Audizine - An Automotive Enthusiast Community

Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Wagner FMIC initial observations

    Guest-only advertisement. Register or Log In now!
    Itís never really winter here in Hawaii so I took advantage of a nice Black Friday sale and DHL Express dropped this off straight from Germany last week.







    After installing it I decided to log a few pulls to see how it performs. It is well known that aftermarket intercoolers decrease IATís and cooler air is more dense which makes more HP. This monster of an IC does that quite well. Some other benefits of the FMIC upgrade are:

    -Pressure drop. Wagner claims 2 psi pressure drop, this means your turbocharger is having to compress 2 PSI less air to generate the same boost at the intake. Compressing air generates heat. Cooler air going into the intercooler means even cooler air coming out.

    -Better efficiency. MAF readings from my data logs show more air flowing throughout the powerband. Boost is around 1 PSI lower but MAF readings are up 5 g/s at lower RPM and up to 10 g/s at readline. More air means more power. Also less stress on the turbocharger.

    -Hot air promotes detonation. Knock sensors will cut back timing advance when your motor is breathing hot air. Comparing data logged with my stock IC and the Wagner FMIC, I am showing 1 to 2į more timing advance throughout the powerband with the upgraded IC. More timing advance means more power.

    The one downside I saw from the data logs is slower turbo spool (turbo lag). It was roughly 200 RPM slower to spool up compared to the stock IC. My turbo muffler delete arrived 2 days after the FMIC and after deleting that soundbox, I regained some of what I lost. Turbo spool up is now about 100 RPM slower than stock but I can live with that. Especially when you compare all the benefits.
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  2. #2
    Senior Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Aug 17 2015
    AZ Member #
    349632
    Location
    Michigan/Ontario

    Thanks for the review. Do you have any data files or graphs of the before and after logs you can post?

    Is this running stage 2 tune?

    A few days ago I managed to hit 295 g/s airflow on my setup! That's huge! Now I just need to work on this lame timing I'm seeing from the APR 93 K04 file. It's about 9 degrees near redline.
    JHM K04-R // APR v3.1 // 034 HFC // Treadstone TR8 FMIC // Snow Performance Stage 2 WM Injection // Bilstein B12 Pro-kit // Borla Downpipe // // Rockford 8" Woofers // JL 10" Sub // 2200 W // Audison BitOne DSP

  3. #3
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 15 2016
    AZ Member #
    383194
    Location
    Denver

    Thanks for the review! Are you on the stock turbo?

  4. #4
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Itís still mostly raw data but I did manage to chart a before MAF and after MAF chart. Notice the erratic airflow before I installed the FMIC and turbo muffler delete.



    Iím at stage 2 (stock turbo) peaking at 27 psi of boost and MAF readings max out at 230 g/s.

    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Four Rings bhvrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 21 2004
    AZ Member #
    2873
    My Garage
    997S; Camaro SS; e30 BMW, Toyota FJ
    Location
    South Florida

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry01 View Post

    -Pressure drop. Wagner claims 2 psi pressure drop, this means your turbocharger is having to compress 2 PSI less air to generate the same boost at the intake. Compressing air generates heat. Cooler air going into the intercooler means even cooler air coming out.



    The one downside I saw from the data logs is slower turbo spool (turbo lag). It was roughly 200 RPM slower to spool up compared to the stock IC. My turbo muffler delete arrived 2 days after the FMIC and after deleting that soundbox, I regained some of what I lost. Turbo spool up is now about 100 RPM slower than stock but I can live with that. Especially when you compare all the benefits.
    I have a quick question about pressure drop. Not trying to be negative but I'm wondering about what you were saying. If I am understanding correctly 2 psi of pressure drop for an intercooler would mean that you are losing 2psi measured at the inlet vs outlet.

    This would mean you are actually having to compress 2psi MORE of air in order to make the same boost as without the restriction of the intercooler. Meaning this makes the turbo work harder.

    Did you perhaps mean something else or perhaps they tested it against the stock intercooler for pressure drop?


    BTW, what are your impressions of IAT on each runs. I'd be very interested in that.

    thanks

    Mike
    2013 Audi S5 DSG
    Unitronic Stage 2++ ECU & TCU, 3.17pr, Revo Charge Cooler, CTS Turbo Intake, ST60 380mm BBK
    11.482 at 118.70mph - 97 octane - +465DA
    11.605 at 118.76mph - 93 octane - +544DA
    Gone:
    2016 A6 -- 2015 S4 -- 2009 A4 -- 2004 S4 -- 2006 A4 -- 2003 A4 -- 2000 A4

  6. #6
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 15 2016
    AZ Member #
    383194
    Location
    Denver

    He's talking about pressure at the MAF. To make 23psi there, the turbo may have to generate 27 psi to account for pressure drop across the intercooler. With less pressure drop, the turbo may only have to make 25psi, so lower temps and less wear.

  7. #7
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    What pressure drop means is, if youíre running 24 PSI as indicated by your boost gauge that means the turbo is actually producing something closer to 27 PSI. This pressure loss is a natural byproduct of flowing air, and the loss will grow as boost pressure increases on any given intercooler.

    A good aftermarket IC has much better air flow and this results in a reduction of kinetic energy. If an intercooler had zero kinetic energy loss, then the pressure on the inlet, and the outlet of the core would read exactly the same value. Reducing the pressure drop across the core is important because the lower the pressure drop, the less the turbo has to work to hit its intended boost target as measured after the intercooler.

    Increasing the size of an intercooler will also reduce the resulting pressure drop. The velocity of the air passing through the inside of the core is a function of the volume of air flowing over the cross-sectional area, and fluid friction is a function of velocity. So the higher velocity of air flowing through the intercooler, the higher friction loss.

    A good analogy would be comparing friction loss in a firehose. The larger diameter the firehose the less friction loss or pressure drop. The same applies with a bigger intercooler. Does it make sense?
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  8. #8
    Veteran Member Four Rings SleeperCar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 03 2012
    AZ Member #
    86119
    Location
    Owings Mills, Maryland

    And itís black, which is awesome!
    2013 A4 Scuba Blue Metallic | APR stage 2 | AWE | Milltek | GFB+ | Suntek | Solo-Werks | Eurocode | Blesk | 034 | ECStuning | CR-15 Strut brace | Apikol | R8 Coilpacks | NGK | Akebono | Hawk |MRR-GF07 19x9.5 ET38 | 18x8.5 peeler reps ET 40 (winter)

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Four Rings bhvrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 21 2004
    AZ Member #
    2873
    My Garage
    997S; Camaro SS; e30 BMW, Toyota FJ
    Location
    South Florida

    Right fellas. Thats what I said.

    2psi pressure drop as it pertains to an intercooler is 2psi measured drop or loss in pressure from the obstruction in airflow of that intercooler. The lower the better assuming you can still cool the charge effectively. This pressure drop is what the turbo has to overcome in order to see the same amount of boost or pressure at the intake manifold as without the obstruction.

    I was asking because you stated "Wagner claims 2 psi pressure drop, this means your turbocharger is having to compress 2 PSI less air to generate the same boost at the intake. "

    I'm just trying to get clarity on that.

    Because if you are losing 2psi pressure due to the intercooler than actually the turbo would have to compress 2psi MORE air to get that same reading at the manifold.

    Look at it this way. Your calibration is going to specify at a certain rpm a certain manifold boost pressure.... lets just randomly say 20psi at 5000rpm. Now your turbo without the pressure loss would hypothetically run a 70% wastegate duty cycle to make that 20psi at the manifold. Now if you had an obtruction causing 2psi of pressure loss, your turbo is still going to target that same 20psi but now it is having to use lets say a 75% duty cycle to make that same psi. The turbo has to work harder to compress more air to make up for that pressure loss pre-intake manifold.

    I'm asking because it appears to be a tube and fine design as well so maybe it is giving a bit more pressure drop than some of the other bar and plates out there who knows. Just be interesting to see that the pressure drop really is.


    thanks,
    mike
    2013 Audi S5 DSG
    Unitronic Stage 2++ ECU & TCU, 3.17pr, Revo Charge Cooler, CTS Turbo Intake, ST60 380mm BBK
    11.482 at 118.70mph - 97 octane - +465DA
    11.605 at 118.76mph - 93 octane - +544DA
    Gone:
    2016 A6 -- 2015 S4 -- 2009 A4 -- 2004 S4 -- 2006 A4 -- 2003 A4 -- 2000 A4

  10. #10
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Mike, the reason why I mentioned Wagnerís claim of pressure drop because only Integrated Engineering and Wagner are the only companies that I know of that have published data to back their claim of pressure drop.
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  11. #11
    Established Member Four Rings Spawne32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 20 2016
    AZ Member #
    386232
    Location
    NJ

    ECS claims pressure drop up to 52%

  12. #12
    Veteran Member Four Rings bhvrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 21 2004
    AZ Member #
    2873
    My Garage
    997S; Camaro SS; e30 BMW, Toyota FJ
    Location
    South Florida

    I was just trying to clarify the statement thats all. Just making sure it was actual pressure drop of their unit. I'm looking at putting a setup together for my avant and was just comparing.


    Just to clarify the ECS claims are that they have reduced pressure drop by 52% (compared to the stock setup) not that their intercooler has 52% pressure drop - I know most people would realize that just clarifying.

    It looks like the ECS unit measured a max pressure drop of .65psi actually measured on our cars. Awesome...


    Some treadstone cores are rated up to max of 2psi or 1psi of pressure drop depending on the core you choose but unknown the conditions of testing and probably not on our cars so who really knows? Id be interested to know.


    The IE appears to max out at .8psi pressure loss on our cars.


    Mike
    2013 Audi S5 DSG
    Unitronic Stage 2++ ECU & TCU, 3.17pr, Revo Charge Cooler, CTS Turbo Intake, ST60 380mm BBK
    11.482 at 118.70mph - 97 octane - +465DA
    11.605 at 118.76mph - 93 octane - +544DA
    Gone:
    2016 A6 -- 2015 S4 -- 2009 A4 -- 2004 S4 -- 2006 A4 -- 2003 A4 -- 2000 A4

  13. #13
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    ECS claims pressure drop up to 52%
    Anyone can make a claim backing it up and published data is another story

  14. #14
    Established Member Four Rings Spawne32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 20 2016
    AZ Member #
    386232
    Location
    NJ

    Quote Originally Posted by Perry01 View Post
    Anyone can make a claim backing it up and published data is another story
    exactly, thats why id take that 2psi pressure drop claim with a grain of salt

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by bhvrdr View Post
    I was just trying to clarify the statement thats all. Just making sure it was actual pressure drop of their unit. I'm looking at putting a setup together for my avant and was just comparing.


    Just to clarify the ECS claims are that they have reduced pressure drop by 52% (compared to the stock setup) not that their intercooler has 52% pressure drop - I know most people would realize that just clarifying.

    It looks like the ECS unit measured a max pressure drop of .65psi actually measured on our cars. Awesome...


    Some treadstone cores are rated up to max of 2psi or 1psi of pressure drop depending on the core you choose but unknown the conditions of testing and probably not on our cars so who really knows? Id be interested to know.


    The IE appears to max out at .8psi pressure loss on our cars.


    Mike
    Yep your right, was just quoting right from the product page. I bought the ECS one because I was pleasantly surprised by all the testing they did on it and the results for the price. They are on sale right now for 212 bucks for the core kit without the charge piping.

  15. #15
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    exactly, thats why id take that 2psi pressure drop claim with a grain of salt

    - - - Updated - - -
    Wagner tested their intercooler on an Audi 2.0T gen 2 motor And publish the data on their website.

    http://www.wagner-tuning.com/product...200001108.html
    Last edited by Perry01; 12-07-2017 at 04:49 PM.

  16. #16
    Veteran Member Four Rings bhvrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 21 2004
    AZ Member #
    2873
    My Garage
    997S; Camaro SS; e30 BMW, Toyota FJ
    Location
    South Florida

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    exactly, thats why id take that 2psi pressure drop claim with a grain of salt

    - - - Updated - - -



    Yep your right, was just quoting right from the product page. I bought the ECS one because I was pleasantly surprised by all the testing they did on it and the results for the price. They are on sale right now for 212 bucks for the core kit without the charge piping.

    I agree that 2psi seems unlikely. Looking at the link that Perry just posted it seems they are also claiming and showing less pressure drop than OEM and OEM is around 1psi so i have no idea where 2psi comes from. The testing from ECS and IE shows much less pressure drop than OEM as well.

    The increase in lag Perry is seeing though is a bit concerning and I wonder if that large core or core design is a bit much for the stock or k04 turbo. That huge surface area is pretty cool though.


    I appreciate the ECS link. I'm strongly considering just buying their core and running it with my stock plumbing. Their testing looks solid as well.

    Mike
    2013 Audi S5 DSG
    Unitronic Stage 2++ ECU & TCU, 3.17pr, Revo Charge Cooler, CTS Turbo Intake, ST60 380mm BBK
    11.482 at 118.70mph - 97 octane - +465DA
    11.605 at 118.76mph - 93 octane - +544DA
    Gone:
    2016 A6 -- 2015 S4 -- 2009 A4 -- 2004 S4 -- 2006 A4 -- 2003 A4 -- 2000 A4

  17. #17
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by bhvrdr View Post
    I agree that 2psi seems unlikely. Looking at the link that Perry just posted it seems they are also claiming and showing less pressure drop than OEM and OEM is around 1psi so i have no idea where 2psi comes from. The testing from ECS and IE shows much less pressure drop than OEM as well.

    Mike
    After looking at the Wagner pressure drop chart again, Iím not sure how to interpret the data. I thought it showed the Wagner had a 2 PSI drop but it apperars to show the stock IC at 300 CFM has 2 PSI drop and the Wagner at 300 CFM at 1 PSI of drop. Itís a bit conflicting compared to the IE and ECS data though.

    I guess the bottom line is that an aftermarket FMIC will have less pressure drop than a stock IC which we all know is better.

    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  18. #18
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by bhvrdr View Post
    The increase in lag Perry is seeing though is a bit concerning and I wonder if that large core or core design is a bit much for the stock or k04 turbo. That huge surface area is pretty cool though.

    Mike
    I plan to go K04 or other BT eventually and the bigger turbo pushing more air should (in theory) make up for the extra large core of the Wagner FMIC.
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  19. #19
    Established Member Four Rings Spawne32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 20 2016
    AZ Member #
    386232
    Location
    NJ

    Quote Originally Posted by bhvrdr View Post
    I agree that 2psi seems unlikely. Looking at the link that Perry just posted it seems they are also claiming and showing less pressure drop than OEM and OEM is around 1psi so i have no idea where 2psi comes from. The testing from ECS and IE shows much less pressure drop than OEM as well.

    The increase in lag Perry is seeing though is a bit concerning and I wonder if that large core or core design is a bit much for the stock or k04 turbo. That huge surface area is pretty cool though.


    I appreciate the ECS link. I'm strongly considering just buying their core and running it with my stock plumbing. Their testing looks solid as well.

    Mike
    The increase in lag is identical to what I saw with the ECS IC and its going to be typical of any of the larger volume intercoolers. You have more of a space to fill with air so its going to take a tad longer to fill that volume. The wagner, IE, and APR's are larger in physical size but they arent particularly that much larger in volume overall, thinner larger cores where as the ECS is a shorter thicker core. I'd have to look at each one but you could probably chart out the volumes of each intercooler compared to the stock one to get an idea which is going to increase turbo lag the most based on sheer volume.

  20. #20
    Established Member Four Rings Spawne32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 20 2016
    AZ Member #
    386232
    Location
    NJ

    wagner 1111.698 inches3 =18.217466275 Liters
    ECS 567 inches3 = 9.291465 Liters
    CTS 660 inches3 = 10.81546 Liters
    APR 801.9 in≥ = 13.140787 LITERS
    OEM 357.0 in≥ = 5.85018 Liters

    so admittedly the wagner is the biggest intercooler it seems
    Last edited by Spawne32; 12-07-2017 at 08:49 PM.

  21. #21
    Veteran Member Four Rings bhvrdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 21 2004
    AZ Member #
    2873
    My Garage
    997S; Camaro SS; e30 BMW, Toyota FJ
    Location
    South Florida

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    wagner 1111.698 inches3 =18.217466275 Liters
    ECS 567 inches3 = 9.291465 Liters
    CTS 660 inches3 = 10.81546 Liters
    APR 801.9 in≥ = 13.140787 LITERS
    OEM -357.0 in≥ = 5.85018 Liters

    so admittedly the wagner is the biggest intercooler it seems
    Thanks so much man! As long as I can keep IATs below 60c on a repeated basis im ok with that. I really like the large frontal area of the APR, IE, Wagner since thats how you're getting your cooling affect but if the ECS tuning works well enough to keep those temps down I cant see a reason to go bigger. hmmm. have to look at the IAT comparos more.

    Mike
    2013 Audi S5 DSG
    Unitronic Stage 2++ ECU & TCU, 3.17pr, Revo Charge Cooler, CTS Turbo Intake, ST60 380mm BBK
    11.482 at 118.70mph - 97 octane - +465DA
    11.605 at 118.76mph - 93 octane - +544DA
    Gone:
    2016 A6 -- 2015 S4 -- 2009 A4 -- 2004 S4 -- 2006 A4 -- 2003 A4 -- 2000 A4

  22. #22
    Established Member Four Rings Spawne32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 20 2016
    AZ Member #
    386232
    Location
    NJ

    Quote Originally Posted by bhvrdr View Post
    Thanks so much man! As long as I can keep IATs below 60c on a repeated basis im ok with that. I really like the large frontal area of the APR, IE, Wagner since thats how you're getting your cooling affect but if the ECS tuning works well enough to keep those temps down I cant see a reason to go bigger. hmmm. have to look at the IAT comparos more.

    Mike
    It's all about balance, remember, small turbos on our cars. So larger you make anything along the air intake tract, the longer its gonna take for that tiny turbo to fill that space, or in other words, longer it will take for it to get that space between the turbo and motor to the requested pressure. No doubt a larger IC will see better and more consistent IAT's, but at what point are you trading off certain aspects for that cooling, thats what I cannot answer for you. 18 liters is frigin massive for a K03 even a K04.

  23. #23
    Established Member Three Rings B8_Dude97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 05 2016
    AZ Member #
    380221
    Location
    Antioch, California

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    wagner 1111.698 inches3 =18.217466275 Liters
    ECS 567 inches3 = 9.291465 Liters
    CTS 660 inches3 = 10.81546 Liters
    APR 801.9 in≥ = 13.140787 LITERS
    OEM 357.0 in≥ = 5.85018 Liters

    so admittedly the wagner is the biggest intercooler it seems
    Anyone have the IE fmic dimensions to add to this. I'm highly considering the Wagner just do to future big turbo goals


    Sent from my iPhone using Audizine

  24. #24
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    IE FMIC

    22x16x2.5" = 14.4 liters
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

  25. #25
    Established Member Two Rings Perry01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 22 2016
    AZ Member #
    367620
    Location
    Hawaii and Utah

    Quote Originally Posted by Spawne32 View Post
    It's all about balance, remember, small turbos on our cars. So larger you make anything along the air intake tract, the longer its gonna take for that tiny turbo to fill that space, or in other words, longer it will take for it to get that space between the turbo and motor to the requested pressure. No doubt a larger IC will see better and more consistent IAT's, but at what point are you trading off certain aspects for that cooling, thats what I cannot answer for you. 18 liters is frigin massive for a K03 even a K04.

    The Wagner FMIC is big but cold dense air is what makes power. Iíve been driving turbocharged cars a long time and know how to keep the boost up. Turbo lag isnít really a big issue for me.

    But.......When I jump in my NA 4.2 V8, the instant response really puts a smile on my face.
    2013 Q5 Primium Plus
    2008 Touareg 4.2 V8 FSI
    2009 A4 S Line
    2016 GTI Stage 2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


    © 2001-2017 Audizine, Audizine.com, and Driverzines.com
    Audizine is an independently owned and operated automotive enthusiast community and news website.
    Audi and the Audi logo(s) are copyright/trademark Audi AG. Audizine is not endorsed by or affiliated with Audi AG.