Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestodude
This is why I went with a water/ air chargecooler. There is simply no way to get enough air through that mail slot of a roof/ clam to effectively cool the charge. (no matter how much fettling of the clam you do, the roof opening going into the clam is what it is). The RLS is a bigger/ "more efficient" intercooler but it can only be as efficient as the air flow through it. Are you going to test with water/ meth injection? That would, I'm sure, make a big improvement.
|
Water injection, yes. But the "true" location of the IAT has gotten me wondering. I'm thinking it would improve if one could get the post water injection charge to resemble that of the TMAF IAT. I guess it couldnt do any harm as the charge would prob never get cooler than TMAF IAT's.
May be this is one reason besides aerodynamics/weight savings, the 211 IC location is where the trunk is... but then again, on the flipside, this is near the exhaust manifold.
On a side note: Wonder how much contribution the return head cylinder gasses have to do with the temps at the TMAF IAT. If it's significant, catch 22, might lower the temps at the IAT to change timing in a way thats not combustion efficient under the assumption that post IC temps may not drop in proportion.