). I've read (dont recall where exactly) that a flat mount btween the rad and crossmember is actually a good place for an I/C in a Merk after front or a cowl mount. But it didnt mention a scoop. I was wondering if there was downflow in that area (with the flap) or if it needed a scoop. I have a T/C cooler in the stock position now with no airflow but I put a fan on it and a snorkel to the original intake slot as I have a cold air cone anyway. I havnt decided whether to try a fron mount, I want to keep the A/C as well.jkxr4ti wrote:Yes its mounted flat, and no scoop was used. I was going to reinstall a rubber strip on the crossmember again but i never got around to it. I modeled my install after Dimitri's setup in his first 2.3 scorpio. Pics are over on the Merkur Tech picture pages. As you can see this is by far not the best mounting location and the Supercoupe intercooler does a great job of cooling the charge air.
the performance advantage of a front mount is well worth the SLIGHT and virtually unnoticeable (on a 3000 lb car) change in polar inertia. top mount is just a lazy way to go, it's what you do when you can't front mount. the cowl induction is probably the best way to go where front mount isn't possible. top mount directly isn't bad... but it's not great either.Ed Lijewski wrote:Another of several reasons why I like and run with the TCIC top-mount:
"2006 MAZDASPEED6 Exterior, Interior, Performance, Safety, Gallery ...The intercooler is top-mounted, rather than front-mounted to reduce polar inertia. ... The overall result of MAZDASPEED’s effort is greater low-end torque, ...
[www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage. action?pageParameter=modelsMain&vehicleCode=MS6 - 48k - Jan 9, 2006]
Note: although Google Search brought up the above on reducing polar inertia, I couldn't find the actual text in which it appears. But, I don't doubt that it's there, somewhere on that site. The physics involved re polar moment/inertia is unassailable.
YMMV
Lots of blather there....turbofan wrote:the performance advantage of a front mount is well worth the SLIGHT and virtually unnoticeable (on a 3000 lb car) change in polar inertia. top mount is just a lazy way to go, it's what you do when you can't front mount. the cowl induction is probably the best way to go where front mount isn't possible. top mount directly isn't bad... but it's not great either.Ed Lijewski wrote:Another of several reasons why I like and run with the TCIC top-mount:
"2006 MAZDASPEED6 Exterior, Interior, Performance, Safety, Gallery ...The intercooler is top-mounted, rather than front-mounted to reduce polar inertia. ... The overall result of MAZDASPEED’s effort is greater low-end torque, ...
[www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage. action?pageParameter=modelsMain&vehicleCode=MS6 - 48k - Jan 9, 2006]
Note: although Google Search brought up the above on reducing polar inertia, I couldn't find the actual text in which it appears. But, I don't doubt that it's there, somewhere on that site. The physics involved re polar moment/inertia is unassailable.
YMMV
)
As you can see from my post, I thought it was in reference to handling characteristics of the car.wilky wrote:WTF is all this talk about Polar Inertia - is this just a fancy way of saying air doesnt like to go round corners so the straighter the air path from turbo to engine the better?
But either way, I'm with you Wilky... WTF? 
it's about the ability of a car to rotate on its axis. extra weight in the nose makes it more difficult to move the nose, increasing polar inertia.wilky wrote:WTF is all this talk about Polar Inertia - is this just a fancy way of saying air doesnt like to go round corners so the straighter the air path from turbo to engine the better?
Wilky
Oh bloody hell - I'll give a prize to anyone who can measure the difference in the polar inertia on a Merkur due to the location of the I/C. IMHO were picking fly crap out of pepper on this one - but it's a fun discussion so lets keep it going eh 
Argue with the Mazda engineers, I don't pretend to assume they've not calculated it as they called it for the Mazdaspeed6 top mount. Mass centralization differences on motorcycles is pretty easily felt--Honda does it better than others, almost magically. Same principle in cars, while it's harder to assess/feel with your butt; but then real engineers use instruments to measure these effects, don't they.wilky wrote:
Wilky
Ed Lijewski wrote:Argue with the Mazda engineers, I don't pretend to assume they've not calculated it as they called it for the Mazdaspeed6 top mount. Mass centralization differences on motorcycles is pretty easily felt--Honda does it better than others, almost magically. Same principle in cars, while it's harder to assess/feel with your butt; but then real engineers use instruments to measure these effects, don't they.wilky wrote::lol: :lol: Oh bloody hell - I'll give a prize to anyone who can measure the difference in the polar inertia on a Merkur due to the location of the I/C. IMHO were picking fly crap out of pepper on this one - but it's a fun discussion so lets keep it going eh :P
Wilky
YMMV
