Oil cooler question
 

Any recommendation for a -10 oil cooler to mount under the car?

Where exactly 'under the car' we you thinking...?? as this may point the direction to which type of cooler to use.

For instance, if you were thinking of under the floor board... a round tube/finned type would work better... and if you were thinking somewhere on or near the core support, a stack plate would be better suited. There are even a couple of cylindrical flow thru types that might be worth consideration.

Anyway... Setrab (or Earls) for a stack plate... and there are numerous tube type manufacturers, so the selection might be overwhelming... but Ron Davis, C&R, Griffen, Baker Precision and even Durale... have a few to choose from.

The question is... I guess... where were you thinking of mounting it ?

I need an oil cooler as well.. my issue is where to put it.

Is there a distance issue? In other words should the oil lines not exceed a given distance?I was thinking of a tube type under the floor board. The lines would run back from the engine then forward to the remote oil filter and then back to the engine.

All I know is that my oil temp went WAY up after a few laps at the track.

Where to put it ???

In the radiator... where it belongs. I would have the drivers side tank modified for a heat exchanger... there really is no other choice for what you are trying to accomplish. Not to mention that when looking at it from a cost / performance point of view... it's a no brainer.

Suck it up... and just do it... halfassing it isnt an option. :lol:

I agree with Tom. After messing with air/oil & water/oil coolers, a properly sized in-radiator heat exchanger is the way to go. Another benefit is that it gets the oil up to temp faster. Also, unlike an air/oil setup there is no need for a thermostat in the oil cooler lines which is strongly recommended on a street car so the oil doesn't stay too cool under "normal" driving conditions-- no such problem of "too cool" oil with a heat exchanger in the radiator if you size it properly for the job.

Plus, it can be a real PITA on some vehicles to fit a properly sized air/oil cooler within the confines of the nose and still expose it to enough airflow to be effective. It's a lot easier to stick a heat exchanger in the hot side tank of the radiator.

That's not really cost effective if you already own a radiator... lol

Option #2?

Could it be welded onto your current setup? I don't have room but you may.

Well... yeah, it can be. Doing the math, after the cost of the cooler, the lines, the fittings and the time... the cost of modifying the tank and adding the cooler... is close. And then... the function aspects of what was done by that, clearly out perform the other options by a long shot. I'd give Chet a call at C&R (and the others as well) just to see what it would take.

I mean... if you look at what CarlC has into his set up and what it does performance wise... the $695 he spent on the radiator... would tell me to sell the current radiator and step up to what it is that you really need vice that of slapping a bandaid on your current cooling system.

Option #2...

Hang a stack cooler on the front of the core support and deal with it. It's the only other choice that will actually provide enough of a cooling benifit for the cost involved.

Anything that you place under the car, under the trunk etc etc... will need dedicated, directed air and an external fan for it to even worth it's consideration. But, that increases it's complexity ten fold....

Is the automatic transmission cooling connections in an aluminum radiator sufficient for this purpose? It would be nice to be able to reuse that when I swap to a manual trans.

Jon

In short... no.

The minimum line size for an enginer oil cooler in any application is -10 (1/2")... and allow me to stress this... the very minimum size. Ideally, -12 is perfectly suited for the majority of applications here... but there are some that may even require -16 for the feed with multiple -12 returns.

The associated in tank auto trans cooler is much too small fitting-wise and capacity as well.

Although... it may be used for the return side of the power steering... in lighter duty applications.

Does he have a website? Does the $695 include the elec fans? Been happy with my AFCO unit but I need cooler oil on the track.. that's a proven fact.

Is this it?

http://www.crracing.com/radiators/late_model_heat.shtml

Thanks for clearing that up!

Jon

I had planned on installing the cooler under the floor plan due to the limited room in front of the radiator because of my intercooler. The trans cooler is already being used for the trans. My biggest concern would be a presssure loss. Im using the lingenfelter adapter and the line sizes are -10 at the oil filter area.

Mine is more like the NASCAR type. I got lucky when I purchased it. The radiator was on closeout and scored it for $400 or so. It's really too big for the car. If it was 3" narrower it would be perfect. And no, it does not come with any sort of fan for $625+. The good stuff is going to cost more up front, but in the long run will be less expensive than having to do it all over again.

The hottest the oil has ever been was 240*, and that was with a 106* ambient, 130*+ on the track, 20 minute session with the old iron 406.

I don't see why your tank could not be modified to accept a cooler. The question is, as Tom points out, is how much will it cost? If it could be done for less than 1/2 the cost of a new radiator, then OK. If more than that you might as well sell the one you have and buy the Big Kahuna.

I don't think you will be happy with an undercar cooler. Too many compromises and likely an ineffective system. Think of how PO'd you will be if you found out it was not effective and you had to go the in-tank heat exchanger later on? $$$$$$$$ and time (that's free.)

I will give them a call.. I don't mind spending for quality stuff. Might be a decent tech story on oil cooler theory in there someplace. After three laps I was near (over?) 300-degrees..

Maybe I could still run my current single fan with thier shroud? That would save me $ plus I wouldn't have to mess with the electronics. They would also have to be able to put the in and out both on the pass side (LS Setup).

damn.. this site is always costing me cash.. lol

The C&R does not have a shroud. It's a blank on both sides.

Mine is dual-pass with fittings on the passenger side. However, they are sized for Gen1. You would want them fitted for LS sizes. You could also have the in/outlets modified for angle/height/length/curves to accomodate a standard hose.

Measure your fan width and height before making the call. That way it will be easier to narrow down the choices. Max total width for the lower tanks would be helpful as well.

Something else to think about. If I could do it all over again I would make a lower mount/upper plate similar to a 2nd gen. Basically a floating mount so that the radiator is not hard-mounted to the radiator support.

What was your coolant temp?

Not surprising. A similar build to the previous 406SBC in another f-body car had the same thing happen. He had to back off for several laps to get the oil temperature down even with a Canton road-race pan. Water temperatures were not abnormal. High RPM will make oil temperatures rise much faster.

Welcome to the Tom and David spending plan.

Like Carl said.. not abmormal.. 205ish I think.

Electric fan(s)... no. But you dont need more than one fan to begin with... if you use the right fan from the get go.

The only time I might recommend... read: might... run more than one fan is if I was wanting to run duals for the secondary to kick on when the AC is active. But... you dont have that problem... and niether do I. So why not run a single fan that pulls more than the two you have now ??

Secondly... you dont really need a shroud. If you purchased a Mark VIII fan with the same size core as the OEM offering... the fan shroud of the Mark VIII fan would be nearly perfect. Not having a shroud with this fan is not really an issue... it's will damn near pull the car forward in neutral.

The dual pass mechanics... is really where the performance gain is.

Sorry.. I should have said FAN since that's what I run now.. one large fan. I plan on contacting C&R next week. I still like the idea of a shroud, even if it's for asthetic reasons. And my current AFCO radiator is a double pass unit.

What do you think about an oil cooler story? discuss plate, tube and heat sink options along with location. Could be a good theory piece. I hate doing the same old stories over and over. Thoughts?

I think that it is a great idea for a story Steve. It's definately something that everyone would benefit from and I would think that it is something that the majority of people have at least given some consideration to over the course of ownership. And for a bit of variety, it's not LSx specific...

Two things that I have used on my last two builds that I thought were cool was (1) a "sandwich" style thermostat/bypass on my 502 (it was off of a Mercury Racing marine big block) and (2) the Canton remote thermostat that I have on the '67 now. Hindsight being 20/20 I might have gone with a cooler in the rad but that ship has sailed.

On my last '67 I bought a used Fluidyne nascar setup from Rousch racing. While it was not an integral part of the rad it was designed to be mounted directly beneath it.

It would be interesting to get C&R's take on aftermarket/fabricated shrouds. Some of the AM "shrouds" act more like barriers.

What is very interesting on newer cars is just how small the radiators are and how well the fan systems work with them. Nearly all of radiator is covered by the shroud and there is a very high open area ratio. If air cannot freely flow, cooling effectiveness is reduced. This is very important when space is at a premium, even for our applications where turbos/intercoolers/plumbing take up a lot of space.

As said earlier, mine is too big, and the car has a problem getting enough heat in the oil during the cooler months. I'm fabricating a block-off plate that will slip down the front of the radiator and block off a portion of the top section during the winter months. A thermostat would be a better option, and I'm in the planning stages for that as well.

A technical story would be very interesting. Each type will have advantages and disadvantages. I have a lot more respect for a product when the company points out not only where their products work, but also applications where it is not well suited.

Would it be futile to try and cool the oil in a turbo set-up?

Hey Carl,

C&R felt that a shroud should be ran on the street and shouldn't be ran on the track. This is due to the high track speeds over pressurizing the fan. With the lower speeds on the street the shroud is a good idea.

Also, I talked with AFCO and they are going to make a radiator with the built in oil cooler similar to the C&R piece. In fact they are working on it right now.

I also heard BeCool will do it on request.

Sort of nice to have more options.

Oh and there will be an "oil cooler 101" type story. :)

Just want to throw this into the mix, how about a Oil thermostat bypass on the oil cooler? Get the engine up to temp faster.

That's a good idea if you are using an air based cooler. But, if you're running one through the radiator they it's unnessary since the water will warm the oil in addition to cooling it.

Kinda back to the original application (and for my own interests)...

I see how a turbo application could REALLY benefit from cooler oil but I question if any set-up would make a dent. Turbos are pretty efficient at raising oil temps.

I've thrown some ideas and theories around this subject and came to the conclusion that no oil cooler could be more efficient at cooling than the turbos are for heating the oil.

Basically- I theorize that you'd be pissing-in-the-wind trying to cool the oil in a turbocharged engine. The oil will reach a similar max temp regardless of how you try to cool it down. Am I wrong?

Not so.

On cool days the oil temperature in mine during normal cruise the oil temps get to maybe 150*. On the freeway, 140*. If I hammer it for a while, 180*. On warm days it will get up to over 200* occasionally.

I would really like the oil temp to be 210-220* during normal operation, so a thermostat is in the planning stages. I may go with a Mocal, but the CV part is really nice.

No matter how much heat turbos may add to the oil, if the oil is overheating a cooler is needed. Worst case the cooler will delay the onset of overheating, but the amount of oil a turbo uses is much smaller than that used in the rest of the engine, which creates a lot of waste heat during high-horsepower output.

Hmm.. the techies at C&R is where I got my info. Interesting.

My water temp is never below 190, so shouldn't the oil always end up near this since it's warmed by the water much like it's cooled by the water?

Carl,
Was this with your old engine with cooler and radiator inlet on the same side? The LS enters the pass side right?

The way it should work is the oil heat exchanger should be on the radiator inlet side tank receiving the warmest coolant. I'm getting a Be Cool rad and it's double pass, they have to put the exchanger in the pass side tank.

Thermostat valves take up a bit of room especially with all the extra plumbing. The cleanest way would be to have it on the engine block. I don't think you need to actually shut off the rad cooler and open the bypass. I think just opening a bypass would be enough, the cooler should have enough extra resistance to flow that would not allow much flow thru it when the bypass is open.

A factory LS radiator (from GM) has the inlet on the drivers side and the exit (lower) on the pass side.

Most aftermarket LS radiators have the inlet and outlet both on the pass side to make plumbing cleaner. That's how my current AFCO is and how the C&R unit is.

My new AFCO will have both on the pass side and the cooler will be on the upper driver's side like the C&R unit.

With the C&R dual-pass radiator the oil cooler is placed in the mid-tank. Hence, the engine coolant has already gone through 1/2 of the cooling cycle. By the time the coolant, which exits the engine at thermostat temperature, gets to the mid-tank it has cooled significantly. This keeps oil temperatures low on cool days.

It's the same for both the previous 406 and the current LS. On warm days while street driving it takes quite a bit to get the oil into the 220* range. On track days it performs very well. Having the cooler in the return tank would help keep oil temperatures up.

David,

The inlet/outlet are on the RH side and the oil cooler is on the LH (pics on website). I think the Mocal type could be used with only one extra hose in my application. I've thought of a simple bypass as well. Any hints on a good design/parts?

Though I like the design of the ATS pan it would have been really nice to have a sandwich-type thermostat adapter, even if it meant having to 90* the filter to make it work. Having the thermostat built in to the radiator heat exchanger would also be kind trick but a nightmare if servicing was needed.

Nice... definately, looking forword to that and getting the 'tech' out to the masses.

nate- you still got your turbo setup in the 68?

Right now I'm doing a shock tech story.. like a "shock 101" deal.

My problem is that I have more story ideas than I have time.

Not sure how the LS motors are bypassed but I have recently learned you need to increase the blow off pressure of the bypass when running a cooler or remote oil filter. (At least on a genv/vi big block) 11 to 30 lbs in my case.

Yep, I still have it all but the car is on a rack right now for paint/body. I commited to the project before the economy went South. It's still moving forward albeit a bit slower.