80 LPM is a lot of flow. I thought that the factory IC pumps were on the order of 5 GPM which is about 20 LPM. Am I wrong? Wouldn't this also impact potential heat rejection rates?
Steeda 05-13 GT/GT500 Triple Pass Heat Exchanger w/Fans
- Thread starter SteedaBrandon
- Start date
Actual testing and actual results with specific info. Otherwise it's just the same old empty claims that happens all too often in the performance market.
I'm not a blind brand loyalist either. I ditched my Afco H/E because Van posted up data...several others have done the same thing. I've done that with other parts as well.
Van@RevanRacing
Active Member
I'm not sure which heat exchanger is Competitor A. AFCO is thicker than C&R.
You are not incorrect. NuclearPower you know more about water speed and heat rejection than probably anybody on this forum. Please opine.
Thanks Van, I think...simplistically speaking if the water if flowing that much faster then you need more surface area to remove the same amount of heat. Ideally Heat=flow rate*heat exchanger constant coefficient of heat rejection*Delta Temp. There is a fine balance between the efficency of the heat exchanger coefficient and the flow rate to give you the optimum delta temp. If they test with an 80lpm pump and we use stockers say 20lpm then our heat rejection rates will be SIGNIFICANTLY lower. I have not seen anything that the others have posted about C&R or AFCO, but were they tested with stock or super shelby pumps? I would have to break out my fluid flow books and computer programs to give more details...:read:
Bottom line, rather than brocher info we are asking for the detail info to make informed decisions. Van fully supports this and is why he has an extremely loyal base, all we are asking is to validate your data to be loyal to you as well.
Bottom line, rather than brocher info we are asking for the detail info to make informed decisions. Van fully supports this and is why he has an extremely loyal base, all we are asking is to validate your data to be loyal to you as well.
Great Post!
This is bullcrap. Let's be fair here. Folks requested data to support the efficiency claims of the new Steeda heat exchanger and Steeda provided it. Now, it's being claimed that the supplied data isn't good enough.
Way back when, when Revan posted the copied IAT2 log data showing the efficiency of the new C & R design, that was certainly enough for complete belief in their design. How does anyone know that that data was accurate?? How does anyone know if any vendor data is legitimate???
That's one big difference between the Terminator guys and the GT500 folks: the Terminator guys could care a less about vendor claims. They went out and bought the stuff and tested it themselves and then shared the data. That's how we found out what was optimal for performance. In many cases, the GT500 guys just take the vendor's word for it. (Except for Steeda's heat exchanger information......)
One thing that gives Revan credibility, and BJ at VMP as well, is that they are out there doing it. Modding and racing their cars. Trying to maximize performance. Experimenting and then sharing the results. Maybe Steeda should throw one of these babies on a project car, datalog the crap out of it, and share the results. Or maybe one of us should/could do it.:beer:
Way back when, when Revan posted the copied IAT2 log data showing the efficiency of the new C & R design, that was certainly enough for complete belief in their design. How does anyone know that that data was accurate?? How does anyone know if any vendor data is legitimate???
That's one big difference between the Terminator guys and the GT500 folks: the Terminator guys could care a less about vendor claims. They went out and bought the stuff and tested it themselves and then shared the data. That's how we found out what was optimal for performance. In many cases, the GT500 guys just take the vendor's word for it. (Except for Steeda's heat exchanger information......)
One thing that gives Revan credibility, and BJ at VMP as well, is that they are out there doing it. Modding and racing their cars. Trying to maximize performance. Experimenting and then sharing the results. Maybe Steeda should throw one of these babies on a project car, datalog the crap out of it, and share the results. Or maybe one of us should/could do it.:beer:
Last edited:
I don't like wasting money. Instead, I prefer well thought out and researched builds. That's not BS, that's prudent use of my money.
This is basic info they have that can be provided. I disagree that the customer base should buy a part, test it, and gamble with their own money that it does as advertised, and then post the results. Steeda is a pretty big company and, apparently, has tested the product otherwise they wouldn't be making the claims that they are.
I've been a Steeda customer for a loooong time. Placed an order this weekend for a part as a matter of fact.
2013 TVS powered
This is basic info they have that can be provided. I disagree that the customer base should buy a part, test it, and gamble with their own money that it does as advertised, and then post the results. Steeda is a pretty big company and, apparently, has tested the product otherwise they wouldn't be making the claims that they are.
I've been a Steeda customer for a loooong time. Placed an order this weekend for a part as a matter of fact.
2013 TVS powered
Last edited:
Terp, let's be honest. The chart that was linked doesn't provide the answers that people are looking for. If it is indeed a superior product, there will no doubt be a following from within the GT500 community. But (apparently) unlike the Termi guys, many here research as much as possible prior to parting with their money. It's a new product and the claims are that it topples a much favored competitor(s). That alone raised many an eyebrow.
There will be testing and the results will make their way back here eventually. But in the meantime, all everyone wants is to examine (just like a detailed dyno graph) the data that substantiates the original claims. That's all. And if the claims indeed hold water, the product will sell very well.
There will be testing and the results will make their way back here eventually. But in the meantime, all everyone wants is to examine (just like a detailed dyno graph) the data that substantiates the original claims. That's all. And if the claims indeed hold water, the product will sell very well.
I agree its a good buy for those with a stock unit or have buckets of cash. For those that are racers or concerned about IAT's they will run a tank in the trunk to ice down the system. On the street I can't see even 18% cooler doing a thing for you except empty your wallet of $800.00
Excellent point, I couldn't agree more. You'd think they have the resources to do so and I think this is what people are expecting from them.
Van@RevanRacing
Active Member
It's more expensive than mine without the Free Roush Reservoir at $724
Lawdude, it needs to be tested on a road course thoroughly. I know you've got a built motor but you really want to let them beat on that new motor? I suppose if they give you a letter saying we break it we buy that would work!
Last edited:
Supplied data is not against the two big heat exchanger on the market. So how it would it compare to them.
Forgot to mention that a 3 core is not necessarily better than a 2 core with a low flow IC pump (read stock). A 3 core will have smaller flow channels which creates a higher pressure differential that the IC pump has to overcome. With these new electric pumps that are basically off/on this could be a problem. Bottom line, if you do not have the same like components you will not get anywhere near the stated 18% increase. I know obvious answer...
The same holds true for the AFCO or Van's, but any of these units is better than the factory just because of the attached fans. I am a little worried though with a 3 core and the factory IC pump...Depending on how much smaller the flow holes are any added efficency in the heat exchanger design will be not realized without the higher flow pump.
I will say that we are a tough crowd and ALL parties have been providing data, albiet at different rates.............
The same holds true for the AFCO or Van's, but any of these units is better than the factory just because of the attached fans. I am a little worried though with a 3 core and the factory IC pump...Depending on how much smaller the flow holes are any added efficency in the heat exchanger design will be not realized without the higher flow pump.
I will say that we are a tough crowd and ALL parties have been providing data, albiet at different rates.............
Come on Tob......there is no data from a supplying vendor that will give these answers. The appropriate data will come from the end users with no vested interest either way. Heck, way back when, Revan posted up a IAT2/RPM sequence of numbers representing a datalog from one of his pulls with his HE. Is there any way of knowing whether these numbers were accurate?? I honestly feel they were because Revan is a standup guy that has proven his values over time. But, the point is obvious. Revan's HE sales have been successful not because of his posted data, but because his customers bought em, datalogged em, and posted in forums on how good they were!
Steeda is a extremely well established and respected company that has made an effort with a product that may be of benefit to the GT500 community. I totally appreciate Brandon coming on here and posting up this thread and look forward to end user results and testimonies.
And Tob, the Terminator fellas are indeed unlike the GT500 guys. The 03/04' guys are generally younger and poorer than their 07-13' Brothers!! We took research and development to a whole new level with Ford's first great supercharged offering, which can be seen with the 137,000+ Terminator threads here on SVTP, as opposed to the 14,400+ GT500 threads! lol But in reality, we very seldom accepted vendor data, but made our own on the street, the dyno, and the race track, then shared it, and progressed from there.......
Last edited:
Since you put it that way I guess not.
Van@RevanRacing
Active Member
:beer: LOL
Wondering what test was done to achieve the results. Shelby stock blower cruising the streets. Dyno runs. Road course on a hot day. What were IAT1 and 2. I like the graph, very easy to read. Still don't know how it was tested to say better. Suppose I have a Eaton spinning to the moon, does it still cool the air 18%.
Not bashing anyone, when you say its better than A, you have to show proof and describe the test that showed that result. Right now I have a hypothetical HE that is better than competitor A without knowing how.
Not bashing anyone, when you say its better than A, you have to show proof and describe the test that showed that result. Right now I have a hypothetical HE that is better than competitor A without knowing how.
Users who are viewing this thread
