SPOOL vs iONperformance (FMIC & CAI)
- Thread starter TLSteel
- Start date
I will be going with the Ion I think, for one main reason. When coupled with their CAI all the factory black plastic crap is replaced. I like continuity and aesthetics and don't really want to pay extra for the MAF to Turbo pipe (Spool did say this was an option.) I do not like the fact that I will have to cut my car for the Ion though so I am torn. Spool hasn't offered any numbers yet, but their other stuff is reputable and quality built. Ion certainly has excelent customer service which is a big factor in my book. They always answer questions and are eager to provide assistance whenever they can, even when it is to me, someone who has not bought anything from them yet. I have not dealt with Spool except when I contacted them about their CAI several months ago and was told to check back in a few days, but they didn't release it until now. Since we haven't seen any specs on the Spool set up, it's hard to know if they made a custom fit IC core like Ion, or if they used an off the shelf unit. Spool does not use any 90 degree silicon hoses like Ion. But Ion really needs to get their website fixed!
So who knows? This didn't help much, but hopefully I provided some discussion material.
Britt
So who knows? This didn't help much, but hopefully I provided some discussion material.
Britt
Last edited:
The IC from Spool is not custom made. It is the same one they use in all of their kits. To mount the intercooler there is minimal cutting as well.
ION is in the developmental process currently and have not had time to update the website. They have stated time and time again that they are going through rigorous testing to ensure quality parts.
ION is in the developmental process currently and have not had time to update the website. They have stated time and time again that they are going through rigorous testing to ensure quality parts.
Last edited:
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
Here's a picture of the stock IC vs our stage 1 FMIC:
Here's a picture of the stage 1 FMIC installed:
Here are the facts & results:
- Charge temps went from 60C (post I/C on the stock set-up) down to 20C on our stage 1 FMIC.
Stock car baselined: (Before stage 1 FMIC) - boost was 5.5psi peak
(Run #1) 120.6whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 125lb-ft torque @ 4200rpm
(Run #2) 119.4whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 114lb-ft torque @ 4200rpm
(Run #3) 116.2whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 106lb-ft torque @ 4700rpm
After stage 1 FMIC added (w/ stock airbox & K&N panel filter): boost was 5.7psi peak
(runs #1-11 were all higher then #12, we stopped at 12 runs)
(Run #12) 139.3whp peak @ 5800rpm, 146.3lb-ft torque @ 3900rpm.
Baseline Dyno Run:
After Stage 1 FMIC was installed (12th dyno run showed)
After an EBC was installed and our 3" cat-back, boost was set to 8.9psi and 192.2whp was made. This was the 12th run as well that set the 192.2whp
Here's a picture of the stage 1 FMIC installed:
Here are the facts & results:
- Charge temps went from 60C (post I/C on the stock set-up) down to 20C on our stage 1 FMIC.
Stock car baselined: (Before stage 1 FMIC) - boost was 5.5psi peak
(Run #1) 120.6whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 125lb-ft torque @ 4200rpm
(Run #2) 119.4whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 114lb-ft torque @ 4200rpm
(Run #3) 116.2whp peak @ ~6000rpm, 106lb-ft torque @ 4700rpm
After stage 1 FMIC added (w/ stock airbox & K&N panel filter): boost was 5.7psi peak
(runs #1-11 were all higher then #12, we stopped at 12 runs)
(Run #12) 139.3whp peak @ 5800rpm, 146.3lb-ft torque @ 3900rpm.
Baseline Dyno Run:
After Stage 1 FMIC was installed (12th dyno run showed)
After an EBC was installed and our 3" cat-back, boost was set to 8.9psi and 192.2whp was made. This was the 12th run as well that set the 192.2whp
Last edited:
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
TLSteel - our core is probably the larger of the two (stage 1 vs. the Spool kit). This makes a larger heat sink, which means that the threashold at which heat-soak occurs much later. The Spool set-up uses a hyperflow I/C out of Australia which is "off-the-shelf" which looks like the same one for several other applications incl. the Civic/Integra.
122 Vega - actually the reason why we chose the route to have 2 holes cut is to maintain your ground clearence. With Spool's set-up. If you kiss a parking curb, or go past a speed-bump a little too fast, the lower I/C pipes are gone. You won't even be able to consider having your MSP lowered then either.
Cirielle - our stage 1 FMIC kits are all shipping this week
So the FMIC's are actually done development. It's our turbo-back that's under-going some hush hush testing right now
122 Vega - actually the reason why we chose the route to have 2 holes cut is to maintain your ground clearence. With Spool's set-up. If you kiss a parking curb, or go past a speed-bump a little too fast, the lower I/C pipes are gone. You won't even be able to consider having your MSP lowered then either.
Cirielle - our stage 1 FMIC kits are all shipping this week
So the FMIC's are actually done development. It's our turbo-back that's under-going some hush hush testing right now HondaToMazda
Member
Jack,
Being that the all Dynos are different and if I were to go by the numbers that Turbo magazine posted which was 158.2 To the wheels. Would it be fair to say that the Max HP could possibly be 229.8 to the wheels? Since there is a 71.60 hp difference?
Being that the all Dynos are different and if I were to go by the numbers that Turbo magazine posted which was 158.2 To the wheels. Would it be fair to say that the Max HP could possibly be 229.8 to the wheels? Since there is a 71.60 hp difference?
- :
- 2003.5 Titanium Gray MSP #1699
So the ION FMIC adds 20whp/20tq to a basically stock MSP? I would think for most cars that a FMIC wouldn't be justified until the boost was turned up, but does this mean it's warranted on the MSP?
I see that you posted the whp with the FMIC & EBC, but do you have any idea how much it adds to that setup?
I see that you posted the whp with the FMIC & EBC, but do you have any idea how much it adds to that setup?
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
HondaToMazda - yes you're right, most dynos will read different #'s. We chose to use the most accurate dyno available to do all of our R&D on. The Dynodynamics dyno generally reads 15%-20% lower then all other dynos in 2wd mode, and ~20-35% lower for 4wd mode.
Unfortunately, parasitic losses are different @ different power levels, so you can't really just tack on the power difference onto another dyno. That won't be totally accurate. You can use that as a guesstimate though.
Black Majik MSP - yes, the system that's used on the MSP has plastic charge-pipes (cold & hot) as well as plastic end tanks. The core isn't very efficient either. Thus with just the change to our stage 1 FMIC, there was an observed gain. If you note the stock MSP baseline runs how quickly heat soak became a problem, with our kit, "heat soak" doesn't occur at all. The benefits are just magnified when boost is increased even further. Just like any other pump, the more air you have coming in, the more necessary it is to ease it's exit. Hence increasing the boost on just the stock exhaust itself won't give as large gains as clearing up the exhaust track.
ddogg777 - we'll be releasing our P5 turbokit shortly. It'll feature the same turbo that we use on our stage 2 MSP upgrade, an equal-length manifold, our stage 1 FMIC and a host of other components to work on the P5. We do have exhaust systems as well as suspension components & CF/Kevlar hoods available for the P5 as we speak
Unfortunately, parasitic losses are different @ different power levels, so you can't really just tack on the power difference onto another dyno. That won't be totally accurate. You can use that as a guesstimate though.
Black Majik MSP - yes, the system that's used on the MSP has plastic charge-pipes (cold & hot) as well as plastic end tanks. The core isn't very efficient either. Thus with just the change to our stage 1 FMIC, there was an observed gain. If you note the stock MSP baseline runs how quickly heat soak became a problem, with our kit, "heat soak" doesn't occur at all. The benefits are just magnified when boost is increased even further. Just like any other pump, the more air you have coming in, the more necessary it is to ease it's exit. Hence increasing the boost on just the stock exhaust itself won't give as large gains as clearing up the exhaust track.
ddogg777 - we'll be releasing our P5 turbokit shortly. It'll feature the same turbo that we use on our stage 2 MSP upgrade, an equal-length manifold, our stage 1 FMIC and a host of other components to work on the P5. We do have exhaust systems as well as suspension components & CF/Kevlar hoods available for the P5 as we speak
Our unit is not off the shelf. It is the same intercooler utilized in our protege kits. It is custom made to our specs by PWR australia. Size means nothing in the world of intercoolers. Our core is rated to 350whp. Intercooler design and construction play a greater role in"heat soak/efficieny ratings ect)
Incorrect. Our setup is installed on a lowered MSP that has been lowered 1.75-2.0 inches with no ground clearence issues.
Thanks
Terry
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
ARunto - those #'s are somewhere, however they maynot have been recorded. Dyno #'s were done on stock wheels & tires. The Dynodynamics is designed to maintain maximum traction, hence there was no wheelspin etc.
spoolinmp3 - actually the threshold @ which heat-soak occurs is purely a function of mass. So a smaller intercooler core will heat soak faster then a larger core.
In regards to construction, not sure how in-depth the end-tank design was, according to several fluid dynamics models, having a square tank w/it's source situated at the top isn't exactly going to provide the most efficient flow across the core. The top of the core is being over utilized vs. the bottom.
So how much ground clearence is there left then? Up here in Canada and any other snowbelt locations, loosing that extra ground clearence could mean getting stuck and not getting home.
spoolinmp3 - actually the threshold @ which heat-soak occurs is purely a function of mass. So a smaller intercooler core will heat soak faster then a larger core.
In regards to construction, not sure how in-depth the end-tank design was, according to several fluid dynamics models, having a square tank w/it's source situated at the top isn't exactly going to provide the most efficient flow across the core. The top of the core is being over utilized vs. the bottom.
So how much ground clearence is there left then? Up here in Canada and any other snowbelt locations, loosing that extra ground clearence could mean getting stuck and not getting home.
Yes you are correct in regards to end tank design, unsure on how your design is but smoother endtanks do add marginal performance and flow gains. But many things compromise an efficient intercooler system such as intercooler design, I/C plumbing ect. We actually chose our design of I/C plumbing pipes running them under the car becuase we were looking for the straightest shot from point A to B. We were really not concerned with cutting holes in the car intially to use that as some lame marketing ploy.......because thats what we are not all about. We just chose this setup because it offers the most efficient flow path not to avoid hacking up the car.
As for our intercoolers they are plenty large enough. Actually they are a bit on the (oversized side) again we utilized this since that was needed. No big oversized intercooler here. Bigger is not always better. Many things affect intercooler design such as the way the bar and fins run in relation to airflow, the specific design and construction of the bar and fins , the thickness of the intercooler and the greatest frontal area. Just because an intercooler has a larger front cooling area in no means does it mean it will out preform another I/C that is designed better.
Our intercooler cores are manufactured by PWR Australia, they are the premiere intercooler manufacturer boasting incredibly low pressure drops and awesome efficiency ratings. They are also involved in many rally and drag racing ventures here and abroad. They are considered to be the industry leaders in intercooler technology and development and thats why we use them
Utilizing an intercooler that is to large on a car has many negative aspects (I am not stating that ION is to big...I have no clue) such as turbo lag and unresponsive throttle.
As far as clearence it is only 1 inch lower than the rest of the front assembly. This is marginal and will NOT have any clearence issues. You will have to be more careful obviously when a car is lowered but that goes for all lowered vehicles.
Last edited:
Yes a smaller core can heat soak faster.......but our cores are not small
Any why would heat soak matter to you..........you live in the snow belt you have plenty of cooling up there
On a seroius note, our cores have been extensively utilized on our turbo proteges in varying weather conditions (South Florida to Canada) with different turbo combos(i.e. t3/t4 and T3) with no cooling and heat soak issues whatsoever
Ion and Spool, you both require cutting at least some of the vehicle frame??? how would that do to crash safety???
And I'm glad you two are out defending your products, now it's really hard to decide. And spool can you provide some statistic like Ion. I'm not talking about tq or hp from dyno, but like psi drop across the core, and psi drop across the whole system and what was the setup for those tests. thanks
And I'm glad you two are out defending your products, now it's really hard to decide. And spool can you provide some statistic like Ion. I'm not talking about tq or hp from dyno, but like psi drop across the core, and psi drop across the whole system and what was the setup for those tests. thanks
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
spoolinmp3 - so just how large is your core? When we said "small" it was in relative terms. We maximized both width and height as well as depth for the MSP application. Overall we had less pressure drop then the stock I/C set-up (picked up 0.2psi boost peak). There was also faster spool-up and less lag on all the dyno runs.
YuYuRena - before we decided on where the 2 holes needed to be placed, we had constructed a chassis model to simulate stresses on the body. We also consulted with several Mazda chassis engineers on this before we made our final choice. In regard to crash safety, nothing is affected, as the points chosen to make the holes are non-structural and non-load bearing. The re-bar is fully in-tact, so if you get into a frontal collision, the re-bar will still do it's job.
YuYuRena - before we decided on where the 2 holes needed to be placed, we had constructed a chassis model to simulate stresses on the body. We also consulted with several Mazda chassis engineers on this before we made our final choice. In regard to crash safety, nothing is affected, as the points chosen to make the holes are non-structural and non-load bearing. The re-bar is fully in-tact, so if you get into a frontal collision, the re-bar will still do it's job.
iON Performance
Potential Scammer!
YuYuRena - the holes are places in two different and specific plains. There'd be no difference in side impact at all. At an angle (ie: 45 degrees offset) the only thing that would happen is that one of the charge pipes would be deformed into more of an ovoid shape. (driver's side).
