[VintageLambo] Intercooling

Laust, Thanks for the email.I understand your comments and project. I see that by specifying a 180 degree limit to air/water intercoolers, you were referring to using the existing radiator as your heat exchanger.Also, there are a number of parameters to be considered... as you point out ... not the least of which is cost.There"s also the aspect of time... (and I happen to believe that you put your projects together faster than I!). I"m very much an advocate of air/water intercoolers as they"re more efficient heat exchangers for the volume. One has less dead volume in the intercooler (and one would hope, less spool-up time to compress a smaller volume to boost pressure).I also like the idea that I can now take the intercooler coolant and run it to another part of the car where I have an interesting (aerodynamic)pressure differential. This is exactly what I"m doing with my VW rabbit (track only) sleeper.My rather vast frontal area is already taken with the radiator and oil cooler.It"s time to move the oil cooler too (leave more unobstructed flow for the radiator)! This certainly doesn"t make the "system" any less complicated... but then, if we were trying to avoid complexity, we wouldn"t work on project cars and certainly wouldn"t drive a Lamborghini! Your Neighbor, Greg ----- Original Message ----- From: ">lgpdk To: VintageLambo@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 12:03 AM Subject: [VintageLambo] Re: Turbo Charge/intercooling for the Jalpas Greg, I was thinking of the relatively narrow definition of "automotive" as commercially available passenger cars, which I believe our Lamborghini"s fall into. The medium to be cooled is the induction air and the cooling medium is the ambient air. In the case of an air to air intercooler the calories goes from 1) the induction air to (typically) 2) aluminum to 3) air. In the liquid intercooler the calories goes from 1) the induction air to (typically) aluminum, to 3) water/coolant which has to be 4) transported to another heat exchanger, the calories then goes from the coolant/water to (typically) 5) aluminum and lastly 6) ambient air. So what I meant was that the calorie path is more direct. The temperature limit is under the assumption that either engine coolant is used as a liquid or if a separate intercooler radiator is used, that it competes unfavorably with the engine radiator, A/C condenser and possible oil cooler for cool air in the front of the car. I do realize that the air to air intercoolers are exposed to those limitations (heat sources) as well. Whether air or liquid inter-cooling is best depends on a number of design parameters such as cost, component availability, reliability, weight and volume of components, engine room space allocation, ease of installation, maximum boost used, highest allowable intake temperature, cold or warm air intake, etc. and in the case of racing there may even be a rule-book that dictates the decision. Laust --- In VintageLambo@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" wrote: > Laust, > > I commend your projects, but am rather baffled by your statements: > > "The vast majority of automotive inter-cooling > is done with air to air intercoolers, which is more direct that an > air to water to air heat exchange. A coolant liquid intercooler > cannot reduce the air temperature below about 180F." > > 1.)I"m not sure what you mean by "more direct"?Do you mean, easier to implement? > > 2.)Air/liquid intercoolers are the standard in the racing for a number of excellent reasons.I also don"t understand why you are suggesting a thermal limit for the air/liquid intercooler.