Woody, I'm basically making a H/E like your dual fluid-cooler design. While the stock size of 5/8" hose fits great over the inlet and outlets, the actual flow inside the H/E tubes are 3/8"

Will this be worse than stock? Or is the stock restriction so bad that even this new size, since its very free-flowing, would still be better than stock?

And also, for anyone who knows, do you think the MB yellow coolant, which is their latest coolant for aluminum engines, will work with our factory fill blue coolant? I know it will work with the engine itself, I'm just wondering about its interaction with the stock coolant.

 

I designed a 3/8" cooler that was great for temperature drop or differential. It had a flow rate below that of the LET using a johnson pump (3.7 GPM) and I had to change it to work better. It measured out as a bit better than stock, so that was changed. Dropping temperature is good but the goal is to cool lots of water to reject largeR quanties of heat.

I accomplished this by placing the two coolers in parallel to reduce the restriction 4 to 1. When done I was at 3.1 GPM which was good as it had like 4 times the area of the LET design and over 5 times that of the factory H/E.

Coolant on the other hand is coolant as long as fluid protects the metallic surfaces and transports heat. Remembering that antifreeze only carries 60% as much heat as straight water. Water is agressive to metal and other things like the Grand Canyon or Luray caverns so we dont use it except for race applications.

I like and trust Prestone since they were making radiators for the P-51 mustang. The color is for identification and branding, there was a red one that was sorta dumb for the color of rust in the car is .......... Iam less than a purest and as long as its Aluminum safe its ok in my book. Others get all twitchy cause its not factory, but if the chemistry is good, then Ill use it. Foo on factory, they are profit oriented where service is concerned.

My OPINIONS worth the paper it isnt written on unless you agree with me, Hee Hee.

Enjoy, WOODY

 

Very true Woody - but if your XF is still under warranty - the "Yellow" stuff can end up being really expensive....

The MB Fliud is not all that much more...

 

Interesting article I found linked to on a thread at MercedesShop.com detailing the design decision behind MB's coolant chemistry.

https://www.mbwholesaleparts.com/Sta...iFreeDec04.pdf

 

One thing they talk about is the use of tap water. Never use tap water or demineralized water. Distilled water is to be used to mix with the coolant. Distilled water is 100% water, no chemicals.

When the SR71 blackbird was first developed the local water was used to cool the titanimum forgings and they were cracking. Later it was found that the Fluorine in the water to prevent tooth decay was weakening the metallic structure. Crud matters especially when it circulates for a long time.

I would have kept the green stuff in my car if it were not for the deposits that I found in it. This was in response to codes that the engine was throwing a while back.

Woody, use what you like and feel good with but always consider Distilled water, Wal-Mart for about 58 cents /Gallon. Enjoy

 

I believe you mean to say fluoride.

Fluorine reacts with water to form hydrofluoric acid, a compound that I use to etch stainless steel.

 

Yeah, its Tin and Fluorine mixed to creat Stannous flouride, the point was that the Fluorine in parts per milliion affected the characteristics of the metal, i.e. poisoned it.
Re.

Stannous fluoride, also known as tin(II) fluoride, is the chemical compound with the formula SnF2. This colourless solid is a common ingredient in toothpaste. In the enamel, it converts apatite into fluoroapatite, which is more resistant to attack by acids generated by bacteria. Sodium fluoride and sodium fluorophosphate perform similarly. Stannous fluoride can be mixed with calcium abrasives while the more common sodium fluoride gradually becomes biologically inactive combined with calcium.[1] It has also been shown to be more effective than sodium fluoride in controlling gingivitis.[2]

ITS the weekend class dismissed....Woody

 

Soooo Woody... Lets say a person used two thin fluid coolers that equaled the same surface area of the stock H/E. Would the fact that they're thin and air flows through quickly make them better than stock in terms of how the equal surface area is used?

I'm asking because I want to compensate for my code 3, and also for being in Arizona, So I'm looking for a bit better cooling even if its not a supercooler like yours. I believe the stock H/E is sort of sitting on the border of works/doesnt work if you get my drift...

I just hope I dont end up scrapping it all like you did and later going for the supercooler what an addiction this car is.

 

Yeah this car is more fun than a new pair of pants with the pockets cut out.

The mod 3 did work well, I just went to the max with the Super cooler to see it to the logical conclusion.

To answer your question, if you use a good size tranny ( 7.5 x 21") cooler it will have almost as much surface area as the stocker. To make it work, you want to cool lots of water so please connect the cores in parallel so they share the flow. This will reduct the restrictions and increase flow in the system which is also the I/C circuit.

The stocker H/E has an inlet and piping size about 1/2 inch diameter, about 0.196 square inches. The 3/8" pipe transmission cooler is about 0.110 square inches in cross sectional area. THus 2 [3/8" ] pipes in parallel are 0.2208 square inches and a tiny bit bigger pipe area. The deal is that the stocker H/E is short in surface area, thicker, has tiny internal passages, and is located about 2" in front of the A/C core and low so that the fan's effect and ram air going thru the radiators are minimal in their cooling benefits.

Placing a strip of foam tape on the bracing of the tranny cores, will serve to eliminate friction and wear of the cores . By using large wire ties on the cores to secure them to the A/C radiator lines and brackers will make them secure. I did weld the two core braces to form a rigid structure that was easier to handle and secure. This "up-close" radiator location will promote greater air flow and thus cooling for the I/C system.

Changes are nice and sometimes give you warm and fuzzy feelings. I can tell you that the water flow that I measured was greatly improved with my pair of [1/2" tube] cores, Summit sum-g4968 @ 7 x 21 x 1.5". The cores flow rates were: stock MB@ 1.5gpm, 2 cores@ 3.1 gpm, LET@ 3.7 gpm and the Super cooler@ 4.0 gpm.

Actual thermal data is needed to define that amount of improvement that you actually get. With that thought in mind, I just opened my mail and received a Zeitronix data logger that I purchased from Needswings. This will give some better data and I hope charts, to show the relative improvement a change does or does not make. With lots of rain forcast, I hope to get the gauges and DL (data logger) installed this weekend and them Ill be better informed than a 3rd grader.

WEEKEND, yeah W DY

 

Are these figures from the entire circuit, e.g., including the intercooler core, or just the heat exchangers themselves?

I watched and enjoyed your informative videos, but I’m still unclear on that point.


Nice!

Looks like it’ll be a busy weekend for the professor. Looking forward to you sharing even more of your insightful data. TIA

 

Woody, leave it to me to be confused after you explained everything

What do you mean connect the cores in parrallel? You mean one after the other? Or something else... I was just planning to have flow go in one core, go out, and go into the next core, then come out and go to the I/C. Did you have something else in mind?

After thinking about it, I thought hmmm maybe I should have a hose splitter (which may not even exist) split the hose from the pump and have two hoses, one for each core, and then have them merge on the way out before the I/C. It would definately make up for the 3/8" tubing.

But.... thats all just a thought. Please explain what you meant by connect parrallel. Unless my idea actually covered what you meant...

Wow I'm all over the place.

 

Your second description is what 'in parallel' is. Feed both cores at the same time from one hose and do the return the same way. One after the other is 'in series'. Good luck with your mod.

MikeR

 

I probably should've figured that out on my own But anyways, I was thinking if I do that then water will hit only one core before going back to the I/C. yes, flow will be faster, but only water only hits one core or the other before going back.

I was kind of thinking slower flow (still faster than stock) and the hitting of both cores before going back would be better.

Obviously all of these questions depend on the unique differences of each setup, plain and simple, so I probably need to look at my options for my setup in particular. But I'm just trying to get some good opinions here before deciding... Does the slower flow hitting both cores seem better?

Because the other issue with dual flow is one core will be in the lower grill, and one in the upper grill, so only the core on the top will truly be getting great cooling.

 

Splinter: THese readings are with the Johnson pump in the car with the I/C and one of the measured H/E's as it would be when driven. THe h/e's measured alone would be largely inaccurate as the system has lots of friction that dilutes the differences the cores would have. Measured with a mechanical flow meter.

Ohnosea: Parallel cores would be set up with a pair of Tee's to divide the water so that each cooler gets 1/2 of the water and carries about 1/2 of the heat load. THe two outputs would also be reconnected so that they combined into one outlet pipe.

TO do this I would suggest that you get copper Tee's and some copper pipe to STUB out the Tee's about 1" or 2 " so that you can slip the hoses over the stub. A well stocked LOWES or Home depot also have a variety of plastic Tee's that may be what you want and with less labor.

At first I did connect the TWO cores in SERIES and saw that the total restriction was TOO high. At that time I tapped the mid point of the coolers to make an input. I connected the other two ends with a copper tee to make a common output.

Having two cores in parallel allows the water to go thru each core at 1/2 the linear speed it goes thru the I/C. You get better cooling this way and the fact that one core is above the other is little concern. It would be beneficial if the cores are in close proximity to the A/C coil surface to promote more draw- thru air due to the ram air effect and the operation of the fan.

Woody ENJOY

 

Thanks Woody! I did some shopping, I think I have what I need. But, I could only find T's, and no Y's, which is what I wanted... So hopefully using T's won't be bad for flow.... I'm thinking for the exit T that I will have them flow in perpendicular (One line into the stem of the T and the other line into one of the tops of the T) so one helps pull the other's water out, rather than have them flow in straight at eachother and fight to get out the stem of T. Wow I hope that made sense.

Sounds like a fun weekend.

 

You guys would probably kill for a chance to use my new ISG K1000 thermal imaging camera.

 

ONESESAZ
I know you read my posts with my cooling problems once I installed the C3P. Woody had me move my stock HE up, into the higher airflow and since I've had no problems andit was free!
I was even driving around Tucson all day today (wife is now officially a US citizen!!! ) and didn't encounter ANY problems there.
I do plan on upgrading later.

 

Hey Tighed, yeah I'm not having any problems, just looking for better cooling. One HE will be in the lower area, and one in the upper area.

My reason for not keeping the stock H/E and moving it up is because its too restrictive anyways. I want something that flows better. Simply moving it up will definately help get it over that border-line fail temperature that it is at stock, but I'm looking for even better cooling than that, thats why I'm going through with all this trouble.