|05-17-2004 08:08 PM|
|32vicky||blndweasel, I'm not upset with you or anyone else. It's all good. I have a lot of respect for the folks on this site as I said earlier. I just wish I would have found that link to Stewart Components earlier in the discussion. Have a great day.|
|05-17-2004 01:38 PM|
sorry I got a little firey sunday... that link you posted to stewart components is really great. I think perhaps a few of your initial posts were worded a little tricky, and then when you went off on the sarcasm rant it rubbed me the wrong way since everyone in this post is essentially trying to help by contributing something.
at any rate, the stewartcomponents.com tech tips were clearly explained and support your argument.
no hard feelins?
the blonde weasel
san diego, ca
|05-17-2004 04:04 AM|
|Ktaves1971||Yeah email me if you want the Tel. no. Ktaves1967@cs.com Gene is the guys name and he has charged me 200 bucks Canadian for a hot tank, bore and hone, with cam bearings installed and frost plugs and block painted. But I was bringing him quite a few blocks for awhile there. But he is fair and really knows his stuff.|
|05-16-2004 03:31 PM|
I havnt heard about warrior engines, but i am gonna look into it for sure. Thanks for the lead.
|05-16-2004 06:50 AM|
Ktaves, I have been rooked by more than one "dumb" farmer cause they never stop learning!! Yeah, there are other materials that transfer heat better than others, but who is making copper or lead rads these days? Cost prohibitive.
The military has the best schools in this country because of their method of teaching. Their educational culture understands that the human brain, while the best computer by far, only absorbs a fraction of what it is exposed to. Thus, the military repeats itself over and over and states the material in different ways until everone totally understands the same material. Because of threads like this, we are doing the same thing. I learn something almost every day and one of the things I learn is that some of my conceptions of how something works have not been totally correct because someone addressed the subject from a different prospective that opend my mind. That is what keeps me spending time on this great site and you will seldom find me telling someone they are flat out wrong!!!
|05-16-2004 01:03 AM|
Guys Guys... we cant let differences of opinion start up feelings against each other. That just gets in the way of a good debate! I was enjoying this one.
I have learned a few things on this topic again.
ASTROPS... Do you deal with Gene at Warrior Engines there in Oshawa? He runs a good shop and fair prices! I take all my blocks to him.
|05-15-2004 11:37 PM|
Well, the car runs great now, 180 cruisin, to about 195-200 in traffic. Thanks to all who got involved in this thread, I laghed, I cried, and I am sorry to see it end.
Gotta hand it to you guys, you know your stuff, be it one theory or the next, very interesting reading.
|05-15-2004 09:36 PM|
OK...before this thread spins further out of control, let me address some of the points that blndweasel made.
Some folks are mad about what I said and some are mad about how I said it.
I agree 100% with the comment that this site has some very knowledgeable people. In fact I consider trees and troy-curt part of that knowledgeable group. However, none of us (including myself) are correct on all of our ideas and every post we make. If someone has a dissenting opinion, it needs to be aired and hopefully resolved to a common understanding. At no time during this thread was I ever mad, upset or personally offended with anyone who disagreed. I was looking for a dialog to see if we could reach agreement. If I offended anyone, either grow some thicker skin or use the ignore button and shut me out. When I see something I disagree with and feel I have supporting data, I'll stick with it until we reach some kind of understanding. I would expect others to do the same when they disagree with me technically. As a point of reference, this thread was rather mild compared to many others in the past.
|05-15-2004 09:01 PM|
|Ktaves1971||Trees, does your little paper also tell you that aluminum transfers heat better than copper?? I am just a dumb farmer but I always learned thru textbooks and experience that copper is better than aluminum for transfering heat. And altho I do not recommend using straight water (because of corosion and low boil temp) but straight water does much better job at pulling out heat as well as getting rid of heat than antifreeze mix does. Some people think that by making a stronger mix it might help cool , but it makes it slightly worse.|
|05-15-2004 08:46 PM|
I guess it's normal to shoot the messenger. Try this site for info. I'm sure most hotrodders would respect the word of Stewart Components (high flow water pumps).
|05-15-2004 08:30 PM|
I reluctantly reenter this furball for a little more pontification. Think of the thermostat as a flow valve, which it really is. The binarry valve action makes it automatic and it is predicated on maintaining the coolant at a selected level. It can go from most all the way closed to wide open, a setting that was designed by the thermo engineers for a specific engine and a large range of operating conditions such as 40 below 0 F to 130 F and air conditioning going and stop and go traffic. Now we highly modify that motor and put the same rad and thermostat in it and the wide open hole in the little thermostat is just too small to allow enough coolant flow and most likeky if you put in a larger thermostat , the rad will not effectively transfer enough heat. The method of drilling the small holes I mentioned earlier is a cheap way of increasing the wide open flow capacity of the themostat and couple this with a big aluminum rad, then that big fire breathing monster will be tamed.
32, I also have one of those worthless pieces of paper that says I studied thermo and fluid dynamics. That and a buck twenty five will buy me a cup of coffee most any where!
|05-15-2004 08:17 PM|
This is my understanding of the reasoning for reducing the flow at the outlet (whether it be a thermostat, or a 'washer'), so please feel free to correct me:
Water (including coolant mixed in) has a set boiling point. To raise that boiling point, increase pressure (on a linear scale, I believe). So, by resticting flow at the outlet, it creates a pressure build behind it. Pressure is also increase to a certain extent by the expansion of the coolant in a finite space. This increase in pressure reduces/eliminates hot spots around the bores. Without the restriction by a thermostat or washer, the pressure build is not enough to eliminate the steam pockets/hot spots, thus increasing the likelyhood of detonation.
|05-15-2004 07:59 PM|
Hey vicky i really dislike everything you have to say, mostly because the tone you've decided to use in saying it.
This is a great forum full of very knowledgeable people, just as highly educated as you are... they all have useful information to share with you, you just have to not take things personally when someone else disagrees with you.
the blonde weasel
san diego, CA
|05-15-2004 06:42 PM|
There is nothing technical about installing a thermostat, like I've said it's like a valve in the system to control the rate of flow of the coolant so it will stay in the radiator long enough to cool before it recirculates to pick up heat and return to the radiator to radiate more heat.
Net time in the radiator? In that case you could run the coolant through as fast as you want to. Defeating the purpose of the thermostat.
If you don't make mistakes. your not doing anything.
69 ss rs full custom camaro 98 ISCA grandchampion
69 ss rs bb camaro wifes driver
66 Elcamino 350/all dz parts,ac,windows,loaded,my driver
69 ss chevelle bb conv.fresh frame off
26 T sedan street rod
|05-15-2004 05:41 PM|
oh yeah...and my mother wears combat boots, too.
Call me a troll if you wish, but I've given plenty of technical reasons as to the fallacy of flow reduction making a coolant system more efficient. When will someone provide something technical in rebuttal.
I've agreed that slower flow in the radiator allows more heat rejection for that one pass. But I've also demonstrated that the net time in the radiator is the same regardless of the flow rate for the system. So...explain in technical terms how slowing the flow gets you more time in the radiator. Where did my calculation go awry? I've also agreed that on some systems, adding a thermostat can make an engine run cooler. What I have disagreed with is the explanation as to why it sometimes helps.
Stop the name calling and provide something substantial. As for which forum this belongs in, it should stay in the "engine" section as this is where all of the folks look for answers to engine cooling issues.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|