Liquid-to-Air instead of Air-to-Air

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by turbo8765

My prediction is the system works well with an intermediate driver on stock tires. I'll be surprised (pleasantly) if the system is adequate during the summer in the SE (RA, RRR, CMP, Barber, Sebring, Daytona etc) with an advanced driver on sticky tires. With any power mods in the summer on sticky tires I predict reduced performance whether by reduced boost, retarded ignition timing etc.

You expect an air-to-air system to perform better in that respect? N54 and N55 equipped cars are notorious for heat soaking and going into limp mode during extended track sessions. All of my 3 track buddies that run 1Ms complain about losing power on hot days.

Originally Posted by turbo8765

"control over intake charge temp" is not really necessary. The goal is to get as close as possible to ambient in all cases. You might save a little juice by decreasing electric pump speed in an air/water system when demand is reduced but that's more minimizing the downside than it is upside.

You are missing my point, I am not talking about the negligible savings gained by reducing the water flow. It is about optimizing engine opreating parameters around a well controled temperature of the intake charge. With an air-to-air system, because it is so dependant on ambient air temperature and vehicle speed, the intake charge temperature can greatly vary, making it difficult to optimize the engine operation parameters. Most often than not, the engine ECU simply pulls back on timing which kills power.

[turbo8765]

N54 and N55 powered 135's and 335's go into limp mode at the track because of engine oil temp, not high IATs due to intercooler heat soak.

More importantly, I never indicated that either has a well designed air/air setup.

I'm not missing you're point, I'm saying the in all cases "optimizing engine parameters" means getting the IAT as close to ambient as possible… fuel and timing can then be adjusted based on observed IATs. A well designed system whether air/air or air/water will be very close to ambient in all cases, meaning that timing targets are met and ignition timing is not retarded. Both systems are dependent upon ambient temperature and airflow, both systems can be designed to function nearly optimally despite these constraints. Under what conditions would you want to decrease HE efficiency and increase IAT's? What "engine parameter" is optimized by an IAT greater than what the HE can optimally provide? We are taking about track use right? But we're a little of track…

Most box stock FI heat exchangers have inadequate heat dissipation for heavy track work, whether air/air or air/water. This system is likely no different. If your air/air heat exchanger gets too hot then you back off for a lap, if you're air to water heat exchanger gets too hot you scrap that session. Either system can do the job when designed properly but it's easier to get an air/air system stable and effective on track.

I would like to see is IAT/Boost/Timing/ECT/Oil Temp data from tracked s63tu powers cars.