Bigger TMIC -help required-
19 November 2009, 05:17 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigger TMIC -help required-
Hey,
Been looking at some of the TMICs on the market.
Not wanting to go the FMIC way, for various reasons, which is the best TMIC for a newage WRX?
What are pros/cons over a standard WRX TMIC.
All help appreciated!
Thanks!
Been looking at some of the TMICs on the market.
Not wanting to go the FMIC way, for various reasons, which is the best TMIC for a newage WRX?
What are pros/cons over a standard WRX TMIC.
All help appreciated!
Thanks!
19 November 2009, 06:04 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell you what mate give simon a call at chevron motorsport on 01785 223336, trust me he is the man he sets up cars for track and rally and has spent a lot of time developing an awsome tmic, he used to build them for maclaren, nuf said, he is responsable for all the work on john beeches impreza and thats doing rather well in races, tell him steve from nottingham sent you and im sure he will look after you, cheers steve.
19 November 2009, 07:58 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the objective would be to go as far as you can on stock internals.
The car is a every day transport.
Obviously there are implications to the rest of the engine once you fiddle with something like the IC.
What is the most you can get from a TMIC (even without stock internals)?
Ta
The car is a every day transport.
Obviously there are implications to the rest of the engine once you fiddle with something like the IC.
What is the most you can get from a TMIC (even without stock internals)?
Ta
19 November 2009, 07:58 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell you what mate give simon a call at chevron motorsport on 01785 223336, trust me he is the man he sets up cars for track and rally and has spent a lot of time developing an awsome tmic, he used to build them for maclaren, nuf said, he is responsable for all the work on john beeches impreza and thats doing rather well in races, tell him steve from nottingham sent you and im sure he will look after you, cheers steve.
Do they have a site?
19 November 2009, 08:41 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey, when was the last time McLaren used an intercooler on something? F1 cars normally aspirated since 1989, F1 and SLR roadcars normally aspirated...
Jan - the obvious upgrade from a WRX standard TMIC is an STi one - although the answer to your "which is the best" question depends a lot on how much power you want to run. Answer that first and it'll be easier for us to make an informed recommendation.
Jan - the obvious upgrade from a WRX standard TMIC is an STi one - although the answer to your "which is the best" question depends a lot on how much power you want to run. Answer that first and it'll be easier for us to make an informed recommendation.
19 November 2009, 09:47 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey, when was the last time McLaren used an intercooler on something? F1 cars normally aspirated since 1989, F1 and SLR roadcars normally aspirated...
Jan - the obvious upgrade from a WRX standard TMIC is an STi one - although the answer to your "which is the best" question depends a lot on how much power you want to run. Answer that first and it'll be easier for us to make an informed recommendation.
Jan - the obvious upgrade from a WRX standard TMIC is an STi one - although the answer to your "which is the best" question depends a lot on how much power you want to run. Answer that first and it'll be easier for us to make an informed recommendation.
As for the second, how much can you extract, while still making the car feel "everyday normal", with a TMIC?
Thanks
Trending Topics
19 November 2009, 10:12 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MY01-05 is very good, MY06-7-8-9 is a bit better again. Newage WRX IC still produces reasonable charge temps at around 350bhp though, especially on a blobeye.
That's a bit of a confusingly-worded question. Whether the car will feel "everyday normal" or not is a function more of the overall power output and the response of the turbo than directly by the IC. However, to answer the question a slightly different way, the newage STi TMICs are good well over 400bhp.
As for the second, how much can you extract, while still making the car feel "everyday normal", with a TMIC?
19 November 2009, 10:53 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will be wasting the Chevron TMIC on a WRX, it will out perform anything you can do with standard internals and it isn't financially sound if you are going for 400 power wise. You can get that power with an STI TMIC (no-where near as efficiently, but it will do it).
As for which is the best... Due to the core and the efficiency, its the Chevron one. It's more efficient that front mounts (but i'm not getting into that argument again).
Re the Mclaren comment. Simon cut his teeth working on March, Mclaren, Judd, Lola etc. But working on them overall, not their intercoolers. He has a world of knowledge and I personally think he knows more about setup and preparation than anyone else in the subaru industry, but thats just my opinion and lots have their own favourites. I prefer his approach and rounded background rather than bolt on blindness.
As for which is the best... Due to the core and the efficiency, its the Chevron one. It's more efficient that front mounts (but i'm not getting into that argument again).
Re the Mclaren comment. Simon cut his teeth working on March, Mclaren, Judd, Lola etc. But working on them overall, not their intercoolers. He has a world of knowledge and I personally think he knows more about setup and preparation than anyone else in the subaru industry, but thats just my opinion and lots have their own favourites. I prefer his approach and rounded background rather than bolt on blindness.
20 November 2009, 12:39 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MY01-05 is very good, MY06-7-8-9 is a bit better again. Newage WRX IC still produces reasonable charge temps at around 350bhp though, especially on a blobeye.
That's a bit of a confusingly-worded question. Whether the car will feel "everyday normal" or not is a function more of the overall power output and the response of the turbo than directly by the IC. However, to answer the question a slightly different way, the newage STi TMICs are good well over 400bhp.
That's a bit of a confusingly-worded question. Whether the car will feel "everyday normal" or not is a function more of the overall power output and the response of the turbo than directly by the IC. However, to answer the question a slightly different way, the newage STi TMICs are good well over 400bhp.
The second, basically is the answer to the question I should have made in the first place!
Ok, but what about the MY05 WRX hood air intake, does it need to be changed to the larger STi one, or will it suffice for a STi TMIC?
20 November 2009, 12:42 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will be wasting the Chevron TMIC on a WRX, it will out perform anything you can do with standard internals and it isn't financially sound if you are going for 400 power wise. You can get that power with an STI TMIC (no-where near as efficiently, but it will do it).
As for which is the best... Due to the core and the efficiency, its the Chevron one. It's more efficient that front mounts (but i'm not getting into that argument again).
Re the Mclaren comment. Simon cut his teeth working on March, Mclaren, Judd, Lola etc. But working on them overall, not their intercoolers. He has a world of knowledge and I personally think he knows more about setup and preparation than anyone else in the subaru industry, but thats just my opinion and lots have their own favourites. I prefer his approach and rounded background rather than bolt on blindness.
As for which is the best... Due to the core and the efficiency, its the Chevron one. It's more efficient that front mounts (but i'm not getting into that argument again).
Re the Mclaren comment. Simon cut his teeth working on March, Mclaren, Judd, Lola etc. But working on them overall, not their intercoolers. He has a world of knowledge and I personally think he knows more about setup and preparation than anyone else in the subaru industry, but thats just my opinion and lots have their own favourites. I prefer his approach and rounded background rather than bolt on blindness.
I was unaware that Chevron made such good ICs!
21 November 2009, 08:49 PM
#19
Some reading for you.
Post 45 inparticular if you want first hand input from someone who has actually done both and made a lot of effort to make a fair assessment.
https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...99-harvey.html
Post 45 inparticular if you want first hand input from someone who has actually done both and made a lot of effort to make a fair assessment.
https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...99-harvey.html
22 November 2009, 05:57 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some reading for you.
Post 45 inparticular if you want first hand input from someone who has actually done both and made a lot of effort to make a fair assessment.
https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...99-harvey.html
Post 45 inparticular if you want first hand input from someone who has actually done both and made a lot of effort to make a fair assessment.
https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...99-harvey.html
23 November 2009, 12:45 PM
#21
As I have not specifically tested a Blobeye back to back TMIC vv FMIC I don't know but what I do know is that I ran an STi WRX UK at close to 350 bhp with the TMIC as fitted to that car by Subaru and if I was going to go much beyond that say 380 bhp it would have had a front mount where I know there would have been gains to be had.
I say this because of the monitoring we conducted on that car for ACTs and pressure drop.
I say this because of the monitoring we conducted on that car for ACTs and pressure drop.
23 November 2009, 12:52 PM
#22
I can't see why? With 340bhp, the STi TMIC is what I use and recommend. Capable of more than worrying some 500bhp+ cars 
The next stage will indeed include a Aztec supplied Hybrid GT2 FMIC (along with a 2.35ltr, AVCS, GT30 etc).
Just to create a seal in the absence of a undertray.
Yeah, it was a bit too much and was trimmed. 
The next stage will indeed include a Aztec supplied Hybrid GT2 FMIC (along with a 2.35ltr, AVCS, GT30 etc).
Just to create a seal in the absence of a undertray.
23 November 2009, 01:24 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have not specifically tested a Blobeye back to back TMIC vv FMIC I don't know but what I do know is that I ran an STi WRX UK at close to 350 bhp with the TMIC as fitted to that car by Subaru and if I was going to go much beyond that say 380 bhp it would have had a front mount where I know there would have been gains to be had.
I say this because of the monitoring we conducted on that car for ACTs and pressure drop.
I say this because of the monitoring we conducted on that car for ACTs and pressure drop.
Has helped me understand a lot about the FMTI/TMIC issues.
25 November 2009, 12:56 PM
#24
Just to add, if someone has an entrenched position but does not make use of air charge temperature and ambient temperature monitoring then their opinion is unlikely to be from a position of knowledge and therefore what they say could well be poo.
25 November 2009, 12:59 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
make s a big difference to all the cars, here ya go
http://www.scoobyclinic.com/download...coolertest.pdf
Last edited by Tidgy; 25 November 2009 at 01:00 PM.
25 November 2009, 02:43 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .........
Posts: 5,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
make s a big difference to all the cars, here ya go
http://www.scoobyclinic.com/download...coolertest.pdf
http://www.scoobyclinic.com/download...coolertest.pdf
27 November 2009, 10:15 AM
#29
make s a big difference to all the cars, here ya go
http://www.scoobyclinic.com/download...coolertest.pdf
http://www.scoobyclinic.com/download...coolertest.pdf
27 November 2009, 12:44 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
All this shows is that on a dyno with an air cooling system that is obviously incapable of replicating the airflow that a TMIC would see on the open road, you can generate bigger dyno figures using a FMIC. If you drive your car on a dyno using a piddly fan like that for cooling, it's probably quite a good test. For real cars on the real road, it's totally meaningless.
lmao, go and stand in front of the fan and see how piddly it is. The fan is aimed directly at the front of the car, the scoop is in as much airflow in both accounts. So its back to back, so any iacuracies caused by dyno/road are exactly the same for front and top mounts.
Dyno's will never replicate full driving conditions. However, the difference between road and dyno is you can control the forces involved on the dyno but the airflow speed is lower.
Power is all about inlet temps, no one can argue that fact. The cooler the inlet, the more oxygen there is to burn. The first thing to consider is the size. Lets face it, the scoop aint very big, 3 inches, by 15 inches (without measuring im guessing here, the relevance will become apparent). The bumper hole is what 8 inches by 20 inches.
3*15 = 45 square inch
8*20 = 160 square inches.
so your getting 3.5 times the cooling area, just based on airflow alone, not taking into account any heat from the engine bay.
so how can 3.5 times less area produce the same cooling? and thats not taking into account any sort of airflow movement (balooning) caused by the shape of the bonnet.
Now before you go on about there is no ballooning have a look at this,
this thing has the areodynamics a car company would love to have on a normal car. No road going car has them as efficient as something like this, and the first thing you can see is the smoke line hits the front and gets kicked up away from the bonnet, where the scoop would be (mid bonnet) i'd estimate form the pic its about an inch off the bonnet, so the 3.5 inches suddenly becomes 2.5 reducing the area to 30 quare inches.
Even on the road you can see inlet temp difference between a top and front mount so your argument has no basis on fact at all and does in fact go against the data that has been proven by many a person.