ETS TMIC v. CP-E FMIC MS6; guess I need a bigger intercooler

[dale_gribble]

Been crunching data and making sense of this. These results for the FMIC are even after I hacked the crash bar/grille so the FMIC has full exposure to fresh air.

I guess it just goes to show you that even though the stock location TMIC heat soaks terribly at a stop, when it's getting fresh air shoveled in, it is better at holding bats down better than my CP-E FMIC IC which by CP-E's statement is rated to 400hp. This would even more significant for GENPUs since they have the massive hood scoop instead of Gen 1/Speed6 ducting. The CP-E doesn't heat soak nearly as bad as TMIC, but it doesn't hold temps down as well where I expected it to bury the TMIC. Flow is equivalent and the CP-E flows just fine. It just isn't as thermally efficient.

For the testing, conditions were similar, ~76 degrees, 29.9 baro pressure, ~80% humidity.



I want to share this because the advantages of FMIC aren't necessarily everything that people think they are for the work involved if the setup isn't optimized. So, now I'm going to start shopping for an upgraded FMIC for my MS6 CP-E kit.

EDIT: here is some additional information which makes more sense now that I crunched the numbers. The volume of the ETS TMIC core is 546 in^3 (3.25x12x14) and the volume of the CP-E FMIC core for the MS6 is 360 in^3 (20x6x3). So the ETS TMIC has 33% greater volume than the CP-E FMIC. So, I guess if you are sizing a FMIC, make sure it is probably around 546 in^3.

[dale_gribble]

I found a Treadstone TRV1859 that is the same side design as the CP-E FMIC, but has a core volume of 582 in^3 (18.48 X 9.00 X 3.50). So, it's 3" taller and 0.5" wider than the CPE.

[Caligula]

lol @ 80% humidity. The weather has indeed sucked royally.

[dale_gribble]

Also, for anyone wondering, the Treadstone TR6 has a volume of 462 in^3 (6" X 22" X 3.5") and the TR8 has a volume of 600 in^3 (7.8" X 22" X 3.5"). I would say the TR6 is probably not the best option for FMIC setup for anyone on the fence. It appears the TR8 would better match the volume of the upgraded TMICs.

[Pu Manchu]

ETS also made a 3.5" TMIC. that along with a genpu hoodscoop is nice.

[MD1032]

Fantastic information, dale. Thank you. Why is there such a large discrepancy between the IAT's of the two runs? Also, did you take more than one log with each setup? I like to see multiple runs to verify that the test is precise within reason.

I wonder how CP-E's TMIC compares to their own FMIC. I have the CP-E TMIC and I'm aware that the ETS is regarded as being better than the CP-E.

Since you're on pump gas, were you able to run more timing with the ETS than the CP-E FMIC?

[speedfreak44]

My theory, and I may be wrong, is that the air on those top to bottom flow fmics is that the air does not spend enough time within it to actually cool down enough. The side to side ones keep air in them longer allowing it to cool better. Before dismissing the fmic I believe a side to side version needs to be expiremented with.

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by MD1032 Fantastic information, dale. Thank you. Why is there such a large discrepancy between the IAT's of the two runs? Also, did you take more than one log with each setup? I like to see multiple runs to verify that the test is precise within reason. Since you're on pump gas, were you able to run more timing with the ETS than the CP-E FMIC?

IAT variations have little to no difference on charge air temps and subsequently power, assuming ambient conditions are the same. This is why cold air intakes don't do squat for our cars. With the tmic ducting gone more fresh air gets into the intake. I've run multiple logs and the data is consistent.

This particular fmic setup didn't worsen performance but it didn't necessarily improve it either which is the takeaway here.

Originally Posted by speedfreak44 My theory, and I may be wrong, is that the air on those top to bottom flow fmics is that the air does not spend enough time within it to actually cool down enough. The side to side ones keep air in them longer allowing it to cool better. Before dismissing the fmic I believe a side to side version needs to be expiremented with.

I am not dismissing fmic's. I am dismissing MY setup. There is a lot of data out there that suggests vertical flow units are superior for flow and that the first few inches of an ic do a majority of the cooling regardless of orientation. The fmic core is 33% smaller than the tmic core and I believe this is the driving factor.

[Voltwings]

I just have incidental data from being in dozens are cars tuning folks, but i'd have to agree with you; an ETS on a Gen2 is probably close to as good as you can get on these cars (on stock turbo, even though i ran my 3071 through the ETS before my 5th port).

[speedfreak44]

How did the BT fair when comparing ets vs whatever you currently run?

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by speedfreak44 How did the BT fair when comparing ets vs whatever you currently run?

I was running meth, so its not a fair comparison. Honestly though, the only reason i went to a FMIC was to get a 5th port. We were actually trying really hard to design a system using the Speed6 cold pipe for a TMIC 5th port, but the price just stopped making sense after a bit.

[dale_gribble]

Also as you can see I have my setup wide open. There is no lack of high pressure cold air getting into this thing.

[speedfreak44]

Off topic

Your car is beautiful

[sheston]

@dale_gribble: That is some very interesting data. Sounds like especially for the Genpus, that upgraded TMIC may be the right answer unless you go all out for the FMIC (meaning crash bar replacement, etc).

Now you just need to figure out a way to calculate pressure drop, lag, and the benefits of Meth :-)

Does the TMIC have less drop? I've seen people say lag isn't any difference, but you seem to have dug in more, taking into account things like volume.....

[neganox]

Thought you ran meth dale.

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by neganox Thought you ran meth dale.

I do. I was just tuning pump gas only up first to get a good baseline for all of the new changes. Meth tuning is so much fun. A degree of timing from 4k plus a little more boost give like 15-20whp jumps every iteration on my way up to optimized tune.

Originally Posted by sheston @dale_gribble: That is some very interesting data. Sounds like especially for the Genpus, that upgraded TMIC may be the right answer unless you go all out for the FMIC (meaning crash bar replacement, etc). Now you just need to figure out a way to calculate pressure drop, lag, and the benefits of Meth :-) Does the TMIC have less drop? I've seen people say lag isn't any difference, but you seem to have dug in more, taking into account things like volume.....

This 2.25" fmic setup provides no difference to me in response vs. tmic at all and I do have a point of reference since I ran the 2.5" cx fmic kit and I hated how that kit effected throttle response.

[dale_gribble]

I got my order in on that Treadstone TRV1859 unit. We'll see what happens. I'm expecting improvements since it's a little bigger than the ETS and 38% larger volume than CP-E FMIC. It's 38% larger in volume, so let's set the baseline at 20-30% improvement in BATs.

[Mazdazilla6]

Dale I might be interested in buying that Cp-e core off you if you're willing to sell.

When the time comes we can talk more and have it be "official" and per the fs rules. Just stating my interest currently.

[dale_gribble]

Sure dude. I'll post it up when it comes off.

[WAMBUSHHHH!]

I've been told that if you paint your core purple and coat it with glitter your BATs stay, on average, roughly 30 degrees cooler. Any chance you can test that for us as well and add that data?

Good information, man! Coming from my CPe TMIC to my current Cobb FMIC set-up, my results are much the same. I wish I still had my CPe TMIC logs to run a similar graph but such is the nature of blown hard drives. It's annoying to see some people spewing data like "my BATs were 25 degrees cooler with my FMIC compared to my TMIC". It's bullshit. On average I saw maybe a 10 degree drop, certainty nothing to change your current set-up especially if you already have an updated TMIC.

[Jarods7920]

So, just to keep this in perspective your data is limited to your test subjects. For you to say that because these tests yielded these results does not lend itself to say that all FMICs are worse at holding down BATs.

As your data states the volume of the CPE is less than the ETS. The CPE has far less surface area than the ETS as well. 396 in^2 vs 505 in^2 So, you're not exactly comparing equal test subjects.

[WAMBUSHHHH!]

Originally Posted by Jarods7920 So, just to keep this in perspective your data is limited to your test subjects. For you to say that because these tests yielded these results does not lend itself to say that all FMICs are worse at holding down BATs. As your data states the volume of the CPE is less than the ETS. The CPE has far less surface area than the ETS as well. 396 in^2 vs 505 in^2 So, you're not exactly comparing equal test subjects.

I mean, yeah in a perfect world this test would have been done with each set-up using cores with identical measurements. He's just simply testing two of the more popular intercooler brands we have for the platform. Not saying your comment doesn't have merit but he's testing real world options, that's all.

I don't think the take away is that ALL FMIC are worse, I think the take away from this is that between these two popular brands there really isn't a performance difference that's worth making the switch for one if you have the other. Or at least, that's my take away. Something I've hinted at for a while in similar conversations I've had about my CPe TMIC vs my Cobb FMIC. I've just never had the data nor the desire to swap out the FMIC to the TMIC to get new logs to make a similar comparison.

At the end of the day, if you want drastically cooler BATs, shoot meth. Only way I've seen BATs lower than ambient. Fuck those meth heads.

[Code Monkey]

I bet a FMIC makes less of a difference on the street, but at the track there is no comparison; last graph here vs first graph here.

[WAMBUSHHHH!]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey I bet a FMIC makes less of a difference on the street, but at the track there is no comparison; last graph here vs first graph here.

Yeah, probably should have stated that. I hard park my car and use my FMIC for rice points. I can't speak to the performance differences when tracking the car. While you guys are doing real race car things, I'm debating camber.

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by Jarods7920 So, just to keep this in perspective your data is limited to your test subjects. For you to say that because these tests yielded these results does not lend itself to say that all FMICs are worse at holding down BATs. As your data states the volume of the CPE is less than the ETS. The CPE has far less surface area than the ETS as well. 396 in^2 vs 505 in^2 So, you're not exactly comparing equal test subjects.

Thanks captain obvious. I guess you just read the top post instead of reading through.

I don't think fmics for street are what everyone thinks they are. It's not a guaranteed gainer as I showed from a supposed brand name 'engineered' setup if it isn't engineered right. People just have in their heads that fmics are superior across the board which I showed isn't necessarily correct.

[Easter Bunny]

Originally Posted by dale_gribble Thanks captain obvious. I guess you just read the top post instead of reading through. I don't think fmics for street are what everyone thinks they are. It's not a guaranteed gainer as I showed from a supposed brand name 'engineered' setup if it isn't engineered right. People just have in their heads that fmics are superior across the board which I showed isn't necessarily correct.

engineered my ass

[aviator79]

Same size core as my Spearco but end tanks are bigger on Spearco for 3" in/out vs 2.5.

[dale_gribble]

That Spearco was on my list, but damn, $$$...

Do you have any datalogs on that intercooler?

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey I bet a FMIC makes less of a difference on the street, but at the track there is no comparison; last graph here vs first graph here.

Whats funny is i was going to say that a FMIC wins if you're comparing BATs when cruising, but (on a Gen 2 at least*) at WOT i could show you two logs and you'd be hard pressed to tell me which was which .... but then you came along with this post haha.


Actually, now that i think about it, you're using your ETS core as a FMIC arent you... so you're essentially proving Dale's point, that the ETS is a superior core since you saw an improvement going FMIC than he did with the CP-E core.

[Tokay444]

Glad my txs core is 793 cubic inches.

[Voltwings]

I miss my 302 Cubic inch core

[Tokay444]

And fits under the stock crash bar.

[Jarods7920]

Originally Posted by dale_gribble Thanks captain obvious. I guess you just read the top post instead of reading through. I don't think fmics for street are what everyone thinks they are. It's not a guaranteed gainer as I showed from a supposed brand name 'engineered' setup if it isn't engineered right. People just have in their heads that fmics are superior across the board which I showed isn't necessarily correct.

I read the majority of the thread.

I agree with what you're saying in large part. But, again you make a blanket statement about FMICs and assume this broadly applied to all of them. I would love to see this test performed again with equal or nearly equal surface area on both systems.

As others have already alluded to, I dont know that this set up is as "engineered" as everyone thinks it is.

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by Jarods7920 I read the majority of the thread. I agree with what you're saying in large part. But, again you make a blanket statement about FMICs and assume this broadly applied to all of them. I would love to see this test performed again with equal or nearly equal surface area on both systems. As others have already alluded to, I dont know that this set up is as "engineered" as everyone thinks it is.

Code monkey used the exact same core, took his ETS and made it a FMIC and saw massive improvement.

Dale says his FMIC did not do as well as his TMIC
Code Monkey's ETS TMIC works fantastic as a FMIC
Ergo - the ETS TMIC core is superior to the CP-e FMIC core
/thread.

[Jarods7920]

Originally Posted by Voltwings Code monkey used the exact same core, took his ETS and made it a FMIC and saw massive improvement. Dale says his FMIC did not do as well as his TMIC Code Monkey's ETS TMIC works fantastic as a FMIC Ergo - the ETS TMIC core is superior to the CP-e FMIC core /thread.

I think that was stated by the OP that the CPE < ETS.

[Tokay444]

Fuck CP-e.

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by Jarods7920 I read the majority of the thread. I agree with what you're saying in large part. But, again you make a blanket statement about FMICs and assume this broadly applied to all of them. I would love to see this test performed again with equal or nearly equal surface area on both systems. As others have already alluded to, I dont know that this set up is as "engineered" as everyone thinks it is.

Of course I am doing this test again with equal or near equal surfaces on both systems. ETS TMIC volume is 563 in^3 and treadstone FMIC is 582 in^3 (within 3%) so your wish will come true. I predict the Treadstone FMIC will do much better than CP-E FMIC core, due in large part to the increase in volume and lesser part denser core design.

I think most FMIC intercoolers have cheap cores or are too small. What I keep saying is that people take at face value that FMICs are a guaranteed power adder and I and others showed that they aren't. I have taken at gospel from people evangalizing FMICs here as a killer bolt on mod, and have twice been a little disappointed. It's not a matter of piping since piping is piping, it's a matter of the quality/size of core. Many have gone from CX cores to treadstone cores with much better results size for size.

New intercooler comes in Wednesday, I'll get mounts welded onto it on Thurs-Fri and bolt it on next weekend. Expect magic.

[Tokay444]

What's funny is people buying tr6's and thinking they're an upgrade.

[dale_gribble]

Exactly, especially for the guys getting the TR6 size intercooler but instead get a cheaper cx racing core or equivalent.

Here's a blanket statement for FMIC. If you go FMIC, get a Treadstone TR8 or volume/core equivalent. If you can't afford it or don't want to cut your crashbar, stick with an upgraded TMIC.

[Jarods7920]

Originally Posted by dale_gribble Of course I am doing this test again with equal or near equal surfaces on both systems. ETS TMIC volume is 563 in^3 and treadstone FMIC is 582 in^3 (within 3%) so your wish will come true. I predict the Treadstone FMIC will do much better than CP-E FMIC core, due in large part to the increase in volume and lesser part denser core design. I think most FMIC intercoolers have cheap cores or are too small. What I keep saying is that people take at face value that FMICs are a guaranteed power adder and I and others showed that they aren't. I have taken at gospel from people evangalizing FMICs here as a killer bolt on mod, and have twice been a little disappointed. It's not a matter of piping since piping is piping, it's a matter of the quality/size of core. Many have gone from CX cores to treadstone cores with much better results size for size. New intercooler comes in Wednesday, I'll get mounts welded onto it on Thurs-Fri and bolt it on next weekend. Expect magic.

There is something to be said about buying a quality product. I am inclined to believe the FMIC of equal proportion to the ETS will out perform the ETS TMIC. I look forward to your results!