Greddy vs. Spearco Intercoolers

[Nayr747]

I was looking at intercoolers on ebay and came across this Spearco intercooler for sale. The page said this:
"It uses a SPEARCO BAR AND PLATE CORE. It is 35% more efficient than the infererior Greddy & HKS tube and fin cores."
Is that true? Cause I was gonna buy the Greddy, but then i read this. Is it just BS?

Hey also, it's 30.5 X 8 X 3 from entank to endtank and its selling for $400. Think that's a good price?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2465119398

[EclipseRST]

i use the Spearco 29.5 x 12 x 3 on my RST and it works great, i have been happy with it and i have no reason to change... personally i thing the Greddy IC's are way overpriced! i am happy enough with the Spearco that i think i am goin to get another one for my GST... i like the 33.5 x 12 x 3 (HUGE!!!!)

[JoeWagon]

EclipseRST did you have your IC pipes custom made? Just wondering how easy it would be to do. I'm not a big fan of 1200 dollar IC's

[EclipseRST]

yea my uncle has an exhaust shop with a 3" pipe bender very helpful... made 3 sections on each pipe and clamped it together with rubber connections and some hose clamps.

[kjewer1]

I dont care much for the greedy FMICs. But some poeple do ok with them. I like to use the biggest that will fit in the car, and that doesnt include length. Any time you can increase the height and thickness of a side to side core, you reduce pressure drop and increase flow capacity. Making it longer doesnt allow any more flow, and increases pressure drop. I stick to 24" length, and 3.5" thickness. Height is typically 10", or you can fit a 12" (in a 2g) if you make sure it wont over heat. The typical sizes that DSM specific vendors offer FMICs in is the same. 24x3.5, and 10 or 12 inches tall. I like the beefier bar and plate types over the tube and fin. Tube and fin is lighter, but bar and plate is typically more effective.

[JoeWagon]

Can you elaborate on tube and fin / bar and plate? You lost me there.

[EclipseRST]

ok i was just reading HCI magazine and they have a good write up on the whole intercooler thing in there... they talk about air to air (tube & fin and bar & plate) and they talk about air to liquid! i will explain both using quotes from the magazine:

Originally Posted by Hot Compact & Imports magazine

The tube and fin core design is the most economical to produce and therefore more affordable to consumers. The tube and fin intercooler is also relatively light in comparison to the bar and plate design (Like Kevin said), affording users a slight weight reduction. When the charge air enters the end tank, it travels through tubes in which the heat is transferred via fins where cooler ambient air passes over the tubes. This further removes heat from the air before exiting the opposite end tank en route to the engine. All in all, the tube and fin intercooler is perfect for the tuners building their first custom turbo systems on limited budgets. The disadvantages to the tube and fin intercooler is that its effective efficiency is lower when compared to a similar sized bar and plate intercooler.

Bar and plate intercooler cores function identically to the tube and fin core, with the exception that charge air travels through rectangular shaped passages that have more surface area, thus improving cooling of the air charge. The advantage to using this type of intercooler is that because the bar and plate core design affords up to 35% larger surface area for cooling, a physically smaller intercooler can be used and still retain the cooling characteristics (efficiency) of a larger tube and fin design. This is important for a builder who has a vehicle with a small opening in the front of it or where there are immovable obstructions present. There is a downside to this design, too, as it is generally more expensive due to the extent of fabrication that is involved in its construction. The bar and plate intercooler is also heavier due to the larger surface area and denser fin design. Simply put, it generally contains more material, thus the heavier weight.

The subject of tight space leads us to the third type of intercooler, the air to liquid or air to water, as it is commonly called. While the function of the air to water intercooler is the same as the air to air intercooler, its design and application differ greatly, as does its cost. The air to water intercooler is primarily used where space is at a premium and where plumbing intercooler piping to the front of the vehicle isn't practical. An example of this would be a mid engine vehicle such as the Acura NSX. Running intercooler pipes from the engine in the rear of the vehicle all the way to the front increases turbo lag, dampens throttle response and would be far more expensive. By using an air to water intercooler, all of these problems can be alleviated.

To better understand how this intercooler works, picture an air to air intercooler that's encased in sheetmetal. How does a design like that cool the charge air? There's more to this design than passing air over its cooling surfaces, as a liquid (such as water) is pumped through a fitting on the casing at one end and exits though a fitting on the other. Water passes over the core that has a denser fin design when compared to an air to air intercooler, since water is being forced throught it. As the water passes through the core, heat from the charge air within is removed. This effect is amplified by passing the heated water through a heat exchanger, located in direct flow of ambient air. This is a continuous process that results in the efficiency of the intercooler, which can approach or exceed 90% in many applications. This, of course, results in higher power levels and a greatly reduced chance of detonation.

The high efficency of the air to water intercooler allows its phyiscal size to be much smaller than even the bar and plate intercooler, which is a definite plus to owners of cramped engine compartments. If you wish to go one step further, you can place the intercooler in such a way that ambient air will pass over it as well, adding to the cooling effect. While this setup sounds great on paper, it's not without drawbacks. The problem with this setup is that it is not very practical for most street applications, as the ancillaries - such as waterpump, cooling tank/reservoir and lines - consume considerable space. Plus, the water and/or ice must be changed once it warms up or melts. For this reason alone, you mainly see air to liquid intercoolers used on race-only vehicles.

this is a very good article and would suggest if you have any other question about it check out the article!! Kevin please add to this and also correct anything that you see that is wrong with it, just tring to get the basic explaination out there to give you a break for once!

[EclipseRST]

it is the April of 2004 issue, starts on page 131-139... a lot of helpful information in that article!

[JoeWagon]

Sweet, that clears it up, but since I've never seen a FMIC labeled either of these, I don't know which are what. What are SBR/Kinetic, greddy, spearco, and victory core designs? I promise, they aren't labeled on the web as to which one. Thanks for the info, I love learning something new.

[EclipseRST]

i do too... thats why i posted it up here! i though that article was so helpful, cause i was lost when kevin was talking about the Tube and Fin + the Bar and Plate that when i saw the article i bought the magazine!

[kjewer1]

That article seems to be right on.

Look at a pic of the greedy core. (http://www.roadraceengineering.com/p...ic-compare.jpg)

Then look at the pic on my page. You can see the difference in the design. The bar and plate is much beefier and doesnt get wrecked as easily by flying rocks and the like. Add to it the fact that it works better, and you can see why all the fast cars use them despite the slight weight dissadvantage.

I believe SBR/kinetc, spearco, and VP are all bar and plate. VP is the one I'm not sure about. I used to own it, but IC ant rememvber. the greddy and other bling blang ame brand types are usually tube and fin.

There are other reasons why tube and fin isnt that great, but its a lot to list. If I can find an old article I read a while back I'll post it. Very long, but very imformative with pics and numbers.

[EclipseRST]

sweet... atleast i went with the right choice then!!! although i have one more question... why is the Spearco brand a lot cheaper then Greddy?

[JoeWagon]

Probably because Spearco couldn't get away with it. Greddy has a lot of other expensive parts that people know them as a top name. For some people, if it says Greddy it's the best. That's all I can think of.

[EclipseRST]

yea that could be... but when i hear Greddy, all i can think about is overpriced and way outta range! thats why i bought the spearco in the first place! plus it was kinda a package deal.

[kjewer1]

We dont call Greddy Greedy for nothing Its the bling blang ricer effect. The most expensive parts are very often not the best performance option available.