In that article, the idle temps for a std TMIC bear no relation to figures I've ever seen in road tests.
That was either down to poor fan airflow or very significant heat soak.
Unsurprisingly, the gear being flogged shows much better idle temps...
The article serves its advertising purpose but is in no way a scientific test that anyone should use as evidence.

 

My ARC intercooler

 

That ARC looks lovely.. nice bit of kit but bet it set you back a bit!?

 

advertising for who?

the test was done by jap performance mag, they borrowed clinics rr and a customers car, mechanics to change the parts. But the mag comissioned it hired the mapper and wrote it.

when was the last time you sat idling a car in 3rd gear? thats rather a daft statement isn't it? lol

but tbh i'm still yet to see any real data that contradicts that, there's lots of unbacked up opinions, but no tests to show that is correct. each and everytime an argument comes up about fron't mounts and top mounts the same info arrives and its always in favour fo front mounts making a helpfull difference.

Harveys done alot of testing about this issue, including on road inlet temp test etc etc and has come to exactly the same conclusion. i realy think your trying to flog a dead horse taking that line which has no justification whatsoever.

 

My beef isn't about FMICs as I agree with them.
What I don't like is this article being dragged out time and time again, inferring the std IC is useless and a punter needs to buy product X and Y, whether its an FMIC or TMIC.

With an ambient temp of 9 deg c and a fan blowing, how the hell did the idle temp get to 36 deg C without being sat on the rollers for a considerable period.
Yet the article quotes that the idle temp was measured after a 30 sec heat soak.
Fit a Hyperflow TMIC and hey presto, the idle temp goes down to 18 deg C

The article is very flawed and should be taken a nice read only.
I'm more than happy with Harveys info as I've discussed it with him some time ago and it would be great if it was written up as an article.

 

What other mods do you have and what power/torque figures you achieves with those using this tmic?

cheers

 

the hyperflow tmic is huge compared to standard one, the laws of physics do apply, it takes longer to heat up a larger volume of air.

my guess, and its a guess cos i don't know, is it was sat without the fan blowing, idle speed isn't moving on a road (except changing gear) its when your sat waiting to move etc, so why would you have the fan going to get a fake result?

i don't think any of what you have said discredit's it, the idle temp issue you claim isn't realy an issue, the hole point was to see what they did at idle. running a fan etc would muddy the water.

perhaps they should have tested a larger branded intercooler as well to add that in there, but i don't think it would make any difference. If you want to ignore the hyperflow tmic the figures still say what it is.

Is there something your not telling us about this?

i think its pretty widley accepted that the standrd intercooler isn't ideal and does suffer from heat issues even as low as 300bhp.

 

Exactly my point - in that dyno test, a FMIC produced more power. But more power on a dyno run doesn't equate to a faster car on the open road once you add in better, more realistic cooling to a TMIC and the virtually lag-free gear changes. I would happily put my car up against any FMIC-equipped car producing similar power and torque figures and be confident that it would be faster in A-B conditions on the road due to zero lag between gear changes. Unlike you, I had a TMIC, then fitted a FMIC then ripped it out and put a TMIC back in again cos there WAS a superior throttle response using a TMIC!

 

If anyone wants to pull the information together and print a report they are welcome to do so but I have already reported this umpteen times so breifly here are the facts.
OE STi TMIC, turbo, injectors and ECU running 1.35 bar ish. 0-100 mph sprint. ACT off the clock at 69.9 deg.C. Dyno power runs showing temperatures rising quickly in the high 50s and low 60s. After a couple of runs back to back off the clock.
Same car with top mount intercooler from STi 8, HS380 turbo, 550 injectors, Simtek ECU.
Initially running 372 bhp but went to 392 bhp with development. 0-100 sprint temperatures in the high 40s. The rolling road temperatures in the 40s. Back to back runs could achieve low 50s and 50C stood at idle in the Summer was quite common.
Same car rolling roaded with TMIC 392 bhp and a few days later with Hybrid GT FMIC fitted (not GT2) 401 bhp straight out the box and with mapping 410 bhp so 9 bhp from the front mount and 18 bhp after mapping. Nothing else was done to the car.
Rolling road temperatures typically 23-25 C and even after hard driving and heat soak for 10 minutes it is rare for the temperature to exceed mid 40 C.
After mapping no appreciable lag and no different to what it was like with the STi 8 TMIC other than that I had an extra 18 bhp and I would suggest :
1. If you experience bad lag on gear change then there are issues which cause this.
Perhaps turbo related. Perhaps to do with your installation. Perhaps to do with the mapping of your car and if this really is something that upsets you consider Anti-Lag which is available from Bob Rawle on Ecutek maps. (Plus Simtek etc.)
2. With 18 extra bhp ie. 5% more power, the car will be that much faster anyhow so this will offset any gear shift lag. However, if my car was suffering gear shift lag I would want to find the cause.

Would I fit a top mount again even if it was free. No.
I think those that were advised to fit STi top mounts were seriously misled. They do a job but it is just as big a job or bigger to fit an STi top mount to a Classic as it is to fit a Hybrid FMIC. There is no cost saving because without the STi 8 scoop and undertray the STi 8 top mount performs very poorly to the point it is not worth having fitted. If anybody wants to argue about this let me have the data but also let me know what air charge temperature monitoring equipment you have and where it is located.
Another Scooby myth that has misled many owners. Don't get me wrong, the STi 8 TMIC is a big step forward from the Classic TMIC all model years 93-00 but the only logical time to fit one of these MIGHT be if you are chasing the last tenths of a second on the quarter mile strip. Most people want a car as an everyday driver that can turn its hand to numerous disciplines, not just quarter mile but track days, cross country A-B driving, handling courses, top speed and so on. The reason why certain competitors with fantastic quarter mile results would not tackle top speed runs WITH A TOP MOUNT INTERCOOLER FITTED was that they knew their engine was at great risk from the very high temperatures that would result from a top speed attempt with TMIC.

I have come across cars that had very clear lag on gear shift which has been rectified in some of the instances with careful mapping.

My STi 3 Wagon has 413 bhp with the Snow water/methanol injection on and 403 bhp without. Figures as of a week last Friday. If you would like to devise some sort of on/off accelleration test I am quite happy to see which vehicle suffers from gear change lag. Mine doesn't have any despite the front mount intercooler.

If anyone with a Hybrid GT or GT2 supplied by me is suffering lag on gear change and has a mappable ECU that we are familiar with, I would like them to get in touch as I would like to find a car suffering lag on gear change which we can benchmark and then remap to demonstrate the falacy that front mounts cause lag.

From Redline, a magazine I would not normally read, December edition, page 58, 16 Tuning Myths. One of these "Shorter Boost Pipes Give Less Lag".
Another "Theory versus Reality". One that would score lower if it didn't have some small grounding in fact. In theory a longer and larger boost pipe run wiould take longer to reach a desired boost level. But the difference, considering the monumental amount of air an engine ingests every second, isn't even something you would notice. Don't fit over big or long boost pipes but never sacrifice cooling just to get a shorter pipe run."

I think if you can tell the difference in lag on a properly set up car between a top mount and a front mount you must have an extremelyl delicate bum. Nearly 5% more power will more than compensate for the infinitesimal lag that will exist and like I said if you have lag issues, chances are there are issues elsewhere.

Also in the same article :
"Wastegates make a Chattering Noise".
"Bigger Cams/Ports are always better".
"You must fit a dump valve"
"Exhausts need back pressure". Who in their right mind dreamed that one up?
And several more that may interest you.
There was also an article testing headlights. They tested HIDs and raved about them but unfortunately they only tested them on dipped beam. Now I don't know about most people on here but I want maximum forward vision on full beam when I am cracking on so why did they only test on dipped beam? I can only conclude because they know perfectly well that even H4 HID kits costing a remarkable £599 cannot compete with good aftermarket bulbs on full beam and the technical reasons are well understood.

 

Harvey - agree with much of what you say on here. If I were attempting top speed runs, or tracking the car, or I lived in a hot climate with lots of standing starts, I would definitely ditch the TMIC for a FMIC for all the reasons you have so eloquently and comprehensively described above. However, on the road in British conditions, I have seldom seem the charge temperature on my Hyperflow TMIC rise above 40C, even in warm conditions.

Regarding the issue of the increased between gear lag I experienced when I had the FMIC fitted, I can assure you, this was definitely a noticeable effect. But as I have often repeated on here, there's a lot of subjectivity about the driving experience; some people may find any increased lag however small undesirable. Others on the other hand may not even notice it.

You mentioned that the issues I had with lag could well be due to faulty installation or less than optimal mapping. Well, if you remember, it was one of your Hybrid FMICs that I had installed and it was you that installed it, so I'm sure that wasn't the case. And then I had the car remapped by Bob Rawle (on your recommendation). Bob did a fine job but when I discussed with him the issue of increased lag between gear changes, he explained to be that there was nothing he could do about it. In his words, "it's the simple laws of physics of having a larger volume of air to pressurise." I can dig around and post AndyF's calculations for increased lag due to a larger volume of pipework if you like? They're pretty comprehensive and I think it would be churlish to dismiss them out of hand.

Please don't think I'm having a dig here - I'm not. I'm just trying to explain why some people actually prefer to run a TMIC. I know how passionate you are about Subaru tuning and I'm a great fan of your GT Spec up-pipe, which was a brilliant addition to my car, so please keep up the good work

 

Hi Andrew. As you say each to his own, however, I did not question the installation on your front mount intercooler, I was talking generally and I did point out that on SOME cars poor installation could be contributary. While 40C is not very high, typically I can see 6 deg.C over ambient maximum unless I give it the beans in which case 12 over ambient is probable with sustained use so a good bit lower generally than 40C.
Please refresh my memory. What turbo was on your car at the time we fitted your FMIC?
I accept there is a greater volume of air to compress but for exactly the reasons outlined in the magazine article above and quoted elsewhere on many occasions, if the car is mapped properly with an efficient installation you have a very sensitive backside to detect it and from my own experience, when you have a laggy car your driving style adjusts to compensate for it. However, I have already accepted that quarter mile sprints are probably the only place in my opinion where a top mount may show an advantage over an FMIC. Remember that theoretical calculations by eminent physicists have proven that the bumble bee cannot fly In the real world, done properly, the difference between a top mount and a front mount is more than offset by the additional power developed from the lower charge temperature on the front mount.
Coming from a naturally aspirated background you are passionate about response and I respect your alternative view on front mounts but I was interested enough to get to the bottom of these comparisons myself which is why I took the time, trouble and expense to fit an STi 8 intercooler and continue to develop the car with that fitted. We obviously have different views and your experience leaves you anti front mount whereas my experience indicates to me that beyond a particular power point there are gains to be had from a front mount and that the point at which a front mount becomes viable will vary model to model and subject to power and modifications all the way from MY93 forward. Indeed the 93 to 96 cars probably benefit from a front mount before 300 bhp. 97 to 98 and 99 to 00 will benefit by 320 bhp I guess and very definately by 330 bhp and the New Age cars 01 to 05 are in need of a front mount somewhere between 350 and before 400 bhp depending on whether they are WRX or STi. All 2 litres.

Thanks for your comments on the Special Performance 3 bolt uppipe. Nobody that has fitted one so far has had other than glowing reports.
Cheers.

 

do front mounts make the car more laggier?

just wondered if it's worth fitting one as i want a punchy 300bhp ish on a 96 jdm.

 

Why not read the thread and make your own mind up. Better still do a search as there is lots of information on this already available but at 300 bhp on a 96 car you will already benefit from a front mount. The big question is have you already done the other supporting mods and is this the next logical step or should you be spending the money elsewhere prior to actually fitting a front mount.
Much as I would like to sell you one of my Hybrid GTs, don't fit a front mount if you are not prepared to remap and for this reason your modification process should be thought out carefully and implemented in a logical order.

 

My 98 car had around 300bhp, and was running an STi6 TMIC. It had been mapped by Bob Rawle, who stated at the time that he thought the TMIC allowed him to dial in more advance.........it was better than the standard one.

However: my cylinder head gaskets needed replaced last October , and when they were done, the heads were skimmed. This was done by a local guy, who didn't fit thicker gaskets against the increased compression ratio, and didn't inform me to have the map checked against the same reason.

The engine destroyed itself in France last summer: it was running in 40 degree temperatures, at high speed for hours on French motorways. Three out of four respected tuners on here, who I contacted after it went pop, reckoned heatsoak would have been the problem.........not JUST the increased cr, because it had run over 9 months BEFORE it gave up, including a nice spirited run DOWN France

It has now gone to Harvey for a rebuild to around 400/400, which WILL include an FMIC.

I might also say that I have tried two other Scoobs since mine went bang, in order to satisfy myself what route to take in my rebuild, (cheers Duncan and Nathan). Both had FMICs and I could detect no lag in either.

 

Harvery - at the time I fitted the Hybrid FMIC, I had a VF35 and supporting mods to make about 340bhp. You are right - before running turbo cars, I had a high revving NA car running throttle bodies - absolutely instant response. Thus I probably have a touch of OCD about throttle response I would also add for anyone reading this thread that my car is an 03STI (Newage). If I had a Classic and wanted more power, I would absolutely fit a FMIC for all the reasons Harvey has given - it's a no-brainer! I would also add that in the many transactions I've had with him, Harvey has been great to deal with - a more helpful guy you will not find

 

Thanks Andrew. Do you need more NF and a fruit juice yet?
I guess you might have a few impassable roads over there. Some of our roads were closed last night and that is a very unusual occurrance. Cheers.

 

[quote=alcazar;9071639]My 98 car had around 300bhp, and was running an STi6 TMIC. It had been mapped by Bob Rawle, who stated at the time that he thought the TMIC allowed him to dial in more advance.........it was better than the standard one.

quote]

just out of curiosity, was this compared to the standard top mount? way it reads it sounds like its comparing to standard.

 

The high peaks around here are snow-capped and apparently the road over to Teesdale was pretty bad this morning, but the weather has improved since then. I'm OK for NF just at the minute but will be needing some before too long. I'll stick my head round the door when I'm next over your way

 

i am looking at fitting a new age tmic on my 97 classic.the ic is easy enough to get hold of on ebay but what else is needed to fit???

 

[quote=Tidgy;9074937]Yes, mate, compared to a standard UK '98 top mount intercooler.

 

Yes, mate, compared to a standard UK '98 top mount intercooler.

 

Harvey- Do you have any comparisons on running the STI 8 to the Hyperflow or APS top mount vs FMIS?

Thanks,
Carle.

 

[quote=alcazar;9075167]
i bet you can get even more in with a front mount

 

Sorry Carle but I have never considered wasting money buying an APS TMIC. I can tell you that the APS FMIC on my STi 6 Wagon performs less well than the Hybrids on H13 Wagon and STi 3 Wagon, something noted by both Bob Rawle and Steve Simpson. I plan to fit a Hybrid FMIC on the STi 6 Wagon soon. As for Hyperflow I cannot comment but didn't Scooby Clinic try that.
Personally, having taken a lot of time and trouble comparing ACTs on numerous standard TMIC set ups, STi 8 TMIC on Classics and front mounts on both Classics and New Age I just would not bother fittng a so called uprated top mount once the ability of the OE TMIC was exceeded. At that point for me it is straight on to an efficient front mount ie. Hybrid for a cost effective and efficient solution in terms of both performance and fitting.

 

Go read this very informative and eye opening article on top mounts and the results they found after testing them,it basicly backs up what Harvey has already said though,but well worth a read. http://www.autospeed.com.au/cms/A_1618/article.html

 

What an interesting find. Now for part 2. Thanks.

 

Here ya go Harvey,just for you.
http://www.autospeed.com.au/cms/A_1619/article.html

 

FWIW

MRT use rebranded hyperflow intercoolers

 

Thanks for keeping me out my bed WhiteWagonMan

 

..no probs mate,your welcome.