Denial,

I do have a Nisei Engineering FMIC. I have not put on my undertray back on... It will need to be modified in order to refit. How much? I Don't Know. For this reason I haven't put it back on.

I will keep everyone posted when I do and what it takes!

P.S. Don't bank on it happening anytime soon...I'm lazy and it's just not a priority for me! Just being honest.

Good Luck Guys!

 

Damn! Another intercooler ruled out for me... any chance of turning the top mounting bracket 180 degrees to meet the needs of others? I have no interest otherwise.

 

Str8Ryda,

First off, thanks for finally answering that undertray question. I really wanted to know this.

Listen. I'm not trying to insult your testing methods (or whoever did the posted tests). I'm actually very pleased that SOMEONE is actually performing some sort of scientific tests on aftermarket parts. It's fairly rare now a days. I'm just trying to give you some constructive criticism. Now back on subject...

Real world testing isn't the best way of performing this experiment. It just isn't. I think you misunderstood me. What we're interested in is obviously temperatures, but not what the temperature is while you're going down the road. Rather, we want to know the change in temperature, delta T, between the inlet and the outlet. Bigger delta T, better cooling, better IC (for simplicity's sake).

By doing your "real world" testing, once you expand your lineup of testable intercoolers (which I do hope you will), it's going to be hard to keep things comparable especially when the termpature changes. Plus, from day to day things there's humidity, wind (I do realize that if you're traveling at 100+ this doesn't matter that much), etc. Also, how long did you let the car warm up before going out to the "testing zone?" How many minutes between each run? How was the drive from the shop to the "testing zone?" Did you one time drive really fast, full boost and another time slow and easy? How long did you cruise what 100+ mph? Are you sure it was the same for each run? Could these be consistent? Sure. But it'd be hard with traffic, etc., things outside of your control. Do these things even matter? Perhaps. But if you did it my way you wouldn't have to worry about any of this at all. These are just some of the variables that I'm talking about. It's just scientific common sense. Make as most of the things EXACTLY and PRECISELY the same as possible so that the only thing different is the subject of the experiment, the IC.

You sound like you know a lot more about this dyno business than I do. But none of this LOAD part matters. Why? Because it would be consistent from one test to another. Yeah, sure, we'll have "higher real world inlet temps with a leaner A/F ratio"--whatever. But so what? This will happen on any intercooler we test, right? We're not trying to measure power numbers here. We're trying to see which IC has the larger delta T. That's it. Of course eventually, this will all translate back to power gains and whatnot, but that's beyond the scope of my suggestions in this experiment.

Now you've got me on the aerodynamics part. But again, this would be a constant b/t each test. But think about it: if the Niesi FMIC kicks everyone elses butt even in spite of the lack of airflow, how badass would that be?

All that heatsoak business was really just an afterthought. I didn't mean much by it, but SOMETHING should be reflected in your data and it would be interesting to see how the numbers change as the runs progress.

Now you've made a really good point about the surface area comment. And yes, it has crossed my mind, thank you. The problem is I don't know much about dynos and what kinds of fans people use on them. I was just thinking of getting the biggest (pratically, of course) one you could find. Or 2. Or 3. Enough to cover the entire front end of the car and be placed in such a way that it is repeatable between each and every run. And even if the fan is capable of only blowing 40 mph, so what? There should still be a measurable delta T regardless. All of the intercoolers would be seeing 40 mph air travel. Again, it'd be consistent between all the experimental subjects.

Oh, and I just want to clarify and reiterate that my "dyno testing" isn't really dyno testing. It's done on a dyno, just because you can accelerate the car safely and yet be immobile. That's about it.

HOWEVER, this brings up an interesting point. Is 40 mph not enough to measure a significant delta T between intercoolers?

EDIT:

***i'm going to leave the post as it is. I don't really remember what I was going to say due to unexpected, personal circumstances.

For the record, I agree with Zeus: a IC that retains the stock undertray is a must for me. Good luck guys.

 

I believe that so much interest in retaining the OE un-modified tray was what pushed David Buschur to offer his intercooler in an accommodating design. He actually listened to his customers.

 

why would you not be interested in the delta t ON the road (which is the ONLY number that matters)? what, pray tell, will you do with a number that has not so necessarily direct applications to the real world scenario? and if you are concede that dyno results do relate directly to the real world scenario, then why would real world tesing not be more directly related to real world results?

how do you keep things comparable on a dyno? temps change day to day, so does humidity and the power of your fan... none of that is excluded from dyno test.

why does it matter how many minutes between each run? as long as you're not continually blasting it the whole time the real world results are not gonna vary, why? because we're talkin' about an system of ocilating temperatures that doesn't take that long to go back to equilibrium... NOTHING is constant in an intercooler, air is CONSTANTLY moving through it internally AND externally. plus... the real world temp difference is what ends up MATTERING as long as they publish the results in fair detail and there aren't unexplicable deviations, the test is good.


my bottomline cuz i don't even know why i'm arguing about testing methodology. i don't give a **** what the numbers are on a dyno cuz i wanna know what the outlet temp is for every intercooler on the market when i'm goin' in 4th gear 3000 hold then punch it til redline. i can't use the dyno temp numbers... that's it.

 

trinydex,

Look, I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but re-read my posts and you'll find your answer. I've outlined all my reasons enough times to where I don't want to repeat them--nothing against you personally. You've brought up some good points yourself.

 

Power of the fan's constant. Temps indoors will change less than out doors. Humidity will change less inside an enclosed space than outside. I mean, it's not perfect, but it's better.

Why does it matter how many minutes between each run? Fine it doesn't. But what about all those other things I mentioned? Plus, those were semi-rhetorical questions, not meant to be taken as solid-this-has-to-be-the-end-all statements if you know what I mean.

EDIT:
Oh, I never said their test was bad. I just am suggesting (what I believe to be) a better, more efficient way of testing. That's all. I completely agree with you about your last comment ("what ends up MATTERING as long as they publish the results in fair detail and there aren't unexplicable deviations, the test is good"). It's just that it could be better, like any experiment. Like I said, constructive criticism.

EDIT #2:

That's fine. It doesn't matter if you don't understand the tests. The outcome is going to be to your benefit regardless.

 

Denial,



Is that your name or what you are about??? First I’d like to say by far I’m sure you can out debate anyone who doesn’t believe what you believe. BUT, this is NOT a debate…



The principles you are preaching will work CONDITIONALLY. Furthermore, most of the people that read this thread will probably not have access to the facility & equipment (dyno) you are suggesting or just don’t care.



First, this was not an experiment, this was a TEST for proof. Now, I don’t know if you’ve read my first posting on this thread. If not….In a nutshell…ultimately, I ended up taking on a challenge by friends of friends who ended up being Nisei Engineering. I didn’t know who they were at the time but I quickly learned who they were and what they knew. The one condition of this challenge was that the burden of proof was on me. Since I took on this challenge, I did what I did because, for me it’s absolute (there is no denying the truth.. pun intended… now everyone clap!) . I look at this as when I’m racing my car… I’m not racing it on the dyno… I’m racing on “track conditions” (excuse the expression, I use it very loosely). So… knowing what I do, and how long I’ve been in the game… I went with reality, not theory, and took it to my testing grounds.



In the end I lost the challenge. The Nisei core dropped temperatures below the stock core (which we all know is very good), there were no pressure drops detectable by 2 HKS boost gauges, and throttle response had increased. Seeing the size of this monster core I figured it would create a pressure drop, which would counter act the benefits of the temp drop…that would change the overall “intercooler efficiency” (please do not get confused with “cooling efficiency”). After crunching the numbers, I was wrong again the core had proved it was more efficient than stock. So I ended up buying a core a.s.a.p.



The one thing I had in common with them was our opinions of “how people get ripped off and the bs used to sell intercoolers.” If you read my first post on this thread you will see that I’ve spoke to many company representatives and got the run around.



Now back to point – Denial, the case you plead is presented very well, BUT in my opinion your just making statements you can not prove / back up. I think your being very “difficult” (for the lack of better terms) because I believe you’re a very competitive person. The testing I’ve conducted has provided me data to be able to make factual statements.



If you believe your testing is better than mine then maybe you should conduct your own studies and not be so critical of others who are just trying to inform others in the EVO community of their findings.



Now in closing, I would like to say I don’t recall hearing any other companies who are willing step up and test against their competitors products.



If I’m not mistaken it appears as myevostore.com and Nisei have posted some results of the Greddy vs the Nisei.



I am anxious to see how far they will take it and who will end up on top. My money is on the Nisei core! Just want to be the first to say it.



Good Luck Guys!

 

funny you should ask that. My name is almost denial, it's daniel. Go figure.

Chill out buddy. I mean, seriously. Where did I ever say your testing method sucked? I have repeatedly told you that I was very appreciative of any and all information presented. I LIKE the way you tested, and whole heartedly agree that it does present GOOD, FACTUAL data. I was just suggesting an alternative, perhaps better way of doing it if someone else where to go about and test other ICs. That's it.

Oh, and there's no way in hell I could test these ICs myself. I don't have the resources, cash, and, well, resources. So I can't back up anything. Sorry.

Good god people. Alright, last post on this subject, I have effectively ruined a great thread (I was just throwing out suggestions, really!).

EDIT:

You know what? I'm going to retract my last statement. I just re-read all my post and have found them to be polite for the most part constructive in an educational manner. They only reason why I have typed so much in the past day is because you guys kepted on trying to kill my idea. You guys could have easily said, "sure that could work, why not." Hell, you could have even expounded upon it instead of rubbing it in the dirt.

Welcome to the internet boys.

 

awww shucks... you didn't say there was no pressure drop in the testing post... did you? dang... that makes this core so much more enticing... it must be the fact that they have smaller transfer tubes and maintain a high venturi effect and also because of the square finning which increases cooling efficiency without having to use louvring or bumping.

i wouldn't have believed the no boost drop but you said throttle response increased too... so assuming you're telling the truth... this is lookin' good.

only one question. how much heavier is this than stock? sorry... it's such a nitpicky question but i'm thinkin' this thing is a tank.

in any case for the methodology thing, i said it above... i can't use the dyno temp numbers, but i guess i mean moreso that i just want the outlet temp at proper car speed, because that's what goes into the throttle body, which determines how much knock you keep away.

the only thing keeping me shy of the nisei core is that it is a full 2 inches taller than the br and at least 1 inch taller than most other ics can this be mounted any lower than it already is?

 

Str8Ryda

What parts did you have to modifiy to make the fmic fit?

 

Funny, I want it higher as it seems it is already hanging too low... then again, I'd give up a tube or two for better fit.

 

I just received the new Nisei IC.

Following a thorough visual examination, I must say this is hands down the most visually impressive IC I've seen. There is literally not one sq. mm of wasted space.

 

let us know how it performs. how did you get your hands on one?

 

Estimation on how much lower the IC sits below the splash guard?