|
|
In a message dated 10/22/2002 12:21:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, canarder@starband.net writes:
AMEN brother Leon !!!
That said :o) ... What are your thoughts around brother Tracy's notion
that controlling temperatures by lowering the pump output to pump less
coolant would result in higher temperature gradients from inlet to outlet
of the block? One might intuit that the EWP is efficient enough to run at
capacity and still have efficiency advantages over stock system, so why
not either bypass coolant around the radiator or use cowl flaps for
coolant temp control.
Makes sense to me .... Jim S.
I just cannot keep my mouth shut about this. All of the coolant going through my race engines, (about 245 HP at 9,400 RPM) must pass through a 5/8" restrictor.
The opening is in a flat aluminum plate welded over the end of the water outlet on top of the water pump. It (the outlet) happens to be off of a Spitfire, but could have been off of a Mazda. It makes no difference. The hole in the plate has sharp edges. From watching test pieces on the flow bench, I would suggest that it flows about as much as a radiused 1/2" hole or maybe a little less. My empirical data suggests that the maximum flow rate of an unobstructed stock pump is maybe 4 times what is required to cool the engine at speed. It has to be so lest it not save the engine after a long pull at speed and a drop to idle speed for a long period. It has to move enough water past the hot spots at IDLE speeds or the engine would be ruined after the first run up over 100 MPH. And don't tell me you never had it over 100. I know you better than that. I will not be amazed if the electric pump works. I will be amazed if it doesn't.
Lynn E. Hanover
|
|