SE Turbo Front Mount Intercooler
- Thread starter Otto J
- Start date
- Joined
- May 27, 2001
I don't think that Dave is mean........ 
Just Kidding Dave, I am just jealous....
Call me some time!!!
Just Kidding Dave, I am just jealous....
Call me some time!!!
OMFG! Some peoples heads are a little to swelled and they might want to remove the c@ck rings from around thier necks.
This thread is not supposed to be a personal attack on any one. Jack Cotton and his IC have both been singled out, and the crap has been slung back and forth. You guys need to stop thinking that Jack and all the rest of us reading this post are stupid. If you guys REFUSE to let this be hashed out intelligently then it proves that this is a personal attack.
Now I have met TED in person, talked to him on the phone more than a couple of times, bought some parts of him, asked him for, and taken some of his advice. I'm not questioning Ted's intellegence, knowledge, or experience. I'm responding to this thread because...
I picked up a Cotton FM to go on my nephews car.
My nephew Andy Filson died in a car crash in July which was only a few months after he graduated college. I don't want to go into a big post about all that, but I've been given his car and asked by his parents to finish his dream. I need to find out if this Cotton FM is a P.O.S for a mid to low 9 second car. I CAN NOT afford to let a poor intercooler choice compromise this project.
I asked a few questions, gave a little input on why I was asking those questions, and I was not rude or arrogant in the way I asked them. I have only personally met and talked to five guys running stage motors. Four of them run a Cotton FM; Ted A, Jack, DrBoost, and Odell. I thought that this was the IC i was supposed to go get, and I did.
There are a couple of people that this IC is flat out not working for. They have concluded that its a P.O.S for thier application. I need to ask some serious questions and then make a decision. Ted and Otto ran a GN-1 / 76 turbo combo, Andy's combo will be Stage 2 heads / 88 turbo. If I ran a relatively low boost 9.50 with the S2/88 combo will this IC work good, or will it still be a P.O.S. Mainly and most importantly I would like to know a few details of thier set ups to help me make my decision.
Otto and Ted:
There are people out there building up stage motors for the first time, some like myself may already have a Cotton FM sitting there. I can't speak for them but I know if you guys took the time to answere those few questions in my previous post it will help me make my final decision on wether I should keep or sell this IC.
Thanks in advance: Jason
My TTA is only about 90% of the way done. It will probably sit partially completed for a long time, because of Andy's car. The IC for it is a custom liquid unit built for and ran on a 7 second Mustang, (I might be able to figure out a way to run it in Andy's GN, in that case I would build my own liquid for the TTA). It might be two or three years before the TTA ever makes a pass. When it does run I dont care if it goes 9.80 or 8.80, it will be my car and I'm sure I'll have alot of fun tinkering with it. BTW thanks for stating that my above post is useless garbage. The guy who built your IC would not think so, and the engineers who designed the cores would not think so either.
This thread is not supposed to be a personal attack on any one. Jack Cotton and his IC have both been singled out, and the crap has been slung back and forth. You guys need to stop thinking that Jack and all the rest of us reading this post are stupid. If you guys REFUSE to let this be hashed out intelligently then it proves that this is a personal attack.
Now I have met TED in person, talked to him on the phone more than a couple of times, bought some parts of him, asked him for, and taken some of his advice. I'm not questioning Ted's intellegence, knowledge, or experience. I'm responding to this thread because...
I picked up a Cotton FM to go on my nephews car.
My nephew Andy Filson died in a car crash in July which was only a few months after he graduated college. I don't want to go into a big post about all that, but I've been given his car and asked by his parents to finish his dream. I need to find out if this Cotton FM is a P.O.S for a mid to low 9 second car. I CAN NOT afford to let a poor intercooler choice compromise this project.
I asked a few questions, gave a little input on why I was asking those questions, and I was not rude or arrogant in the way I asked them. I have only personally met and talked to five guys running stage motors. Four of them run a Cotton FM; Ted A, Jack, DrBoost, and Odell. I thought that this was the IC i was supposed to go get, and I did.
There are a couple of people that this IC is flat out not working for. They have concluded that its a P.O.S for thier application. I need to ask some serious questions and then make a decision. Ted and Otto ran a GN-1 / 76 turbo combo, Andy's combo will be Stage 2 heads / 88 turbo. If I ran a relatively low boost 9.50 with the S2/88 combo will this IC work good, or will it still be a P.O.S. Mainly and most importantly I would like to know a few details of thier set ups to help me make my decision.
Otto and Ted:
There are people out there building up stage motors for the first time, some like myself may already have a Cotton FM sitting there. I can't speak for them but I know if you guys took the time to answere those few questions in my previous post it will help me make my final decision on wether I should keep or sell this IC.
Thanks in advance: Jason
My TTA is only about 90% of the way done. It will probably sit partially completed for a long time, because of Andy's car. The IC for it is a custom liquid unit built for and ran on a 7 second Mustang, (I might be able to figure out a way to run it in Andy's GN, in that case I would build my own liquid for the TTA). It might be two or three years before the TTA ever makes a pass. When it does run I dont care if it goes 9.80 or 8.80, it will be my car and I'm sure I'll have alot of fun tinkering with it. BTW thanks for stating that my above post is useless garbage. The guy who built your IC would not think so, and the engineers who designed the cores would not think so either.
Laz, Did you ever record your inlet temps after the intercooler?
Postal, If my turbo is out of its range at 22#s on a 76,What is the range on a 71 turbo? <But by what you are posting My GTS 76 Turbo is good for 800 Horsepower? And the one Ted had also???
I know PTE rates my turbo at 1100 hp,On a calculator my car made 1019 flywheel,So i pushed 200 or more horsepower than you say its good for?
Not sure i follow well.
Postal, If my turbo is out of its range at 22#s on a 76,What is the range on a 71 turbo? <But by what you are posting My GTS 76 Turbo is good for 800 Horsepower? And the one Ted had also???
I know PTE rates my turbo at 1100 hp,On a calculator my car made 1019 flywheel,So i pushed 200 or more horsepower than you say its good for?
Not sure i follow well.
In my post I stated:
If you guys are at 27 psi and over about 750 or 800 hp at that boost level then the 76 isn't working at a high efficiency.
Not running at a high efficiency and not working are two different things. You would have to understand pumps and compressors. I will not try to help teach you guys anything about that because I would just get a few more crude remarks thrown my way. Anyway your sig just states 76 turbo, and this is based on a T76 compresor map. Your GTS would have a different comp map. I'm not sure of a GT76 comp map but the 74.5mm GT comp starts a down hill slide around 850 hp (its been a few months since I researched it)Ted's on the otherhand would be the exact comp map used in the above statements, because he's running Jack's old Turbonetics T76. Turbonetics has the T76 compressor map posted on there site.
Once again do you have any input to my original questions?
Jason
postal said:
I tested with a custom 76MM turbo that Jack used on his car to run 8's, so some data backing his intercooler from him with a simular combo(his old combo) would be nice, since he is the one who built it, not me. I would expect after developing the part he would have obtained some data on it's performance(other than a timeslip), but it seems that never happened from the response, or lack of, on this thread.
I tested with a 47/80 and a 47/88 turbo and had higher MAT temps(car went faster).
This is not a personal attack against Jack. If some think so, that is thier choice. Jason, you can call me if you want, I'm sure there is several details you are unaware of that I cannot discuss here as others do not want thier names used for fear they will be judged by Jack and others for posting the truth(Must suck to be scared to speak the truth), but they are obviously right as the accusations made on me prove that.
postal said:
And we have presented our data why, with FACTS to back it, sorry he doesn't like it, but he had the chance to take this thread in a different direction if he handled it differently.
I have no personal issues with Jack other than selling me a part with no factual data to back it's repuatation other than a 8 second slip at his track of choice in the fall in favorable conditions which I would like a apology for. Remember he sold me this intercooler for a 8 second car not a 10 second car.
postal said:
1 Custom aluminum 2 1" cores 31x19
2 Ramcharger fan ( enoigh tro keep car at 160 all the time)in 100* weather (BPG)
3 part of fan assembly(not sure what electric fan doesnt have a integral shroud)
4 No A?C condensor
5 no scoop, But intercooler was boxed on the sides
6 nevercleaned intercooler, Air filter does a fine job job there(Never had turbo failure, so no oil or foriegn material would be present)If your speaking of the frontal area, i have blown it out,and washed it out.Not sure of another way that would make it cleaner,
7 Not quite sure but intercooler is mointed in location specified by intercooler builder. radiator in stock location.
Hope this helps
Otto
Sorry i just saw i was signed on Lens Name.But its nice out here in Vegas
TurboDiverArt
The Guru Thorn
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2002
Then how do we really know it's not "Evil Otto" signed on?LV GN said:
Art.
325DR said:
I would recommend the standard Precision front mount depending on your goals. I ran 9.50's@ 143 and my mat's were 135. My temps with the standard Precision intercooler were well below others using the Cotton intercooler running much slower times.
The custom 1 1/2 Precision intercooler provides even better mat's, 10 degrees above ambient on a 9.30 pass @ 147 mph
Cheeseburger
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2004
Dave, just a thought........do you think your inlet temps could be down compared to others do to the fact that you are making more mph and ramming more air past the intercooler?
Maybe Ted can make a pass and swap intercoolers with you and do some back to back testing, same day/temp/track/altitude etc? I know, i know p.i.t.a!
I just bought a Cotton's front mount at BG this year and have ZERO miles on it and it was not mentioned to me about a more efficient design coming out soon........
Or maybe i got it backwards, the higher the mph the more heatsoak.........i'm going to bed,lol.
Maybe Ted can make a pass and swap intercoolers with you and do some back to back testing, same day/temp/track/altitude etc? I know, i know p.i.t.a!
I just bought a Cotton's front mount at BG this year and have ZERO miles on it and it was not mentioned to me about a more efficient design coming out soon........
Or maybe i got it backwards, the higher the mph the more heatsoak.........i'm going to bed,lol.
Cheeseburger said:
I sold the black car and it is dissassembled, so I can't do anything on that. I no longer own a Cottons front mount or anybody directly who does anymore
, so I will not have a test mule. We are looking for somebody who has a Cottons front mount(not the bigger one) to use in Reynolds for some testing on low 9/8 second car(s). Maybe Jack can send us one??Thanks for pointing out that the new cooler design was not mentioned to you either.
postal said:
I get what you're saying Jason. A car capable of flowing 700hp of air and still able to push enough excess air to generate 27psi, may be being overworked and generating heat, whereas a 700hp car, making 22psi will be flowing substantially less air, and heating it that much less. Actually, turbo efficiency has nothing to do with "boost" it is all about airflow thru the housing as I understand it. At 40000rpm the turbo will surge as there isnt enough flow to keep the wheel spinning, at 80000rpm it may flow whatever, 1000cfm, in My car that would be say 35psi, but in Ottos car might be 20psi, and at 100000rpm, it is flowing say 1500cfm, again, in my car 45psi but Ottos might be 30psi. My car will heat the air more due to compressing the air in the intake (45psi vs 30psi), but we will both need more IC since the turbo is getting hotter to flow the same amount of air in both cases, I will just need MORE IC. I'd think this is why the v8 guy at 30psi is different than a V6 guy at 30psi. The V8 will naturally be flowing more air (2 extra cyls) and the turbo will have to work that much more to build 30psi in the manifold, pushing the turbo out of its efficiency area.
I think the best test, would be back to back as Otto said he was planning on. Change nothing, sorry Bruce, dont touch the tune, dont touch the boost, simply swap IC's and see what changes.
But since you guys are WAY over my head, maybe I should just STFU
TurboJim said:I get what you're saying Jason. A car capable of flowing 700hp of air and still able to push enough excess air to generate 27psi, may be being overworked and generating heat, whereas a 700hp car, making 22psi will be flowing substantially less air, and heating it that much less. Actually, turbo efficiency has nothing to do with "boost" it is all about airflow thru the housing as I understand it. At 40000rpm the turbo will surge as there isnt enough flow to keep the wheel spinning, at 80000rpm it may flow whatever, 1000cfm, in My car that would be say 35psi, but in Ottos car might be 20psi, and at 100000rpm, it is flowing say 1500cfm, again, in my car 45psi but Ottos might be 30psi. My car will heat the air more due to compressing the air in the intake (45psi vs 30psi), but we will both need more IC since the turbo is getting hotter to flow the same amount of air in both cases, I will just need MORE IC. I'd think this is why the v8 guy at 30psi is different than a V6 guy at 30psi. The V8 will naturally be flowing more air (2 extra cyls) and the turbo will have to work that much more to build 30psi in the manifold, pushing the turbo out of its efficiency area.
I think the best test, would be back to back as Otto said he was planning on. Change nothing, sorry Bruce, dont touch the tune, dont touch the boost, simply swap IC's and see what changes.
But since you guys are WAY over my head, maybe I should just STFU
No, you hit it. MORE INTERCOOLER.
