f-two-fiddy
Registered User
With all the talk of additional cooling during the last few hot mo's. I stumbled across a Be Cool Aluminum radiator application for 84 6.9ltr. @ Summit
Be Cool
Be Cool
Camarogenius said:Cross flow is generally considered better than vertical flow radiators. Simply, because the horizontal flow causes the coolant to travel farther before it goes back into the engine. I don't see enough of a difference to spend a bunch of money on a cross flow radiator.
As to the Two row Vs. four row core.
I see some trouble here. The more rows, the more coolant can come into contact with the cooling surface inside the core. Even if the rows in the two row are twice the size of the rows in the four row, it's still not as good as the four core. It doesn't do any good to pass twice as much coolant through a larger tube, if the coolant doesn't come into contact with the side of the tube, so it can transfer it's heat to the cooling fins.
I cetainly wouldn't spent money on a radiator with less rows.
Now onto the "Electralisys" between aluminum and Iron. When general motors made the switch to aluminum radiators, they also went to that damned orange "dexcool" anti freeze. It didn't really help the problem much, but it kept the cooling system alive until the warrantee ran out. Ask someone who's torn into a cooling system that's had the orange crap in it for a couple years. they'll tell you all about big globs of orange "Snot" that comes plopping out of the bottom of the radiator. This is Iron Oxide. Rust.
The only way to prevent this is to run very expensive waterless coolants. This Idea runs head on into the SCA issue.
The short answer is Keep the Brass and Copper radiator you've got.
sign_man said:I have a Becool in my 66 Mustang that works very well. IIRC, the aluminum two row, having larger tubes than brass radiators, has more surface area than a brass 4 row. The tubes in the brass radiators are small because they can't take the pressure if they were made as large as aluminum radiator tubes.