I saw this one done on a 'B' a few years back by a fellow owner I have great
respect for (he's had a 'driver' for a LONG, LONG time). He indicated that it
was of some help.
His idea was to increase the gap between the radiator and the condensor by
placing a bit of tubing (or other spacer) over the bolts at the bottom of the
condensor. The theory being that opening the gap at the bottom will allow or
force more air between the two 'heat exchangers' and therefore get more to the
radiator, where it is needed. Since the air scoop is right under this, at
first glance it would appear to push more air past the radiator - rather than
being blocked by the condensor. As it stands, the condensor blocks a portion
of the radiator from getting as much air / airflow at the bottom of the
radiator as it could - in addition to having what air gets through preheated
by the condensor (yeah, can't be much). Normally, they are parallel and close
together like this (condensor on left, radiator on right):
|
||
Spacing out the bottom of the condensor would do this:
|
/|
(Hey, what do you want for just text! ;) )
Obviously, this 'fix' is controversial and of questionable benefit. Given that
you only have x amount of air coming into the area, the heat to be transferred
hasn't changed, you still haven't changed the hot air exhaust characteristics
and the mechanical fan is still pulling the same amount of air past the
radiator, I'm not sure how much of a benefit this really provide. If, however,
this allows the fan to pull more air THROUGH the radiator rather than from
AROUND it, it might actually have some real, measurable benefit. I would
expect some loss of cooling to the condensor as a result, but for the 'B', I
doubt this would have much of an impact on the air conditioning system.
Michael
VIN 1155
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002 08:19:18 -0400 Mitwelt <mitwelt@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Some history: lets see, there was the remove
> the hood seal fad, that didn't
> last too long, then there was the cutting of
> the actual fenders to
> accommodate little hood scoops, that didn't
> last too long either. At least
> with the former, the damage was not permanent,
> providing fumes entering the
> passenger compartment did not overwhelm the
> driver/owner. And then of
> course, there is the wonderfully "simple"
> modification of attaching a newly
> designed air dam/scoop. I'm still have
> expecting the pixie dust rumor to
> begin (again?). Almost makes ya think Malcom
> is still around. Most of the
> results reported are based on methods not even
> approaching scientific
> modality, some, not even common sense or
> reason. However, being Bricklin
> owners, what the hell do we know about common
> sense (or reason)?
>
> TT at one time tried a single elec fan, but in
> place of the mech. one.
> This was not very successful, understandably.
> The idea of TWO elec fans,
> one in front, and one behind, is at the very
> least (or most) avant garde.
> I've rarely seen manufacturers even attempt
> this. The rather small gain in
> actual power by removing the mech comes at the
> expense of an extremely high
> amp draw and utter elec dependency. The idea
> of a pusher elec boosting
> the mechanical puller is quite common nowadays,
> and besides actually working
> well, it seems to draw on the best both have to
> offer. Whether you use a
> single pusher or twin depends on many factors,
> just pay attention to amp
> draw and CFM and don't forget to put in some
> kind of temp control and never
> ever ever use those little plastic push through
> connectors. Of course, many
> of us still have a half empty and somewhat
> rusted can filled with some kind
> of miracle concoction that promised to lower
> temps by *at least* 20 degrees!
> Again, we are Bricklin owners, highly
> individual, a little nutz, and
> sometimes, remarkably funny.
>
> stephan #2821
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/bricklin
|