Cobb Intercooler for Bronco Raptor - Tested/Data - Amazing Performance

[swamp2]

Frankly I'm a bit shocked at how well this Cobb IC for the Raptor Performs. Although there was a lager outside air temperature difference between the tests than I wanted (55 °F ambient with OEM vs 48 °F with the Cobb) the primary way I will show the differences should account for most of this.

The OEM data is 2 WOT pulls from a dig to about 95 mph whereas the Cobb is just one, to the same speed. However, I will primarily compare the first pull from each hence apples to apples. I did not yet have the time/space/safety to do testing that accounts for sustained high rpm or high load use along with potential heak soak. Call this the street "drag race" version of the data/results.

My relevant mods are ZFG E50 Race Tune, S&B CAI (dry filter) and the Cobb IC (front shutters still on, rears removed). Data was taken with the HP Tuners MPVI3 dongle and VCM Scanner software.

The temperatures recorded here include intake (IAT), maifold charge (MCT) and charge (CAT). The IAT is just that - using the temperature sensor near the airbox. The MCT is the temperature of the air in the intake manifold. I don't fully understand the CAT, but I think it is supposed to be a calculation (not direct measurement) of the actual in cylinder charge temperature.

Input from ZFG stated that at a MCT of 130 °F and above, the PCM will be cutting power. Now to largely account for ambient air temperature differences, I have calculated and plotted (in organge and bold) the key result here: MCT minus IAT, which better shows the effect of the IC swap not really the small difference in my ambient conditions.

Here are the data:

(* Do note the time scales in the two graphs are not identical as you can most easily see in the yellow speed vs. time traces as the WOT parts do in actuality have almost identical slopes. Obviously not all of the data is WOT. If you can't tell which parts are and which are not, kindly go away...)

Just look at those orange traces! It is 81 °F vs. 43 °F at the peaks, or a 38 °F lower manifold charge temperature increase over ambient (really over IAT, technically).

Also, with the OEM IC that critical 130 °F manifold charge temperature is reached at only 69 mph, whereas the maximum MCT with the Cobb was only 113 °F, nowhere close to the critical 130 °F limit. With the OEM IC the MCT peaked at 170 °F, really deep into the power cutting temperatures.

I plan to repeat the Cobb tests again soon, hopefully tomorrow evening, at a closer or identical ambient temperature. I also hope to do a more severe duty test of the Cobb, but I am not going to bother swapping back to the OEM IC.

I am thoroghly impressed.

Shout out to @GooseTuned for the Cobb IC!

*EDIT/UPDATE* 2/2/26 - @GooseTuned has verified similar numbers via dyno testing here in post 45. Differences not as large, as expected, since vehicle wasn't moving hence reduced convection cooling.

Sponsored

 

[HB's24Brap]

I concur with my seat of the pants test after installing the COBB IC, my Brap pulls harder and feels quicker. Next up GooseTuned.

 

[Ninjak]

It has been said that the Cobb IC is one of the best IC's for the BRaptor, it is made out of really good materials. The CP-E IC is also near the top of the IC list. They both also get the high marks because of the ease of installation.

Good information. I want to get some numbers, but alas, I never tested the OEM IC. It just feels better with pulls and runs. Happy with the purchase.

 

[Ape Factory]

They all use the same basic core dimensions and likely identical cores as there aren't a lot of companies making them in the states and Cobb/CP-E aren't making their own cores. They're all aluminum construction. The end tank design is one variable and you can have tube/fin or bar plate designs. I'm guessing they're all using Bell Engineering for the cores. Some of the cheaper offerings may be using cores out of China.

 

[GooseTuned]

Awesome data man!!

 

[swamp2]

I concur with my seat of the pants test after installing the COBB IC, my Brap pulls harder and feels quicker. Next up GooseTuned.

To be fair, this effect is a lower dynamic loss in power as opposed to a power gain. It will also occur quickly but smoothly with changing intake thermodynamics.

I suspect this is very hard to discern via seat of the pants. Even harder with a factory tune. On the flip side, my hunch also is that when tuned, these effects can be directly observed by a measurement of raw performance metrics.

 

[23OBX2.7]

What does it all mean? What's the dyno HP and TQ benefit on 20 repeated back to back pulls at X ambient temp?

 

[Ducati1098]

The temperatures recorded here include intake (IAT), maifold charge (MCT) and charge (CAT). The IAT is just that - using the temperature sensor near the airbox. The MCT is the temperature of the air in the intake manifold. I don't fully understand the CAT, but I think it is supposed to be a calculation (not direct measurement) of the actual in cylinder charge temperature.

Charge air temperature is a measurement post-intercooler just prior to the throttle body and intake manifold. If you look just before your throttle body, you’ll see the sensor for that.

 

[Ducati1098]

What does it all mean?

More efficient intercooler = cooler air charge = more consistent performance.

That’s the main goal here, and good proof that the upgrade worked well.

 

[Tye]

Thanks for doing this. Now, are you going to get the Cobb Bronco Raptor Charge Pipes that are coming out?

 

[swamp2]

I repeated the Cobb test at a warmer ambient temperature (this time, to be extra conservative, not at but above the temp of the OEM IC test by 7 °F). I also let the truck sit idling and watching various temperatures rise, which was more similar to the exact test process with the stock IC. Results changed, but only a bit. The Cobb still offered amazing reduction in MCT-IAT, but that was about 6 °F worse than the Cobb to OEM difference in the original post. That said the MCT itself (absolute not subtracting out the IAT) peaked at only 125 °F, never reacing that 130 threshold. Somewhat surpising the peak absoute MCT was 13 °F higher than the initial test.

 

[Ninjak]

Thanks for doing this. Now, are you going to get the Cobb Bronco Raptor Charge Pipes that are coming out?

Hmm I have not seen anything on Cobb releasing charge pipes for the Raptor.
More choices out there would be nice. I have the AFE Bladerunners, I like them.

 

[Tye]

Hmm I have not seen anything on Cobb releasing charge pipes for the Raptor.
More choices out there would be nice. I have the AFE Bladerunners, I like them.

They are under development and info should be coming soon

 

[swamp2]

What does it all mean? What's the dyno HP and TQ benefit on 20 repeated back to back pulls at X ambient temp?

I start with the conclusion: A good intercooler can save you from losing about 10% of your power during agressive acceleration.

This is certainly more significant than I believed prior. I certainly am guilty of prior minor heckling of IC companies and members here for not providing any claims whatsoever, on temps or power losses.

As I stated in the OP, this is an initial stab of some measurements in the context of a single WOT run to near the vehicles governed speed limit. It would take a lot more testing and either wide open space or a dyno (which of couse doesn't model real world performance perfectly either due to mechanical and environments differences which can't be adequately controlled nor duplicated) to get anywhere close to your specific scenario.

Anyway, heated air is less dense and thus there is less fuel (oxygen) in it. Turbos get hit with this effect just like an NA engine but turbos tend to be more robbed of power as they operate closer to knock limits and adjust both boost and timing due to high(er) charge temperatures.

The most basic approximation for the output power ratio under different MCTs is just based on the ideal gas law and results in:

P2/P1 ≈ T1/T2 (power ratio, not pressue, temps in °Kelvin not °F)

Above I've shown a 60 °F difference at 95 mph at WOT (170 vs 110 °F). This, big caveat, all other things equal in the motor, will equate to a 10% reduction in power. Just convert those temps to °K and you get 0.9 from the simple formula above. Another very coarse rule of thumb for a turbo ICE engine is about 1-1.5% loss per 10 °F increase in MCT. That upper result is very consistent with the ideal gas law result.

Is your average, non-tuned, non Raptor Bronco, with a factory IC going to consistently take a 10% power hit at 95 mph following a WOT run to get there? I doubt it. Will is get hit with a 5% reduction on a hot summer day under long-ish periods of WOT? Likely.

That said, that is the crux here. By reducing MCTs with a good intercoooler, you can at times, be preventing a roughly 10% loss in power. Contrary to what I said above, you might also be able to squeeze a power gain, above the factory spec power output. After all factory specified power is with all factory engine accessories including the factory intercooler.

The more tuning and perhaps ethanol you run, the more significant the effect can be as the factory intercooler is not sized for the boost level when tuned.

Hope that helps.

 

[swamp2]

Thanks for doing this. Now, are you going to get the Cobb Bronco Raptor Charge Pipes that are coming out?

No idea. Can you convince me of their benefit?

Sponsored