IE Air to Air Intercooler

[B6_Dolphin]

Have they responded to any of your emails?

Our Engineers have seen another case on this with a B9 and a B9.5 RS5. So far we have not been able to find when and why Audi used the two different inlet styles for these vehicles. They are aware that some customers have had a similar situation to you and are working to find a solution that will hopefully work for both inlet versions that Audi put on these vehicles. This will take some time to test and further develop, but hopefully, we will have a solution sooner rather than later.

Based on this response, I decided to take matters into my own hands, and I'll know very soon if the new silicone tubing, IC clamps, and Aluminum coupler I've ordered will address the issue with the tubing blow-off.

[kfxjc]

hmmmm i am a bit confused with their answer. ETKA clearly shows cars built before Nov 4th 2019 are two piece pipe and cars built after that date are one piece pipe.

pretty cut and dry.

[Enzoba]

Our Engineers have seen another case on this with a B9 and a B9.5 RS5. So far we have not been able to find when and why Audi used the two different inlet styles for these vehicles. They are aware that some customers have had a similar situation to you and are working to find a solution that will hopefully work for both inlet versions that Audi put on these vehicles. This will take some time to test and further develop, but hopefully, we will have a solution sooner rather than later.

Based on this response, I decided to take matters into my own hands, and I'll know very soon if the new silicone tubing, IC clamps, and Aluminum coupler I've ordered will address the issue with the tubing blow-off.

Thanks for sharing your experience! I hope IE solves it soon and is 100% compatible with B9.5. I think this is currently the best solution for this platform and easy to install.

[Dan99]

The Air/Air intercooler has more air mass, air inlet to outlet, than a Water/Air intercooler.

Let's not forget that water transfers heat 13 times better than water, so they don't have to be the same size to get the same result.

[wwhan]

Let's not forget that water transfers heat 13 times better than water, so they don't have to be the same size to get the same result.

The air mass is not an issue for heat transfer. The larger air mass of the air/air intercooler has additional inertia for air moving and air movement stopping, as throtte is moved from open to closed.

[Dan99]

The Air/Air intercooler has more air mass, air inlet to outlet, than a Water/Air intercooler.

The air mass is not an issue for heat transfer. The larger air mass of the air/air intercooler has additional inertia for air moving and air movement stopping, as throtte is moved from open to closed.

The only reason the IE intercooler has such a large volume of air, is that air-air systems are less efficient at dissipating heat, which is what an intercooler is supposed to do.

The purpose of an intercooler is to make the intake air more dense (by cooling), so it can process more fuel (air/fuel ratio), which creates more power (amount of fuel burned per combustion cycle). The more heat the intercooler can remove, the more dense the air will be, and the more power it will support. So, the first relevant metric for an intercooler is how much heat can it remove from the compressed air. More heat removed is better.

Next, turbos push air into a cylinder under pressure, but that air has to get through the intercooler first. So, the second relevant metric for an intercooler is its flow rate - can it process as much air as the engine needs, when it needs it. So, the second relevant metric for an intercooler is its flow rate. More is better.

You said that Inertia was the magic elixer for an air-air system, but there is more than enough air volume in the stock system to support a ram effect. For example, the stock hose between the oem intercooler and the throttle body holds enough air to fill 2.5 cylinders. The additional volume of the manifold after the throttle body only adds to that, and its all under pressure, and it remains under pressure until the intake valve closes.

The ram effect that you are referring to is common in naturally aspirated engines, but does not really apply so much to forced induction. If air-air outperforms water-air, it is because it either removes more heat or it has a better flow rate. Both could be true of the IE intercooler, but they don't publish those numbers so we don't know.

In general, air-air has the ability to provide more cooling than water-air, but only if the heat exchanger is large enough and the car is moving fast enough. Water-air allows smaller body work and better aerodynamics while it also provides a more consistent temperature regardless of road speed, so you get more consistent behavior. For example, consistent air intake temperatures allow more control over ignition timing. F1 teams use both methods. The most common is air-air, but Ferrari and Mercedes both use water-air.

I'm curious and looking forward to some actual numbers coming from the IE system to see how it compares to the numbers provided by Wagner for their Competition water-air system. Unfortunately, IE obscures these details in the few numbers they do publish.

[wwhan]

The only reason the IE intercooler has such a large volume of air, is that air-air systems are less efficient at dissipating heat, which is what an intercooler is supposed to do.

The purpose of an intercooler is to make the intake air more dense (by cooling), so it can process more fuel (air/fuel ratio), which creates more power (amount of fuel burned per combustion cycle). The more heat the intercooler can remove, the more dense the air will be, and the more power it will support. So, the first relevant metric for an intercooler is how much heat can it remove from the compressed air. More heat removed is better.

Next, turbos push air into a cylinder under pressure, but that air has to get through the intercooler first. So, the second relevant metric for an intercooler is its flow rate - can it process as much air as the engine needs, when it needs it. So, the second relevant metric for an intercooler is its flow rate. More is better.

You said that Inertia was the magic elixer for an air-air system, but there is more than enough air volume in the stock system to support a ram effect. For example, the stock hose between the oem intercooler and the throttle body holds enough air to fill 2.5 cylinders. The additional volume of the manifold after the throttle body only adds to that, and its all under pressure, and it remains under pressure until the intake valve closes.

The ram effect that you are referring to is common in naturally aspirated engines, but does not really apply so much to forced induction. If air-air outperforms water-air, it is because it either removes more heat or it has a better flow rate. Both could be true of the IE intercooler, but they don't publish those numbers so we don't know.

In general, air-air has the ability to provide more cooling than water-air, but only if the heat exchanger is large enough and the car is moving fast enough. Water-air allows smaller body work and better aerodynamics while it also provides a more consistent temperature regardless of road speed, so you get more consistent behavior. For example, consistent air intake temperatures allow more control over ignition timing. F1 teams use both methods. The most common is air-air, but Ferrari and Mercedes both use water-air.

I'm curious and looking forward to some actual numbers coming from the IE system to see how it compares to the numbers provided by Wagner for their Competition water-air system. Unfortunately, IE obscures these details in the few numbers they do publish.

NO, NO, No. I was referring to the mass of air in the intercooler that is flowing, that but must suddenly stop when the throttle plate is closed. This is why on a prior application, I had the add a second bypass across the intercooler, so the air mass could continue flowing through the intercooler, when the throttle plate was closed. In that case (with a MAF sensor), it minimized the air turbulance. Since the the RS5 uses a different sensor technology, it is not an issue.

[Dan99]

NO, NO, No. I was referring to the mass of air in the intercooler that is flowing, that but must suddenly stop when the throttle plate is closed. This is why on a prior application, I had the add a second bypass across the intercooler, so the air mass could continue flowing through the intercooler, when the throttle plate was closed. In that case (with a MAF sensor), it minimized the air turbulance. Since the the RS5 uses a different sensor technology, it is not an issue.

Sorry, I misunderstood your post. You did not quote which post you were responding to and it appeared in the flow of a discussion on IATs.

[B6_Dolphin]

UPDATE: I received the 45 deg silicon hose elbow and 2.5" ICT Hose Barb Splice earlier this week, and after looking over how the Inlet Pressure Pipe doesn't quite intersect with the end of the IE IC hose, which is likely why, in combination with the radiator clamp, the IC Hose blew-off under-boost.

I decided to cut-down the length of the new 45 deg elbow, push the end onto the Inlet Pressure Pipe, and rotate the elbow. I removed the left front wheel and peeled-back the front of the wheel well liner to access the end of the modified Inlet Pressure Pipe, which looks like this:



In addition, I went ahead and cut the IE IC hose at the mid-point of the last 90 deg bend.

Now, both hose ends lined-up in-space, and I used the 2.5 ICT Hose Barb Splice to join the hoses. Pic of the Hose Barb Splice:



Here's what it looked like when installed:



These connections with the T-bolt clamps are not going to blow-off under-boost!

I re-installed the wheel well liner and front left wheel, and then used my VAG-COM Hex-Net to clear the engine codes from when the IC hose blew-off.

I test drove the car and everything is back to normal.

[jdm-v35]

UPDATE: I received the 45 deg silicon hose elbow and 2.5" ICT Hose Barb Splice earlier this week, and after looking over how the Inlet Pressure Pipe doesn't quite intersect with the end of the IE IC hose, which is likely why, in combination with the radiator clamp, the IC Hose blew-off under-boost.

I decided to cut-down the length of the new 45 deg elbow, push the end onto the Inlet Pressure Pipe, and rotate the elbow. I removed the left front wheel and peeled-back the front of the wheel well liner to access the end of the modified Inlet Pressure Pipe, which looks like this:



In addition, I went ahead and cut the IE IC hose at the mid-point of the last 90 deg bend.

Now, both hose ends lined-up in-space, and I used the 2.5 ICT Hose Barb Splice to join the hoses. Pic of the Hose Barb Splice:



Here's what it looked like when installed:



These connections with the T-bolt clamps are not going to blow-off under-boost!

I re-installed the wheel well liner and front left wheel, and then used my VAG-COM Hex-Net to clear the engine codes from when the IC hose blew-off.

I test drove the car and everything is back to normal.

Thanks for all your detailed posts of your mods. You are bad influence though and make me want to buy stuff LOL

[B6_Dolphin]

Thanks for all your detailed posts of your mods. You are bad influence though and make me want to buy stuff LOL

Yeah, IE got the A2A IC design 95% right, and then forgot about the B9.5 facelift changes, despite originally saying this IC fit 2018+. The only way to make it work right now on the B9.5 is to substitute the B9 Inlet Pressure Pipe ($600+ w/online discount retail pricing), or make these minor tweaks like I did to make a reliable connection. Otherwise, I would assume IE updates to account for the B9.5 is likely 3-6 months out, but that's my best guess.

[jdm-v35]

Yeah, IE got the A2A IC design 95% right, and then forgot about the B9.5 facelift changes, despite originally saying this IC fit 2018+. The only way to make it work right now on the B9.5 is to substitute the B9 Inlet Pressure Pipe ($600+ w/online discount retail pricing), or make these minor tweaks like I did to make a reliable connection. Otherwise, I would assume IE updates to account for the B9.5 is likely 3-6 months out, but that's my best guess.

I have a 2019 so it should be a direct fit without issues, but If it really does improve cooling efficiency while driving as well as stop and go traffic; especially in summer heat, then it is something I would highly consider doing. So is the air to water system its own closed loop cooling system(not connected to the engine radiator at all) that just gets entirely removed? Seems like if it also improves power and boost kicks in faster it would be nice.

[JohnEnglish]

I have a 2019 so it should be a direct fit without issues, but If it really does improve cooling efficiency while driving as well as stop and go traffic; especially in summer heat, then it is something I would highly consider doing. So is the air to water system its own closed loop cooling system(not connected to the engine radiator at all) that just gets entirely removed? Seems like if it also improves power and boost kicks in faster it would be nice.

The air to water system shares its coolant with the engine.

[Enzoba]

Yeah, IE got the A2A IC design 95% right, and then forgot about the B9.5 facelift changes, despite originally saying this IC fit 2018+. The only way to make it work right now on the B9.5 is to substitute the B9 Inlet Pressure Pipe ($600+ w/online discount retail pricing), or make these minor tweaks like I did to make a reliable connection. Otherwise, I would assume IE updates to account for the B9.5 is likely 3-6 months out, but that's my best guess.

how did it go? we need feedback

I see you have eurocode sway bars/link. Why did you go for them and they didn't choose 034 (very used here)?

[B6_Dolphin]

how did it go? we need feedback

My mods to to the connection with the 45 deg elbow, the 2.5" dia. Aluminum Hose Barb Splice, and the T-bolt clamps (pictured a few posts back) are holding-up - no issues.

I have not heard back from IE on what their planned changes to the kit to make it a "drop-in" installation on the B9.5 RS5.

Despite the install challenges, the turbos spool-up much quicker, and the boost is much more consistent. It feels like I got a tune without getting a tune ... LOL.

[B6_Dolphin]

I see you have eurocode sway bars/link. Why did you go for them and they didn't choose 034 (very used here)?

Cost (BFF on-sale for like $399 for both front & rear STBs), similar spring rates to 034, and the Eurocode monoball end links were also on-sale and are equivalent to the 034 motosport end links.

I also had previous good experience with Eurocode - like having the hardware in-stock and fast shipping.

[Dan99]

The air to water system shares its coolant with the engine.

This is misleading. This makes it appear as though you are trying to cool the charge air with hot water from the engine. You are not.

The oem water-air intercooler is on its own separate low temperature cooling circuit with its own radiator and water pump. If it did rely on the same coolant as the engine to cool the charge air, the IATs would not get any cooler than the engine coolant.

Click on the Wagner chart below. It includes temperatures for ambient air, turbo outlet, oem IATs and Wagner IATs. Columns 16-18 display the maximum charge air temperature coming from the turbos in this test as 127.2C (261F). The resulting IATs with the oem intercooler never get above 43.7C (110.7F). This would be impossible if the charge air was getting cooled by the same coolant as the engine.

Wagner-Temp.jpg

Wagner improves upon the stock water-air system by increasing the volume of the intercooler itself, along with the volume of the dedicated IC radiator/heat exchanger. As a result, the IATs with the Wagner system never got above 20.2C (68.4F) at the highest load. Again, this would not be possible if the water-air system used the same coolant as the engine.

Audi equipped the S4/5 models with an air-air intercooler, and it would have been easy to give the RS models a larger air-air system. Have you ever wondered why Audi chose water-air over air-air for the RS models?

[wwhan]

This is misleading. This makes it appear as though you are trying to cool the charge air with hot water from the engine. You are not.

The oem water-air intercooler is on its own separate low temperature cooling circuit with its own radiator and water pump. If it did rely on the same coolant as the engine to cool the charge air, the IATs would not get any cooler than the engine coolant.

.....

Well there is a single common connection between engine coolant and the Turbo Air/Coolant radiator system (for filling), but the coolant does NOT flow through the engine then through the Turbo Air/Coolant circuit, except when one fills the coolant system. It has a shared coolant reservoir.

Years ago, some aftermarket coolant-air intercoolers came with a seperate reservoir tank to divorce the coolant from the engine, but it may only produce a minimal improvement from using a single common connection. Another reason for a seperate reservoir tank is to put ICE in the intercooler system reservoir tank (drag racing).

Routing of the air tubing is more difficult, with limited space, on an air/air intercoler than on an coolant-air intercoolers, which may be the motivation for OEM choices.

[Enzoba]

Cost (BFF on-sale for like $399 for both front & rear STBs), similar spring rates to 034, and the Eurocode monoball end links were also on-sale and are equivalent to the 034 motosport end links.

I also had previous good experience with Eurocode - like having the hardware in-stock and fast shipping.

Do you have dragy or a similar tool to measure your car?

[B6_Dolphin]

Do you have dragy or a similar tool to measure your car?

I have a Dragy. I'll see about getting some data this weekend or next.

[Dan99]

I have a Dragy. I'll see about getting some data this weekend or next.

Do you have Dragy numbers before the IE IC for comparison purposes?

[Enzoba]

I have a Dragy. I'll see about getting some data this weekend or next.

Could you post the times in mph and km/h please

[B6_Dolphin]

Do you have Dragy numbers before the IE IC for comparison purposes?

No, I don't.

[Dan99]

I have a Dragy. I'll see about getting some data this weekend or next.

Any updates?

[Enzoba]

Any news?

[B6_Dolphin]

Any news?

In regards to Dragy #'s, no. Otherwise, still happy with my decision.

Note: I did a code scan with my Ross-Tech VCDS, and I have a soft code in the Engine Module for "Coolant Pump Short to Ground". I need to examine the coolant pump connector plug and see if the IE dummy connector is installed, and if so, why the code is popping up. If the dummy plug is not installed, I'll need to source one from IE.

[Enzoba]

In regards to Dragy #'s, no. Otherwise, still happy with my decision.

Note: I did a code scan with my Ross-Tech VCDS, and I have a soft code in the Engine Module for "Coolant Pump Short to Ground". I need to examine the coolant pump connector plug and see if the IE dummy connector is installed, and if so, why the code is popping up. If the dummy plug is not installed, I'll need to source one from IE.

I have the same code but on exhaust valves with the typical cancellers... At the moment I have not noticed any loss of performance or other inconvenience.

[FLOS5IN]

I have a Dragy. I'll see about getting some data this weekend or next.

Are you still planning to get some data?

[BlindingRS5]

Are you still planning to get some data?

I am very interested in the performance numbers as well. I hope IE can recover from this oversight quickly and provide a fix to their kit, while still keeping the price below the improved air to water options.

[Enzoba]

I am also interested in the results. I think the system can be improved even more by removing the shock bar.

[B6_Dolphin]

I am also interested in the results. I think the system can be improved even more by removing the shock bar.

This A2A IC is no joke... I think it does a better job of providing a less restrictive flow path for the charge air than the OE A2W cooler.

The airflow through the grill and around the crash bar are just fine. I've not not experienced any timing pull from heat soak.

FWIW, since I'm in the US Pacific Northwest, we only have 92 octane.

[gpxluke]

This A2A IC is no joke... I think it does a better job of providing a less restrictive flow path for the charge air than the OE A2W cooler.

The airflow through the grill and around the crash bar are just fine. I've not not experienced any timing pull from heat soak.

FWIW, since I'm in the US Pacific Northwest, we only have 92 octane.

I am glad that i've overcome all the installation barriers and had this bad ass intercooler installed on my car. Performance improvement is massive imo. I've compared that intake temperature, it dereased from a constant 45-50 degree of celisius to 34-40 degree of celisius

[Enzoba]

numbers are similar to the Wagner air/water. maybe air/air is more consistent. A compariso with dragy would be interesting.

[JohnEnglish]

That's great that people feel that there's a performance improvement but I'd like to see draggy and dyno numbers of a stock vs wagner intercooler & heat exchanger vs IE A2A on a hot day with like 10 runs.

[FLOS5IN]

This A2A IC is no joke... I think it does a better job of providing a less restrictive flow path for the charge air than the OE A2W cooler.

The airflow through the grill and around the crash bar are just fine. I've not not experienced any timing pull from heat soak.

FWIW, since I'm in the US Pacific Northwest, we only have 92 octane.

You said you'd post Dragy numbers, but we still haven't seen any to back up your claims

[jdm-v35]

lol people need to ease up on him as he is doing these nice posts just to help out the community and not selling IE's product. I am just glad someone is posting detailed reviews of it including install and part quality pics.

[Adams Audi RS5]

Wouldn't this be the best option based on bargain? it's like $1,000 cheaper than the Wagner option.

[JohnEnglish]

It’s only a bargain if it actually works as advertised.

[jdm-v35]

It’s only a bargain if it actually works as advertised.

IMO, the only thing it needs to do to work as advertised is keep IAT's down while not raising engine coolant temps(because it is a much larger block in front). It seems like people are missing the point of this, and really Dragy numbers would really not indicate anything with this mod unless there was a sample of 5 consecutive pulls immediately before install and 5 consecutive pulls immediately after showing differences during heat soak. The difference in air temps/weather can affect draggy numbers to the extent of any difference you might expect.

The intercooler would not really create more power; just prevent timing pull as heat rises because it should be more stable as the car gets run longer. It may also "free up" some air flow so it can optimize current air flow from the turbos, but technically they should be hitting the same PSI in the end, it just might be a bit more responsive due to easier flow. I don't see it doing the 1/4 a second faster due to this mod so dragy results would be negligible.

I personally am interested in it to stabilize IAT's, while not affecting engine temps and remove the possible point of a coolant leak into the engine. Looking to get this to increase power is a misconception.

[FLOS5IN]

IMO, the only thing it needs to do to work as advertised is keep IAT's down while not raising engine coolant temps(because it is a much larger block in front). It seems like people are missing the point of this, and really Dragy numbers would really not indicate anything with this mod unless there was a sample of 5 consecutive pulls immediately before install and 5 consecutive pulls immediately after showing differences during heat soak. The difference in air temps/weather can affect draggy numbers to the extent of any difference you might expect.

The intercooler would not really create more power; just prevent timing pull as heat rises because it should be more stable as the car gets run longer. It may also "free up" some air flow so it can optimize current air flow from the turbos, but technically they should be hitting the same PSI in the end, it just might be a bit more responsive due to easier flow. I don't see it doing the 1/4 a second faster due to this mod so dragy results would be negligible.

I personally am interested in it to stabilize IAT's, while not affecting engine temps and remove the possible point of a coolant leak into the engine. Looking to get this to increase power is a misconception.

idk, when I installed a larger intercooler on my stock S5 I definitely could feel the car continue to pull a bit harder into higher RPMs