FFTEC Torture Test: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost, Intercoolers!! OEM, Garrett, and private!! - Mustang Ecoboost Forum
User Tag List

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 1 Old 01-16-2015, 09:08 PM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1
FFTEC Torture Test: 2015 Mustang Ecoboost, Intercoolers!! OEM, Garrett, and private!!

We took a few days out of our calendar to dive into EcoBoost intercooler development. Our goal is to outline exactly why an aftermarket/upgraded replacement is a much needed addition to your chassis.

Please keep in mind that all of these results were derived within one day of each other and are as close as we could get keeping run to run condition the same. For all of the test, the intercoolers were swapped while the car was still strapped to the dyno.

— OEM Mustang EcoBoost Intercooler —

The stock Mustang EB intercooler makes a fair attempt at cooling the engines air charge, but falls quite short. Its small design is (somewhat) useful in stock form, but its effectiveness in cooling the air charge quickly diminishes if you deviate from factory configuration; even in the slightest (raised boost targets, etc.)

OEM Intercooler specs:
  • Core size 5.75”h x 20.6”l x 3.25”w
  • Number of rows = 8
  • Row size .39”h x 20.6”l x 3.25”w
  • Plastic/composite end tanks crimped to aluminum bar and plate core

OEM Intercooler Core Volume:
  • 208.88 CI total core volume
  • Each row is 26.11 CI

The torture! -- Below is a datalog of 1-4th gear with the OE intercooler at WOT. This is a true torture test to both the engine and charge air cooling systems:

NOTE: Below some of the posted images, you will find links to the datalog which created it. Please follow the link, and enjoy the interactive log!



datazap.me | trbolexis | 1-4_StockIntercooler_MustangEcoBoost

At the end of the test sample the charge air temperatures in excess of 230°F! More than 3x hotter than the beginning of the run at 77°. OE Intercooler efficiency (vs. ambient temperature) at the beginning of the run is 72%; at the end of the run is below 25% effective.

On our dyno we found it necessary to allow 10 to 20 minutes worth of cool down between individual power tests. If we do not allow cool down time between passes:
test results would become very inconsistent
huge timing compensations would interfere with preferred timing models
OAR would start to reduce rapidly

Next is a 4th gear test sample on the OEM intercooler.



datazap.me | trbolexis | 1-4_StockIntercooler_MustangEcoBoost

This log shows a start CAT Temperature around 76°. As the test pass endures, the CAT rises to over 140° before the run ends. This became one obviously cause for our inconsistent test samples. The intermittent timing model (compensation) always displayed itself as large swings in power with either loss or gain. As you will also notice, the IC efficiency starts around 72% vs. ambient temp, but quickly diminishes to 38% by the end of the test.

One last thing to really take note on is the slow recovery from heat soak as represented on these logs.

For reasons brought to light in the above writings, the intercooler quickly became our first area of concern and upgrade.

— FFTEC EcoBoost Intercooler option “EcoEconomy” — based on a private label IC core —


EcoEconomy core specifications:
  • Core size: 11.80”h x 17.80”l x 3.35”w
  • Number of Rows = 17
  • Row size = .3"h x 17.80”l x 3.35”w
  • All aluminum Bar and Plate construction
  • Cast end tanks, fully TIG welded (by FFTEC)
  • Pressure drop @ ~24 PSI is ~0 to 1.4 PSI

EcoEconomy core volume:
  • 304.11 CI total core volume
  • Each row is 17.89 CI

Our EcoEconomy is based on a private label IC core that does yield exceptional efficiency over the OEM unit.

With this intercooler installed the first thing we noticed is that the throttle response was greatly improved. Having the cooler air charge at the ready, netted a much more peppy spirited feel.

Next log shown is the endurance test which is 1-4 or 5th gear. As mentioned before this is a huge stress test on the engine and charge air cooling system.



http://www.datazap.me/u/trbolexis/mu...206-164-123-96

Huge improvement over factory! At the end of the run, the charge air temps climbed only to 144°. While this may seem like a high number, do keep in mind that the factory equipped IC yields 59% higher outlet temps during a similar test run. The upgraded IC’s efficiency also faired well during the test, dropping from 82% to 38% by the the runs end.

The recovery time for the charge air temperature to normalize back to a steady/nominal has been greatly reduced. With this intercooler we are able to produce very consistent runs with minimal delay. Our typical cool down after a test run with the EcoCore is about 3 to 5 minutes. We’ve found a good measurement for cool down on this core is to make and flash map adjustments. By the time the calibration is loaded and ready to run, the intercooler outlet temps are normalized and ready to produce a consistent test run.

Below is a datalog of 4th gear:



http://www.datazap.me/u/trbolexis/mu...rk=112-148-181
  1. 73° charge air temperatures at the beginning of the run rising to only 97° buy run end.
  2. Intercooler efficiency falls from ~80% to ~61% by run end

— FFTEC EcoBoost Intercooler option “EcoPro” — based on a Garrett/Honeywell intercooler core —

We opted to add another option to our IC offerings as we expect some owners will be pushing their cars beyond the efficiencies of the EcoEconomy.

EcoPro core specifications:
  • Core size: 12”h x 18”l x 3”w
  • Number of Rows = 14
  • Row size = .435"h x 18”l x 3”w
  • All aluminum Bar and Plate construction
  • Cast end tanks, fully TIG welded (by FFTEC)
  • Pressure drop @ ~24 PSI is ~0 to 1.8 PSI

EcoPro core volume:
  • 328.86 CI total core volume
  • Each row is 23.49 CI

The (at this point) obligatory 1-4(5) gear pull to test heat soak and overall efficiency. Poor car.



datazap.me | trbolexis | 2015 Mustang EcoBoost Garrett Core Testing

Even more temperature drop! 140° at the end of the run, from a 70° starting temperature. This may not seem like much, so another overlay showing the EcoPro vs the EcoEconomy is in order.



As you can see, the EcoPro has shifted the entire charge air temp curve to the right. By comparison it is effectively more efficient and providing a cooler air charge, at similar engine speeds (or wheel speeds on the log). The IC efficiency also has and impressive spike up to 90% as the test run progresses, falling off to 40.5% near the test completion.

4th gear datalog on the EcoPro:



datazap.me | trbolexis | 2015 Mustang EcoBoost Garrett Core Testing

Obviously this is the best performing core out of the whole lot! Efficiency during this test run starts around 79% effective. Toward the middle of the power band efficiency increases to over 85%. Most impressive is the end of the test run; the intercooler is down to only 70% efficiency. That is a total loss in efficiency of less than 10% through the test run!

Similarly, charge air temperature is also maintained will by the dense core. At the test beginning charge air begins to cool before slowly starting to rise. From 72° at the test start to only 79° at the test end!

If you are planning to push your car to its limit this is absolutely your best core choice to maintain peak performance!

— Pressure Drop Data — EcoEconomy and EcoPro

What these images represent are the delta PSI drop across the intercooler — intercooler inlet pressure vs. outlet pressure.

NOTE: The Y axis has a very high resolution in order to extrapolate the exact trend path for the Pressure drop across the core. What may appear to be a very erratic or choppy line is within anywhere from 0 to 2 PSI of change.

The EcoPro features a more dense core system. As such we expect it should have more pressure drop due to the air passing through needing to navigate between more internal fins. To combat the pressure drop, the core also features larger “bars”. .435 inches in height vs .300 inches possessed on the EcoEconomy.

Two ideas to take away from the above statement:
  • EcoPro features a more dense internal construction but larger passage ways for air to travel.
  • EcoEconomy features a less dense internal construction with smaller passage ways for air to travel

In theory we can suppose that the above statement will hold true. Also, by theory, the EcoPro should be able to rid itself of heat quicker, reducing heat soak incurred by the to other IC's we’ve tested. Check out the data below.


  • The blue line is the raw pressure drop data. It is derived from INLET IC PRESSURE - OUTLET IC PRESSURE
  • The white line is the trend line for the pressure drop. This is used more or less as a filter value and shows the median values if we were to capture a perfectly smooth reading at the from the two pressure sensors (Pre and Post IC pressure sensors)
  • The X axis shows 0, however, keep in mind that this is delta difference between pre and post IC pressures. Testing was done at ~24 PSI. This is why/how negative pressure drop values can be obtained.
  • Negative median values for pressure drop should be ignored (white line)


  • The red line is the raw pressure drop data. It is derived from INLET IC PRESSURE - OUTLET IC PRESSURE
  • The white line is the trend line for the pressure drop. This is used more or less as a filter value and shows the median values if we were to capture a perfectly smooth reading at the from the two pressure sensors (Pre and Post IC pressure sensors)
  • The X axis shows 0, however, keep in mind that this is delta difference between pre and post IC pressures. Testing was done at ~24 PSI. This is why/how negative pressure drop values can be obtained.
  • Negative median values for pressure drop should be ignored (white line)

Theory holds true! The EcoPro has a slightly worse pressure drop when air mass demands are higher (high RPM, high boost). As witnessed in the logs, its thermal efficiencies are also much higher; the amplitudes and period are reduced and can be witnessed as "IC efficiencies” on the graph (overall shape).

— Comparisons —

EcoEconomy vs. Stock IC 4th Gear



EcoPro vs. Stock IC 4th Gear



EcoEconomy vs. EcoPro 4th Gear



EcoPro Efficiency chart



EcoEconomy Efficiency chart



Phew .... this took a long time to put together, but we made it!

Hopefully the data presented and associated information you’ve read here can help you decide the best intercooler upgrade path with your Mustang EB!

Cheers!

FFTEC Motorsports
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mustang Ecoboost Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TFL test drives the Ford Mustang GT with 5.0L V8 Green Horse Mustang EcoBoost Photos and Videos 0 09-19-2014 12:04 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome