Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:20:26 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-2081472@logan.com>
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: weird cooling ideas, part 1
References: <list-2080579@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marvin Kaye wrote:
> Posted for "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>:
>> 
>   Ernest, have you check the diameter of the cross flow tubes.  The 
> reason I
> ask is there was a comparison of Ford and GM evaporator cores in Contact!
> mag a few years back.  The end result was the Ford cores (at least of the
> 1970-80 decade) had cross tubes too small to flow coolant without a
> tremendous amount of restriction.  The GM cores had cross tubes of over 
> 1/8"
> diameter and did much better.  The net results according to the article, as
> best I recall, that made the Ford Cores unsuitable for our needs.  No
> information on Nissan AC cores.  I believe it was in issue #43 or 46 and I
> can no longer find mine (stuck in a safe place no doubt)

That is my biggest worry about the whole thing, Ed.  I could possibly 
use two, plumbed in parallel (I have plenty of space for that), or I may 
just have to scrap the whole idea.  Basically, though, I'm working off 
th idea that a thinner radiator with a larger surface area will have an 
efficiency advantage and require less radiator volume for the same 
amount of cooling.

Unfortunately, I have a lot of time to work on this part of the project.

(Wishing I could fly to Sun-N-Fun THIS year)


-- 
----Because I can----
http://home.nc.rr.com/deltabuilder
------------------------