jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

is this the best option or could you re-route the
outlet hose on the turbo compressor housing to the
o/s instead of changing the charge carrier

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

Reversing the charge carrier is the best set up if your running a single pass intercooler on an ERST. If you stick with std charge carrier then you have to make up long bendy boost hoses to re-route the charge air, more or less defeating the purpous of the single pass I/C

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

fair enough but surely its not much longer than the hose would
be if you had a reverse charge carrier

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

No cos you only uise it when you have a single pass aftermarket intercooler on, such as a GRS, Pace or Cossie cooler.

On std RST's the turbo air enters at the bottom of the cooler and out again at the top, both on the right hand side (as you looking in the engine bay), but with a single pass GRS/Pace?cossie cooler the air from the turbo enters at the right hand side as normal, but exits at the left hand side. Hence why the charge carrier points to the left.

Twin pass GRS type coolers have both ports on the right hand side so is a std fitment, no need to change c.carrier....

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

u could still use a single pass intercooler but leave the
standard charge carrier and change the other pipe,surely
its not much work and a bit cheaper,im not trying to argue
it was just a query,i was just interested to see if it woul be ok
or worth doing it

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

To further illustrate my point here is some crude diagrams showing normal, twin pass and single pass set ups

The one top right in the box shows a single pass whilst returning charge air to a non-reversed charge carrier, to show how much extra pipe work would be needed....

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

You could but then you have it set up like I have out lined in the diagram above....

Doing it this way would mean the charge air has to travel much much further than it needs to a) meaning you are likely to get a pressure drop from all the bends (eliminating the advantage the single pass cooler offers, rendering it pointless doing the conversion) b) the pipe work would need to travel back over the turbo charger - heat rises, pipes gonna get very hot, meaing you are heating up the charge air you jsut cooled down, and c) there jsut ain't proper room to do it.....

Doing it this way basically renders the single pass conversion completely pointless as it takes away from it everything you would gain and you'd be better off with a GRS twin pass cooler....

HTH

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

the way i was thinking was having the charge air from
the turbo going 2 the o/s,the way all your diagrams
show is the charge air going 2 the n/s as a standardthe
way i was thinking was the charge air goes from turbo along
the rad crossmember to the o/s of the car,then through the
intercooler to the n/s of the car then into the standard charge
carrier,like i said its just a thought

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

Again not sure if that it really worth it Jonesy m8.... In as far your making the boost ipes a lot longer than they need to be, with more bends and angles than need to be.

The thing with boost is the straighter the pipe work is (in as far as : the least ammount of bends) the better the flow, and the quicker the flow....

Also lets say you were goning to fit a Cosworth sinlge pass Ic to your ERST. yes you could re-route the turbo-to-intercooler outlet to go in at the o/s and exit at the n/s into a std charge carrier, but apart from the reasons in the above paragraph, also it would be a lot simpler and cheaper to jsut have the charge carrier modded.... You can get them off the shelf now aswell, so not even really a custom job anymore - NMS do them, Pace do them, I know A+S (bling bling company) have supplied em, Lee at fusion can do em, so not expensive or hard to get hold of

EIL132

What turbo would you use? You would have to turn it upside down or have some kind of reversed compressor?

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

James I think he jsut means route the pipe work out the normal exit but reverse it - too many bends for my liking there......

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

ok cheers 4 that,like i said i wasnt trying to cause an argument
its just that i had seen a lot of cars with the reverse charge carrier
and just wondered why it wasnt or hadnt been done the other way,i
suppose the inlet charge temps 2 the intercooler would be a bit higher
because it has 2 pass the exhaust so the intercooler would have 2 be
the dogs danglies 2 cool it down that little bit more,cheers again

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

I don't thing you caused and argument with anyone m8 At least certainly not with me - all I did was answer your questions and explain why it wouldn't be the best idea to do it, which also answers your last question about why it isn't done the other way

EIL132

As Thrush, no argument but it would be hard to fit and it would require a lot of work in a very tight space and benefits maybe not great if at all, but good that people are thinking of new ways to try tho

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

ok cheers 4 that,much appreciated ,just 1 more question
though,if i email you a pic of my car is there any chance you
could do me a sig please,seen some of the others uve done
on another post they look great

jonesymk2

iTrader: (2)

again as to thrush,thanks eil132

Thrush

iTrader: (1)

Yeah sure, but can you PM it to me as I have limited space in my email inbox and pics jsut clog it up..... Upload em at www.photobucket.com and PM me the URL links

(remember some text/spec idea's you can think off too )