If I take this gasket, make a copy, make it thicker, shell it, make some cuts, throw in a heat exchanger and some lines, that would work, right?

Not a chance. The gasket has very loose tolerances with regards to bolt and pin holes, not to mention bypass, PCV, and coolant locations. Even when installed this is obvious (with regards to the gasket).

In order to insure a good fit and seal, the intercooler plate has to be designed and manufactured with strict attention to detail, referencing the bottom of the SC and the top of the LIM itself.

And this ain't my only secret Also, notice my plate design isn't shown

willwren what are you using for the core of the IC? That is what is going to make or break an IC being so thin.

I'm not building an IC in the traditional sense. It'* not necessary, so why go through the cost and build a thick plate when you don't need it?

If I drop more than one more pulley size, I'll be using my input shaft as a pulley. If I can only go one more size down, do I really need a full-blown intercooler? Nope. I need just enough to drop to a 2" pulley with no additional KR

There'* alot more to this than meets the eye. Some have seen the design. And I have thermal analysis to back it up. The first 3-4 units should be running by spring in our cars. Perhaps more by summer.

I'm seriously interested in the ideas......I just need to know more....and what kinda mod'* I would need to be at before I could utilize something of this nature?

With a 1" core I really wouldn't even call it a full blown IC. And to say you dont need it, when was colder air not helpful even with 0 KR? I think that a IC will not be practical for most the S1 guys. I think that is what you are trying to say or getting at. But for my setup I'm looking on going farther then just a 2" pulley on a '92-'93 M62. But for my 2nd guess I'll PM you so I dont let the secret out. If I'm right on my guess - with your "secret projet" the M90 guys are seeing like a 40*-50* drop in temp. I think that something like what you are creating would be great for the S1 croud just because it would only require very very minor modification to work, hardly any work to instal, and of coarse CHEEP! - that is if I'm right on my guess what it is.

If you plan on going smaller than a 2.0", good luck. You need to calculate the RPM'* of the rotors at engine redline before you think any more about it. And the other aspects are how small can you make that pulley before you run out of room? How much belt slip are you willing to deal with at those rpms? We're very near the limits of practicality here.

Yes the Series 2 guys use full IC'* or the new 'short stack'. But I have thermal analysis to back up my claim that this isn't necessary or practical for me when all I want to do is drop from a 2.2" to a 2.1 or 2.0" pulley, and not induce KR. I'm not shooting for the stars here, just the moon, because that'* all I need.

We have a whole different set of problems induced by our different belt path, smaller pulleys, and faster-spinning superchargers. In many respects, it'* a totally different world than the M90.

Think of it this way:
The 94/95 L67'* are pushing the limits of feasability, the 92/93 guys may already be there.

And as a teaser, this is a step further than what you're thinking. Maybe two steps further, because it also takes into account FUTURE mods

I'm not looking at below a 2" that is just crazy. I'm talking about different rotors that are better then any S1 L67 has had to help improve efficence and adding some timing.

New rotors? To put in your M62? Tell me how and how much. That would be tricky, but interesting.

eventually you are going to be looking at an M90 with a custom snout.