Nisei Engineering > Forum > View topic

**Nisei Team** Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 115

Recently, we were fortunate to have come across an EVO owner who was willing to have his vehicle upgraded from the BR Deluxe FMIC, pipe kit, and mini battery kit.

NOTE: This BR Deluxe FMIC is the newer, “revised” design, which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the FMIC we used on our previous road tests. More details available regarding the differences between the “Original” and “Newer” Deluxe designs below.

Our Nisei Pipe Kit (including the Nisei Battery Kit) fits with the stock air box and stock intercooler. I have heard the Buschur Pipe Kit does not fit with the stock air box, however, I have not test fit this for myself, so I cannot confirm fitment of their pipes.

Since many of you rarely get to see the different manufacturers’ products side-by-side before making a purchase, I thought I would give you all some idea as to how the products differ.

Below is the BR Stainless upper piping with the HKS SSQ BOV. Just off to the right of the upper pipe you can see the BR mini battery kit.

We replaced the stainless steel upper pipe with the Nisei Polished Aluminum upper pipe and Nisei Genesis battery kit. You will notice the following:

A) Relocated HKS BOV closer to the T/B.
B) Routing of the upper pipe is slightly different. Coming off the throttle body, the Nisei does NOT utilize as tight of a bend as the BR.
C) Replaced all “Worm Gear / Screw” clamps to “T-Bolts”.
D) Replaced the thin Aluminum BR mini battery tie down with our Billet CNC machined Aluminum battery tray assembly. Detailed photos outside the vehicle posted below.
E) Battery terminals – BR Lead terminals upgraded to Nisei Brass terminals.

Below are a series of photos of the upper piping outside of the vehicle. We used our custom red pipes so there would be no confusion as to which pipes were Nisei Engineering.

Nisei Engineering – Top (red)
BR – Bottom

BR – Notice the sharper bends on the BR pipes.

(see photo below)
Nisei - Right
BR – Left

The photo on the right give you a good indication of how our upper pipe coming off the T/B gives you a straighter line and uses less degree of bend between the T/B to outlet of the intercooler.

Since many of you have concerns with the weight of the vehicle, I thought it would be interesting to see the weight savings of Aluminum pipes vs. Stainless steel ones.

As you can see from the above photo the Nisei upper pipe is about half the weight.

After seeing that the Nisei upper pipe was about half the weight, I decided to put the entire Nisei Pipe Kit (LICP and UICP) (05’ Evo 8 / 06’ Evo 9 model) on the scale just out of curiosity.

I was surprised to see how lightweight the entire pipe kit is. I believe this is not just because the pipes are made of lighter weight Aluminum but also, the length of the piping may be significantly shorter. I will confirm this at a later date.

The Lower
(see photo below)
Top – Nisei – 2.5” pipe.
Bottom – BR Deluxe – starts at 2” and transitions to approximately 2.25”.

]

Now many of you have asked whether we planned on producing a new outlet pipe off the turbocharger. This is an example of why we will not produce one. We’ve discovered with a larger diameter than the stock outlet pipe there would be many difficulties with installation and fitment.

During the time we prototyped our pipes, we noticed that we would be limited in our design due to the restriction posed by surrounding components. Since we believe there was no detectable or significant benefit by using a slightly larger pipe, we didn’t want to sacrifice quality for looks.

As you can see below the BR pipe off the turbocharger is rubbing on the actuator/wastegate.

We reinstalled the stock outlet pipe to increase the clearances. As you can clearly see, fitment was greatly improved.

(see photo below)
BR – Top
Stock – Bottom

Special flanges would be required in order to accommodate the larger diameter pipe. Notice the notch on the BR pipe where bolt would typically go through a hole.

As you can see, although one may be able to increase the diameter of the pipe slightly, it may NOT necessarily increase the flow / volume. Due to the additional length of the pipe.

(see photo below)
BR – Top – 2” diameter approximately 14” L

Stock – Bottom – 1.75” diameter approximately 7” L. Note: After the approx. 7”L, it immediately attaches/transitions to our 2.5” diameter Nisei Lower pipe.

Mini Battery Tie Down / Tray:

Front View
(see photo below)
BR – Left
Nisei - Right

Rear View
(see photo below)
Nisei – Left
BR – Right

3/4 View

BR – Utilizes thin bent Aluminum sheet metal, drilled in several places for the mounting, and holes for long bolts, which are used to secure the Tie Down Strap. The Tie Down Strap is also made from sheet Aluminum that is laser cut and secured with “Wing Nuts”.

Nisei Engineering – Billet Aluminum Tray assembly CNC machined.

Before BR products were removed below.

Nisei Engineering products installed above.

Below we have the BR Deluxe FMIC with front bumper on.

Nisei Engineering FMIC with bumper installed above.

After installation was completed.

As mentioned above, I have provided details of the different BR Deluxe FMIC’s and how to identify them.

Top – “Newer” design BR Deluxe FMIC with black coupler which, has NOT been officially tested with the MoteC BUT, will be tested in the near future. Our original test previous to acquiring the MoteC with this core showed a significant increase in pressure drop and NOT as much heat exchange as the Nisei “Street” FMIC.

Bottom – “Original” design BR Deluxe FMIC with red coupler that was tested previously (test results posted on another thread). The “Original” is also identifiable by the broken mounting bracket.

(see photo below)
“Newer” design on the left, “Original” design on the right. Identifiable by:

Newer Deluxe (left) – 12 Cooling Tubes

Original Deluxe (right) – 15 Cooling Tubes & broken mounting bracket

Here is a better visual comparison between the 2 Deluxe cores.

Original Deluxe – Front
Newer Deluxe - Back

Newer Deluxe – Top (black coupler)
Original Deluxe – Bottom (red coupler)

Here is the internal design of the Original Deluxe.

Close up view – Straight fin design approximately 8 fins per inch. The low fin count explains the ineffective cooling characteristics and low pressure drop across the core. As was indicated by our testing on the intercooler thread.

Newer Deluxe

Close up view – Louvered fin, very dense, approximately 18 fins per inch. Effective cooling characteristics BUT, has a significant pressure drop across the core. We tested this core about 6 months ago with analog equipment. Now that we own this core, we will test this unit again with the MoteC in the near future. Stay tuned for the test results.

Side by side comparison of the fin density differences between the “Original” design and “Newer” design. Not only is there a difference in the fin density but, there is a difference in the cooling tube size.

Original Deluxe – Right side
Newer Deluxe – Left side

The “Original” Deluxe below has approximately 1/4" tube passages.

Newer Deluxe – Left side
Original Deluxe – Right side

The Newer design has just over 3/8” tube passages.

Comparison shot of the fin design and count:

Newer Deluxe – Top
Original Deluxe – Bottom

Below the Original Deluxe on the scale.

Newer Deluxe below coming in a few pounds heavier than the original design.

As you can see, the differences between the 2 Deluxe Cores are quite significant. We have tested the Original Deluxe FMIC and will post the test results of the Newer Deluxe FMIC once testing has been completed.

Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2

Here are some facts that I am sure will be removed.

#1. That is not our newest design of our Deluxe FMIC. The core is correct the intercooler plumbing is changed.

#2. I notice in all your "testing" you do that you have failed to compare anyone's FMIC that is even close in size to the yours. Our race FMIC outperforms you intercooler. We offer 3 different intercooler kits for the EVO's. You came into the market late and just made one larger than everyone else's, at the time, and have tested only the small units offered by other companies.

#3. Your intercooler temps starting at -4 and -7 degrees in 1st gear is not possible. You are not providing false facts to your potential customers. I agree with the fact that your only intercooler that is much larger than our standard or deluxe kits will cool more efficiently than our 2 smaller kits, not our race fmic kit. Your FMIC has more pressure drop than all three of our kits though and this is a critical mistake in FMIC design.

#4. Please install the t-bolts clamps a few times on those aluminum intercooler pipes you are so proud of. You will find that the aluminum not only distorts but it will actually crush and loose the seal. This is ONE of the reasons we do NOT use aluminum in our intercooler plumbing. The other is aluminum is a good at disapating heat but it is also good at absorbing it. Polished SS has been proven to REFLECT engine bay temps AND keep the intake charge that has been cooled by the intercooler at lower temps that aluminum can.

David Buschur
President
Buschurracing, Inc.

**Nisei Team** Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 115

First thing David, I want to welcome you as the newest member and thank you for taking the time to join.

Now before I respond, I would like to state this forum is driven by TECHNICAL FACTS! Nothing more, nothing less. I hope every existing /new Nisei-Evo.com member who takes the time post will have something to contribute which will benefit the Evo community. We will not tolerate arguing, fighting, bashing, slamming, etc.

Since this forum is NOT a business nor does it generate direct income to hire professionals to regulate the content of each thread, posts that are directed with the intent of instigating any action related to a negative outcome will be deleted. Put simply, we don’t have time to make corrections for others. Those who take time to post BUT don’t make the extra effort to ensure the content is technically driven or addressed with respect for their fellow members will be responsible for making their own corrections until their posts / threads reflect that of which is beneficial for the community and will then and only then be made viewable.

Now that being said, I will respond to your post.

#1 I did not state it was your “newest” design. I made the statement it was your “newer” design. If you want to give me the official / appropriate designation for your cores, I will be more than happy to make the corrections in my post.

#2 – Sheer size/mass of an FMIC is NOT the ONLY thing which makes a FMIC work well. David, you of all people know this. If I recall correctly, when OUR FMIC was initially released, I believe you had addressed the size/mass issue on another forum stating the Nisei was TOO LARGE which was not beneficial. Yet today, you are upset that we tested against your “smaller” Deluxe FMIC.

In order to “DESIGN” an effective FMIC, it must be multi-facetted.

a) According to your SINGLE dyno pull comparison, your outcome is correct. From my understanding of the post you provided on the other forum, I was lead to believe there were multiple pulls. If that were to be the case and multiple pulls were conducted, it’s very well known (and especially one being in your position, as well as anyone who’s ever been on the dyno) that every pull conducted on any dyno, with the same car, same parts, back-to-back will deviate from it’s 1st to its last pull. Of course the duration of “cool down” time can affect the numbers as well. I think in all fairness, if multiple pulls were conducted, then an average whp would have proven to be more effective and should have been posted.

b) I also noticed regarding your test there was a boost discrepancy between your “race” and our “street” FMIC. I believe you were running additional pressure, which very well could have explained the difference in whp. I also read that you felt by adjusting the boost to match YOUR FMIC, it would have generated more heat and therefore you deemed the test uninformative and did NOT attempt it. That is your prerogative. I would like to add that had our “street” FMIC been extended the opportunity, it would have been able to exchange the additional heat and continued to produce a positive gain. Again, if multiple runs were made and overall averages were posted, it would have resolved this discrepancy.

c) You may offer 3 different styles for what ever reason you have, again, your prerogative. I can only speak for Nisei Engineering. Nisei Engineering does NOT believe in selling products knowing the performance of the product is compromised. We feel our DESIGNS should NOT have to endure/undergo revisions once released. Especially, when the “End-Users” are the ones who will lose out in the end. We believe it is the Manufacturer’s RESPONSIBILITY to conduct adequate Research and Development to the best of their abilities to provide the market with the “BEST” products. This responsibility is not only reflected in the time & money invested into our designs, quality, and production PRIOR to the release of our products, but is also reflected in our high level of customer service and price point.

#3 Our temperature analysis was released with the intent to increase awareness of “How the performance of FMIC’s can register/be measured outside of a dyno.” Regarding your statements about negative temps (Referring to below ambient). Are you saying it is not possible “factually”? David, since you are taking that stand on this topic. I believe the burden of proof belongs to you. Upon hard evidence being provided, I will be more than happy to either retract or revise the statements I’ve made.

a) Regarding your above statement of our “street” FMIC having more pressure drop then ALL 3 of your FMIC’S. Is that a factual statement, and can you provide me with hard data showing this? On this topic, I will choose to disagree with you. Based on some early testing with analog equipment. Our results did not reflect that to be true. As you know, we’ve recently acquired the “newer” Deluxe FMIC (please indicate the proper designation for this FMIC and I will make corrections) and we will be testing specifically for that characteristic. Upon the completion of testing, we will make the information available to the public.

#4 Again David, your prerogative but, we have included the more expensive, higher quality “T-BOLT” clamp upon many repeated requests. I also feel supremely confident in our clientel, and their ability to make the proper adjustments accordingly. I do not believe they will “over torque” the T-BOLTS to the point of crushing. To date we do not have any record of your statement being true regarding crushing of the pipe kit.

a) David, please keep in mind this forum is TECHNICALLY & FACTUALLY DRIVEN. If you are certain that your “polished stainless steel pipes” will reject the engine bay temperatures and sustain internal temperatures better on the Evo versus other pipe kits on the market, please provide us with the tests you’ve conducted on the Evo or list a reference where we can access this information. I would be very interested in seeing your results of the thermal differences. I’m sure this type of information will be very appreciated in the community.

In closing I would greatly appreciate your future posts to include more details of the testing, data, documentation, links or references so, that our users can get a better understanding of the statements you make.

Again, welcome to Nisei-Evo.com.

Enjoy the day!

Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2

#2. I don't know if I said the Nisei was "too" big although anything could have happened. There is more to an intercooler design than sheer size and I believe the lowest possible pressure drop is of the utmost importance as long as the cooling is also acceptable.

a) There were multiple pulls conducted and the pulls were consistant with each other. I did pulls back to back to back in our testing. The power levels stayed consistent at 5 whp. This is completely realisitic, as even by your own testing of our product we have less pressure drop than yours, which is what I am 100% sure produced the 5 whp. More boost equals more hp as we all know. The single pull that I spoke of was the last pull compared to the first pull after removing your intercooler. The reason I used these two pulls to compare was I took great measures to make sure I had your intercooler as cool as it would possibly go and I also shut the car off and regulated even the engine coolant temps. Then I made the pull with the air temp as low as I could get it and the engine coolant temp starting at (from memory 160 degrees). I then took 19 minutes to take your intercooler off and install our on the car. I then got the coolant temp back to 160 degrees and made another pull. These pulls started at EXACTLY the same outlet air temps and same coolant temps. I could not get the pulls any more consistant than that.

b) I did not RUN more boost, our core has less pressure drop than yours, which you yourself have logged and that is where the increase in the boost came from. It was .7 psi. This was NOT from any adjustment, simply what our core picked up in boost over yours.

c) I have never sold a product that the performance was compromised on. I have made changes to products to further improve the design. You have done this too as the intercooler I had here to test was shipped to one of your customers to replace one he had that the brackets were not correct on.

#3 Yes, that is fact. An intercooler cannot drop the outlet air temps to below AMBIENT air temps unless you are spraying the intercooler with something such as cold water, nitrous, Co2 etc.

That's all. I won't get into a pissing match and appreciate you keeping my post up here.

As a side note, your intercooler, as I said in my post on EVOM is a nice product and did do a good job cooling. I also believe that your intercooler will drop the outlet temps further than our deluxe and standard (smaller core) kits will. I have no problem with that. I only had a problem with the negative numbers (below ambient) that are being advertised. The pressure drop with your intercooler was .7 psi more than ours and in the single gear runs on the dyno the air temps did rise an additional 4 degrees.

David Buschur

**Nisei Team** Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 115

David,

I thought I was very clear about what this forum stood for. I will say again, this forum is “Technically & Factually” driven. Sales pitches, marketing schemes, self-promotion for personal gain, etc. WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!

Again, as a professional courtesy, and the fact you are a new member, I will retain your post. However, future posts which do NOT present hard numbers, facts, data, references, links, etc. WILL BE DELETED!

As a competitor posting on our company forum, negative claims about our products without data to back them will not be tolerated. We encourage open discussion of our products with competitors, as long as it is technically driven. Questioning our integrity by insinuating that our tests were manipulated in any way is disrespectful and unacceptable behavior on our forum.

This forum will be and remain for those individuals who can contribute to the growth of the community in a positive manner.
This forum will NOT ALLOW vendor programs!
This forum first and foremost will be TECHNICALLY & FACTUALLY driven.
This forum will NOT BE CORRUPTED by money.

Now that being said, since I’ve extended you the floor to voice your opinions, I will address your post.

#2 This is exactly what will be considered a pointless contribution and will not be allowed on Nisei-Evo.com, especially, from a manufacturer / vendor trying to maintain his market share. My post on this topic was a RESPONSE to your complaints about the difference in size of the Deluxe and the Nisei cores. I will allow your response to remain on this forum, however, in the future, posts such as this will be removed unless they ADD something to the discussion.

Using "off the shelf" items to fulfill your product line may be an acceptable manufacturing practice for your company, however, Nisei Engineering believes in DEVELOPING the best product for a specific application. I will state this again, intercooler design must take into account many different aspects in order to achieve one's performance goals. Nisei Engineering not only sized the core, we selected the internal/external fin configuration, determined tube count, tube lengths, surface areas and took into account the pressure drop versus temperature drop. This core is a proprietary design, NOT an “OFF THE SHELF” item. We do everything from the ground up. My point is the characteristics were targeted with intent.

Bottom line – there is more than one-way to make a good intercooler.

a) You state multiple pulls were conducted; yet ONLY 1 was made public, which was supported with NO Documentation. You claim power levels for every run differed by 5 whp each time. That being the case then the data should have been made public when said test had taken place.

You try to manipulate our information to benefit your test. Tirelessly, you focus in on the pressure drop recorded by our equipment, yet you did not take the time to add your own pressure sensors to validate your own test. Not to mention your using information based on your "Original" Deluxe FMIC and applying it to your "Race" FMIC. I will make an official statement. Nisei Engineering NEVER TESTED THE BR “RACE” FMIC. The pressure drop recorded by Nisei Engineering was based on the “ORIGINAL” Deluxe FMIC.

Now, I hope when you make your future comparison to our core, your OWN SENSORS will be included to record pressure drop. Referencing 2 separate tests taken on 2 different occasions, in 2 different locations, with 2 different weather conditions etc. is irresponsible. I do hope you understand by trying to approximate your pressure loss based on our study, you are essentially misleading the public. Combining the 2 tests in hopes of making your product look better, you are distorting the facts to of both of our products. Not by any means what you attempting to do is considered a validation, data, or factual evidence of any kind to prove your products performance on your end. I understand you are concerned with the loss in your market share and are trying to remain one of the leaders in the community. But, I do not appreciate the fact you are trying to manipulate what we do in order to salvage your reputation. As you can clearly see above, this thread is nothing more than factual. Ultimately, we know our products speak for themselves.

Addressing the more boost equating to more power. You openly state this repeatedly, yet did not make the effort to bring the boost pressure to an even level before conducting the pulls. Your reasoning being that the additional boost pressure and heat would have resulted in the loss of hp. If that were to be the case then the margin of separation could have been larger and you had everything to gain by proving your product. BUT, you chose NOT to do so because if contradicted, and our core was NOT AFFECTED by the potential increase in temperature. It is very feasible we would have produced MORE power than you.

Now another prime example of why Nisei-Evo.com will not accept claims without data to validate them is:

If I were to apply the “THEORY” which AMS CLAIMS regarding boost pressure and the direct increase to wheel horse power. In your test against the Nisei “street” intercooler our numbers would look something like this:

Your original test showed:

BR Race FMIC Nisei “street” FMIC
Max HP 374 Max HP 369
Max TQ 372 Max TQ 371
Max Boost 31.07 psi Max Boost 30.36 psi

The difference in boost pressure recorded by you equated to .71 psi.

Applying the CLAIMS provided by AMS posted on another forum that “a 4 cylinder will make 10-15 (or more on big turbos) hp per 1psi of boost.”

The Nisei “street” FMIC would then look like this:

Max HP 376-379 with the additional .71 psi added to our FMIC. Based on a small turbocharger.

Now if I were to present that information as if it were “REAL” and tested. Then we actually would have out produced your “RACE” with OUR “STREET” by a minimum of 2HP up 5 HP based on a smaller turbo.

Consider this, AMS is respected in the Evo community, I don’t know if they market with CLAIMS or they have data to reference. But according to their expertise, Nisei did perform better than you.

Once again, I will point out, posts with NO DATA, REFERENCES, LINKS, etc. to support CLAIMS WILL BE DELETED!

David, in your post you try and explain your exact step-by-step / play-by-play on what you did. I do not see the documentation to justify an explanation.

ON THIS FORUM, it is “TECHNICALLY & FACTUALLY” DRIVEN! The numbers are what matter here. Presenting them is all we ask, nothing more, nothing less.

b) I believe I addressed this above. I believe the boost should have been adjusted to ACTUALLY SEE what the “REAL” outcome would have been.

c) Nisei Engineering did NOT redesign - change the core, design, fin configuration, etc.

#3 Please submit the data to validate “your fact” about how an air to air FMIC can not produce outlet temps below ambient under any enviormental condition or even how aluminum temperatures can not be affected by windspeed.

David, you are more than welcome to post “TECHNICAL & FACTUAL” information here. If your posts do NOT have references, links, data, etc. to support your information. It will be DELETED!

I want to make this clear, the courtesy you’ve been extended today WILL EXIST NO MORE! If you want to address my post I suggest the following:

Let me know when you will be available so I can make arrangements to contact you over the phone.

If you decide the above is not acceptable, please PM me with your suggestions. I want to make it clear this forum will NOT become a MINDLESS PLATFORM!

Enjoy your weekend!

Joined: 15 Apr 2007 Posts: 1

In response to the question "can an air/air intercooler drop temps below ambient? I did a quick little test that answers the question.

Here is my digital dual probe temp gauge used for this simple test. It is about 78 degrees in my room as evident by both t1 and t2 probes.

Here is a picture of the probe t1 on my tounge. This is warm water at body temp.

Now here is the temp of probe t1 after a few seconds of removing it from my tongue. The warm water evaporates from the probe pulling temperature from the surface. the temp dropped to 72 but I couldn't snap a pic fast enough. That is 6 degrees below ambient.

No imagine an intercooler surface has about a million times more surface area than the tip of this little probe. I believe this simple test proves that moisture in the air that rests on the surface of the cooler pulls temp down below ambient when air evaporates from the surface. On a low 60 degree night there will be plenty of moisture in the air to cause this affect.

So it appears david buschur was just out to ruin the credibilty of the testing done by nisei by making the statement " its impossible for starting temps to be below ambient" without any technical evidence to back it up.