HPT Microtubule Series - FL5 Intercooler

[siwelnosaj]

Do we have any testing data comparing this to other ICs?

Yes we do. I did track testing 2 weeks ago and I created a separate post with all the info. You can see it here:

https://www.civicxi.com/forum/threads/wot-hpt-microtube-intercooler.61514/#post-1006062

Sponsored

 

[siwelnosaj]

Bigtime dyno testing results with the WOT/HPT Microtube IC!

My first client at the release of the microtube intercooler, he has the same tuner as me, Rtuned (Ramon) in Puerto Rico. Two days ago they installed the ic on the car and ran on the dyno to do testing.

Rtuned made a post on Instagram and with his permission I'm sharing. He said:

"Testing the new @wot__performance Microtube Intercooler in this time attack Civic Type R FL5. Results: Previous WHP was 475 and 442 torque (industry leading IC), without any adjustments to the map just replacing the intercooler car did 511WHP/472WTQ. Ambient temperature was 91 degrees and 51% humidity, from 3500rpm-7000rmp IAT1(Intake manifold) stayed at 100 degrees the whole pass in 4th gear making it highly efficient. The best part of this intercooler is that it has minimal restriction to airflow to the radiator and we've already tested at Buttonwillow Racetrack in another FL5 and confirmed significant lower coolant temperature. We'll be testing at our local track in Puerto Rico in a couple of weeks to share the coolant temperature results."

Follow up from Ramon when asked if they did multiple dyno pulls, he said:

"Did 3 pulls. First one was 509, second 511, then I lowered 1 pound of boost and made 504."

So now we have Dyno results to go with the track results.

Message me to get one, I have 8 left in the upcoming batch, target release of December 20th.

 

[Bigfx]

Not to be a sceptic but what was wrong with the other intercooler? It would have to perform worse than stock for that type of power bump? Seems more like dyno variance than that actual change. I imagine the last dyno it was hotter and more humid. Great product but there are only so many ways to peel an onion and unless the other intercooler had a function issue or a boost leak don’t see 30 plus horsepower coming from that.

 

[siwelnosaj]

Not to be a sceptic but what was wrong with the other intercooler? It would have to perform worse than stock for that type of power bump? Seems more like dyno variance than that actual change. I imagine the last dyno it was hotter and more humid. Great product but there are only so many ways to peel an onion and unless the other intercooler had a function issue or a boost leak don’t see 30 plus horsepower coming from that.

One of the strengths of a microtube design is minimal pressure drop. So more than anything I would suspect it's a function of massively enhanced air flow.

Here's an example of a traditional bar and plate design with internal fins to increase surface area, but they also inhibit air flow.

And then the microtube design which doesn't have these obstructions.

Additionally we saw similarly impressive results 2 weekends ago during track testing at Buttonwillow. I created a whole post around that, but in a very quick summary in addition to massive coolant improvements from increased air flow to the radiator, we saw a big power increase noted in my trap speed going from 128 with the previous (industry leading) intercooler, up to 131 while using the microtube. The results were consistent over the rest of the weekend of testing with 2 more days of similar results.

 

[Bigfx]

Yeah that still doesn’t make sense, your are talking about massive increase in efficiency and air flow but without enhancements further upstream this wouldn’t be possible. The previous dyno was done under worse conditions and/or there was a boost leak. Almost 40+ hp from just an intercooler is insane and akin to KN intake saying they gained 35hp from increased air flow. The fmic main purpose is to cool the air charge, it’s a power adder if the previous fmic was inadequate and failing to cool the air charge. The fmic that was tested against was pwr and there is no way that product would be designed that poorly, hell the stock fmic would perform better. I like the innovation and intrigued by the microtubes but this is a very bold claim and needs to have some more 3rd party testing.

 

[apl360]

Yeah that still doesn’t make sense, your are talking about massive increase in efficiency and air flow but without enhancements further upstream this wouldn’t be possible. The previous dyno was done under worse conditions and/or there was a boost leak. Almost 40+ hp from just an intercooler is insane and akin to KN intake saying they gained 35hp from increased air flow. The fmic main purpose is to cool the air charge, it’s a power adder if the previous fmic was inadequate and failing to cool the air charge. The fmic that was tested against was pwr and there is no way that product would be designed that poorly, hell the stock fmic would perform better. I like the innovation and intrigued by the microtubes but this is a very bold claim and needs to have some more 3rd party testing.

I’m with U. I don’t understand this either. Did dude’s first dyno = damaged bent stock intercooler with bent fins?

I hate putting it that way cuz I’m not trying to shit on the product. It’s just, that’s a crazy gain

no offense to anyone btw. It’s just hard to believe

regardless. I’m not gonna sit here and call y’all liars, Grats on the performance of the product. Don’t mind me. I’m a skeptic

 

[siwelnosaj]

Yeah that still doesn’t make sense, your are talking about massive increase in efficiency and air flow but without enhancements further upstream this wouldn’t be possible. The previous dyno was done under worse conditions and/or there was a boost leak. Almost 40+ hp from just an intercooler is insane and akin to KN intake saying they gained 35hp from increased air flow. The fmic main purpose is to cool the air charge, it’s a power adder if the previous fmic was inadequate and failing to cool the air charge. The fmic that was tested against was pwr and there is no way that product would be designed that poorly, hell the stock fmic would perform better. I like the innovation and intrigued by the microtubes but this is a very bold claim and needs to have some more 3rd party testing.

I am sharing the results as they come in. I shared the track testing results last weekend as well.

But having an intercooler that has less pressure drop can make a huge difference.

 

[siwelnosaj]

I am sharing the results as they come in. I shared the track testing results last weekend as well.

But having an intercooler that has less pressure drop can make a huge difference, especially on higher boost.

 

[julianobl]

I am the owner of this car. I have no business affilitiations with RTuned, WOT, HPT, PRL, PWR etc. I am just a curious and enthusiast customer.

Just to give full context on the results: everything was done same car, same dyno, same fuel, and the PWR vs microtube comparison used the exact same optimized map. Also roughly same weather, ambient temps, humidty (year round tropical climate).

My tuner explained it best: “We previously had a PRL unit installed and adjusted to 485whp. After changing to PWR, power decreased to 455whp. Had to adjust again and be more aggressive to reach 475whp.”

Then we installed the microtube intercooler with that same 475whp map, no changes at all, and the car immediately did 509 → 511 → 504 (last one with 1 psi less boost). So this wasn’t dyno luck.

The main difference is pressure drop. The microtube flows much better, so the turbo hits the same boost with less restriction, giving more actual airflow even on the same map. IAT1 also stayed around 100°F the whole pull at 91°F ambient.

PRL (old map): 485 whp
PWR (optimized map): 475 whp
Microtube (same optimized map): 511 whp

Once you consider the airflow differences, the gains make sense and the data is repeatable.

Skepticism is nice and healthy, but this is just straight up empiric data which we are enthusiastically sharing.

 

[Bigfx]

I am the owner of this car. I have no business affilitiations with RTuned, WOT, HPT, PRL, PWR etc. I am just a curious and enthusiast customer.

Just to give full context on the results: everything was done same car, same dyno, same fuel, and the PWR vs microtube comparison used the exact same optimized map. Also roughly same weather, ambient temps, humidty (year round tropical climate).

My tuner explained it best: “We previously had a PRL unit installed and adjusted to 485whp. After changing to PWR, power decreased to 455whp. Had to adjust again and be more aggressive to reach 475whp.”

Then we installed the microtube intercooler with that same 475whp map, no changes at all, and the car immediately did 509 → 511 → 504 (last one with 1 psi less boost). So this wasn’t dyno luck.

The main difference is pressure drop. The microtube flows much better, so the turbo hits the same boost with less restriction, giving more actual airflow even on the same map. IAT1 also stayed around 100°F the whole pull at 91°F ambient.

PRL (old map): 485 whp
PWR (optimized map): 475 whp
Microtube (same optimized map): 511 whp

Once you consider the airflow differences, the gains make sense and the data is repeatable.

Skepticism is nice and healthy, but this is just straight up empiric data which we are enthusiastically sharing.

The results don’t make any sense, you are saying a fmic change is netting like 60 at the crank? This wouldn’t happen without more boost or a boost leak in the previous setup. Maybe the pwr isn’t rated to your horsepower flow but even then that power increase would be hard to come by. Something else is happening, any chance your tuner would share your dyno logs with fuel and other parameters?

 

[julianobl]

The results don’t make any sense, you are saying a fmic change is netting like 60 at the crank? This wouldn’t happen without more boost or a boost leak in the previous setup. Maybe the pwr isn’t rated to your horsepower flow but even then that power increase would be hard to come by. Something else is happening, any chance your tuner would share your dyno logs with fuel and other parameters?

Totally lost on the 60-ponies figure. I’m not sure where you got that from. Who said anything about 60 at the crank? Are you equating a wheel-horsepower delta with actual bhp losses? That’s not what I said at all.

I just shared the wheel numbers from the same dyno and the same map. From what my tuner and even a quick AI consult explain, the difference mainly comes from pressure drop and airflow. The way you’re framing it doesn’t match what I actually posted.

I don’t know buddy, I’m not that invested in convincing anyone. And honestly, tuners aren’t out there sharing their sauce with internet randos. Either the data helps you make an informed decision or it doesn’t.

I’ve tried 4 intercoolers now (OEM included) and am very happy with my latest purchase.

 

[Bigfx]

Totally lost on the 60-ponies figure. I’m not sure where you got that from. Who said anything about 60 at the crank? Are you equating a wheel-horsepower delta with actual bhp losses? That’s not what I said at all.

I just shared the wheel numbers from the same dyno and the same map. From what my tuner and even a quick AI consult explain, the difference mainly comes from pressure drop and airflow. The way you’re framing it doesn’t match what I actually posted.

I don’t know buddy, I’m not that invested in convincing anyone. And honestly, tuners aren’t out there sharing their sauce with internet randos. Either the data helps you make an informed decision or it doesn’t.

I’ve tried 4 intercoolers now (OEM included) and am very happy with my latest purchase.

The dyno shows 36hp to the wheels which give or take drive train loss 50-60 to the crank. You don’t get that with pressure drop unless there was a boost leak or functional issues with the other inter coolers tested ie they are busted.

 

[HondaHoon]

Arguing on the internet does nothing for anybody. If anyone feels that this man's data from his tuner and car is not correct due to the change of the intercooler. Than simply move on. Noone is going to "win".

Hell, I bought this intercooler with NO data at all. Why? Because it was an intriguing design and I like different.

I am glad to see data is coming in anyway, shape or form. More the merrier guys.

 

[ABPDE5]

The dyno shows 36hp to the wheels which give or take drive train loss 50-60 to the crank. You don’t get that with pressure drop unless there was a boost leak or functional issues with the other inter coolers tested ie they are busted.

... assuming 60 crank hp given 36 WHP? That's an aggressive estimate, especially in an FF.

Regardless, crank HP is irrelevant, as all the figures we're comparing here are WHP and the drivetrain is literally identical. A 36 WHP gain is 7% of the 511 WHP total output using the second IC and a 7.5% increase over the 475 WHP total output of the first IC.

While significant -- and certainly impressive -- that's also believable.

 

[Bigfx]

... assuming 60 crank hp given 36 WHP? That's an aggressive estimate, especially in an FF.

Regardless, crank HP is irrelevant, as all the figures we're comparing here are WHP and the drivetrain is literally identical. A 36 WHP gain is 7% of the 511 WHP total output using the second IC and a 7.5% increase over the 475 WHP total output of the first IC.

While significant -- and certainly impressive -- that's also believable.

What platform has shown that type of increase from one aftermarket fmic to another?

Sponsored