through a tube and fin style heat exchanger better than a bar and plate. Whilst a bar and plate may have a larger internal surface area, the effective surface area for heat transfer is limited by the air flowing through the intercooler. This makes the tube and fin superior.

The bar and plate intercooler also acts as a heat sink, thus sitting on top of the engine it can't disperse the heat as efficiently as a tube and fin style exchanger.

The main reason people like bar and plate is that it is easily available and easy to modify. This then lets people put stupidly thick IC on which provide minimal benefits.

As for tube and fin being more economical, I'm yet to see that.

__________________
[COLOR="Gray"]550Nm off a 2L... Just wish it was in the dak dak...[/COLOR]

Don't search car sites then. Search for real heat exchangers. Learn the thermodynamics and fluid mechanic properties then you can have more of an understanding than people who just believe marketing crap of the products they sell.

FWIW I found those articles you copy and pasted in one google search. My information comes from 10 years of learning at university + a lot of practical experience working.

__________________
[COLOR="Gray"]550Nm off a 2L... Just wish it was in the dak dak...[/COLOR]

So in a FMIC setup does that still hold true? (Obviously not the heat soak part)
Also, are you saying cooling the charge of air has more to do with internal surface area or external? Or is that where some sort of balance needs to be applied?

__________________
No more GC8, sad face.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]