Turbine Tech front motor mount interest

[MS6 P.C.]

Came across an original Turbine Tech front motor mount for the mazdaspeed6. If I could get these made, who would be interested??? Like a group buy???

 

[Speedie6]

I actually threw mine out. I guess I shoulda sold it. At least for me, way too much vibration. I'm very happy with the complete set of Damond mounts and wouldn't want anything else.

 

[Speedie6]

I still run to this day the Turbine Tech rear diff frontward mount. Seems to be a good piece.

They actually made an air to water intercooler. I don't recall anybody else making something like that for our platform. But I only saw one report of the product and the user said it was no good, it was mounted in place of the TMIC and had bad heat soak. I don't recall what they used for the heat exchanger. I've sometimes wondered if something like that design would work with a vented hood. Nobody has tried it as far as I know.

 

[Enki]

The heat exchanger was probably too small; for water cooling boost, you want as much surface area with as little thickness as you can get away with (look at how thin the stock radiator is, for example). There's a gradient of heat dissipation as air flows past the fins, and past like an inch, it drops off pretty hard.

That said, if the intercooler core holds more than (pulling a number out of my ass here) 10% of the water that the heat exchanger holds, they're doing it wrong.

 

[Raider]

This post is Raider Approved and is for the masses.

 

[Speedie6]

The heat exchanger was probably too small; for water cooling boost, you want as much surface area with as little thickness as you can get away with (look at how thin the stock radiator is, for example). There's a gradient of heat dissipation as air flows past the fins, and past like an inch, it drops off pretty hard.

Definitely getting off the original topic. But when you say, "as little thickness as you can get away with", well, I'm somewhat confused. You say that the heat dissipation drops off rapidly. Still, it doesn't go to zero, thicker is still better than thinner, yes?

And yes, the stock radiator is stupid thin. Mine started to leak so I replaced it with a Koyorad. It is only about 1/2" thicker, so its not huge. Still it's definitely thicker than stock. You almost make it sound like its not worth the trouble. But since it is thicker, it does have some additional thermal dissipation, yes? And since it has higher capacity that means higher heat capacity yes?

 

[Enki]

Definitely getting off the original topic. But when you say, "as little thickness as you can get away with", well, I'm somewhat confused. You say that the heat dissipation drops off rapidly. Still, it doesn't go to zero, thicker is still better than thinner, yes?

In terms of thermal mass, yes. In terms of cooling, no; in fact, I have an anecdote for this exact question.

Neighbor down the street had a supercharged Mustang he would race down at the local airstrip when those half mile races were going on. Yeah, it was quite fast, but had cooling issues. His radiator was already like 3" thick, which I thought was too thick, and recommended going to a thinner radiator; instead he went to a 4" thick rad and the issues got worse.

Y'see, when you do that, you add to thermal capacity in the short term, but once everything is equalized, that back-half thickness of the radiator is being "cooled" by air that's probably within a few degrees of the water temp going in to the radiator to begin with... And since that back half of the radiator isn't doing much, if any cooling, the water flowing through it mixes with the cooler water from the front and brings the overall temp back up. This leads to a feedback loop and ends with overheating. In order to overcome this limitation with thickness, the amount of air that would have to flow through the rad would be...impressive to say the least. It might actually have been fine over 100 MPH, but that doesn't help when you're in stop and go traffic.

A good example of this (while not an engine coolant radiator, the physics are essentially the same) is Subie TMICs; they use a water sprayer to help with cooling, because there's not enough frontal area to do the job (those intercoolers are THICK, if you've ever seen one). Even then, it's not enough long term to keep temps down without spraying a LOT of water.

And yes, the stock radiator is stupid thin. Mine started to leak so I replaced it with a Koyorad. It is only about 1/2" thicker, so its not huge. Still it's definitely thicker than stock. You almost make it sound like its not worth the trouble. But since it is thicker, it does have some additional thermal dissipation, yes? And since it has higher capacity that means higher heat capacity yes?

I have a Koyorad as well; IIRC, the stock is 1/2" thick while the Koyo is 3/4" thick. The extra thickness allows for slightly more coolant capacity (and the coolant in the radiator will stay there a touch longer due to slower overall flow through a larger core), but the aluminum endtanks (vs plastic) help drop a tiny amount of heat themselves, and the increased thickness is arguably better at higher speeds/airflows.

Keep in mind, there are people running around with stock radiators and making 400-600HP without cooling issues.

 

[Speedie6]

Thanks. You are a bit off on the radiator, not quite THAT thin. The Koyorad specs 36mm thick, about 1.4". It says "over twice" as thick as stock.

For an FMIC on the Speed platform, I think most people use 3" cores. I've heard of 3.5" and 4" cores. Of course I've heard of much thicker but not our platform. I'm guessing you would say that the cores thicker than 3" maybe not worth it?

 

[Enki]

Just went out and measured it, you're right, it's not 1.4" thick but mine is 1" thick. I went to the site to figure out why mine is 1" while yours is 1.4, and it even says on the site:

"In this case, the 36mm V-Core Series will suit your...
*25mm Core Thickness for Mazda 3 and Mazdaspeed 3 Applications"

You have a PTO to cool too, after all.

The reason you can get away with 3" thick FMIC is because of turbulence in the rows (which tend to be the full thickness of the IC, whereas a 4" thick radiator is probably has two rows), and also the lack of thermal mass in air. Thicker intercooler cores can be worth it, especially if you only do quick bursts or have sustained high speeds where the heat can be pulled away more effectively; keep in mind that most aftermarket intercoolers are bar and plate, which have higher thermal mass than factory (generally tube and fin) intercoolers.

Being completely honest, I'm currently on the lookout for a 3" thick tube and fin intercooler core (like stock, but thicker) for a new TMIC for my car; 3" thick for the extra flow, but tube and fin so the heat gets pumped away efficiently. Probably won't be able to find one, though, so that sucks, but it is what it is.

Overall, when talking about heat exchangers (whether it be a radiator or an intercooler), the most important number to keep in mind is surface area; after all, what good is an intercooler if it cant get enough cool air through it to drop charge temps?

I have a spreadsheet for this kind of thing (intercooler sizing) somewhere that I might be convinced to pop into a thread and provide screenshots of or whatnot.

 

[Speedie6]

Thanks much! Interesting information.

I hijacked this thread. But, I guess I should return it to the original topic of the Turbine Tech front motor mount. Didn't look like it generated much interest and as I said, I certainly don't recommend it...

 

[Enki]

The hijack can always be moved to another thread. Easy peasy.

 

[MS6 P.C.]

New post in GB Section...