VRSF FMIC Who has one?
Jan 25, 2013, 07:57 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VRSF FMIC Who has one?
Feedback on this unit? Seems similar in design to the Perrin, but cheaper (450ish for 3.5"). Any feedback on how it compares to ETS, Beshuer, etc?
Thinking about getting one but dont know why more people dont use it; seems a happy median between Ebay and the marked up brand names.
Thinking about getting one but dont know why more people dont use it; seems a happy median between Ebay and the marked up brand names.
Trending Topics
Mar 8, 2013, 09:32 AM
#8
Evolving Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: chicago
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been eying this FMIC for a little while now. Looks to be a nice product at a good price. Any "disadvantages" of the 4" over the 3.5" (such as loss of spool etc) or is "bigger better" in this case? I am running the FP black/2.3 combo.
Mar 8, 2013, 10:21 AM
#10
Evolving Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: chicago
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the response. I thought it was interesting that you recommend the 3.5" for 300 - 550+whp setups when other vendors are rating their 3.5" intercoolers higher. Not a huge deal, just curious about the difference...
Mar 8, 2013, 11:01 AM
#11
We can change the rating to match theirs if you'd like, but we like to be realistic. Most shops take the dimensions of their core and do a bit of math to determine how much HP it can handle based on flow. They also rate in HP rather than WHP which can range from 12-20% on certain dynos. We rate in WHP because it's more relateable to guys who are building their own cars.
We have a few guys running 600whp+ on the 3.5" before we intro'd the 4", it's just that the 4" is a safer option for guys looking to push their cars on larger turbos.
I don't recommend the 4" for guys pushing 350whp simply because the extra size/pressure drop from the larger core negates the benefit of cooling capacity.
We have a few guys running 600whp+ on the 3.5" before we intro'd the 4", it's just that the 4" is a safer option for guys looking to push their cars on larger turbos.
I don't recommend the 4" for guys pushing 350whp simply because the extra size/pressure drop from the larger core negates the benefit of cooling capacity.
Mar 8, 2013, 01:22 PM
#13
Evolving Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: chicago
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We can change the rating to match theirs if you'd like, but we like to be realistic. Most shops take the dimensions of their core and do a bit of math to determine how much HP it can handle based on flow. They also rate in HP rather than WHP which can range from 12-20% on certain dynos. We rate in WHP because it's more relateable to guys who are building their own cars.
We have a few guys running 600whp+ on the 3.5" before we intro'd the 4", it's just that the 4" is a safer option for guys looking to push their cars on larger turbos.
I don't recommend the 4" for guys pushing 350whp simply because the extra size/pressure drop from the larger core negates the benefit of cooling capacity.
We have a few guys running 600whp+ on the 3.5" before we intro'd the 4", it's just that the 4" is a safer option for guys looking to push their cars on larger turbos.
I don't recommend the 4" for guys pushing 350whp simply because the extra size/pressure drop from the larger core negates the benefit of cooling capacity.
