Joined
·
251 Posts
I run a killer chiller, my IAT's start at 80 and never get above 111. This is perfect because timing won't be pulled. I/C coolant never gets above 70 on a hard pull at the track. Ran 9.6 last week on a hot lap. 
BWoody Heat Exchanger install, race version, and BMR ice tank reservoir
-
Hey Everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of this months Ride of the Month Challenge!
21 - 40 of 74 Posts
Joined
·
419 Posts
Very nice. For 1/4 mile racing, it's pretty clear that some kind of interchiller is the most predictable, effective, and straightforward way to go. Install really isn't any worse than the race HE, with all the trimming of the fascia you have to do with the HE.
I think that larger BMR tank really helps to keep those temps low through the whole run with the chiller. Gotta have that reserve of supercooled fluid.
I will have to see what my IAT's hit at the end of the track (1/8 mile) when racing starts this year.
I think that larger BMR tank really helps to keep those temps low through the whole run with the chiller. Gotta have that reserve of supercooled fluid.
I will have to see what my IAT's hit at the end of the track (1/8 mile) when racing starts this year.
Thanks, keep us updated
Joined
·
299 Posts
From what I've read the 3.5 core is too thick. (I don't know how accurate this info is so take it with a grain of salt)
Thick/Tight Cores Are A Problem:
Through testing we have learned that once cores get thicker than 2.625” they’re too thick to efficiently pass air though them. As an extreme example we have tested a 2.65” core vs a 3.125” core. The 3.125” core had half the airflow of the 2.65”. So yes, core size/volume is very important. But only if that volume is attained without making it too thick.
www.departmentofboost.com
Thick/Tight Cores Are A Problem:
Through testing we have learned that once cores get thicker than 2.625” they’re too thick to efficiently pass air though them. As an extreme example we have tested a 2.65” core vs a 3.125” core. The 3.125” core had half the airflow of the 2.65”. So yes, core size/volume is very important. But only if that volume is attained without making it too thick.
Heat Exchanger Size-Tech Information S197 - Department of Boost
www.departmentofboost.com
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
Yeah, but you see all the condensation those chillers generate on aluminum. The placement of the bmr tank is bad imo with use of anything, especially a chiller, because you’ll be dropping water from condensation directly on the coil packs and wiring/connectors under it
Joined
·
419 Posts
Yes, I've read that, but this was the only option. I've talked quite a bit to the guy who has that site as he's a mustang guy, and he told me that he does plan to make a kit for the hellcat eventually. The big thing he emphasizes is the importance of water speed and also inlet and outlet sizes of the HE and also the intercooler, and as large of hoses as you can run, like 1.25". The bwoody also should have bigger ports.From what I've read the 3.5 core is too thick. (I don't know how accurate this info is so take it with a grain of salt)
Heat Exchanger Size-Tech Information S197 - Department of Boost
So, yes, the bwoody HE could be more efficient. But it is a big improvement over the dinky HE the car comes with. But time will tell when I test it out this summer.
Joined
·
419 Posts
I am not running ice in mine, and no interchiller. I am just trying to increase coolant capacity, which this does, by a little under 1.5 gallons, which is a lot considering how little coolant is actually in the stock system. I have adhesive heat material around the box. It stays cool, and no issues with condensation of course using it the way that I am. But I see how that would be a problem with running ice or interchiller.
If someone were going to run ice, they could run a trunk mounted ice tank.
That's a good point. If it were me and I ran the BMR tank with ice or interchiller, I'd makes some kind of shield or something so that water didn't get on coil packs or whatever, or maybe try to add a reservoir down behind the front bumper or something.
I'd never mess with ice. Seems like a big pain.
Joined
·
419 Posts
Another obvious negative with the BMR reservoir is it has to be removed to get to the coils and spark plugs. However, I will just suck the fluid out of it and then I have AN fittings for everything, and I also have AN caps and plugs to put on all the lines and on the reservoir itself.
So it will be a pain. But I'd still rather do it this way than have something in the trunk. There isn't really room anywhere along the front bumper since the stock HE is on the DS and the oil cooler is on the PS.
So it will be a pain. But I'd still rather do it this way than have something in the trunk. There isn't really room anywhere along the front bumper since the stock HE is on the DS and the oil cooler is on the PS.
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
The trunk is a bad idea. Takes way too long to get back there and up front. If you runner a chiller, never do a trunk ice tank
Joined
·
73 Posts
What IS the Bwoody cooler? A cooler for the intercoolers?
Joined
·
73 Posts
Line the front of the tank (EDIT: COOLER, NOT TANK) with a series of all-environment Noctua cooling fans that can be switched on via thermostat or manually? Or put them behind. Noctuas don't care. They are top-of-the-line computer cooling fans, and the industrial ones can REALLY flow the air and are splash-proof.From what I've read the 3.5 core is too thick. (I don't know how accurate this info is so take it with a grain of salt)
Thick/Tight Cores Are A Problem:
Through testing we have learned that once cores get thicker than 2.625” they’re too thick to efficiently pass air though them. As an extreme example we have tested a 2.65” core vs a 3.125” core. The 3.125” core had half the airflow of the 2.65”. So yes, core size/volume is very important. But only if that volume is attained without making it too thick.
Heat Exchanger Size-Tech Information S197 - Department of Boost
Joined
·
299 Posts
That same company said cooling fans don't help and actually hurt airflow above 40mph. There is no room for them in any case there is barely enough room for the cooler.
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
It’s a ball cooler - all hellcat owners have huge balls
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
I kind of want one, I don’t know. Going to change the plugs again soon, maybe I’ll do them before I get the tank lol
Joined
·
73 Posts
What I find hard to believe is that the thicker cooler would somehow lack airflow in the first place. Have you noticed it fails to cool in any sense?
I looked on their site, and, evidently, it cools the intercooler coolant in addition to the stock cooler(s.) If that is the case, the results seem effective, for certain.
This looks like an interesting little factory souvenir, like the piece of wax paper and coffee cup found by one Mustang restorer under something in his car when he restored it, evidently a souvenir from coffee break way back in the 1960's during the build process at the factory.
Joined
·
419 Posts
View attachment 595993
This looks like an interesting little factory souvenir, like the piece of wax paper and coffee cup found by one Mustang restorer under something in his car when he restored it, evidently a souvenir from coffee break way back in the 1960's during the build process at the factory.
[/QUOTE]
I thought that was pretty funny.
I contacted bwoody and asked them about the 3.5 thickness. They said that if it's a street car go with the 2" one, and they've found that the 3.5" works better at the track where you are cooling down between runs. I do think coolant capacity makes a big difference. Anything you can do to increase that, is good, and the stock system really has a surprisingly low coolant capacity.
Also, whenever someone talks about testing they've done, I always want to know the exact parameters of the test. What was the speed of the air? Did they test it like what will happen on the track where you go from no air speed to where your car is going 100 mph or more? The question is what will my IAT and IC coolant temp be rolling up to the beams and at the end of the track (or what was the average temp for the run). I think someone posted that with the interchiller they were at like 80 degrees or somewhere around there at the end of the track. And I am still wondering about the physics of losing 50% airflow with a 15% increase in thickness. Of course, physics is usually not linear, so that could be, but, again, how was this tested, and what was the cooling effect. Maybe the cooling effect overall was still better when you take into account the area and the coolant itself???? In the link to the site that's tested HE's a lot, it says the airflow was reduced by 50%, not that the cooling was reduced by that much. They should post the effect on the coolant temp, as they state earlier on that page that's how HE's should be tested, by the coolant temp prior to and after the HE.
For me, if my IC temps are at ambient and stay there long enough for me to sit in the staging lanes for 15 minutes and then stage and roll into the beams, this will be a success. Just looking for consistency.
This looks like an interesting little factory souvenir, like the piece of wax paper and coffee cup found by one Mustang restorer under something in his car when he restored it, evidently a souvenir from coffee break way back in the 1960's during the build process at the factory.
[/QUOTE]
I thought that was pretty funny.
I contacted bwoody and asked them about the 3.5 thickness. They said that if it's a street car go with the 2" one, and they've found that the 3.5" works better at the track where you are cooling down between runs. I do think coolant capacity makes a big difference. Anything you can do to increase that, is good, and the stock system really has a surprisingly low coolant capacity.
Also, whenever someone talks about testing they've done, I always want to know the exact parameters of the test. What was the speed of the air? Did they test it like what will happen on the track where you go from no air speed to where your car is going 100 mph or more? The question is what will my IAT and IC coolant temp be rolling up to the beams and at the end of the track (or what was the average temp for the run). I think someone posted that with the interchiller they were at like 80 degrees or somewhere around there at the end of the track. And I am still wondering about the physics of losing 50% airflow with a 15% increase in thickness. Of course, physics is usually not linear, so that could be, but, again, how was this tested, and what was the cooling effect. Maybe the cooling effect overall was still better when you take into account the area and the coolant itself???? In the link to the site that's tested HE's a lot, it says the airflow was reduced by 50%, not that the cooling was reduced by that much. They should post the effect on the coolant temp, as they state earlier on that page that's how HE's should be tested, by the coolant temp prior to and after the HE.
For me, if my IC temps are at ambient and stay there long enough for me to sit in the staging lanes for 15 minutes and then stage and roll into the beams, this will be a success. Just looking for consistency.
Joined
·
299 Posts
For me it takes only 5 minutes or so for my IC coolant temps to spike to 130+
It takes considerably longer than 1/4 mile to cool back down.
My IC temps never get to ambient either while driving it's usually 10-12 deg above ambient.
These are the exact same temps as before with just the stock set up. It maybe cools down a little bit faster than stock.
I only paid $350 for the 3.5" "race" version and even at that price don't think it's worth it.
It takes considerably longer than 1/4 mile to cool back down.
My IC temps never get to ambient either while driving it's usually 10-12 deg above ambient.
These are the exact same temps as before with just the stock set up. It maybe cools down a little bit faster than stock.
I only paid $350 for the 3.5" "race" version and even at that price don't think it's worth it.
Joined
·
251 Posts
very theoretical there…
factual: havent seen condensation anywhere on them or on the ground.
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
It’s not theoretical, it’s physics. The aluminum will be so cold from dipping below freezing / at freezing from the interchiller condensation from the air will collect and freeze on it. Do you have a killer chiller?
21 - 40 of 74 Posts
Join the discussion
