# Aftermarket Intercooler???



## Charles_39 (Jan 16, 2021)

I am wondering has anyone installed an aftermarket intercooler on a GEN2 cruze? I am new to the cruze world and this is my first turbo car ever. It’s a 2017 LT RS. Manual!!! Yeah!!! Anyway I am close to pulling the trigger on some mods. New tune( it currently has Trifecta tune ), BNR catless down pipe, recirculating valve, throttle body spacer, and maybe even exhaust. I’m worried about heat wash in the small FMIC. If anyone has done this mod maybe they could provide some specifics on how and what they used. I am asking for part numbers if available because I don’t even know where to start. Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

I have a Gen 1 Cruze, which the body style before yours. If heat soak is your issue, I can attest the an aftermarket intercooler cut down on that for me. As far as how your going to accomplish that with your Gen 2 Cruse, I don't have any idea.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

As far as I know no one makes a aftermarket bolt on intercooler upgrade for a gen 2. You could go to a fab and race shop to have them make you a set up. Use a appropriate core and aluminum welded end tanks, brackets, and nice plumbing then off to the races.


----------



## TheNightFallsGray98 (Aug 4, 2020)

I have every mod on the gen 2 except an inter cooler. Realistically, I don’t think any one will make it but there is a aftermarket hood with functional vents that might help some bit with the heat.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Charles_39 said:


> I’m worried about heat wash in the small FMIC.


Is there room to fit a bigger one? It's not like the stock one is terrible. It's mounted right up front for the best airflow, and it's certainly made of aluminum just like any aftermarket charge air cooler would be.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> Is there room to fit a bigger one? It's not like the stock one is terrible. It's mounted right up front for the best airflow, and it's certainly made of aluminum just like any aftermarket charge air cooler would be.


Problem is very inefficient plastic end tanks that always favor packaging and cost over long term reliability, and performance of the unit. On gen 1 it’s a big upgrade, cool to see gen 2 putting it up front in the fresh air vs behind ax condenser.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> Problem is very inefficient plastic end tanks that always favor packaging and cost over long term reliability, and performance of the unit. On gen 1 it’s a big upgrade, cool to see gen 2 putting it up front in the fresh air vs behind ax condenser.


I'd have to look and see where it's mounted. My assumption was that it was in a "standard" location of fresh airflow. 

The stack of components is always AC condenser first, so it gets the coolest air, and then the engine radiator. For cars with a charge air cooler, it goes either before the AC condenser so it gets the coolest air, or it is co-located with the AC condenser (side-by-side, or stacked one above and one below) so that neither of those important things is getting warmed air from the other. This is a reason some manufacturers like Subaru and Mini (BMW) use a top-mount charge air cooler: to give it fresh, cool air that isn't affected by the AC condenser or having it stuffed into some tight packaging.

Of course, this doesn't touch on any of the water-to-air charge air coolers that use their own radiator mounted somewhere.

Plastic end tanks aren't the worst thing in the world. Those end tanks aren't a huge part of the overall cooling capability of a charge air cooler. They don't have a large surface area like the tubes and fins of the main body of the charge air cooler does, so it's mostly about getting efficient airflow through the unit. The benefit if you are worried about heat soak is that plastic is BETTER for that because it doesn't hold as much heat capacity as aluminium does.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> I'd have to look and see where it's mounted. My assumption was that it was in a "standard" location of fresh airflow.
> 
> The stack of components is always AC condenser first, so it gets the coolest air, and then the engine radiator. For cars with a charge air cooler, it goes either before the AC condenser so it gets the coolest air, or it is co-located with the AC condenser (side-by-side, or stacked one above and one below) so that neither of those important things is getting warmed air from the other. This is a reason some manufacturers like Subaru and Mini (BMW) use a top-mount charge air cooler: to give it fresh, cool air that isn't affected by the AC condenser or having it stuffed into some tight packaging.
> 
> ...


Definitely air to water coolers are great but they are heavy and complicated. Yah definitely performance cars put the IC in a good spot to get fresh air. Unfortunately in economy cars stable lower performance is fine. I’d be ok with a top mount intercooler, but at this point I’m just happy the turbo is in front of the engine bay vs rear.

as for plastic end tanks they just don’t last the lifetime of the car like all metal would. Same for the radiator. That and with aftermarket IC that’s aluminum tanked they tend to make less sacrifices of smooth flow in favor of tight packaging


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Mishimoto offers a number of "universal" intercoolers. I wonder if any of them are hard to fit to the Cruze?









Intercoolers


Available in universal and direct-fit applications All-aluminum constructionReduce air intake temperaturesTIG-welded for increased durabilityAvailable in several sizes and colors




www.mishimoto.com


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Im


Barry Allen said:


> Mishimoto offers a number of "universal" intercoolers. I wonder if any of them are hard to fit to the Cruze?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I’m sure one of them would work. Plus their products are quite good.


----------



## Taxman (Aug 10, 2017)

When I got my BNR tune, I took a 35-75mph pull on a freeway ramp and logged it.
30 degrees F outdoor temp. 
My IAT shot all the way up to 37 degrees. 
I don't see what can be accomplished by upgrading the I/C, maybe change a seven degree temp rise to a five degree temp rise?


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Taxman said:


> When I got my BNR tune, I took a 35-75mph pull on a freeway ramp and logged it.
> 30 degrees F outdoor temp.
> My IAT shot all the way up to 37 degrees.
> I don't see what can be accomplished by upgrading the I/C, maybe change a seven degree temp rise to a five degree temp rise?


Freeway on ramp flows a lot do clean air, wot after you’ve been sitting in traffic for 20min then the IC should show it’s worth.


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

pandrad61 said:


> Freeway on ramp flows a lot do clean air, wot after you’ve been sitting in traffic for 20min then the IC should show it’s worth.


I've seen my IAT's drop 20 degrees under normal acceleration after sitting at a stop light for 5 minutes.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

JLL said:


> I've seen my IAT's drop 20 degrees under normal acceleration after sitting at a stop light for 5 minutes.


Well here in bumper to bumper Florida heat temps do tend to go up since I blast a lot of AC. the diesel not so much but the 1.4t did heat soak, anecdotal yes since I didn’t have a dyno.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

It would be nice if someone like Mishimoto made an easy bolt-on replacement. If my stock charge air cooler were broken for some reason, I'd replace it with an aftermarket (all metal) version if the price was not too much higher.


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

Barry Allen said:


> It would be nice if someone like Mishimoto made an easy bolt-on replacement. If my stock charge air cooler were broken for some reason, I'd replace it with an aftermarket (all metal) version if the price was not too much higher.


Even the ZZP kit for my Gen 1 wasn't a bolt on replacement. It came with brackets but I still have to drill and mount it.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

JLL said:


> Even the ZZP kit for my Gen 1 wasn't a bolt on replacement. It came with brackets but I still have to drill and mount it.


For the price I find that unacceptable. They don’t sell it as a universal kit so brackets should be bolt on.


----------



## Thebigzeus (Dec 2, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> For the price I find that unacceptable. They don’t sell it as a universal kit so brackets should be bolt on.


I couldn't agree more, main reason why I won't get one. I would expect a universal IC to be around $350 or so. That's all this is I assume with a few $5 brackets to drill and attach.


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

pandrad61 said:


> For the price I find that unacceptable. They don’t sell it as a universal kit so brackets should be bolt on.


I know. I know. But the installation instructions were good and the quality of the components in the kit were GREAT, as I expect from ZZP, so I didn't complain.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

The stock LE2 intercooler is in fresh air, it's not layered in any fashion. It's approx. 23.5" wide x 4.5" tall x 4" deep. It's a pretty solid size.

If you were to maintainwidth, you could pull the intercooler farther forward and go taller, but wider is really possible without completely rerouting the charge piping.

It would honestly probably be easier to stick an air-to-water charge cooler, and an auxiliary coolant heat exchanger in the car than to fit a notably large air-to-air cooler and different charge pipe routing.


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

Ma v e n said:


> The stock LE2 intercooler is in fresh air, it's not layered in any fashion. It's approx. 23.5" wide x 4.5" tall x 4" deep. It's a pretty solid size.
> 
> If you were to maintainwidth, you could pull the intercooler farther forward and go taller, but wider is really possible without completely rerouting the charge piping.
> 
> It would honestly probably be easier to stick an air-to-water charge cooler, and an auxiliary coolant heat exchanger in the car than to fit a notably large air-to-air cooler and different charge pipe routing.


The stock LE2 intercooler sounds really stout.

My ZZP Intercooler is:
27.5" Wide x 6.75" Tall x 4" Deep

If I had a Gen 2 I'd probably keep the intercooler stock.


----------



## Cruzin2011 (Jul 5, 2020)

JLL said:


> I know. I know. But the installation instructions were good and the quality of the components in the kit were GREAT, as I expect from ZZP, so I didn't complain.


I can’t agree more, comparing other intercooler a you have the CX one for a little over $500 and the pipes are not made to fit. Then there was another manufacturer that name is skipped my mind but they wanted $799 for it. The ZZP is huge for the size of our engines.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Actually, I change my opinion. If I had a stock intercooler fail on my diesel Cruze sedan and I had a choice, I'd entirely eliminate the charge air cooler. I'd have the outflow from the turbo go right into the intake manifold. With diesel engines, intake air temperature doesn't matter much. The charge air cooler on diesel engines is only for help with emissions.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Intake air temp matters. Higher IAT will result in lower power. A non intercooled 2.0 could easily produce 250+F degree charge air. The power loss versus staying intercooled would be "undesirable" at best. LOL


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Ma v e n said:


> Intake air temp matters. Higher IAT will result in lower power. A non intercooled 2.0 could easily produce 250+F degree charge air. The power loss versus staying intercooled would be "undesirable" at best. LOL


With diesel engines, it largely doesn't matter. You aren't fighting detonation like with gasoline engines.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

[/QUOTE]
With diesel engines, it largely doesn't matter. You aren't fighting detonation like with gasoline engines.
[/QUOTE]
sure but colder air going in is more dense then hot air going in.


----------



## Thebigzeus (Dec 2, 2018)

With diesel engines, it largely doesn't matter. You aren't fighting detonation like with gasoline engines.
[/QUOTE]
sure but colder air going in is more dense then hot air going in.
[/QUOTE]

But if it doesnt matter... 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> sure but colder air going in is more dense then hot air going in.


Diesel engines run lean. It largely doesn't matter, and the hotter air intake can often help with more complete combustion.

The first Cummins engines in Dodge pickups didn't have a charge air cooler - that was only added in about 1991 for emissions reasons. 

The Detroit Diesel V-8 engines (6.5 turbocharged) in Chevy/GMC pickups and Hummers never had a charge air cooler - adding one (for about $1,200!) doesn't do anything to make more power. For that engine the GM turbochargers are only efficient to about 14 psi, and you can actually make the engines run BETTER (cooler) by installing a $100 manual boost controller that keeps maximum boost at 14 psi across the entire engine operating range.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

There's lots and lots of diesels out there, even non emissions ones that would disagree with you.

Air density plays a role in power output, and intercoolers help maintain stable temps, so that the ECM can reliably mange power output in varying climates and altitudes. And so it can help protect the turbo.

Old mechanically regulated and non charge cooled diesels are not very good at controlling turbo speed, or maintaining constant power outputs at various temps/altitudes.

One could argue all this is merely a side effect of controlling the emissions. But it's definitely a drivability feature as well, and non intercooled diesels wouldn't have the same level of acceptance in light duty vehicles as cooled ones do in my opinion. Charge cooling makes them more controllable, and more consistent I feel.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Ma v e n said:


> Old mechanically regulated and non charge cooled diesels are not very good at controlling turbo speed, or maintaining constant power outputs at various temps/altitudes.
> 
> One could argue all this is merely a side effect of controlling the emissions. But it's definitely a drivability feature as well, and non intercooled diesels wouldn't have the same level of acceptance in light duty vehicles as cooled ones do in my opinion. Charge cooling makes them more controllable, and more consistent I feel.


My experience is with the 6500 Optimizer engines (the old Detroit Diesel V-8 from GM and then AM General). For turbocharged applications, the stock turbo is good to 14 psi and is worthless after that because it's quickly off the map and inefficient. The stock wastegate valve is controlled with vacuum and that comes from a vacuum pump on the engine. The vacuum pump exists only to control the wastegate! One quick modification for these engines is: 1. Remove the vacuum pump, 2. Throw it in the trash, and; 3. Install a manual wastegate controller.

This is the same engine that installing an intercooler is absolutely worthless. It does nothing. It does NOTHING (and it also costs at least $1,000 to add it). There is nothing to be gained in power, reliability, efficiency, etc.

These same engines are dead reliable for basically any light or medium duty use. Temperature and altitude do nothing so long as you have a later manufactured water pump (1997 and later fixed cooling issues).


----------



## JLL (Sep 12, 2017)

Barry Allen said:


> My experience is with the 6500 Optimizer engines (the old Detroit Diesel V-8 from GM and then AM General). For turbocharged applications, the stock turbo is good to 14 psi and is worthless after that because it's quickly off the map and inefficient. The stock wastegate valve is controlled with vacuum and that comes from a vacuum pump on the engine. The vacuum pump exists only to control the wastegate! One quick modification for these engines is: 1. Remove the vacuum pump, 2. Throw it in the trash, and; 3. Install a manual wastegate controller.
> 
> This is the same engine that installing an intercooler is absolutely worthless. It does nothing. It does NOTHING (and it also costs at least $1,000 to add it). There is nothing to be gained in power, reliability, efficiency, etc.
> 
> These same engines are dead reliable for basically any light or medium duty use. Temperature and altitude do nothing so long as you have a later manufactured water pump (1997 and later fixed cooling issues).


Guys, isn't this conversation about a Gen 2 Cruze with a LE2???


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

JLL said:


> Guys, isn't this conversation about a Gen 2 Cruze with a LE2???


Sure, Still, in such a light duty engine, I doubt there is much benefit of an intercooler other than helping emissions. If you were able to remove the intercooler and had an engine tune that ran fine without it, doubt you would notice any loss of power.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> Sure, Still, in such a light duty engine, I doubt there is much benefit of an intercooler other than helping emissions. If you were able to remove the intercooler and had an engine tune that ran fine without it, doubt you would notice any loss of power.


Yah no. Look at 80’s dodge non intercooler T1 engine vs the later T2 intercooler. Basically same boost, same set up just intercooler added and power went up. With using an inner cooler do you have a denser air, and more so a controlled air intake with a computer can always stay at a higher boost without fear of detonation. If your claim of intercooler is being useless, don’t you think manufactures would be not using them today? They can get around omissions easy but it seems intercooling is a necessity


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

pandrad61 said:


> Yah no. Look at 80’s dodge non intercooler T1 engine vs the later T2 intercooler. Basically same boost, same set up just intercooler added and power went up. With using an inner cooler do you have a denser air, and more so a controlled air intake with a computer can always stay at a higher boost without fear of detonation. If your claim of intercooler is being useless, don’t you think manufactures would be not using them today? They can get around omissions easy but it seems intercooling is a necessity


That's on gasoline engines. Yes, intercoolers are very effective and useful on gasoline engines. For diesel engines, they largely don't matter.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Barry Allen said:


> My experience is with the 6500 Optimizer engines (the old Detroit Diesel V-8 from GM and then AM General). For turbocharged applications, the stock turbo is good to 14 psi and is worthless after that because it's quickly off the map and inefficient. The stock wastegate valve is controlled with vacuum and that comes from a vacuum pump on the engine. The vacuum pump exists only to control the wastegate! One quick modification for these engines is: 1. Remove the vacuum pump, 2. Throw it in the trash, and; 3. Install a manual wastegate controller.
> 
> This is the same engine that installing an intercooler is absolutely worthless. It does nothing. It does NOTHING (and it also costs at least $1,000 to add it). There is nothing to be gained in power, reliability, efficiency, etc.
> 
> These same engines are dead reliable for basically any light or medium duty use. Temperature and altitude do nothing so long as you have a later manufactured water pump (1997 and later fixed cooling issues).


You're talking about a now nearly 40yr old engine platform, one that wasn't designed to be turbocharged, and then once turbod didn't benefit from charge cooling due to it's power density and mission goals. Not to mention engine control and fuel system technology of the time. The 2.8L Duramax diesel makes more hp and tq than most of the 6.5s ever introduced, from half as many cylinders and less than half the displacement. 
The 2001 Duramax benefitted from CRI but it was also intercooled, this brought power from ~200 on the Optimizer to 300gp on the Dmax. All from a .1L increase in displacement. There's a different head design as well, but the major factor is twice as much boost. The intercooler is need to keep the density of the air at acceptable levels in order to be able utilize the proper amount of fuel. If you've got very hot less dense air it wont be able to use as much fuel as if it had less hot, more dense air charge. 

Less dense intake air charges lead to richer mixtures and higher EGTs which are not conducive to maximum power production, or engine longevity, regardless of emissions status. Agreed?


----------

