Slash

Insane civic Sedan is probabally thinking of something similar to aquamist water injection. But usually the people using it are filling 1 tank of water every 2-4 tanks of gas... Its really not that much extra work...

Alan

So what kind of extra maintenance is involved with the liquid-to-air. I assume keeping the tank filled is #1 priority to keep the pump from burning up. Most likely you have to prime the pump every once in a while as well? Sounds almost like keeping track of a damn pool...pain in the ass, yet worth the effort.

king_johnthegreat

How often do have to "prime" you engine water pump? The system is pretty straight forward. Yes, it is more equipment and more complex than an air to air system, but typically it is worth the added equipment. As far someone making the comment that an air to air core is more efficient, they are dead wrong. The liquid to air cores that are typical to most systems have greater charge air side core surface area, and drastically reduced charge side core length. The air to air core needs to have the charge air travel in a rather diffused manner typically several times the distance of an equivalent liquid to air core. The more distance the air has to travel to pass through the core, the more pressure drop the charge will suffer on the cold side of the system. The liquid to air core pressure drop is in most cases measured by fractions of a psi, whereas the drop in an air to air core is typically measured in a few whole psi (Anywhere from 2-3.5 in many cases). This equates to a more efficient use of the pressure levels generated by a turbo at a given psi, and a quicker boost response due to the faster delivery of charge air on the intake side, and less resistance to flow on the hot pipe side. The issue of producing chage temps well enough below ambient has already been addressed, which short of paying to spray N2O is something the air to air will NEVER do. Aquamist and ghetto fab water injection systems will not produce the same results of a good liquid to air system. Both can get heat soaked, but the liquid to air system constantly works to aleviate that concern by its very nature; not something the air to air system does. Depending upon the volume of the system, and cooling core efficiency, there is no reason to stop to cool off, check fluid levels, or believe that the system will suffer heat soaking too dramatically. I use the added liquid weight in my system to counter balance the added weight of the turbo system. I have a pickup truck, so traction is a huge concern. I put my battery in the bed box, as well as the five gallon cell, pump, and the radiator dedicated to cooling the intercooler water is under the bed where the spare tire used to go. Also consider the added benefit of having much shorter, straigher piping on your system. I love liquid to air!! This one is my second street driven daily gring vehicle with a liquid to air system.

John

InsaneCivicCoupe

im not saying it would run out of water im just saying changing the heated water out and replacing it with cooler water.... theres no way around it the water does heat up and that just makes you loose power and defeats the purpose of the intercooler.... i really do believe there is no purpose in a water to air if the water inside is hotter than the air thats going through it... who knows maybe im wrong but u figure the warmer water would heat up the intake charge thus having the complete opposite affect of what the intercooler is designed for, to cool the intake charge...

even if im wrong i still say air to air because its low maintenance and way less comlicated.....

SyTyArchives

if the water in the w/a ic system is hotter then the charged air temperature, you sir, have a poor w/a system. Not that it cant happen.

There are a lot of factors to think about. pressure drop, core size, length, piping length, water speed, radiator effeciency. All of it is important.

assuming a good system, comparing core size to core size, an air/water can easily be more efficient. Air sucks at heat excange compared to water (jump in a pool at 60 degrees vs going outside when its 60 degrees).

So at the core side, all things are great.. but once you get to the radiator where the w/a system has to get rid of it's heat, once again we have to rely on air.

as stated once and again, a/a is just easier.

My truck came with a w/a system so I've spent time learning about it and optimizing the best I can. heat reflective materials, bigger coolant lines, faster pump, an additional electric fan, and even a second radiator added to the system.
With all that, I can maintain a HOT side water temp of about 20 degrees over ambient. Thats taking a very hot charge out of a overworked turbo and brining my intake temps down to 120ish at the end of the 1/4. All that without worrying about ice or sprayers.

However, should I wish, I can add some coolant, and get the water down to 30 degrees or so. Again at this point everything is working against it though as the heat exchanger and the intercooler core are both heating it up.

Quite a few drag cars run a w/a system, with no heat exchanger. Rather a tank out back full of ice water. Once it heats up, dump more ice in.

After all is said and done, its a balance of your driving conditions and personal preferences.

king_johnthegreat

Well put, Ian. I, too, had a Syclone while in my HS years (The one that Carrie and Greg have now). That stock IC system held up to tons of abuse on Frontage Road in Clearwater for all of the late night romps we had back then. Plenty of evenings on Gandy also helped prove that even a stock w/a system was pretty effective. Getting into the weather like this (cooling down a bit) it would run incredibly consistenly with only a short period of time between cruising/running/sitting.

John