Originally Posted by
BenFenner Just wanted to tailor my debunking to your reasoning. As expected you went with the "more volume to fill" myth, and I've thankfully already got the answer for that one.
You got it.
Most of the time I just link to a post I made a while back but I'll boil it down for you here. For a second lets forget about flow through the intercooler and imagine all we want to do is get the air compressed, since that's what you seem so hung up on. No matter that flowing the air through the intercooler will make more power than if it would compress in the intercooler. No, let's forget that for a second and just assume we want to pressurize the bitch.
What's the difference in volume between a smallish intercooler and a large intercooler? 2 liters at most? Okay good. How much does the engine displace? 2 liters? Excellent. How long does it take to pressurize the engine? Oh, two revolutions you say? Alright then... How long is one revolution at idle...
800 revolutions.....1 minute......= 13.3 revolutions
....1 minute............60 seconds........1 second
13.3 revolutions per second works out to 0.075 seconds per revolution, it takes two revolutions to fill the engine so it will take 0.075*2 or 0.15 seconds longer to fill another 2 liter cavity (not taking into account how much easier it is to fill or pressurize the intercooler compared to the engine chocked by tiny valves).
How long is one revolution at some normal operating rpm like 4,000?
4,000 revolutions.....1 minute......= 66.6 revolutions
....1 minute............60 seconds........1 second
66.6 revolutions per second works out to 0.015 seconds per revolution, so it will take 0.015*2 or 0.03 seconds longer to pressurize an additional 2 liter cavity at 4,000 rpm. The question is, would you find this significant enough to continue to recommend an intercooler smaller than another one based on the so-called delay in boost onset?
If you'd like something a little more fleshed out, read this:
Charge pipe sizing & differences: - e30tech.com Forums
Pay attention to post # 18 if you'd like a more general formula. That's a thread about charge pipe size and mythical additional "turbo lag".
Basically with 20-50 pounds of air per minute flowing through the charge pipes a couple of liters here and there are completely insignificant.
Oh really? Tell me what turbo lag feels like. I dare you.
The reason i beleive you are incorect on certain counts is this.
Turbo motors achieve wahts called pressure resonance. So at you 66.6 revolutions per second - you have 15 psi of hot air being pumled into the vavles 66.6 times per second. Now evertime this happens - the air revererates back - throught the intercooler piping and through the cooler back to the turbo - before it is nullinfied as lag (slows the compressor blades) then back up to the throttle again.
Now the quicker it gets back to the turbo - the quicker the air can regain efficient speed and back into the clyinder for the next opening. We do have to consider here this is all happpenign in a matter of absolute miliseconds. But the key point to consider here is that the larger the intercooler - the longer paths the energy of the resonance has to travel - so the longer it takes for the intake charge air to regain speed. Higher the RPM, the more drive on the turbo housing - so more effective boost - higher volumetric efficiency - gain in rpm and the cycle starts to build RPM. At lower RPM the sysem is hampered with a larger cooler.
The air in the inlet system moves as a continuall whole block, not the engine sucking air - then the turbo chasing to fill the intercooler. Wangman this is what it seems your theorising.
But if you want to argue my theory, please theorise this further point.
You have a turbo - where the outlet snout to the engine is welded shut but the exhaust gases keep on flowing past the rear housing. Your left with a turbo thats in effectively a compression dead zone - and can not suck more air nor can it pump more air and looses its effective inertia. A turbo is totally dependant on the efficiency of both sides of its housings. Apply this to your turbo for longer periods (low rpm) and this is what gives you low end lag(lowboost). Apply this theory 100 times per second and your left with a turbo that maintans a high constant of RPM, mainting high volume of air delivery at efficiency speeds.
In summary - the larger the cooler - the longer it takes for a turbo to respond to inlet air speeds - effectively hampering boost generation and causing whats commonly reffered to as lag