• Welcome to ClassicBroncos! - You are currently viewing the forums as a GUEST. To take advantage of all the site features, please take a moment to register. It's fast, simple and absolutely free. So please join our community today!
    If you have problems registering or can't log into your account, please contact Admin.

Heat torture cooling system test... Exploder mech vrs Tauras electric fans...

OP
OP
nvrstuk

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,903
Nice comparison pic!!


Cooling efficiency is of course also directly affected by cooling area. Two 1 1/4" inch aluminum tubes have more cooling contact area than four brass copper tubes ... there is a lot of small variables... another major factor involved in that is the turbulence of the water flowing through the tubes for contact...

It's a science/engineering "thing" as you can't just look up thermal efficiency when comparing the two and use that for your determining which is more efficient.
 
Last edited:

chuzie

Bronco Guru
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
2,697
I'm running a 351 explorer efi with ron Davis rad, clutch fan shrouded and sealed, 192 stat, stock pump, and giant oil cooler with fan.

In city or crawling or just sitting i can get up to 210 or 220 which bothers me considering everything i have going on to keep cool. I know most people say that's not hot, but i want to be between 192 and 205 on a hot day.

Maybe a flowkooler is worth looking at. Either that or a hood louver.
 

ntsqd

heratic car camper
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
3,297
Loc.
Upper SoKA
Sounds like we're in "violent agreement" that AL has no distinct cooling advantage over C/B.

Going to the Stewart pump over the generic parts store pump was a real revelation! Went from barely kept the Ranchero cool when working to hard to get it to warm up when not working it. There's a lot to be said for a good impeller design.
 
OP
OP
nvrstuk

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,903
lol !!! I'm not convinced it's the alum factor over the ability to design the rad VERY differently than copper/brass. Tube design and airflow over the tubes is a huge factor along with turbulent water flow within the tubes so better/more efficient cooling occurs.

I looked last year and Stewart doesn't make a reverse WP for Exploder serp setups.
 

ntsqd

heratic car camper
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
3,297
Loc.
Upper SoKA
Most of the back to back tests that I've seen show no real net gain in either direction. The superior surface area of the AL is offset by its lower thermal conduction. The superior thermal conduction of the C/B is offset by the thermal barrier that the solder between the tubes & the fins presents. Essentially is a draw.

They do, sort of, now. http://www.stewartcomponents.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=60_68&product_id=138 Seem to recall it doesn't accept the Exploder's thread-on fan, which for me was a big part of that front dress' appeal.
 

73azbronco

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
7,842
Has anyone gone from a stock type explorer water pump to a flowkooler pump and noticed an improvement, ever? I mean someone who came on here and said "this fixed everything, or even just made it better by 5 degrees at idle"?
 
OP
OP
nvrstuk

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,903
Has anyone gone from a stock type explorer water pump to a flowkooler pump and noticed an improvement, ever? I mean someone who came on here and said "this fixed everything, or even just made it better by 5 degrees at idle"?

I wii be doing this before next summer... no help now but my stroker only gets hot when I'm using most of its power! Example- 25deg F, wet heavy snow headlight deep, locked all 4 corners, turning 4-5500 rpm, wheel speed at 40-50 mph for 4 minutes straight and it instantly climbed to 215F.

I can idle all day at 100F and sit at t- stat temp, this includes trails

I'm going more surface area on radiator first... Rapto is appr 569sqin
 
Last edited:

Tucknkitty

Newbie
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
52
Lincoln Mk8 Fan

Guys,

My two cents - I have a well built 408 and throttle body efi. I have an explorer front dress, ron Davis aluminum radiator and a mk8 fan with an autocool pulse width modulator. I also run a 198 thermostat.

In traffic or on the highway pulling 70-80mph, I sit right at 203-208 never higher and rarely lower. I drove from Newport Rhode Island to Sebago Lake in Maine last Friday night - that means Boston stop and go traffic and pulling hard on the interstate. Same temps. Been running this for a few years. For me it works and has yet to kick on full speed. Think noon in stop and go traffic in the tunnel around Boston...stays the same and the pwm does its thing.

It's a bit of work to get everything to fit - and clear with the water pump but once it's in and work cooling becomes a non issue. I had to cut my radiator hangers and reweld on the outside - had to cut down the water pump boss (where the mech fan screws onto), and had to wire everything up. I got my PWM from Hollister road - again, a bit of a leap of faith but it does control the fan really well, and it's adjustable.

This works for me and I drive my rig nearly everyday- in every condition possible. Hope it adds depth to your decision making process.
TnK
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
47,821
Good data Tucknkitty. Sounds like you get around in yours, so it's good hard info.

In city or crawling or just sitting i can get up to 210 or 220 which bothers me considering everything i have going on to keep cool. I know most people say that's not hot, but i want to be between 192 and 205 on a hot day.

Well, I won't say that's "not hot" (because it is!), it's just not overheating. Still likely should not be at that level on a regular basis. Have you verified your gauge is reading correctly? That's something I've yet to do on mine, but it's seemed consistent so far with what was expected, so have not taken the time to verify.
Had mine to 240 the other day with just a short drive in 100 degree weather. But that was because the radiator was almost empty. When it's topped off, it just chugs along between 180 and 195 most of the time. Only goes above that on rare occasions.
And this is with stock radiator and A/C running. So yeah, yours seems high by those standards.

What about engine tune? Since the Explorer stuff is no a 351, did you make any modifications such as going up in size on the injectors and a custom tune? I know I've watched your build, but don't remember those details.

Maybe a flowkooler is worth looking at. Either that or a hood louver.

I say it's always worth looking at a high-volume pump. But even at that, mine is also on a stock Explorer pump, so that's not a real argument in favor of one in your case. At least not yet.
Louvers are another big thing for Broncos. Depending on how yours flows, air pressure could be a thing.
What fan in your case? Stock Explorer too? What else is under your hood.
One exception to the rule under my hood is the passenger side vent is gone completely due to the under-dash A/C setup. This missing piece alone could be allowing quite a bit of extra air flow out of the engine compartment through that gaping hole in the side fender skirt. Something to thing about.

An experiment that only takes a little time and effort on your part (instead of money first) would be to simply remove the hood for awhile this summer. If your temps immediately go down to what you'd expect, you have an air-flow issue. Whether it's the effectiveness of the fan, or just too much air getting caught up under the hood (or both) you at least have your direction to go.

I looked last year and Stewart doesn't make a reverse WP for Exploder serp setups.

As said, Flowkooler has one: http://www.wildhorses4x4.com/product/FlowKooler-Water-Pump-Explorer-5/EXPLORER5ENGINEPARTS and has had for over about 2 years or so. Guessing they work as advertised. As much as I like Stewart, if I needed a pump sooner than they were going to have one, I would not hesitate to substitute a Flowkooler.

Has anyone gone from a stock type explorer water pump to a flowkooler pump and noticed an improvement, ever? I mean someone who came on here and said "this fixed everything, or even just made it better by 5 degrees at idle"?

Not that I remember. But I don't remember anyone saying they put a Flowkooler Explorer pump on and still had the problem either.
Much of that is likely to do with the fact that 90% of the Explorer swaps are more recent, the Flowkooler pump has only been around a couple of years now, and not all users of the Explorer stuff are having any trouble worth fixing anyway.
Of course, we'll see if it helps Chuzie's issue if that ends up being one of the things he does!
I almost hope he ends up doing it, even though it's a hassle to replace a pump. Be nice to see if it helps someone that's actually having a water flow issue with an Explorer.

The problem with this method though, is when it does NOT help, is knowing ultimately whether the existing problem was a water flow issue in the first place. Or something else.
Often enough we've found over the years that severe overheating problems don't respond to the normal "cures" because they end up being engine tuning problems rather than an issue with coolant flow or air flow.
But it's the combination problems that really give knowledge bases fits!

Paul
 

chuck

Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 14, 2001
Messages
6,474
Loc.
Ingram, Texas
Sounds like we're in "violent agreement" that AL has no distinct cooling advantage over C/B.
passionate agreement is closer for me. About 15 years ago I found a small radiator co in ScCal that made hi density radiator cores with 17 fins per inch soldered to 4, 5/8" tubes, 3/8" apart in cross flow so I had them build some for me. A little later I had them put 3 baffles in them to make them into a triple pass radiator forcing all the coolant to cross through 1/3 of the radiator 3 times. My reasoning was that the water that could get past the t-stat would pass easily through 1/3 of the tubes. The radiator worked great and now you can buy a hi density triple pass copper radiator from most radiator co. and EB venders. The whole idea is to get the most radiator you can in that small EB space.
 
OP
OP
nvrstuk

nvrstuk

Contributor
Just a Bronco driver for over 50 yrs!
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
8,903
I will add to my post saying that I can drive mine on the highway which we do for hours at a time ( last fall-280 miles in one day -- the day after wheeling in Moab all week) )and never get above 195 thermostat but like I said , when I load it really heavy, it climbs up.
 

chuzie

Bronco Guru
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
2,697
I will add to my post saying that I can drive mine on the highway which we do for hours at a time ( last fall-280 miles in one day -- the day after wheeling in Moab all week) )and never get above 195 thermostat but like I said , when I load it really heavy, it climbs up.

Same here.
 

sykanr0ng

Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 11, 2014
Messages
5,363
passionate agreement is closer for me. About 15 years ago I found a small radiator co in ScCal that made hi density radiator cores with 17 fins per inch soldered to 4, 5/8" tubes, 3/8" apart in cross flow so I had them build some for me. A little later I had them put 3 baffles in them to make them into a triple pass radiator forcing all the coolant to cross through 1/3 of the radiator 3 times. My reasoning was that the water that could get past the t-stat would pass easily through 1/3 of the tubes. The radiator worked great and now you can buy a hi density triple pass copper radiator from most radiator co. and EB venders. The whole idea is to get the most radiator you can in that small EB space.

If we could get one of those smaller companies to make a radiator like that but a mirror image of a stock Bronco radiator the guys with serpentine belts would be set.
 

DirtDonk

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2003
Messages
47,821
Or just make them a "double-bypass" rather than the usual "triple-bypass" (my names for them) instead, then the inlet and outlets would be on the same driver's side.
This would let you continue to use the existing styles of upper hose most are using, and probably another off-the-shelf lower hose instead of the crossover or awkward Super Duty hose (or whatever it is). Something like a Mustang maybe?

The manufacturer would still have to make the outlet so that it's not squeezed down in the corner by the frame, but I've seen plenty of them that looked like they worked well enough.

I'm probably over-thinking the problem though, as the radiators with reverse inlets (passenger side) don't really seem to have much trouble fitting a hose. Still, it's food for thought and a way to get at least some of the benefit of baffling the radiator to focus the internal flow pattern.
And that would also leave one tank open without the baffle, which would then allow the use of an internal oil cooler that the bypass radiators typically can't accommodate.

There's always something to regurgitate ideas around about!

Paul
 

bronconut73

Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
9,916
Or just make them a "double-bypass" rather than the usual "triple-bypass" (my names for them) instead, then the inlet and outlets would be on the same driver's side.
This would let you continue to use the existing styles of upper hose most are using, and probably another off-the-shelf lower hose instead of the crossover or awkward Super Duty hose (or whatever it is). Something like a Mustang maybe?

The manufacturer would still have to make the outlet so that it's not squeezed down in the corner by the frame, but I've seen plenty of them that looked like they worked well enough.

I'm probably over-thinking the problem though, as the radiators with reverse inlets (passenger side) don't really seem to have much trouble fitting a hose. Still, it's food for thought and a way to get at least some of the benefit of baffling the radiator to focus the internal flow pattern.
And that would also leave one tank open without the baffle, which would then allow the use of an internal oil cooler that the bypass radiators typically can't accommodate.

There's always something to regurgitate ideas around about!

Paul




I've thought about this for years..../\/\/\
 

pbwcr

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
624
Well we now know pumps matter and radiators not so much. Mechanical fans perform better than electric for most everyone that has cooling issues. Fans and clutches do matter.
So here I am with a EB and a Jeep and cooling applies to both. Turns out late model Wranglers use the same interface as Explorers. 18” fan and the same thread for attachment. The thread below discusses 9, 10, 11, & 12” Explorer fans is full of posts that are worthless. Finally a guy showed up and presented real data. Let me help to wade thru the thread, page 9, post 131 does still have pics or the 10”.
The smart guy is “cubecompmtdx “and his first post is 641, page 39. His latest post 641, page 43 gives clarification on the 2794 and 2793 clutches.
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f9/tj-radiator-fan-upgrade-info-2000-2006-tj-1237538/
Enjoy the read - Ha.
So my dilemma is my EB has a 92 Mustang and now I need to convert to the serp to the Explorer front dress. Another project to be started soon.
About the Jeep I put the Ford 11 blade and the Hayden Hd clutch on the thing and am very impressed with the performance. When the Rig does not need cooling the fan just idles , but in the deep sand washes of Baja the thing engages and I get flurry of dust. It’s a low cost upgrade and I am satisfied with the change. I consider all the sound discussions as worthless. For an EB it still will be very important to have a proper shroud which results in a close fit to the rad and has ½ or a little more clearance all the way around to the fan. The best way, IMO, to do the shroud is start with a so-so Ford plastic shroud and use fiberglass and metal reinforcement and modify to get a proper fit. The result should be a nice aero internal shape for good air flow.
What I bought is https://www.amazon.com/Motorcraft-YA220-Radiator-Fan/dp/B000CJ2PKM and the 2792 Hayden clutch shown on the link. And Ford F87A-8600-EA = YA220.
Regards, PaulW
 

Crush

Contributor
Bronco Guru
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,463
Loc.
Greenbottom, WV
I agree on the fan. Explorer + hd clutch is awesome. For the rad and shroud, I used a 4.0 automatic with ac explorer radiator.(had to make upper mounts and use the explorer lower mounts welded to my core support and the ac part made the rad mount off the core support far enough for a condenser when i go ac) this let me use the 4.0 explorer shroud which fit perfectly. My fan as between 3/4" and 1" out of the shroud and airflow is awesome. The other be efot is if i need any of this stuff it is readilly available at any parts store. I also have a 351
 

chuck

Bronco Guru
Joined
Aug 14, 2001
Messages
6,474
Loc.
Ingram, Texas
Pau, we have a rev. in/out radiator with 2 baffles. one 1/3 below the inlet and the 2ed a 1/3 above the outlet. No internal cooler thou.
 

toddz69

Sponsor/Vendor
Bronco Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Messages
10,183
I was noodling on the idea of the multiple pass radiator and came across this tech tip some time ago on the Stewart Components website:

http://stewartcomponents.com/index.php?route=information/information&information_id=13

The vast increase in pressure required for the double/triple pass units seems to negate any of their benefits, although I'm not sure if most of the EB vendor units are the 'old style' or 'new style' radiators they differentiate between in the article.

Todd Z.
 
Top