Wraith pointed that out.....Bubonic said:I was just looking were to find a air to water unit and came upon this and I posted it to see what you said about this. I do some what understand why the water one to be better because of the ice. But wouldnt you have to constintly refil the ice?.... Well I would assume I would living in a hot and dry climate. I dont know too much about it thats why I researched it.... I usualy dont go on only one persons advice.
I posted this so maybe someone could help me understand why air to water is better.
And if you are to take someones opinion, Wraith is the one to listen to. I don't think there is one time that he has ever been corrected.Bad= because you have to run a water pump, a heat exchanger, a ice chest or a accumulator of some sort, not very street friendly,constant refill of ice and water...
Alltracs come with water to air, and aside from having to replace the pump at 180K miles, no problems with it. So I don't know that maintenance is all that much of a headache. The pump switch is easily bypassed to keep it on all the time, which reduces heatsoak. Nothing to add on which is better beyond what has been said already.
What ranges of efficiency can be expected from an intercooler?
A typical air-to-air intercooler for a street application achieves between 60% and 70% efficiency, an excellent/optimum design for road racing can approach close to 90% efficiency, but requires an adequate "budget!”
Typically, a liquid-to-air intercooler achieves higher efficiencies than an air-to-air intercooler, starting at 75% efficiency and reaching peaks of 95% efficiency. Another advantage is the optional use of ice as a coolant, which is the only way to reduce the charge-air temperature below the ambient air temperature.