Intercooler pipes

The place for all technical car discussions. If you haven't already, read our Disclaimer first!

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Intercooler pipes

Postby Dell'Orto » Sat May 21, 2005 10:23 pm

Okay, Im currently making my engine bay look pretty :D
However the intercooler to throttle body pipe looks like arse, and I doubt even polishing or chroming could improve the look of the damn thing.
Basically, I want to replace it with something more smooth looking, but the factory pipe starts at 2", then flares rather suddenly to 2.5 at the throttle body.
What Im wondering, is can I replace the whole thing with a 2.5" pipe, or will I have to somehow get a pipe that replicates the standy one?
Still have the stock intercooler there, running a CT20b anywhere between 10 and 18psi :twisted:
1988 KE70 Wagon - Slowly rusting
1990 NA6 MX-5 - because reasons
2018 Ranger - Because workcar
1997 FD3S RX-7 Type R - all brap, all the time
OMG so shiny!

Quint wrote:Not just cock, large cock.
User avatar
Dell'Orto
** Moderator **
 
Posts: 17494
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 5:07 am
Location: Straight out the ghetto, Lower Hutt

Postby RS13 » Sat May 21, 2005 10:27 pm

I'd just get another 2.5" pipe made up. Samco I think can make silicon joiners to any size, (including adaptors to go from 2" to 2.5") for any application, I believe, and silicon is pretty enough.. :D
Daily driver: Toyota RunX/Toyota Caldina
Ex: 2x AE101, 5x KP60, KP61, EP71, 3x KE70, KE72, AE70, AE82, 2x TE71, AE90, AE92, ST170, plus 11 Hondas, 12 Nissans, 6 Fords, 4 Mazdas, 3 Mitsis, an Isuzu and a Lada!

Image
User avatar
RS13
Toyspeed Member
 
Posts: 3580
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:07 pm
Location: Christchurch

Postby Dell'Orto » Sat May 21, 2005 10:39 pm

Yeah, I got lots of Samco joiners already :D I'm more concerned that the 2.5" will create lag
1988 KE70 Wagon - Slowly rusting
1990 NA6 MX-5 - because reasons
2018 Ranger - Because workcar
1997 FD3S RX-7 Type R - all brap, all the time
OMG so shiny!

Quint wrote:Not just cock, large cock.
User avatar
Dell'Orto
** Moderator **
 
Posts: 17494
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 5:07 am
Location: Straight out the ghetto, Lower Hutt

Postby RS13 » Sat May 21, 2005 10:45 pm

Well, I'd imagine with such a minor increase in diameter, loss in response would be minimal, hardly noticable if anything. I'd imagine, as smaller piping means increased airspeed/increased turbulence/heat, larger piping, with slower airspeed/less heat/less turbulence, would mean a denser charge, more power? :?
Daily driver: Toyota RunX/Toyota Caldina
Ex: 2x AE101, 5x KP60, KP61, EP71, 3x KE70, KE72, AE70, AE82, 2x TE71, AE90, AE92, ST170, plus 11 Hondas, 12 Nissans, 6 Fords, 4 Mazdas, 3 Mitsis, an Isuzu and a Lada!

Image
User avatar
RS13
Toyspeed Member
 
Posts: 3580
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:07 pm
Location: Christchurch

Postby Erelyes » Sat May 21, 2005 10:57 pm

RS13 wrote:Well, I'd imagine with such a minor increase in diameter, loss in response would be minimal, hardly noticable if anything. I'd imagine, as smaller piping means increased airspeed/increased turbulence/heat, larger piping, with slower airspeed/less heat/less turbulence, would mean a denser charge, more power? :?


My guess would be that the 2" to 2.5" change would induce turbulence. If theres a bend in the pipe, the press bend would also increase turbulence, as it goes large>small>large.

That's my take on things, I am of course talking out my ass but thats what I've heard here'n'there.

So: 2.5in mandrel pipe would be fine :lol:

Edit: And reducing turbulence is good.. more airspeed = less lag.
Pete
JZX100 / Lancaster6
User avatar
Erelyes
Toyspeed Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 6:08 pm
Location: Wellington

Postby Lloyd » Sun May 22, 2005 12:35 am

RS13 wrote:Well, I'd imagine with such a minor increase in diameter, loss in response would be minimal, hardly noticable if anything.


2 inch up to 2.5 inch is an increase in area/volume of around 56%
User avatar
Lloyd
** Moderator **
 
Posts: 6195
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 1:50 pm
Location: Dunedin

Postby Malcolm » Sun May 22, 2005 1:10 am

I think that with such short piping the 2.5" won't make any significant (or even noticable) increase in lag, however since the exit from your turbo, and entrance to the intercooler are both 2", you will be increasing then decreasing cross sectional area, then increasing again coming out of the intercooler, and you may (just a maybe) find that a standard 2.5" mandrel bend isn't tight enough to fit in nicely up to your throttle body, so you might need a rather tight donut type, so infact the 2" might flow better (ie less turbulence and hence restriction) than the 2.5". 2" should still be plenty big enough too, provided you don't intend to further upgrade your turbo
User avatar
Malcolm
Toyspeed Member
 
Posts: 4631
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Auckland


Return to Tech Questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron