Which top mount to upgrade to?
18 February 2005, 06:52 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which top mount to upgrade to?
Which top mounted intercooler would you recommend for a MY97 WRX? I was thinking of an STI 5 unit,any suggestions?
18 February 2005, 11:04 PM
#4
From what has been posted on here the STI5 IC is not much better than what you have. I'm assuming that yours isn't the slanted type?
A samco hose would make yours very close to the spec of the STI5.
The 2002 WRX IC seems to do away with the need to modify the IC in relation to the idle speed control valve and is easier to fit than the STI8. Also, they go for around £80 -100 on ebay.
The STI8 is the way to go, as long as you dont mind the work invloved. Just bought one for my MY98 WRX!! £265
Grahams (911) thread is very informative about the fitting process
A samco hose would make yours very close to the spec of the STI5.
The 2002 WRX IC seems to do away with the need to modify the IC in relation to the idle speed control valve and is easier to fit than the STI8. Also, they go for around £80 -100 on ebay.
The STI8 is the way to go, as long as you dont mind the work invloved. Just bought one for my MY98 WRX!! £265
Grahams (911) thread is very informative about the fitting process
Last edited by Welloilbeefhooked; 18 February 2005 at 11:07 PM.
19 February 2005, 07:32 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why do you say the sti5 would be a good upgrade?
the 97/98 ic is regarded as one of the best flowing subaru ic`s out there
persoanly i would say the 2002 onwards wrx or the sti8
the sti5 isnt really any diffrent in real terms
the 97/98 ic is regarded as one of the best flowing subaru ic`s out there
persoanly i would say the 2002 onwards wrx or the sti8
the sti5 isnt really any diffrent in real terms
19 February 2005, 08:52 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bournemouth - 5x Ex Impreza owner. 997 GT3 CS.
Posts: 7,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, the Sti5 isn't that great. The MRT / Hyperflow TMIC is worth a look if you want to go with an aftermarket one, which you may do for ease of fitment. Price is not that far off a good FMIC, and quite a lot more than a Hybrid FMIC though.
STi8 is well worth a look as you can pick them up for £200 - £300, then just have the task of fitting it...
MB
STi8 is well worth a look as you can pick them up for £200 - £300, then just have the task of fitting it...
MB
Trending Topics
19 February 2005, 09:05 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stockport Cheshire Xbox Gamertag: Scooby WRX SMACS Member
Posts: 2,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Version 5-6 (MY99-00) WRX Intercooler
Flow 286.3 cfm
134.8 cfm with standard Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 3.8kg
Core Measurements 37.5 x 14.5 x 6.2cm (3371cm2)
As mentioned in Part One, the Version 5-6 intercooler has the same core dimensions as the previous model but has much denser external cooling fins and revised internal fins. This contributes to a big 21 percent increase in mass over the Version 4-5; we can only guess Subaru suddenly decided to get very serious with charge-air cooling.
This focus on improved cooling has come with a trade-off, however. On the flow bench, the Version 5-6 WRX intercooler dropped to nearly to the performance of the Version 2 WRX intercooler. With just 286.3 cfm flowing at 28-inches of water, this is certainly one of the most restrictive Subaru top-mount cores.
Airflow continues to decline when the standard Y-shape feed pipe is bolted on; this part is identical to that used on the Version 3-4 and caused a similarly massive flow loss. The result - at 134.8 cfm - is the worst flow figure of all the 'cooler/feed pipe assemblies.
Version 7 (MY01-02) WRX Intercooler
Flow 293.1 cfm
134.8 cfm with standard Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 3.5kg
Core Measurements 41.5 x 15 x 6.2cm (3860cm2)
Surprisingly - despite its larger dimensions - the current Version 7 WRX intercooler has 9 percent less thermal mass than the unit before. On the other hand, its 15 percent larger core volume - with a completely different cooling fin design - redeems its overall charge-air heat exchange potential. Airflow through the Version 7 intercooler is only slightly improved over the previous Version 5-6 - at 293.1 cfm, though, it's still a fair way behind the flow of the Version 3-4.
The Y-shaped cast alloy/plastic feed pipe is slightly different to those used in previous models and its restriction isn't quite as severe - adding the Version 7 feed pipe reduced airflow by 37 percent (down from about 50 percent in the Version 3-4 and 5-6 WRX).
Aftermarket Version 7 (MY01-MY02) Intercooler
Flow 349.5 cfm
231.7 cfm with silicone aftermarket Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 8.3kg
Core Measurements 48.8 x 17.5 x 11.2cm (9565cm2)
Boy is this thing heavy! The MRT bar-and-plate replacement for the Version 7 WRX 'cooler is well over double the mass of the original part; it's so heavy, in fact, we reckon you might need to strengthen your intercooler mounting brackets! Much of this extra weight comes from an 80 percent thicker core, which - in addition to contributing to a massive 147 percent larger core volume - also enables air to flow more freely. The airflow through the MRT Version 7 core is exceptional - its 349.5 cfm result equates to 19 percent more flow the stock unit.
As part of the MRT upgrade a two-piece silicone Y-shaped feed pipe is supplied. Thanks to its smooth internal surface, this pipe gives minimal restriction - adding it to the intercooler reduces airflow by a relatively low 33 percent. Note that this particular feed pipe won't mate to your factory Version 7 intercooler (again, damn!).
BG (MY97-98) Legacy Twin-Turbo Intercooler
Flow 314.3 cfm
255.7 cfm with twin cast alloy feed pipes attached (not including plastic pipes to turbochargers)
Mass 3.6kg
Core Measurements 37.5 x 14.5 x 6.2cm (3371cm2)
Hmmm, these figures look familiar. It seems the imported BG Legacy twin-turbo intercooler core is the same as used in the Version 3-4 STi - that's not surprising considering they're from the same timeframe and are used on engines making similar power. On the flow bench, the TT intercooler flowed around only half a percent less than the Version 3-4 STi job - this margin is so miniscule, however, it's likely to be variation of the flow bench.
In terms of heat exchange performance, the Twin-Turbo intercooler is around half a kilogram heavier than the Version 3-4 STi - though we suspect this is only because of some extra brackets and a metal core garnish. The core volume is identical to the Version 3-4 STi and WRX; that means, amongst the OE intercoolers, its core volume is beaten only by the Version 7 part.
BF (MY92-93) Liberty RS Water-to-Air Intercooler
Flow 221.1 cfm
211 cfm with standard RS feed pipe attached
Mass 3.9kg
Core Measurements Unable to measure, but smaller than Version 2 WRX (at 2852cm2)
First, we must point out that the 3.9-kilogram thermal mass quoted for the RS water-to-air heat exchanger is a little misleading in the context of air-to-air intercoolers. Some of this mass can be attributed to the external water jacket with two water necks and the alloy feed pipe that's cast as part of the intercooler body. Oh, and - since it's contained within the water jacket - we were unable to measure the volume of the water-to-air heat exchanger core.
And how did the RS intercooler flow? Well, we recorded 221.1 cfm but - again - this figure is misleading. As mentioned, the RS intercooler body integrates a large section of the feed pipe; this inevitably causes extra flow restriction compared to the rest of the 'coolers, whose feed pipe connect at the base of the rear end-tank. In other words, the flow figure for the bare RS intercooler is at a disadvantage.
On the other hand, only a short length of plastic pipe (which incorporates a blow-off valve fitting) is required to link the beginning of the alloy feed pipe to the turbocharger. Adding this to the intercooler saw just a 5 percent flow loss; the relatively small loss from fitting this part helped bolster the flow of the complete RS intercooler assembly beyond that of the Version 2, 3-4 and 7 WRX!
The Results At a Glance
This flow graph shows that the two aftermarket intercoolers have easily the least restriction. The MRT unit delivers 19 percent more flow than the standard Version 7 'cooler, while the AVO Version 2 job picks up 16 percent over the stocker. The acclaimed STi intercoolers put in a fairly unimpressive performance. Both the Version 2 and 3-4 STi parts out-flowed the standard WRX intercoolers by less than 2 percent - bugger all. Note that the Legacy Twin-Turbo intercooler flowed every bit as well as the Version 3-4 STi product.
You can see the run-of-the-mill WRX intercoolers have been undergoing continual development. The progression from Version 2 to Version 3-4 brought a considerable 16 percent flow increase, but - thanks to a focus on improved heat exchange - the Version 4-5 slid back to within a couple of percent of the original. These days, the Version 7 WRX intercooler walks the middle ground - it flows better than the Version 5-6, but not as well as the Version 3-4.
As mentioned, the flow figure we recorded for the bare Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler is a bit pessimistic (thanks to the majority of the feed pipe being cast into the intercooler body). Once the short plastic feed pipe extension is brought into the picture, however, the RS 'cooler assembly out-flows some of the WRX gear.
Adding the feed pipe to the intercoolers has an interesting effect. It's clear that those feed pipes with plastic convoluted sections flow very poorly - airflow through Version 2 to Version 6 WRX intercoolers dropped nearly 50 percent when the feed pipes were attached, while the Version 7 fell about 40 percent. The STi and aftermarket feed pipes show the gains that are possible by smoothing the path into the intercooler - the alloy/silicone Version 2 STi feed pipe more than halved the restriction caused by of the standard plastic part.
This graph clearly shows the superior mass of the aftermarket intercoolers - the large bar-and-plate core constructions are much heavier than the factory cores. In contrast, the STi intercoolers have no thermal mass advantage over the base WRX versions, but - as a trend - the 'coolers become heavier as the models progress. The only exception to this is the Version 7 unit, which is lighter than the densely finned Version 5-6. Note that the Legacy Twin-Turbo shares the same quoted mass as the Version 5-6 WRX, but some of this can be put down to some extra brackets and a metal core garnish - its core section appears identical to the contemporary Version 3-4 WRX/STi. As mentioned, the quoted Liberty RS intercooler mass is also a bit deceptive - the water jacket, pipes and the integrated feed pipe help tip the scales further than the rest of the field.
Here you can compare the second indicator to the intercoolers' heat exchange performance - the volume of its core section. The MRT Version 7 unit is, again, a clear winner with well over double the volume of the standard Version 7 unit; the aftermarket Version 2 core is also much larger than the standard one. The STi core volumes were no different to the basic WRX. Interestingly, though, the standard WRX cores have been growing incrementally - the current Version 7 core, for example, is some 35 percent larger in volume than the Version 2. Note that the core volume of the Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler was impossible to accurately measure - in a side-by-side comparison, however, it's obviously smaller than that of the Version 2 WRX. But, then, a water-to-air core has different heat exchange properties to an air-to-air core so we're not comparing apples to apples...
Summary :
The top-mount intercooler location will always be less than ideal, but we've demonstrated that good flow and heat exchange gains can still be realised.
For those on a budget, the imported Legacy Twin-Turbo intercooler is one to look out for. Within the collection of OE air-to-air intercoolers tested, it provides the equal highest airflow (shared with the Version 3-4 STi), the equal highest thermal mass (shared with the Version 5-6 WRX) and its core volume is bettered only by the current Version 7. What's more, these much-underrated 'coolers can be commonly bought from import wreckers for just AUD$350. And what will it fit? Well, we believe the TT intercooler can be made to fit Version 3-onward WRXs using your existing feed pipe (the twin-turbo pipe arrangement is entirely unsuitable for a single turbo application). Oh, and your blow-off valve arrangement will also need revision.
Note that if your primary consideration is charge-air cooling, the Version 5-6 and Version 7 WRX intercoolers appear the most thermally efficient of the air-to-air OE parts - the Version 5-6 intercooler's flow, however, is very poor.
If you drive a Version 2 WRX you're severely limited by the tight clearance between the throttle and firewall. As we've seen, however, you can achieve excellent heat exchange and airflow improvements by fitting a quality aftermarket intercooler (such as the AVO 'cooler) along with a smoothly contoured feed pipe. If your budget doesn't extend to an aftermarket 'cooler, the only options are to fit a smooth feed pipe (again, like the AVO part) and maybe a water spray system for the core. Oh, and you might also want to enlarge the charge-air inlet in the rear end-tank - STi certainly thought it was worthwhile.
Overall, the STi intercoolers failed to live up to their reputation. Of those models tested here, none of the STi 'coolers gave any thermal advantage over the normal WRX part and their airflow advantage is miniscule. Swapping from a standard WRX intercooler to a STi version is a waste of time, but the STi feed pipe is an effective upgrade. The cast alloy/silicone hose feed pipe offers superior airflow along with improved durability (remember, the plastic WRX feed pipes are prone to split at high boost). The Version 3-4 feed will bolt onto any Version 3-4 or 5-6 WRX intercooler.
An interesting player was the Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler. Offering better airflow than some of the standard WRX stuff and the potential to allow better charge-air cooling - particularly in stop-start conditions - it's an attractive proposition. Despite being able to fit anywhere a standard WRX top-mount lives, the only drawback is the hassle and expense involved sourcing and installing a water pump, radiator and electric system.
The undisputed hot performer leader of those 'coolers tested is the MRT bar-and-plate replacement for Version 7 WRXs. With 137 percent greater thermal mass, 148 percent more core volume and - together with the associated feed pipe - 26 percent more flow than the stock 'cooler it makes you wonder if a front-mount is always that much of a 'necessity'...
Flow 286.3 cfm
134.8 cfm with standard Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 3.8kg
Core Measurements 37.5 x 14.5 x 6.2cm (3371cm2)
As mentioned in Part One, the Version 5-6 intercooler has the same core dimensions as the previous model but has much denser external cooling fins and revised internal fins. This contributes to a big 21 percent increase in mass over the Version 4-5; we can only guess Subaru suddenly decided to get very serious with charge-air cooling.
This focus on improved cooling has come with a trade-off, however. On the flow bench, the Version 5-6 WRX intercooler dropped to nearly to the performance of the Version 2 WRX intercooler. With just 286.3 cfm flowing at 28-inches of water, this is certainly one of the most restrictive Subaru top-mount cores.
Airflow continues to decline when the standard Y-shape feed pipe is bolted on; this part is identical to that used on the Version 3-4 and caused a similarly massive flow loss. The result - at 134.8 cfm - is the worst flow figure of all the 'cooler/feed pipe assemblies.
Version 7 (MY01-02) WRX Intercooler
Flow 293.1 cfm
134.8 cfm with standard Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 3.5kg
Core Measurements 41.5 x 15 x 6.2cm (3860cm2)
Surprisingly - despite its larger dimensions - the current Version 7 WRX intercooler has 9 percent less thermal mass than the unit before. On the other hand, its 15 percent larger core volume - with a completely different cooling fin design - redeems its overall charge-air heat exchange potential. Airflow through the Version 7 intercooler is only slightly improved over the previous Version 5-6 - at 293.1 cfm, though, it's still a fair way behind the flow of the Version 3-4.
The Y-shaped cast alloy/plastic feed pipe is slightly different to those used in previous models and its restriction isn't quite as severe - adding the Version 7 feed pipe reduced airflow by 37 percent (down from about 50 percent in the Version 3-4 and 5-6 WRX).
Aftermarket Version 7 (MY01-MY02) Intercooler
Flow 349.5 cfm
231.7 cfm with silicone aftermarket Y-shape feed pipe attached
Mass 8.3kg
Core Measurements 48.8 x 17.5 x 11.2cm (9565cm2)
Boy is this thing heavy! The MRT bar-and-plate replacement for the Version 7 WRX 'cooler is well over double the mass of the original part; it's so heavy, in fact, we reckon you might need to strengthen your intercooler mounting brackets! Much of this extra weight comes from an 80 percent thicker core, which - in addition to contributing to a massive 147 percent larger core volume - also enables air to flow more freely. The airflow through the MRT Version 7 core is exceptional - its 349.5 cfm result equates to 19 percent more flow the stock unit.
As part of the MRT upgrade a two-piece silicone Y-shaped feed pipe is supplied. Thanks to its smooth internal surface, this pipe gives minimal restriction - adding it to the intercooler reduces airflow by a relatively low 33 percent. Note that this particular feed pipe won't mate to your factory Version 7 intercooler (again, damn!).
BG (MY97-98) Legacy Twin-Turbo Intercooler
Flow 314.3 cfm
255.7 cfm with twin cast alloy feed pipes attached (not including plastic pipes to turbochargers)
Mass 3.6kg
Core Measurements 37.5 x 14.5 x 6.2cm (3371cm2)
Hmmm, these figures look familiar. It seems the imported BG Legacy twin-turbo intercooler core is the same as used in the Version 3-4 STi - that's not surprising considering they're from the same timeframe and are used on engines making similar power. On the flow bench, the TT intercooler flowed around only half a percent less than the Version 3-4 STi job - this margin is so miniscule, however, it's likely to be variation of the flow bench.
In terms of heat exchange performance, the Twin-Turbo intercooler is around half a kilogram heavier than the Version 3-4 STi - though we suspect this is only because of some extra brackets and a metal core garnish. The core volume is identical to the Version 3-4 STi and WRX; that means, amongst the OE intercoolers, its core volume is beaten only by the Version 7 part.
BF (MY92-93) Liberty RS Water-to-Air Intercooler
Flow 221.1 cfm
211 cfm with standard RS feed pipe attached
Mass 3.9kg
Core Measurements Unable to measure, but smaller than Version 2 WRX (at 2852cm2)
First, we must point out that the 3.9-kilogram thermal mass quoted for the RS water-to-air heat exchanger is a little misleading in the context of air-to-air intercoolers. Some of this mass can be attributed to the external water jacket with two water necks and the alloy feed pipe that's cast as part of the intercooler body. Oh, and - since it's contained within the water jacket - we were unable to measure the volume of the water-to-air heat exchanger core.
And how did the RS intercooler flow? Well, we recorded 221.1 cfm but - again - this figure is misleading. As mentioned, the RS intercooler body integrates a large section of the feed pipe; this inevitably causes extra flow restriction compared to the rest of the 'coolers, whose feed pipe connect at the base of the rear end-tank. In other words, the flow figure for the bare RS intercooler is at a disadvantage.
On the other hand, only a short length of plastic pipe (which incorporates a blow-off valve fitting) is required to link the beginning of the alloy feed pipe to the turbocharger. Adding this to the intercooler saw just a 5 percent flow loss; the relatively small loss from fitting this part helped bolster the flow of the complete RS intercooler assembly beyond that of the Version 2, 3-4 and 7 WRX!
The Results At a Glance
This flow graph shows that the two aftermarket intercoolers have easily the least restriction. The MRT unit delivers 19 percent more flow than the standard Version 7 'cooler, while the AVO Version 2 job picks up 16 percent over the stocker. The acclaimed STi intercoolers put in a fairly unimpressive performance. Both the Version 2 and 3-4 STi parts out-flowed the standard WRX intercoolers by less than 2 percent - bugger all. Note that the Legacy Twin-Turbo intercooler flowed every bit as well as the Version 3-4 STi product.
You can see the run-of-the-mill WRX intercoolers have been undergoing continual development. The progression from Version 2 to Version 3-4 brought a considerable 16 percent flow increase, but - thanks to a focus on improved heat exchange - the Version 4-5 slid back to within a couple of percent of the original. These days, the Version 7 WRX intercooler walks the middle ground - it flows better than the Version 5-6, but not as well as the Version 3-4.
As mentioned, the flow figure we recorded for the bare Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler is a bit pessimistic (thanks to the majority of the feed pipe being cast into the intercooler body). Once the short plastic feed pipe extension is brought into the picture, however, the RS 'cooler assembly out-flows some of the WRX gear.
Adding the feed pipe to the intercoolers has an interesting effect. It's clear that those feed pipes with plastic convoluted sections flow very poorly - airflow through Version 2 to Version 6 WRX intercoolers dropped nearly 50 percent when the feed pipes were attached, while the Version 7 fell about 40 percent. The STi and aftermarket feed pipes show the gains that are possible by smoothing the path into the intercooler - the alloy/silicone Version 2 STi feed pipe more than halved the restriction caused by of the standard plastic part.
This graph clearly shows the superior mass of the aftermarket intercoolers - the large bar-and-plate core constructions are much heavier than the factory cores. In contrast, the STi intercoolers have no thermal mass advantage over the base WRX versions, but - as a trend - the 'coolers become heavier as the models progress. The only exception to this is the Version 7 unit, which is lighter than the densely finned Version 5-6. Note that the Legacy Twin-Turbo shares the same quoted mass as the Version 5-6 WRX, but some of this can be put down to some extra brackets and a metal core garnish - its core section appears identical to the contemporary Version 3-4 WRX/STi. As mentioned, the quoted Liberty RS intercooler mass is also a bit deceptive - the water jacket, pipes and the integrated feed pipe help tip the scales further than the rest of the field.
Here you can compare the second indicator to the intercoolers' heat exchange performance - the volume of its core section. The MRT Version 7 unit is, again, a clear winner with well over double the volume of the standard Version 7 unit; the aftermarket Version 2 core is also much larger than the standard one. The STi core volumes were no different to the basic WRX. Interestingly, though, the standard WRX cores have been growing incrementally - the current Version 7 core, for example, is some 35 percent larger in volume than the Version 2. Note that the core volume of the Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler was impossible to accurately measure - in a side-by-side comparison, however, it's obviously smaller than that of the Version 2 WRX. But, then, a water-to-air core has different heat exchange properties to an air-to-air core so we're not comparing apples to apples...
Summary :
The top-mount intercooler location will always be less than ideal, but we've demonstrated that good flow and heat exchange gains can still be realised.
For those on a budget, the imported Legacy Twin-Turbo intercooler is one to look out for. Within the collection of OE air-to-air intercoolers tested, it provides the equal highest airflow (shared with the Version 3-4 STi), the equal highest thermal mass (shared with the Version 5-6 WRX) and its core volume is bettered only by the current Version 7. What's more, these much-underrated 'coolers can be commonly bought from import wreckers for just AUD$350. And what will it fit? Well, we believe the TT intercooler can be made to fit Version 3-onward WRXs using your existing feed pipe (the twin-turbo pipe arrangement is entirely unsuitable for a single turbo application). Oh, and your blow-off valve arrangement will also need revision.
Note that if your primary consideration is charge-air cooling, the Version 5-6 and Version 7 WRX intercoolers appear the most thermally efficient of the air-to-air OE parts - the Version 5-6 intercooler's flow, however, is very poor.
If you drive a Version 2 WRX you're severely limited by the tight clearance between the throttle and firewall. As we've seen, however, you can achieve excellent heat exchange and airflow improvements by fitting a quality aftermarket intercooler (such as the AVO 'cooler) along with a smoothly contoured feed pipe. If your budget doesn't extend to an aftermarket 'cooler, the only options are to fit a smooth feed pipe (again, like the AVO part) and maybe a water spray system for the core. Oh, and you might also want to enlarge the charge-air inlet in the rear end-tank - STi certainly thought it was worthwhile.
Overall, the STi intercoolers failed to live up to their reputation. Of those models tested here, none of the STi 'coolers gave any thermal advantage over the normal WRX part and their airflow advantage is miniscule. Swapping from a standard WRX intercooler to a STi version is a waste of time, but the STi feed pipe is an effective upgrade. The cast alloy/silicone hose feed pipe offers superior airflow along with improved durability (remember, the plastic WRX feed pipes are prone to split at high boost). The Version 3-4 feed will bolt onto any Version 3-4 or 5-6 WRX intercooler.
An interesting player was the Liberty RS water-to-air intercooler. Offering better airflow than some of the standard WRX stuff and the potential to allow better charge-air cooling - particularly in stop-start conditions - it's an attractive proposition. Despite being able to fit anywhere a standard WRX top-mount lives, the only drawback is the hassle and expense involved sourcing and installing a water pump, radiator and electric system.
The undisputed hot performer leader of those 'coolers tested is the MRT bar-and-plate replacement for Version 7 WRXs. With 137 percent greater thermal mass, 148 percent more core volume and - together with the associated feed pipe - 26 percent more flow than the stock 'cooler it makes you wonder if a front-mount is always that much of a 'necessity'...
19 February 2005, 01:45 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BOB'5
IMO the sti5 i/c would be a good upgrade. All depends on your goals really though.
Whats the spec?
Bob
Whats the spec?
Bob
The current spec is : Tsl decat + HKS super drager, Power fc, Sti Panel filter, 1.25bar peak boost
I'm not looking at massive power levels just a reliable 320 ish bhp on standard internals.
Last edited by Jamie_B; 19 February 2005 at 02:06 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Brzoza
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
1
02 October 2015 05:26 PM
