Aftercooler

[Hay maker2]

This has probably been discussed before. I am looking into installing a turbo on my JD 4240. I can get a set up off of a JD4430 resonablly. Is there any beneffit of installing an aftercooler with this set up? Does the aftercooler really do anything other than keeping the pistons a couple of hundered degrees cooler?
Thanks

 

[tim s]

We were discussing this last week,, My vote was No, they are more bother than they are worth..

 

[Anonymous-0]

I have a 4430 and 4450 both with intercoolers added. They both run at least a gallon an hour less fuel while developing more power. I don't utilize the extra horsepower but I do spend the money I save. We actually modified the turbo on the 4450 and cut total fuel use by 2 1/4 gal/hr on our everyday loads. I would be doing some double checking on how adaptable that set up will fit from a 404 to 466 engine.

 

[tim s]

If you are so successful with your fuel economy you would know that the components will interchange..As I have stated inter coolers are not worth the trouble..and I seriously doubt your fuel saving claims...

 

[Tx Jim]

(quoted from post at 09:00:24 02/22/14) I have a 4430 and 4450 both with intercoolers added. They both run at least a gallon an hour less fuel while developing more power. I don't utilize the extra horsepower but I do spend the money I save. We actually modified the turbo on the 4450 and cut total fuel use by 2 1/4 gal/hr on our everyday loads. I would be doing some double checking on how adaptable that set up will fit from a 404 to 466 engine.

Dan
How much fuel were your tractors using before the installation of the intercoolers? My 4255(no intercooler) only uses a little over 3 GPH pulling my 467 rd baler.

 

[tim s]

If you would put an inter cooler on Jim you would need to stop in the middle of the day and drain some fuel out, to keep it from over flowing...:^)

 

[NEIADan]

I have given facts as to what I have seen on performance. Hands down the 4450 stock is a fuel hog. As well as the 466 turbo used in the 7720's. That tractor will run 6 gal/hr on a baler. But then we run a full sized Vermeer model M in some very steep hills. Apples to apples that 4255 with a metric designated engine is a whole different animal. I would agree to say that the 42-4455 series is the best engines deere ever built. Several cooling and performance improvements. These older models show a lot more advantages with a simple intercooler. Deere has already proven the advantages of the intercooler on the larger tractors by adding horsepower into the same engine. I am just trying to tell this gentleman the facts and how he can improve his bottom line with what he has.

 

[Tx Jim]

I owned a 4240 that I traded in '93 for the 4255 and I don't remember it using anything near 6 GPH baling hay but that was 21 yrs ago. I've seen Vermeer advertisements stating how easy their rd balers are to pull. Make a 4X5 bale with a 40 pto HP tractor.

 

[LarrySTN]

Deere used an intercooler on the 4640 & 4840 but not on the 4440, all 466 cid. When the engines are pushed to the higher horse power per cubic inches deere intercooled. Cooling the air allows more dense air into the cylinders with more air, more fuel can be added giving more power. In dynamometer testing as per nebraska tractor testing the intercooled engines really aren"t any more efficient especially when compared at the same horsepower output.

 

[Anonymous-0]

I'm sorry no one has replied about an AFTERCOOLER.

 

[tim s]

And these can be confusing terms,,most consider them both to be the same,, an "after cooler" cooling air 'after' it leaves the turbo?? an inter cooler cooling the air after it leaves the turbo but 'in' the intake manifold??? and then there is the more efficient "air to air" cooler...

 

[D-]

Tim
I agreed w/you last week and still do.
I would be interested in what modifications he made to the turbo.

 

[Lee B]

Not so sure the base claim about cooler pistons is very valid especially a couple hundred degrees worth. Unless you turn up the pump as well, it won't do much at all for you. What they do is allow the air to compress a good deal further due to it's lowered temperature and now you have a good deal more of it in the cylinder when the hammer drops on it. Again you'll need more fuel if you wanted more horsepower, and yet even more fuel if you wanted even more horsepower than an uncooled air stream could provide.

If you are very short on horsepower they can be a blessing, but they will lead to a shorter life for your engine if ran at the extreme end of higher horsepower. So a good answer requires another answer first - just how much more horsepower did you want to beat up your engine with? If you are looking for a safe, modest boost I don't think you need to bother with cooling. HP Books has one on turbochargers with all the math and a few charts, from mild to wild it's all in there, worth a look.