Coolant flow

[Rat Bastid]

This is too much fun
The rat has a lot of hot air coming out of the radiator - hopefully the soap box breaks soon. Video? lol Cartoon at best. Stop being a bully.

If I was going to use a 6 pack I would do the carbs and intake so I could run cooler temperatures. Chrysler took the easy way out (and cheaper way) to crutch a horrible (but money maker) package.
Pure BS....

That horrible package will beat up a 4bbl equivalent all day long when tuned properly. I have driven/tuned more six paks cars than most. 1 six pak car - 100,000 miles, several engines - the last engine was very wicked...195 degrees. I am still tuning six pak and other cars and very good at it. I will put my tuning skills up against the big mouth rat any day.

All mopar STREET engines of the 60-70-80's esp Six paks do not tune properly at 180 degrees - it's been this way since i started working six paks in the late 70's. Speaking of dynos we had a 505 alum head roller six pak on the dyno at 195 degrees and 625 hp. After getting it run in/tested/tuned we tried tuning for 180 because the dyno guy was ignorant and we wanted to see what happened - we could not get the engine run and make the hp as the a-f ratio was bouncing like soccer ball in play. How much hp is lost without the breather and what happens to a/f when run without it? I know but I'm not sharing further info because this not a technical discussion any more.

Today we have modern instrumentation to know exactly what's going on under the hood - the air fuel & temperature data proves him wrong - period. Rat has not paraded out his technology to prove his old school drag racing knowlege. Temperatures....hmmm there are a number of temps check when tuning besides hot air from rats and the rad temps.

I have a serious bad boy [street car] currently in the shop that runs high speed road course laps really well on full tread that will not run correctly at 180 no matter how it is set up. At 195 it runs very nice crisp against the thermostat with only a 22 inch radiator and the proper mopar fan arrangement. Bring it on Rat....

BULLFUCKINGSHIT you clown.

The “6 pack“ is a power loser. If you test the carbs at the same pressure the total of all three is about 820 CFM on a good day.

A well tuned 750 on a Strip Dominator will humiliate that junk ****.

 

[Rat Bastid]

Like I've said all along, just run what works for you. It's not that difficult.

I agree. The issue is some of these guys refuse to learn anything.

This isn’t new. And it makes power. No wonder I go to the track and see 98% of the cars out there are underachieving jokes.

There isn’t an NA 700-800 HP new car out there. They have blowers. Just stupid guys argue this ****.

 

[toolmanmike]

BULLFUCKINGSHIT you clown.

The “6 pack“ is a power loser. If you test the carbs at the same pressure the total of all three is about 820 CFM on a good day.

A well tuned 750 on a Strip Dominator will humiliate that junk ****.

Watch it!

 

[Rat Bastid]

Watch it!

Yeah, say nothing to the guy who was disrespectful to me. Got it.

 

[toolmanmike]

Yeah, say nothing to the guy who was disrespectful to me. Got it.

All I caught is your post because it was the last one. You are in control and can start or stop the crap.

 

[Rat Bastid]

All I caught is your post because it was the last one. You are in control and can start or stop the crap.

…nevermind…

 

[fishmens67]

View attachment 1716089705

 

[fishmens67]

All I caught is your post because it was the last one. You are in control and can start or stop the crap.

It depends on which switch is flicked.
Usually I tend to finish it, rather than start it.

 

[92b]

BULLFUCKINGSHIT you clown.

The “6 pack“ is a power loser. If you test the carbs at the same pressure the total of all three is about 820 CFM on a good day.

A well tuned 750 on a Strip Dominator will humiliate that junk ****.

What test pressure are you using to get 820?

 

[Dave999]

Well i learned something, 3 things in fact......

1) although it might not be desirable in all applications, underdriving the pump can reduce the pressure in the system so that it doesn't vent under sustained higher rpm cruise, and then..... you don't over heat due to coolant loss. I now understand why this works, before my eyes were opened i didn't, and made the suggestion without all of the detail, i do apologise, i'd just taken an engineers word for it. (it seems to be a fix for a very specifc problem assocaited with the kind of radiator and cap used on cars until the mid 70s)
2) shouting at a shouter doesn't work, but standing behind the shouter shouting YEAH after everything he says isn't a good look either....
3) "You wouldn't understand, because your mind is closed you never learn anything and unless you pay me i haven't got time to explain", doesn't really count as evidence or provide validity to anything you have previously said. However constantly saying it promotes the posting of some excellent info and well made points.

I'm going back to the other thread to see how the OP is getting on with his radiator swap,
its been 2 weeks, lets hope he spent some of it out in the shed.



Dave

 

[72bluNblu]

Alright, last time around for me.

Go do some research. Youtube is FULL of coolant temperature tests. Go watch them.

YouTube is not research. It never has been, it never will be. It’s entertaining, it occasionally has decent info, but for every piece of good info there’s 10 that are totally wrong or misleading. “Researching” on YouTube just reinforces what you already believe, it’s not about learning.

I just had this discussion with a very smart man and his line was the same as yours. And that is the OEM’s and circle track guys run hot coolant so they know what the **** they are doing and the rest of us are stupid.

I never said you were stupid. And I never even said that colder intake air temps don’t make more power. What I said is that application matters, and maximum horsepower isn’t the best tune for every application. The NASCAR example shows this clearly, they are tuning for other parameters. Is NASCAR stupid? Nope. Am I going to tune my street car to run 300° coolant temperatures because those engines make more power than mine? Or course not.

Then I asked him the exact same question I’m going to ask you. Let’s see how YOU do.

If Pro Stock chills their engines (they are nowhere near 100 degrees…I hear 70 and at the end of a run it’s 100ish) because they KNOW it makes more power that makes them stupid. Why wouldn’t they look at circle track **** and HEAT their engines??? Are they THAT a stupid?

The reason they don’t is because they make LESS HORSEPOWER the higher the coolant temperatures go up. Simple as that.

Pro-Stock runs for 10 seconds at a time and they get enough time in between runs to chill their temps again. That’s why they do that. If they ran for an hour at a time or had to make back to back runs they’d do something totally different.

Which has been my point the entire time. What Pro-Stock cars do has no bearing on how you’d tune a street car. Pro-Stock isn’t gonna work in a traffic jam on the freeway.

After all, there’s probably a good reason you don’t tune for 100° right? Even though it would make more power?

Like I said, about 160 is as low as I go so I can get a defrost. 180 is as high as I like to see. It kills power, makes the tune up window narrower and causes the same engine with the same compression ratio to use a fuel with higher octane to keep it out of detonation.

I will not test a pump gas engine higher that 160, maybe 165. No reason to.

If you’ve never tested a pump gas engine past 165°, then what proof do you have that it works better than what I’m doing? I know exactly what the theory says, better than you can imagine.

Will it make more horsepower on your dyno? Sure, it probably will. But how much? And how will that change the drivability? If you’ve never done it any other way as you just said, you don’t know either.

So jerk your engine out, drive up here and I’ll test your **** at 200 and we’ll see what it does. I won’t even charge you.

If that doesn’t work for you too ******* bad. You have no proof of what you can do. I have lots of engines out there running 160ish. You just can’t accept the fact that it doesn’t fit your pradigm.

See, even your challenge tells me where you’re coming from. I’d drive my car anywhere in the US, no qualms about putting 2,000+ miles on it because it would make it, I drive more than that every year. The fact that you’d load up an engine and haul it to go that far makes it really clear what you think your engines will and won’t do.

I’m sure my engine would make more power on a dyno tuned for 160°. And I’m equally sure that the handful of horsepower I lose on the dyno at redline isn’t worth running that tune on the street the way I use my car.

There are a lot of ways to tune am engine, max power is only one, and whether it’s best or not depends on how you’re using that engine, how that engine is built, etc, etc.

 

[Rat Bastid]

Alright, last time around for me.



YouTube is not research. It never has been, it never will be. It’s entertaining, it occasionally has decent info, but for every piece of good info there’s 10 that are totally wrong or misleading. “Researching” on YouTube just reinforces what you already believe, it’s not about learning.



I never said you were stupid. And I never even said that colder intake air temps don’t make more power. What I said is that application matters, and maximum horsepower isn’t the best tune for every application. The NASCAR example shows this clearly, they are tuning for other parameters. Is NASCAR stupid? Nope. Am I going to tune my street car to run 300° coolant temperatures because those engines make more power than mine? Or course not.


Pro-Stock runs for 10 seconds at a time and they get enough time in between runs to chill their temps again. That’s why they do that. If they ran for an hour at a time or had to make back to back runs they’d do something totally different.

Which has been my point the entire time. What Pro-Stock cars do has no bearing on how you’d tune a street car. Pro-Stock isn’t gonna work in a traffic jam on the freeway.

After all, there’s probably a good reason you don’t tune for 100° right? Even though it would make more power?





If you’ve never tested a pump gas engine past 165°, then what proof do you have that it works better than what I’m doing? I know exactly what the theory says, better than you can imagine.

Will it make more horsepower on your dyno? Sure, it probably will. But how much? And how will that change the drivability? If you’ve never done it any other way as you just said, you don’t know either.



See, even your challenge tells me where you’re coming from. I’d drive my car anywhere in the US, no qualms about putting 2,000+ miles on it because it would make it, I drive more than that every year. The fact that you’d load up an engine and haul it to go that far makes it really clear what you think your engines will and won’t do.

I’m sure my engine would make more power on a dyno tuned for 160°. And I’m equally sure that the handful of horsepower I lose on the dyno at redline isn’t worth running that tune on the street the way I use my car.

There are a lot of ways to tune am engine, max power is only one, and whether it’s best or not depends on how you’re using that engine, how that engine is built, etc, etc.

One more time.

I have tested higher coolant temperatures with pump gas. POWER LOSER.

Here is something to ponder. Think about this BEFORE you reply.

If hot(er)coolant temperatures were the ****, don’t you think Pro Stock could just as easily (probably much easier) HEAT the engine before they made a pass?

Dont you think that maybe they have tested it? Or do you think they are ignorant about coolant temperatures to the point they haven’t thought about it and tested it?

I damn sure know that Reher-Morrison has tested it because he wrote about it (more than once I believe). And they could just as easily heated the engine IF it made more power.

Or they are just dumb sonsofbitches who haven’t left the 1980’s.

Or maybe, just maybe they have tested it and they know cool(er) engine temperatures makes more power.

So think that through.

Of course an OEM isnt going to produce a cooling system capable of maintaining 160 degree coolant temperatures because they couldn’t give a **** if they give up 30 or even 50 horsepower because the vast majority of these engines never see WOT power. Plus the cooling system would be much bigger. That costs money.

Plus, you don’t know (unless you have opened up the OE computer) to see how much timing it pulls to stop detonation or whatever other measures they use to control detonation.

Again, unless you think the entire Pro Stock class is brain dead there is a reason they chill the engine to 70 degrees. They could heat it to 200 (or higher) IF it made more power.

Could we do that (cool the engine as cold as Pro Stock does) on what we drive? No chance in hell. The cooling system would be outrageous.

But we can drop the temperature from the blessed (and wrong headed) 190 degrees and make power.


Youtube is a great resource IF you have the common sense God gave a pumpkin. Ignoring it is foolishness at a juvenile level.

And as I type that, Uncle Tony has dropped another horrible video about heating the intake manifold to fix his piss poor carb tuning.

FMR. That’s BAD YouTube, but you should be able to deduce that.

 

[RustyRatRod]

The OEMs run as hot as they do for emissions purposes. To heat converters to the point of operating (600 plus degrees) and to help cut back on hydrocarbons.

 

[Bewy]

Saying higher coolant temps looses power as an absolute is simply incorrect. It may or may not.

It will depend on what results from higher coolant temps. If it is a 'looser' engine that has increased the internal clearances, then there is a power gain from less friction. The oil thins out as temps increase & can reduce friction, increase hp. The power output of an engine like a 383/440 is far less likely to be affected by coolant temps because there is no coolant in the intake manifold to heat up the incoming air.

 

[Rat Bastid]

Saying higher coolant temps looses power as an absolute is simply incorrect. It may or may not.

It will depend on what results from higher coolant temps. If it is a 'looser' engine that has increased the internal clearances, then there is a power gain from less friction. The oil thins out as temps increase & can reduce friction, increase hp. The power output of an engine like a 383/440 is far less likely to be affected by coolant temps because there is no coolant in the intake manifold to heat up the incoming air.

All true. But I say cool(er) engine temperatures and THIN(er) oils.

You need to run a quality synthetic oil (not Group III oils) which BTW, makes more power.

I can easily run a 0w20 oil and still carry 75 psi hot at 7,000 RPM. On 160 degree coolant temperatures.

A big mistake is dropping your coolant temperature and continuing to use heavy grade oils. Which BTW using thinner oils allows for tighter clearances. Which reduces oil flow demand which means you can use a smaller oil pump and that saves some power.

That adds up to win, win, win.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Who puts a cooling system together with the goal of running @ 200° or more? An Enthusiast actually says:
“I want my hot rod Mopar to run at or above 200°, Perfect!” Right.
All the discussion over the years here and elsewhere about engines running hot, wanting to lower the temps, talk of using quality 1”+ and up tube radiators, proper shrouds, unimpeded flow, mech/elec fans and cfm, pulley ratio, water pumps, thermostats, timing and afr, fully intending and desiring to run @ or above 200°? Can count them on one hand, with missing fingers. More the exception, not the rule. It really sounds like they ended up running at that temp, they wanted lower, only to convince themselves it’s fine as is but 200° was and is not the goal. 5-4-3-2........LOL

View attachment 1716089231

View attachment 1716089274

View attachment 1716089275

I absolutely want my Duster running at 200.