Return-Path: <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
Received: from tomcat.al.noaa.gov ([140.172.240.2] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.1)
  with ESMTP id 401257 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 07 Sep 2004 17:21:56 -0400
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=140.172.240.2; envelope-from=bdube@al.noaa.gov
Received: from PILEUS.al.noaa.gov (pileus.al.noaa.gov [140.172.241.195])
	by tomcat.al.noaa.gov (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id i87LLRuB006054
	for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>; Tue, 7 Sep 2004 15:21:27 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20040907150946.027f5a68@mailsrvr.al.noaa.gov>
X-Sender: bdube@mailsrvr.al.noaa.gov
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 15:21:46 -0600
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
From: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] high oil pressure and coolers
In-Reply-To: <list-401220@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed


>
>
>I'm really concerned about the evap core in the current 
>installation.  First, it just failed, as did Dave's Setrab (rated up to 
>232 psi).  How many other non-Mazda oil coolers have failed?

         If the car is sitting in the sun on a hot day, not running, the 
entire A/C system will see 170 psi, perhaps more in the tropics. 
Conversely, when the A/C is running, the condenser will see as much as 340 
psi, but the condenser will be at about 15 psi.

         The "big book" says to use the stock oil Mazda cooler. It does not 
appear to be overly heavy or bulky. It has been proven to work. What would 
be the motivation to use something different? Maybe I've missed some 
important point.