UR FMIC for Evo X!
This looks awesome, and 20 whp sounds almost too good to be true. I am seriously considering this, but I just have a few questions. For starters, are hot spots an issue with a core this thick? Also, how is there no loss in spool? On the 9, and most turbo cars in general, larger cores take longer to pressurize and thus increase lag. The 9 and the X both use the exact same core, just with different end tanks obviously, and ICs on the 9 didn't make any more power (until giant turbos were used) and just increased lag. How is the X able to overcome this? I am guessing that it possibly has something to do with the fact that the compressor housing of the X's turbo is insanely close to the manifold, which tends to heat up the air going into the ic a bit more and thus heat soak it a bit (at least this is what perrin's testing showed). Is this a possible explanation as to why ICs actually make a difference on the X? Thanks for any info.
Thanks
I may to do some more dyno and street testing to get you the answers that you're looking for. The only real apples to apples approach would be to measure both the inlet and outlet temps on otherwise stock Evo IX and Evo X. For this product release, we were really only concerned with ambient temps, outlet temps, and performance gains.
Darryl
Darryl
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta Ga.
the reason the X and the previous gen evos differ so much when it comes to the intercooler upgrade is because of the turbo placement. On the X the turbo is mounted behind the engine creating a lot hotter charge air temperatures.... with the addition of the upgraded intercooler it gets these temps down to a more reasonable area.
This question has been covered many times, by Perrin, by AMS, by Buschur..........do we really need another vendor to tell us the same thing for peace of mind?
Darryl, looks like another quality product.... you make some top notch products I have your resonated cat delete and it is a beautiful peace....wich your intercooler would have been released when I ordered that months ago.
Take care.
This question has been covered many times, by Perrin, by AMS, by Buschur..........do we really need another vendor to tell us the same thing for peace of mind?
Darryl, looks like another quality product.... you make some top notch products I have your resonated cat delete and it is a beautiful peace....wich your intercooler would have been released when I ordered that months ago.
Take care.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Isn't that why we have the NACA ducts to cool the turbo behind the engine? I think when driving, actual performance numbers might be higher, since a dyno does not recreate that air effect. At least UR posted their temps clear for everyone to see. I think we should look forward to their FMIC announcement thread to clear that up.
Does anyone know what the pressure drop on this is? Maybe UR can chime in. Pressure drop should be a main concern when selecting an IC, despite UR's having what looks to be great temp drop, the pressure drop might be significant because it's so thick.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
That's what I would think too, but there is no loss in spool or low end power on their dyno graph. Same as buschur's test, which uses the same core. I don't understand how that's possible, but like someone else mentioned, with the X's turbo being on the back side of the motor and imparticular with the compressor housing being very close to the manifold, inlet temps on the IC are higher than on the 8/9 and it appears that IC upgrades yield favorable results on the X. I wasn't really considering a FMIC upgrade on my X early on, but the more tests that come out, the more I am becoming a believer.
...with the X's turbo being on the back side of the motor and imparticular with the compressor housing being very close to the manifold, inlet temps on the IC are higher than on the 8/9 and it appears that IC upgrades yield favorable results on the X. I wasn't really considering a FMIC upgrade on my X early on, but the more tests that come out, the more I am becoming a believer.
That and SilverEvoX pulling on me (him: FMIC, Intake, TP, Buscher exhaust me:intake, UR exhaust o2 housing &/HFC, AP Stg. 2 tune).
That's what I would think too, but there is no loss in spool or low end power on their dyno graph. Same as buschur's test, which uses the same core. I don't understand how that's possible, but like someone else mentioned, with the X's turbo being on the back side of the motor and imparticular with the compressor housing being very close to the manifold, inlet temps on the IC are higher than on the 8/9 and it appears that IC upgrades yield favorable results on the X. I wasn't really considering a FMIC upgrade on my X early on, but the more tests that come out, the more I am becoming a believer.
I could be wrong though, maybe AMS's can't provide the same temp decreases since it isn't as thick, or maybe UR's core doesn't affect the pressure drop as much. Who knows, I sure don't
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Isn't a big difference comes from having MIVEC on both intake and exhaust sides vs the 9 where it is only on the intake side and thus maybe compensating for the pressure drop? Even if the benefit comes from using a bigger turbo, compare the UR fmic in terms of price to others, it's the biggest and cheapest in the same sentence.