Why did Honda put such a tiny intercooler in the Type R?

Amazon

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
95
Reaction score
99
Location
Athens
Vehicle(s)
2009 Cobalt SS
Country flag
Its a painfully inadequate small core they're trying to cram up to nearly 23psi through. I know most are aware that this is the first part to upgrade, but are you aware as to how ridiculously small it is? Example, my SS's core is 525cu, the GTI is 493cu, the Golf R is 616cu, the Type R? 380cu. The cherry on top is that none of the other cars are pushing anywhere near as much boost through their much larger cores.

It explains how one reviewer can get a 4.9 0-60 with a 108mph 13.5 sec 1/4 mile and the next reviewer can only manage a dismal 5.8 0-60 with a 14 sec 102.5mph 1/4 mile. For me its like watching a 23psi Trifecta tuned SS vs a stock 15.6psi SS and being told they're making the same power. For the track guru the Type R was created to be with its ecu highly sensitive to BAT's, it was a glaring oversight from Honda. I understand keeping costs down, but this is just absurd, a 3.5" core isn't going to break the bank.
Sponsored

 
OP
OP
Amazon

Amazon

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
95
Reaction score
99
Location
Athens
Vehicle(s)
2009 Cobalt SS
Country flag
An epically awesome 4-door with a Corvette motor in it available in an auto (boo!) and manual (yay!). It doesn't look fast whatsoever, so it makes for a good sleeper.
Well, its not actually a Vette engine and only the 05-06 N/A SS sedan was available in an auto. All LSJ and LNF coupes and sedans were manual. Either way, if Chevy can put a decent intercooler in a damn Cobalt, why can't Honda put a decent one in much more highly esteemed Type R?
 


remc86007

Senior Member
First Name
Ryan
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Threads
2
Messages
550
Reaction score
409
Location
Jacksonville, FL
Vehicle(s)
2018 Civic Type R
Country flag
I agree it is too small. I guess it was both a weight and cost thing and wanting the turbo to spool as fast as possible. The power difference between a cold day and a hot day is insane. I bought the car in March and (in Jacksonville) the car felt like a beast because the temps were warm enough that the tires gripped but cold enough that I got full power every pull. The first time I drove it on an 80F+ day I thought something was broken it was soo much slower. The car feels weaker than an SI when the IATs are up around 160F.
 

ExVTEC

Senior Member
First Name
Elliot
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Threads
42
Messages
806
Reaction score
605
Location
Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2019 CTR
Country flag
Ah that SS. Didn't realize it had an intercooler so it threw me off.
 

The Vyzitor

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Threads
11
Messages
430
Reaction score
344
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
2019 Civic Sport FK7, 2010 VW GTI MKVI
Country flag
An epically awesome 4-door with a Corvette motor in it available in an auto (boo!) and manual (yay!). It doesn't look fast whatsoever, so it makes for a good sleeper.
Well, its not actually a Vette engine and only the 05-06 N/A SS sedan was available in an auto. All LSJ and LNF coupes and sedans were manual. Either way, if Chevy can put a decent intercooler in a damn Cobalt, why can't Honda put a decent one in much more highly esteemed Type R?
I think people are on two different pages a bit... Tinyman was refering to the LS3 powered Chevy SS, otherwise known as the Holden Commodore elsewhere in the world. You’re talking about the Cobalt SS.
 

AdamD19DFK8

Senior Member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
679
Reaction score
376
Location
Maryland
Vehicle(s)
2020 FK8 Type R, 2007 Civic Si Sedan
Country flag
Terrible intercooler, horrendous fuel pump, stupid heavy wheels and shit tires. Those were my biggest gripes. 3 of 4 have been taken care of. Who know how long until someone puts out a reasonably priced DI pump for us.
 
OP
OP
Amazon

Amazon

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
95
Reaction score
99
Location
Athens
Vehicle(s)
2009 Cobalt SS
Country flag
I think people are on two different pages a bit... Tinyman was refering to the LS3 powered Chevy SS, otherwise known as the Holden Commodore elsewhere in the world. You’re talking about the Cobalt SS.
My bad, figured people would know I was referring to the Cobalt SS since it was the only SS to come with an intercooler.
 


OP
OP
Amazon

Amazon

Senior Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
95
Reaction score
99
Location
Athens
Vehicle(s)
2009 Cobalt SS
Country flag
Terrible intercooler, horrendous fuel pump, stupid heavy wheels and shit tires. Those were my biggest gripes. 3 of 4 have been taken care of. Who know how long until someone puts out a reasonably priced DI pump for us.
Not gonna lie, when I heard about how close the stock pump was to being maxed out, I had flashbacks to my Mazdaspeeds. Also I dont see why Hondata thinks charging nearly $3000 for theirs is fair. CP-E charged only $600 for their aftermarket pumps and they're hardly a bargain bin fabricator.
 

kefi

oh shit waddup its dat boi
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Threads
14
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
2,523
Location
Central Florida
Website
fk8.clinic
Vehicle(s)
2018 Type R
Build Thread
Link
Country flag
Not gonna lie, when I heard about how close the stock pump was to being maxed out, I had flashbacks to my Mazdaspeeds. Also I dont see why Hondata thinks charging nearly $3000 for theirs is fair. CP-E charged only $600 for their aftermarket pumps and they're hardly a bargain bin fabricator.
They probably thought people would hop on it since it would have been the only option to make real power and they were SUPPOSED TO BE first to market, but as of yet haven't shipped.

Keep in mind they're also selling you a bunch of other components with the kit, many of which people think we don't really need, i.e. the in-tank pump replacement and injectors.

Ironically, 4piston already has a HPFP and injectors out, but it of course doesn't have hondata support. APPARENTLY a tuner made it work without MoTeC but it's not easy.

That's what I'm really worried about - Hondata never supporting other fuel systems since they released their own. That would make me go back to KTuner in a heartbeat.

That being said, unlike the intercooler, the HPFP is good for stock and then another 80-100whp (a ~25% increase), so it isn't really Honda's fault there. Would've been nice since they knew full well what we would do to these cars, but even now most are stock.
 

tinyman392

Senior Member
First Name
Marcus
Joined
May 21, 2018
Threads
14
Messages
3,265
Reaction score
2,082
Location
Illinois
Vehicle(s)
'18 Civic Type R (RR)
Country flag
Its a painfully inadequate small core they're trying to cram up to nearly 23psi through. I know most are aware that this is the first part to upgrade, but are you aware as to how ridiculously small it is? Example, my SS's core is 525cu, the GTI is 493cu, the Golf R is 616cu, the Type R? 380cu. The cherry on top is that none of the other cars are pushing anywhere near as much boost through their much larger cores.

It explains how one reviewer can get a 4.9 0-60 with a 108mph 13.5 sec 1/4 mile and the next reviewer can only manage a dismal 5.8 0-60 with a 14 sec 102.5mph 1/4 mile. For me its like watching a 23psi Trifecta tuned SS vs a stock 15.6psi SS and being told they're making the same power. For the track guru the Type R was created to be with its ecu highly sensitive to BAT's, it was a glaring oversight from Honda. I understand keeping costs down, but this is just absurd, a 3.5" core isn't going to break the bank.
Let's tackle these three quickly:
  1. 4.9 0-60/108MPH 13.5s ¼mi vs 5.8 0-60/103MPH 14s ¼mi: Keep a few things in mind with these numbers. Some journals disregard the rollout speed when it comes to the 0-60 and rather it acts more like a 2-5 to 60MPH time, this can alter the timing. Other things that come up is that different drivers have different skills. If you wheel hop, you will end up with a slower time since you end up wasting energy vs putting all of said energy to the ground also resulting in lower times. A lot of the reviews early on just had the reviewer mashing the pedal to hit a 0-60 time while will get you a good 6.0s 0-60. I remember watching a few of those reviews screaming at the screen telling the guy to stop hard launching it at 3500RPM and going full throttle while they were complaining of the dismal 6.0s 0-60 time. I'm sure it took Motortrend (I think it was Motortrend) countless tries to get the throttle control and shifting just right to hit that 4.9, then also account for rollout.
  2. 23psi vs 15.6psi making the same power: this can actually be true if we're dealing with different environments. So let's say we have the 23psi setup in a very warm environment and the 15.6psi in a very cool environment; since this site is so nice and has pretty graphs, let's say 90F for the warm and 8F for the cool. The density of the 90F air is about 0.18 lbs/ft3 at about 23psi while the 8F air is about 0.18 lbs/ft3 for the 15.6psi setup since cooler air is denser in general. Equivalent air density => (approx.) same amount of oxygen => (approx.) same amount of power. The Type R ECU does this from the factory as it's aiming to hit torque targets instead of maximizing torque (and thus power). This is why you rarely see the CTR actually making 23lbs of boost, as it would most likely need to be in a hot environment to need to do that (and not be heat soaked). In the winter its not uncommon to see the boost capped below 17-18psi, sometimes even lower if its cold enough. A lot of piggyback tunes take advantage of this by telling the ECU that it's actually in a situation to produce more boost than it normally would by sending it false information.
  3. The only reason why I could see Honda using a smaller intercooler is to reduce turbo lag. That is, given a turbo at low/extremely low boost, put it in a situation where it would otherwise be at peak, how long does it take the turbo to reach peak boost? I've noticed quite a bit of this when doing a 6 -> 2 shift (at like 45-50MPH) as I don't feel anything near peak boost even as I approach redline (when in reality I should be feeling peak boost the whole time). If I do an X -> 2 shift (at like 30MPH) or a 6 -> 3 shift (at like 60MPH) I'll feel peak boost after about ¼-½ of a second when in reality, it should just feel peak boost if there were no turbo lag*. I'm curious how the PRL intercooler I just got will do with this, if it'll: worsen it, keep it the same, or improve it. Note I see a lot of people talk about the boost kicks 500RPM lower when asked about turbo lag; this isn't turbo lag, this is turbo threshold (minimum conditions required for the turbo to be at peak boost). As a side note to turbo threshold, when I had my stock CTR I never felt the threshold actually at 2500RPM, it always seemed to kick around 3000-3500RPM. When I got lighter wheels, I felt the turbo kicking in around 2500RPM every so often. So for me, putting new wheels on the car dropped the threshold by 500RPM. So when people say it dropped the turbo threshold by 500RPM, I'm not sure if it dropped back to 2500 (where it should be) or if the turbo is hitting peak at 2000RPM (which would be very awesome for me as it would help the power band immensely). I guess I'll have to find out when the PRL gets bolted on.
*Note that lag is big reason why I feel like doing a 20-55 pull is a lot more fun than doing a 40-55 pull. On the 40-55 pull, I barely am able to put the car in a position where I'll feel peak torque; by the time it's there, I have to let off the throttle. For the 20-55 pull, it definitely will hit peak torque for quite a bit longer (in comparison).
Sponsored

 


 


Top