Eric's '90 80QT: rustic bits

JonathanL · Post by **JonathanL** » Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:42 pm

The aan will blow those endtanks off fo sho! VIDS!

DE80q · Post by **DE80q** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:51 am

I have seen people bend radiators, so I dont see bending an intercooler sould be any different. As far as bending one that has already had the tanks blown off, well...

my2000apb DrBeastCar · Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:05 am

DE80q wrote:I have seen people bend radiators, so I dont see bending an intercooler sould be any different. As far as bending one that has already had the tanks blown off, well...

yeah but things to consider the radiator/cooling system has a ~16psi ish relief cap

no matter what the modification, bothering to modify something that has already failed, and the said modification is not even correctly fixing the failure, is a total waist of time, that thing will explode and cause more headache and hassle than it ever saved

DE80q · Post by **DE80q** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:17 am

I agree about the failure point of this idea. Using an IC that has already failed, is not a good idea in my book.

But as for the original concept, I dont see bending the IC will hurt it as long as he did not kink anything. Which from the pic, it does not appear he did.

my2000apb DrBeastCar · Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:23 am

a part is only worth massaging to make fit/ altering other things to make it fit, if its worth it. liek finding a way to run a bigger oil cooler, radiator etc

why all the eaxtra work to make somethign work that has failed and will fail again, yes i said it

its liek adapting/customifying a used 01a to put in your 35r aan s4, pointless
eric, youve gone through so much detailed work to make and do things RIGHT, dont skimp here

whatever im done here

DE80q · Post by **DE80q** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:28 am

my2000apb wrote:why all the eaxtra work to make somethign work that has failed and will fail again, yes i said it

Im not arguing this point. I agree with you. The fact that this IC has already failed once is a damn good reason not to use it agian.

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:31 am

The part you guys aren't aware of is after the intercooler failed (like any other of its sort would as they're only designed to take 15 PSI) and I "fixed" it, I ran it for about a year and a half at the same boost level with no problems.

And I suspect this IC is considerably more efficient than the only other one I own that would fit the car (a small el-cheapo ebay one that came on the 4K), so I can probably make the same power with less boost.

The bottom line is I'm on a limited budget, and I have to direct my spending toward things that will make the car drivable at all (brakes would be nice! :wink: ) rather than things that will make it drive better. Those can come later.

Edit: the other angle to all this is I'm on a self-imposed time budget too. I'd *way* rather have this car drivable but less than perfect for the winter than have it spend the winter on jackstands in the driveway!

DE80q · Post by **DE80q** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:57 am

Eric, I can respect the budget and time constrictions, as I have already blown mine. My concern would be having to completely redo the piping when the tanks blow off again.

As for the small cheepo ebay IC, how small are we talking here. I have seen some really good nubers put down useing small coolers.

my2000apb DrBeastCar · Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:59 am

a small bar and plate will still be more efficient than a slightly larger tubefin design

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:21 am

my2000apb wrote:a small bar and plate will still be more efficient than a slightly larger tubefin design

Actually I don't think that's always true. Tube + fin coolers flow somewhat less than bar & plate units but they don't cool as efficiently because the flat fronts of the "bars" don't let as much cooling air through as the rounded tubes.

Also the size difference between the two is considerable. The two are about the same width, but the ebay one measures about 2" F-R and 6" high. The Saab one is only about an inch F-R but is almost 18" high so the sideways cross-sectional area is about 50% greater.

The other other thing is with the Saab unit, being only one row, all the engine air is being cooled by "fresh" outside air. With deeper intercoolers that have multiple rows, the engine air going through the rear rows is being cooled by outside air that's already been heated by passing over the front rows. That probably doesn't matter much on a track car or one driven mostly on the highway where there's tons of cooling airflow. But most of my driving is around town at speeds < 40 MPH so I need all the cooling I can get from limited airflow.

ur20v · Post by **ur20v** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:48 am

elaw wrote:
ur20v wrote:B4 front crossmember would be what you're looking for!

Is it a drop-in replacement?

It is. Its round and drops down nice and low, and has mounting bosses so you can fit a nice, non-ruptured, highly efficient bar-and-plate intercooler up front

ur20v · Post by **ur20v** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:52 am

And your thinking on the "engine cooling air" that's passed over the intercooler is wrong. *Especially* under 40mph. But it doesn't make you a bad person, per se

JonathanL · Post by **JonathanL** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:34 am

Ya know thinking about it eff it man run it. It's better than no intercooler and if it fails grab another something I'd take that over a pipe right to the TB.

Mcstiff · Post by **Mcstiff** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:52 am

ur20v wrote:
elaw wrote:
ur20v wrote:B4 front crossmember would be what you're looking for!

Is it a drop-in replacement?

It is. Its round and drops down nice and low, and has mounting bosses so you can fit a nice, non-ruptured, highly efficient bar-and-plate intercooler up front

It will need work to fit with a snubber and is very close to the crank pulley.

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:54 am

ur20v wrote:And your thinking on the "engine cooling air" that's passed over the intercooler is wrong. *Especially* under 40mph. But it doesn't make you a bad person, per se

Actually I said "engine air" which was an awkward way of saying the air going from the turbocharger to the TB (as in, the air the engine is ingesting). :-)

The whole "under 40 MPH" thing is tough no matter how you slice it. One advantage of an FMIC set up this way is that the engine-cooling fan will draw air through the intercooler (somewhat. if all the baffles are in place.). I've actually thought about designing a circuit that would run the cooling fan at an extra-slow speed when the car is moving slowly or not at all just to keep the IC from heating up. That's more of a problem in the Saab where the IC sits 1/2" in front of the A/C condenser which sits 1/2" in front of the radiator. But I bet the Audi could benefit from it too.

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:57 am

Mcstiff wrote:It will need work to fit with a snubber and is very close to the crank pulley.

The snubber probably maybe wouldn't be a problem? I'm working on putting in a bar going horizontally under the damper pulley and will use the AAN snubber (using the B3 snubber interferes with putting an IC in front of the engine in a big way).

But if it comes close to the crank pulley that would be bad. I need a minimum of about 2" clearance (measured F-R) for the intercooler. I may just end up making my own crossmember - I could use 3/4" square tubing and probably gain 1/2" or more clearance vs. the B3 one.

ur20v · Post by **ur20v** » Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:55 pm

The B4 crossmember has snub bracket mounts, though I do not know if the V6 and I5 snub cages mount in the same vicinity. And if its too close to the crank pulley for comfort, an angle grinder is your friend. Notch that bitch!

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:10 am

Well I think I've come up with a neat way to kill two birds with one stone here.

The new intercooler creates two challenges. First, I can't use the usual B2/B3-type snubber on the engine as it wants to go right through the middle of the intercooler. And second, the intercooler must be supported, otherwise it'll drag on the ground which I think might reduce its life expectancy.

So here's my answer to both problems:

(The item in question is the low-mounted bar going across the front)

I cobbled the thing together (a little too hastily, as you can see from the one bolt hole that doesn't line up) by brazing together pieces of 3/4" stainless angle.

It provides a nice place to mount the "cage" for the AAN snubber:

...and I can attach brackets to it that will support the intercooler from the bottom.

Stay tuned, there's more to come!

DE80q · Post by **DE80q** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:16 am

very interesting. going to have to keep an eye on this one.

elaw · Post by **elaw** » Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:23 am

The nice thing about the AAN snubber is how far it doesn't stick out in the front. Even with its 3/4" depth, the front of that bar is behind the front face of the crank pulley.

ur20v · Post by **ur20v** » Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:53 pm

The B4 crossmember has the snub very low like that...

mrmotorhead13 · Post by **mrmotorhead13** » Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:23 pm

I'm inclined to think the snubber wouldn't get much snubbin from that crossbar, Eric. Looking at it I suspect it would bend with any real load on it. Any way to run a brace or two from the vicinity of the snubber bracket bolts up to the OEM crossbar, or does that negate the ability to fit the intercooler?

savagerocco · Post by **savagerocco** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:45 am

just grab a b4 crossbar i am gonna use one o. my v8 turbo car. they would be very easy to get grab the front and while you are there....

Mcstiff · Post by **Mcstiff** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:01 am

Yeah, that looks close to the B4.

mr_aj_johnson · Post by **mr_aj_johnson** » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:31 pm

Eric, my snub mount is very similar. U channel crossmember/intercooler support. and a slotted flat 1/4" plate with a 3" Pipe welded to it (I think it's 3") Plate is slotted to allow for about 2" of up and down adjust-ability.

Eric's '90 80QT: rustic bits

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: intercooler bending

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar

Re: Eric's '90 80QT-to-be: raising the bar