[QUOTE=Riggs;705154]Shoot Kev an email and find out for yourself.[/QUOTE]

Kev would still be claiming to be finding the time to prove the results he promised 6 years ago!

I wonder if this has been fitted to a MY99 / MY00 ?
Torx Racing Top Mount Intercooler Kits 2008-2012 WRX & 2008-2012 STI - NASIOC

[QUOTE=tuna;705209]Kev would still be claiming to be finding the time to prove the results he promised 6 years ago![/QUOTE]

I'm with you on the PW stuff, the TMIC on my V6 is like a big heater core, after a few runs it gets so hot.

I also had one on my Spec C, I took it off and put the original intercooler back on due to same issue.

Do the Math ;)

I can understand that when sitting stationary that the larger mass once heated up will then take longer to dissipate that heat but if you were moving and hence the , hopefully, more efficient bar and plate design was actively cooling, would it then be less prone to heat soak then the stock unit?

It is scarey that you had the PW unit and decided to take it off.

I can understand that for quarter mile runs that the big units would heat soak before the line but did you also have the same problems on track days?

Where are you getting this information that bar and plate is more efficient?

Tube and fin > Bar and plate. No question about it.

If only I could buy a tube & fin V-mount.

[QUOTE=STI325V6;705785]I'm with you on the PW stuff, the TMIC on my V6 is like a big heater core, after a few runs it gets so hot.

I also had one on my Spec C, I took it off and put the original intercooler back on due to same issue.

Do the Math ;)[/QUOTE]

I have a large hyperflow IC, and not found this. Yes I did find the temp started high and then rose again when i parked, but during a run it cooled quite nicely, and not by using the intercooler water sprayer. I still have the manual push button and I'm usually to busy to use it.

The temps I'm looking at is the inlet temps recorded on my datalogger and not touching the ic after a run. I haven't compared this to a standard ic.

[QUOTE=Kato;705859]Where are you getting this information that bar and plate is more efficient?[/QUOTE]

Does tube and fin have higher efficiency? I had always heard that the higher flow and lower resistance of the bar and plate worked out to improved cooling.

I think it comes down to positioning and usage for intercoolers. Consider a stop/start use where the intercooler is above a large hot object. The IC may get air flowing accross it only when moving. In this case you would want something that rapidly changes temp, to make the most of the moving periods and cool quickly as it would be hot.

Consider an intercooler that is fixed in front of a large hot object, the IC may have a fan constantly blowing air across it that never stops. This IC would get cool and stay cool. You would want it to "not" respond rapidly to temperture changes maybe.

I think the internal aerodynamics of the two designs could be made equal. Comes down to build and design quality. But the efficiency would depend on usage and the definition of efficiency.

Think of an intercooler in a subaru, TMIC or landcruiser V8 TMIC compared to a FMIC in front of a fixed turbo-diesel generator.

tube and fin is the most efficent for performance, bar and plate is the most effiecent for your wallet.

tube and fin's tempurature drop and increased air density outweighs the volumetric flow of a bar and plate that doesnt cool the air sufficently all of the time.

[url=http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html]Air Properties[/url]

no question though, first few runs on a dyno will yeild better results on a bar and plate.
20 power runs later it is a different story.