Increase row capacity does not mean more heat rejection

You make no mention what fan you plan to use

If you plan on stock fan get a stock replacement rad

 

Indy WTH am I missing? Doesn't it stand to reason that more coolant exposed to air would aid in cooling? And yes I'm using the same OE fan and shroud. The dimensions are near the same except for the thickness. Was thinking of getting one with dual fans but didn't want to spend that much plus mess with any wiring..Also regarding increased capacity, If it takes longer for the coolant to flow through the rad, this too would aid in better cooling..

 

lol, it's always a good idea to get a second opinion.
Now you have mine and Indy's.

I was under the impression that you had already bought this eBay radiator though.

 

Yeah I pulled the trigger on that unit. 115 for the stocker from AZ 131 for the aluminum one. Aluminum, thicker 3 row, better heat transfer=better cooling..only $16 more..the only thing that is unknown is the quality of the Chinamans welding..?

 

Summit Aluminum 2-row 31" X 19" and Ford Contour Fan Setup for the Win!

 

Their quality isn't unknown, lol

If you're expecting the car to run cooler with this radiator then you will be disappointed.

Aluminum is stronger than brass/copper but it doesn't transfer heat better.

 

I have that exact radiator in our car except it is branded J2 Performance. I had to tweak the lower mount and fan mount to get everything to fit but not bad.



No disappointment for me.

you may have observed the fan stay on longer and off longer

but it does not lower or raise the temp

min temp is tstat

max is the fan

its as easy as that

You can't argue those points,the rest is subject to interpretation. Average running temp will be lower = closer to the min temp.

 

I installed a Fluidyne radiator without changing anything else and observed a definite improvement in the radiator's cooling capacity.

 

you may have observed the fan stay on longer and off longer

but it does not lower or raise the temp

min temp is tstat

max is the fan

its as easy as that

 

no

it will run were ever you set the cooling fan to run

that cannot be debated or open to interpretation

you want to run your fan at tstat temp, that is your choice.

BTW, that fan was optimally engineered for the stock rad thickness, but if it works that's all that matters.,

 

FWIW, I'm running a stock replacement radiator on a H/C/I 5.0 with 10PSI of boost at 400 RWHP, and have absolutely no over-temp issues. I see no reason for an oversized radiator in the OP's case, but hope it works out well.

 

no it would be on longer

unless you have found a way to deceive thermodynamics.........

that is how it equates.........

you only saw it the way you did, cause you spent money, so it must be better.

 

And you just see it the way you do so that you can make your smart ass comments. You have so much knowledge to share I just wander what happened in your life to make you seem so miserable....

Please tell me how a radiator working more efficiently would cause the fan to stay on longer?

 

Well the Fed Ex truck came today with it and it had a broken drain plug O-ring smh.and I'll have to trim a teeny bit of the fan shroud to line the bolt holes up but no biggie.
While I waited for it to arrive over the long holiday weekend, I got antsy and took the fan/motor and shroud apart and painted them. my OCD kicked in and I had to paint the bolts too.whether it cools more efficiently or not at least I figure it'll at least look a little better for the extra $20 over the stock replacement..The responses in this thread got me researching a bit and someone linked me to this info on the cooling systems and what's good, bad and a waste of money good info for future reference. Go straight to post #12 BTW, Has anyone painted the plastic coolant reservoir? Was thinking of painting it cause it is nasty looking..

How to calculate radiator size?

 

your linked poster explains heat transfer from engine to coolant

but fails miserably when explaining heat transfer from coolant to air

heat rejected to the air must be equal to or greater than heat gained from the engine

simple algebra could have solved it for them, in stead of that long confusing rant

 

Wow a smart guy like you being confused by that link? Lol, can't hardly believe that Indy. It actually reinforces your view regarding radiator size in that bigger does not always equate to better cooling, and goes on to say that bigger (Rows) in certain cases, actually may INCREASE air flow restrictions! I did not know this and that the extra row or 2 in a radiator without increasing the width/length will work best only if you can increase air flow over the extra rows or fins, so it IS about air flow and the heat exchange process..Still, I'm hoping that it'll look purdy when I'm done with it today. I hope to have it running later on cause it's top down weather out here for me and I haven't driven it in over a week and I am not finished exploring Route 66 here in Az!

 

not butt hurt, just feel sorry for you...

 

I feel sorry for the people who can't understand that the heat needs to be transferred to the air, which is pretty simple, more heat = more air

And more air is what you don't have with a factory fan and factory length x height core.

 

Indy doesn't really care about your feelings.

He is like an encyclopedia and spits out facts.

Some people can't deal with it.

But he is right.

Maybe he is a robot... lol

 

Well guess what fellas? Let this thread be a buyer beware one now..I finished installing the thing after tweaking a little here n there like the fan shroud had to be trimmed where it sits on the little shelf/bracket so the bolts lined up, also had to beat the ABS metal shield/cover in about 1/4"..I then filled it and let it reach temp, t-stat opened and burped it, put the cap on it and noticed a drip from the passenger side lower corner.THE SAME PLACE THE OLD ONE CRAPPED OUT AT..I crawled underneath as the car was already on jacks and there is no doubt the Chinamans fabrication sucks fckn ####balls..Needless to say I am very pissed and after all that I have learned from the comments and reading other links, I'm getting a refund and putting the OE style one back on it with the lifetime warranty AND I will get 15.00 off of that at the local AZ..So fck this project and the cheap E-Bay radiators..Lesson learned...Oh and I could NOT install this part (attached) back on it because it would rub on the pulley..This is a very strange part that I looked up and read about in another Mustang forum. It's a fan motor circuit breaker? Interesting..Some of our cars had it and some don't...It was held on by a ziptie..smmfh.



1995 5.0 Mustang GT Unidentified Part. Please Help! - Ford Mustang Forum

 

You need that circuit breaker.
It was part of a recall for the Fan motor failing, melting the plug/wires and possibly starting fires.

When I had the Fluidyne on, I had all kinds of clearance issues, complicated further with the Vortech s-trim. One of the reasons I went back to the stock replacement.

 

...wait a second.

Yes minimum temperature is the thermostat.

Maximum is the fan?

Let's put some money on that. Bring your car, headgaskets, $20, and a fan of your choice. I'll pick the heat exchanger.

We'll run the car WOT for an hour and if you don't overheat, you get my $20. If you do, I keep yours.

Best of luck to your headgaskets, or do you we need to revise our statements here?

 

^^^ that's the thing, the radiator is sized accordingly for the complete cooling system, which includes the fan, water pump speed, operating temperature and power level of the engine.

You don't think Ford does these types of endurance/failure tests during R&D?

 

Okay that means the heat exchanger must actually matter then or they would use something that minimizes cost, like say a $0.10 piece of pipe 2 inches long.
Therefore if the heat exchanger matters there must be one specific design that is the zenith of extracting BTUs from the water, considering all the other things in the equation you mentioned. So is the argument here then that the factory radiator is the achievement of this zenith? The factory radiator is the ultimate heat exchanger and cannot be surpassed by any other?

Testing this is pretty easy btw. Just pull the thermostat out, run the fan 100%, and see which radiator stabilizes at the lowest temperature.

 

No, but it is matched to the fan and rest of the system. And engineered to fit in the space available.

 

Okay but matched isn't the same thing as the best possible performer. That's just telling us it's adequate.

Either it is literally the best possible radiator design, all other things being equal, or it isn't. If it isn't, then yes it is possible that changing the radiator and nothing else can create a more effective system.

The symptom (dare I say evidence??) of that more effective system, is a fan that runs for a lower period of time. Which is exactly what the other people here have described. I don't mean with less frequency offset by longer periods, I mean a lower total duty cycle.

The reason for that is, minute for minute with the fan running, more heat is being extracted by the "better" radiator.

I'm not saying a better radiator is possible than stock, with nothing else changing, I don't know because I haven't done the testing. But I also don't have to do all the testing to know the heat exchanger does matter.

Multiple people in this thread jumped down one's guys throat with wild implications that the radiator is irrelevant and only the fan or thermostat matters. That's baloney. At best one could argue that in the complete cooling system the factory radiator is literally the most effective design and any deviation will result in a higher fan duty cycle, but that's a hell of a claim. It is perfectly reasonable that there may be room for improvement upon the factory radiator, even without changing anything else. Almost nothing used in mass production is designed as literally the best possible component in the system. I will gladly take a bet on that claim too, that I can find a radiator that will result in a lower fan duty cycle than the factory radiator without changing anything else.

I'm not going to say that the one linked in the original post here is going to be more effective because I don't know, but I will say it's not the OP here that's being unreasonable or silly for asking if there's room for improvement. It's the people who are suggesting that it's not a possibility that are being silly.

 

But it doesn't matter how long the fan runs. It will cut on/off at the same temperatures.
The system as a whole will still have the very same operating range.

Adding rows reduces airflow through the radiator, that's physics.

 

Sure it matters. If the duty cycle of your fan is 95% when it's 75 degrees outside, you're at your limit. There is no headroom left for heat extraction. Maybe you can get away with 76 or 77 before you reach 100% but run that car when it's 100 degrees outside and you're going to overheat it.

If the duty cycle of your fan is 30% when it's 75 degrees outside, you're not going to have problems when it's 100 degrees. The duty cycle will be higher than 30% but it won't be 100% so you won't have problems.

The other side of the same coin is looking at the power of the engine we're cooling. If you never see more than 30% DC on the fan with your 200 horsepower, you'll be okay at 400 horsepower without making changes. If you see 95% DC on the fan with 200 horsepower, you'll over heat it with 400.

You're right that at 30%, or 95% DC regardless of horsepower or temp or who's president the operating temperature will not exceed fan temperature set point and if you can never create a condition where you will exceed that, then it doesn't matter. But once you reach 100% that means you are producing BTUs as fast or faster than you can remove them. If faster, you will overheat.

If you can make a change that results in a reduced duty cycle for the fan, you have increased the capability of your system to remove heat. How much of that capability you are using is directly reflected by the duty cycle of your fan.

Adding rows does reduce the airflow, it also increases the surface area. Go in either extreme and it won't work. Make it paper thin and you lose capability, make it a mile thick and you lose capability. The best is somewhere in-between.

I'm not at all saying the factory design is bad or far from the best mark. It might be dead on, or it might not be.

The only reason I even chimed in is not because of the litany of bullcrap being thrown around, it's because it's being thrown at one dude who said "I observed the fan being on less time", which means he's observing less duty cycle. If we all understand thermodynamics as much as we are claiming, there is no arguing with that. The fan's DC cannot be reduced unless more heat is being extracted during the time that it's running, and the only way that is happening is the radiator is more effective at transferring the heat out of the water and in to the air.

Now if we'd all stop pretending we're so G-D smart a very simple explanation is the possibility that the removed radiator was internally dirty and therefore well-insulated from the inside, reducing its effectiveness. But even if they're both perfectly clean, there's nothing physics-defying about one radiator resulting in a different fan DC than the other, in fact across two different designs I'd be shocked if they weren't different.

 

ahhhuuu cough

seijirou............that is some serious BS

fun to read non the less.

 

Bring your money Indy.

 

You don't understand the subject matter as well as you think you do.

Some of your assumptions are wrong.