komete wrote:and more importantly it'll cool the air to a lower temp than air to air. Should wind up close to stock intake lengths also. All that aside I have a guy teaching me to weld and I gotta use these new skills somehow.
This depends on a lot of factors. Liquid to air does not have inherently better cooling properties than air to air. Liquids, for it's volume is able to absorb more heat than air, but it also must be able to maintain a reasonably low temperature. Meaning, that the radiator portion must be able to effectively bring down temperatures so that the intercooling can be effective.
There are two aspects to this. One, and the most obvious is the radiator size. The large it is, the more dwell time the liquid will have allowing it to cool longer. We will assume it is receiving reasonably sufficient airflow across the core as well. The second is volume. The more liquid you have, the more the medium can act as a heatsink. As with air-to-air, the overall weight of the intercooler can be important in soaking up spikes in temperatures and during sustaiined boost where charge air temps can not be radiated off as quickly as it it getting absorbed. More liquid means it can absorb more heat from the charge airwithout boiling or reaching temps that the radiator can not be effective at shedding so that the liquid maintains a cool temperature.
Air-to-air intercoolers generally require more plumbing (sometimes creative), but are mechanically very simple. Liquid-to-air tend to have more compact intercooler cores so they can fit under the hood more easily and are more flexible in terms of intercooler location and radiator arrangement. Generally speaking a well sized and placed Air-to-air is a better approach unless space is an issue.