Witt

GM did testing on this a couple years ago and stated its not worth it.

ralliartist

Well, still not close. I'm 103 at WOT.

Maybe gm didn't think it was worth it because of cost. But if you are tying to get the MAX cooling for your car, then it's worth it.

I think it is.

I'm just not sure how you guys are ignoring FACTUAL evidence that it works, and works great!

Whatever though.

Witt

Maybe they dont think its worth the reliability hit you take by slowing coolant velocity across the laminovas creating a heat differential from one side of the manifold to the other. /shrug

qwikredline

Update hey i was involved up the ears in that testing 04/05 ; 2 pass and 3 pass are not obviously single pass. The 3 pass did not have a good functional rationale. Tthe 2 pass with option B became a cost effective solution and was offered by GM for sale to the aftermarket. The definition of "worth it" is function, cost and ease of installation. The 3 pass didnt hack it. Our shop produced the single pass and worked on the testing with GMPD. Tim our electrical and A/C certified technical expert did and does most of the hairy thinking for cooling and stuff. He found the backwards wired pumps on Ions in 04 as part of our test program for GM. GM discontinued interest in anything for laminovas, especially as Grand Am rules makers would not allow it, but the rules did permit aftermarket coolant reservoirs so all grand am cobalt LSJ cars had the Saturn ion reservoir....today is today and Ralli has done it and we do it...so here we are. Sounds to me that generally in this forum, any idea Not Invented Here (by the poster) is immediately flamed by everyone else...data , results and cost are the three criteria that i believe make a solution workable. This is one such example. It works. It helps keep temps down. It does not produce power. Hatrick Stus mod is a good idea. I dont drag race primarily I road race so i chose to stay with option B. Ralli primarily drag races so he uses the Hatrick stu mod.

Another example is the heat exchanger radiator. I use a Griffin 1.5 inch thick racing aftercooler in the stock location. It is a 2 pass radiator. Ralli uses an additional CX racing in front of the other rads. Both yield good results... mine costs 600 bucks, Ralli's a lot less. So Ralli's idea produces results for less cost, mine produces similar results for more cost. His is an add on, mine you can hardly tell. To each his own.

Witt

No flaming here. The data that some are ignoring and others not collecting is individual EGT data. This was done over on a redline some time ago and has shown to exaggerate the EGT differential already seen on the LSJ in stock form.

Power and reliability both need to be considered since most people here daily drive the cars they run at the track.

qwikredline

witt you know your stuff. But let us contribute some information. The only single passes that i know of built in the way the former GM coolant engineer for this part suggested, and modified through more input from "Tim" our guru, are the one we built for GM for testing and the one Ralli has made from input i gave him. I have done a "production run" of a more user friendly version which I expect OTTP to sell soon. Any testing for EGT or IAT ( we did IAT as that is what we lived for, as the car pulls spark over something like 85 degrees C inlet air) we pulled the test temp data from a themistor probe placed in the housing right under the blower screws. I use my car every day, drive it to the track and back, logged 16 passes this summer and about 2000 road race track miles...

i will post pics when we have shipped our existing orders (soon) although if you look at my members gallery or ralli's posts you may just see one

Witt

The one he used was welded and setup exactly as the one in the GMPD book illustrated. IAT is obviously easy to log but his concern (which is what led to testing fuel rail pressure differential by the same group) was its effect on charge air density between the cylinders. I really think you guys are skipping some extremely important data collection when evaluating the effects of this mod.

domin8_gt

iTrader: (1)

My car is my dd and track car. Just like Ralli I drag race. I have been following the subject for some time on all of the forums. I have even talked with Ralli about this. The single pass is a very good idea. I will definitely be getting one very soon. Currently, I have the GMPP 2pass with option b and a Cobra heat exchanger mounted just like Ralli's CX. Even with the stock pulley and tune I have noticed temp drops. Unfortunately, since I don't have HPTuners I can only go by what the DIC says for the coolant temps. When I first installed the 2pass I saw a 3-4 degree temp drop with a readout of 178. Now, with the Cobra heat exchanger added and running inline with the OE heat exchanger, I am seeing 174 degrees consistently. This is when driving to and from work. I don't watch this while I'm racing. I believe that the cooler intake temps lead to cooler engine temps (and most people will probably say "Duh!"). IMO, the singlepass setup is a good idea, especially for a powertrain that does not have a return style fuel system and starves cylinder #4 in higher rpm's, which can lead to heat soak and possibly a blown engine. For those that are saying a single pass system would not work, I suggest being optomistic and sitting back to watch what happens. If the system does not do what is promised then you can say "I told you so." If it does succeed I don't think you need to worry about anybody telling you they were right because they already have. besides, you're not spending time and money on this system. If it's a waste, then it is a financial situation the investors such as qwikredline and Ralli need only to be concerned with.

brandondrecksage

....the dual pass and single pass have nothing to do with your engine coolant.

domin8_gt

iTrader: (1)

I think you may have misunderstood. Having done the work myself I am fully aware of this. If the air temp going into the engine is cooler, then the engine won't heat up as high, which causes the coolant temp to not rise as high because it doesn't have to cool as much. If my mods haven't yeilded anything in this aspect, then I don't know what else it could be. It's not like I just installed this stuff and then the weather suddenly got colder. I've had this stuff for a little while.

Anyways, I now feel that we are getting off topic. Let's get back to discussing the single pass intake.

qwikredline

B]The one he used was welded and setup exactly as the one in the GMPD book illustrated. [/B THis is NOT the one we are using. The GMPD example did not work. Ralli and I are NOT using this example... so the data from that is NOT relevant to what we are doing. we do stuff to the inserts, we are doing it very differently, we plumb it differently, from this 3 pass example you are talking about.

we are making the laminova work better, this is not screwing up charge air density, fuel pressure or any other stuff. Its simple make the laminova work better the way Optron designed it, and u do better. YOu can even do a Joe Kincaid killer chiller as well (Laminova/Optron support that idea and invite requests for their quotation to do it ) we dont skip anything. MY car works great on an awesome pykostevo tune, sucks meth and i can go 0-140 mph-0 in 1.1 miles, 1. 38 at Mosport on GA slicks, 1.41 on street tires, and crappy 1/4 mile times of 14.1 on street tires on the 12th consecutive pass without stopping. Ralli does 13.1 with his car...(he is smarter than me on the 1/4) end of rant

so my friend...q.e.d

contact OTTP if you want one. Witt if you dont....

Witt

The fact is you are passing coolant from a single line through the laminovas one single time using the same pump output pressure and flow regardless of how its welded.

Anecdotal evidence about 13 second passes doesn't exactly convince that this is necessarily a smart idea. You keep ignoring the fact that this will exaggerate the EGT differential that the LSJ already is hampered with. Only collecting and evaluating data on the intake side of the head form a single point is only proving my point that the looks can be deceiving.

The bottom line is you will get to a point where slowing laminova flow velocity will do more harm than good. I bet one of you guys will find out where the point is. I would choose 20 degree higher temperatures and balanced charge air density any day than jumping on a band wagon.

qwikredline

I last thing before i move on. I use a 1.5 inch dual pass heat exchanger radiator in stock location; what did you use in your testing? what flow velocity are you referring to? and how slow? and what tube orientation? The original testing in 0405 i cant/ wont share with anyone its not my data but it was a lot more data than you think. and funnily enough it was collected by some engineers...not me. you keep talking about exaggerated EDT differential. Based on what? you dont have these parts,and you have not done the testing so stop the anecdotal flames and move on...i am...

brandondrecksage

so by your train of thought, shouldn't n2o and meth user have cooler engine coolant temps?

domin8_gt

iTrader: (1)

I haven't messed with either yet, so I'm not educated enough to answer that. All I've posted is what I've experienced. Although I do know that meth and nitrous are supposed to cool the air which allows for more power through air density, I've also been told that a negative affect could be the added moisture in the air could create more heat do to limited capacity. Again, that is hearsay. All I know is what I've experienced.

Witt

I am not flaming, I have no idea where you are getting that, only sharing an experience of someone that I trust who has done this testing a while ago that contradicts what some here are saying is a great idea. Just because it doesn't agree with what you think doesnt mean its flaming.

Differential EGT data as in individual EGT probes. His configuration used stock laminova oriface oriented into a single in single out direction. No matter how you weld it or align it to your setup, without a pump and feed line diameter change you cannot argue the fact that the same amount of coolant is flowing at a lower velocity through the tubes. It doesn't take an engineer to mount and data log EGT probes, this isn't rocket science.

qwikredline

your picture from GMPD that you say you copied (we didnt copy anything by the way, jsut saying) shows one out from a welded log manifold, looks like dash 8 or 10 maybe, and two stock in. Thats not what we are doing... but our plumbing etc is ours, and anyway i dont care much what you did back then or whenever. Please don't compare your results to ours. We are doing this; you are saying based on your testing on a car with different materials that our idea either does not work or is less than best or can get us into trouble...take your pick.

A better approach might be: "hey glad you have good results, have you or could you measure X and if so what were your results,and if not, let me suggest you do that and see how X compares to a stock (or more common) configuration. I will be pleased to share my data with you; i took measurements from x, y, z and did so collecting data on a (brand name) data logger etc."

Then you might get some positive reaction...

Up north we are simple folk. Use snap on tools, Miller welding, and hard work, like many folks. It probably helps that our team has won i dunno a dozen or so professional race championships over the years, but thats yesterdays news. We use the GM diagnostic Tech 2 a great deal, and we now use HP Tuners, but are new to this one. We use the DL1000 on board data logger a lot, and we go to a dynojet road wheel dyno when we need it run by a very skilled technician, who owns his own shop. What data logger do you use?

There is no question that the air to water transfer with the single pass treats flow a bit differently, probably I would guess in a more efficient and better balanced way than the production configuration. To understand why I say that you would have to understand our flow diagrams, and thats not likely to happen, it would end up that when you found it worked you might copy it... and at the end of the day its only a few wackos like Ralli and myself who care about LSJ all the smart guys went out and purchased an LNF. GM , gvie them credit, they dont care much about all this, the Cobalt is over and done with, they are working on 2012 and much more pressing issues...

Witt

I thought you said you built that manifold?
Lets put it this way...some of us did this long ago. Some of us had poor results. I'm not looking for anyone's approval to what I am stating, only telling you that offering a differing opinion is not classified as flaming.
The data logger makes no difference as a pyrometer controller outputs nothing more than 0-5 voltage signals as do most other sensors. What was used in this case however was HPTuners Pro EIO box using all 4 analog inputs on a 0-5v scale from 400F-1600F.
Trust me, I'm well beyond modifying stock supercharger intake manifolds. Like I said, the data obtained was from 2 years ago.

What I keep saying and you keep dodging is the fact that you are creating an uneven cooling situation in the stock manifold by passing the same amount of coolant from the stock pump at a slower velocity through the laminovas, if you are opening up the stock oriface on the laminova you are only making it worse. This has the ability to change charged air density across the cylinders.

Personally I could care less what you guys do to your car but there are a lot of followers here who don't know any better and can't afford to risk engine durability on their daily driver. If you don't believe me, do what others have done and monitor EGT probes across the header. If you only have access to two mount them in 2 and 4 or 1 and 3.

qwikredline

i will take your advice and measure egt. I will let u know what i find. We did not build that manifold in the GMPD picture. That is different from the path we went down. There were all sorts of ideas floating around, including ice baths for Time Attack which we built and discarded. thanks


on a different topic, if protecting folks from blowing motors is important, why does everyone support poly mounts that dont fix axle hop? is that an issue to protect folks....just sayin' its off to egt land i go....

Sharkey

iTrader: (1)

ok here is an idea, run coolant through left to right on 2 laminova, and right to left on the other 2. makes plumbing it a little more complex, but should solve the charge temp differential between cyl. 1 and 4

theneelster

It's a bunk argument. Run the car hard enough and long enough and it won't matter what endplate you have on.

If it really worries people they should just spray the manifold and/or the h/e with nitrous or co2... or you could create a coolant chamber from sheetmetal pre-manifold and spray that with the same...not actually spraying into the coolant; however I don't think that would actually harm your i/c system.

Witt

Who woulda thought?

Heat changes charge air density (airmass). Think about that.

qwikredline

the air from the supercharger is heated as it is compressed, is it uniform from front to rear of the housing?

HunterKiller89

iTrader: (1)

so witt, i totally understand what you're saying, and Ralliartists fix is definitely ideal (however ralliartist, i would make the top and bottom laminova ro driver side to passenger side, and the middle two laminovas go passenger to driver side...that way theres no bias between the upper half and the lower half of the charge), but also, assuming it is a single pass with coolant flowing from driver side to passenger side, that would cause the #4 cylinder to be injesting the least amount of air. IF one cylinder HAD to be starved of air, #4 would eb the ideal one to starve, as it is also starved of fuel quite frequently on all LSJs that have not upgraded to a return style fuel system.

Again, i see your point, and understand that you dont want to starve ANY of the cylinders from ANYTHING, but im just pointing that its not like cyl #4 will have extra air flow, resulting in leaner still AFRs, throwing off EGTs in that cylinder even more.

ralliartist

doing the top and bottom together and then the two middle ones in a different direction are impossible as the design of my single pass wouldn't allow it.

Copied from the redline forums.....

I understand completely. While I think that you may be on to something, at the same time, I'm trying to consider what mikey stated a few posts earlier about the laminova's becoming "super efficient" in a "wall-like" manner. I also am thinking along the lines of the stock intake manifold not having runners and since it's an open area that there won't be any significant differences in temps across the cylinders.

Only real way to tell is EGT probes. So I'll patiently await john's data. I'd think that both of us would have been running into problems by now though if something was going wrong.