it doesn't have pressure when the blower is running, it has vacuum. so the pressure being too low cannot be a problem since it doesn't exist

 

thanks for the info, this is the kind of stuff i was hoping to hear

 

I saw in a magazine that a RSX Type S only gained 1 whp with CryO2 system. I'm sure we could gain more, but not enough to make a significant difference.

 

Of course it has pressure...it's below atmospheric pressure but it's pressure. If there was no type of pressure, there wouldn't be such a thing as velocity. If you think that once the blower starts spinning that no air enters the supercharger, than that would be incorrect.

 

you know what i meant.. yet you still posted that lol

someone just save us the trouble and lock the thread lol

 

If you want to you can delete the thread since you were the thread starter.

 

Actually I didn't know "what you meant".

You say what you mean and mean what you say when it comes to stuff online.

 

yeah i know lol, everything is taken literally... i do it all the time too.... we all do

 

no reason to, i was j/k

 

I kinda thought you were.

 

It's alright.

 

Does anyone know what kinda of temp reduction I'd be lookin at if I do the second inline heat exchanger? I'v been pondering doing this for a while since I live in AZ and the ambient air is already hotter than the air coming out of the s/c!

 

Actually that would be impossible...

Remember, your supercharger is a compressor. Your compressed air temperature all depends on the temperature of the ambient air entering the supercharger and the speed of the blades spinning. So basically, ambiest air temperature + compressor speed = compressed air temperature, it will always multiply your temperature over your ambient air temperature.

But in reality, I think you were just exaggerating

As far as a 2nd inline heat exchanger, I don't think it's necessary but I don't have any proof to backup what I'm saying. I'd be more worried about compressor speeds with smaller pullies than the performance of your aftercooler.

 

I'm only getting a 2.8" pulley, I think anything smaller than 2.8 is pushing the limits of the s/c. Also yes I was exaggerating, all though last summer my firend and I looked at our themometer IN THE SHADE and it read 122, so as an experiment we placed the themometer in the sun, 30 minutes later we look to see the therometer reading from what we could tell nearly 155 degrees!!! Let me tell you it felt like 155 that day too, so hot your sweat would evaporate before you could feel it! I'm not sure how hot the after s/c air is but 155 degrees is DAMN hot for ambient air!
EDIT: Yesterday our high temp was 114!

 

Your supercharger compressed air temperature can reach way pass 200 degrees.

 

Blown 4-Banger, sorry, but don't listen to this cr@p...whether or not you put on a 2.5" pulley, yes that will put more heat in the s/c than a 3.0" pulley but doing the two pass helps. There is a RL that is twincharged and he just changed his to a 2 pass after having it tuned at IAT2.

A 2 pass is also helpful and I would suggest with living in AZ. The Grand Am Cup Cobalts use a 2 pass...if GM does it for their cars then there is a reason. Sorry NJHK, but the 2 pass is beneficial.

 

Here is a link to the thread, you will have to take out the space on the address when you paste it for the search...

http://www.redlineforums .com/forums/performance-modifications/12815-well-perhaps-dual-pass-intercooler-does.html

 

How is what you quoted crap? It's a fact...

As far as you saying that it's being beneficial:

Like I said, I don't have proof to back up what I'm saying and I stated this, so he and no one else should take what I said to fact...just my opinion. I will say this though, you have not showed me where I was wrong, you just stated what some guy did with an RL who was twincharged and Grand Am Cup cars.

Honestly, comparing a street cobalt to a Grand Am Cup car is like comparing apples and oranges. The key thing I said was "it's not necessary"...it's not necessary to do for his goal power range and pulley size he's aiming for...it's not neccessary to try and re-engineer your aftercooling system when your stock cooling system is doing just fine.

Are they beneficial? Sure. The more you can cool down air pressure above atmospheric, the better. Necessary for his power range and needs? No.

 

How is colder air not beneficial? There are people on the RL Forums that have been throwing around the idea of an ice box for the cars. When they saw a 25* drop in IAT2, they had a gain of almost 20hp. An Ice Box is only useful at the track though since dry ice disipates after a decent amount of time.

Listen, blown 4-banger, if you want, go ahead and do a 2 pass to the intercooler. PM me if you want a link on how to do it. It is very helpful and when you are running a smaller pulley, it will help cut down the heat from the more spinning of the supercharger internals. It will help, gives you more hp, and it would keep your engine cooled down.

 

WTF? Contradictory?

What does it matter if it is a twincharged RL? Oh wait, I forgot, the RL and Cobalts ARE THE SAME!

He may have a twincharged engine, but he is pushing 21psi...I'm pushing 21psi...pretty equal on the amount of heat at the intake manifold, am I wrong? Also, what is so bad with doing what the Grand Am cars do? Oh hell, don't we want to protect our engine from blowing? Those things last for hours with hardcore driving. If anything, we should be looking at what they did with them and do some to our cars. I am doing it with my clutch. The clutches are so heavy that they have trouble disengaging. What did the Cobalt Cup cars do? They used an adjustable master cylinder from a Corvette (98-04). DJT81185 has the FX400 on his car and is having this problem no matter how much he bleeds it. I'm getting my FX400 installed hopefully in the next two weeks and will get the adjustable master cylinder in by early next week. What do you want to bet that my car will be fine with the FX400?

 

As far as it being necessary, fine, no...happy? As far as it being something worthwhile...definitely.

Thats like saying, hey...lets see if we can get 350whp out of these cars without doing internals. I am sure we could but it wouldn't be safe. Just like we can get the rev limiter to 7250rpm but for someone at the track a lot, it won't do ya that good without upgrading.

I'm definitely going to look into doing the 2 pass. I know someone selling their intercooler for $100 so I'm going to do it on that and switch it in after I'm done so there is now downtime.

 

OMG...seriously...do you have reading issues...

and you even quoted that part.

Once again...you didn't read correctly. I said what you quoted talking about 2 different things.

You quoted me

You said what I said was crap.

My response was:

You said I was contradicting myself when I said...

When I said this, I was referring to what I ORIGINALLY said

Now that I just wasted my time breaking down what was plain as day light, I'll continue with our discussion.

The difference is compressed air temperatures. Turbocharger compressed air temperatures plus supercharger compressed air can be different than a single charged compressed air even with the same PSI amount.

Like I said before, for the power range he's aiming for, I PERSONALLY don't think it's necessary. That's my opinion. You have yours, I have mine. I have yet to hear him say he's looking to run 21 PSI on his supercharger but whatever. Once again, comparing a Street Car and an Grand Am cup car are 2 different things. Those cars NEED whatever they have cooling wise cause they are driving at full throttle and fastly accelerating, like you said, for hours. We have street cars...we're talking about seconds at a time of us accelerating at a hard rate at a given time. That's like me comparing my turbocharged sunfire to a 9 second Supra...they share nothing in common.

Overall, you have your opinion, I have mine but don't come on here with an attitude. If you can't discuss something maturely, than don't discuss it. And don't try and prove people wrong if you have no proof to back it up. You keep saying you need one but you have yet to show me any type of temperatures your manifold would be reaching, no type of examples of it being a bad idea NOT to do this modification yet you are introducing what you're saying as FACT and not an opinion. I have said that what I've been saying is my opinion and I don't have factual proof to back it up...you haven't.