Subject: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 14:13:45 -0400 (EDT)

A number of years have passed since I swapped an aluminum radiator for the
original black brass/copper radiator on my MGA race car, but I vaguely recall
from the discussions at that time that aluminum actually is a worse metal for
heat transfer than copper/brass. Can one of you metallurgists comment?

My understanding at the time had nothing to do with inherent heat transfer,
but rather that I needed a new radiator since mine was very clogged up, and to
buy a replacement original, or recore my original was more expensive than the
cool-looking aluminum replacement I could buy from the standard source in
Phoenix. As an additioanal incentive, the aluminum radiator -- which was a
bolt-in substitute -- was lighter than the copper/brass original. Of course it
worked better, simply because it was brand new and totally uncorroded, in
contrast to the 40 years of corrosion in my old radiator.

Any other thoughts?

Gary Anderson
Editor at large, Austin-Healey Magazine.

David Nock wrote:
Cleaning the original style radiator I would not recommend. The original style
is a very inefficient  style of radiator core.The new style cores with the
fins that go vertically between the tube are far more efficient at cooling.
They can have more tubes and fins per inch.
The next best is an aluminum radiator, they will transfer heat much better
than a copper brass radiator and will recover much faster.I have recently
installed an aluminum radiator in my BN4. This last weekend we had temps at
100 degrees. I was out all day. Engine temp stayed steady at 170 degrees at
driving speedsSlowed thru town and thru the local shopping center the temp
creped up to about 200 degrees then as soon as I picked a little speed the
temp came right back down to 170 . Prior to the alloy radiatorI would run
constantly down the freeway at 190 degrees and closer to 200 on a hot day,
then in traffic it would quickly climb to 215 plus and was slow to recover.
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys

---

From: "BJ8Healeys" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:08:44 -0400

http://www.coolcraft.com/radiator-core-styles#Alum

According to US Radiator, the design and , construction of the core has more
to do with cooling efficiency than the materials used; but in general
aluminum heat transfer is less efficient than brass.

Steve Byers
HBJ8L/36666
BJ8 Registry
AHCA Delegate at Large
Havelock, NC  USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Healeys [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 2:14 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

 A number of years have passed since I swapped an aluminum radiator for the
original black brass/copper radiator on my MGA race car, but I vaguely
recall from the discussions at that time that aluminum actually is a worse
metal for heat transfer than copper/brass. Can one of you metallurgists
comment?

Any other thoughts?

Gary Anderson

[email-masked]

---

From: Larry Varley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 06:14:32 +1000

Hi Gary, copper is a better conductor than aluminium, but solder isn't, 
and there is a lot of soldered surfaces in a copper / brass radiator. I 
agree it's hard to compare an old radiator to a new one.
Regards
Larry Varley

On 15/07/2014 4:13 AM, [email-masked] wrote:
> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>
> [email-masked]
> Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7849 - Release Date: 07/14/14

[email-masked]

---

From: Oudesluys <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 23:33:59 +0200

It is difficult to compare the heat transfer of aluminium and 
copper/brass radiators. In theory copper conducts the heat better than 
aluminium. However it may well be that because of the construction an 
aftermarket aluminium radiator dissipates more heat than a standard 
brass/copper one. A brass/copper radiator with an improved/enlarged core 
would as well.
Anyone got any numbers for heat transfer per square meter or foot for 
the various options?
Kees Oudesluijs
NL

Larry Varley schreef op 14-7-2014 22:14:
> Hi Gary, copper is a better conductor than aluminium, but solder 
> isn't, and there is a lot of soldered surfaces in a copper / brass 
> radiator. I agree it's hard to compare an old radiator to a new one.
> Regards
> Larry Varley
>
>> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]
>>
>>
>> -----
> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]
>
>
>
> -----
> Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
> Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com
> Versie: 2014.0.4716 / Virusdatabase: 3986/7852 - datum van uitgifte: 
> 07/14/14

[email-masked]

---

From: Wilko2 <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:04:04 -0700

Actually for the materials, the ability to dissipate heat is easily measured
and aluminum in a similar configuration does not perform as well as brass. The
benefit of aluminum is weight savings and strength (which allows for better
designs).

One company selling aluminum radiators has published numbers for the side
tanks where a lot of the heat is reportedly dissipated.

here's a graphic that they use that highlights there extruded tank design with
more surface area out-performing all tanks.
www.flex-a-lite-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/radiator-heat-rejection.j
pg?w=285

They go on to say:
"Heat rejection is the term for measuring the ability of a material to
transfer heat to the air. This is what a radiators job boils down to: Take
engine heat that has been transferred to the engine coolant and transfer it to
the atmosphere. Heat rejection is measured by the amount of British Thermal
Units (BTU) per hour the system can dissipate. Higher BTU/hour means more heat
transfer and better cooling.
Brass radiators came in nearly all vehicles until the 80s. A typical
original-equipment brass radiator rejects heat at a rate of about 1,500
BTU/hour. Thats pretty good, and this is why brass was chosen as the material
for radiators. In the 80s, car manufactures wanted to reduce costs and lower
vehicle weight. This led to changing the radiator design to use composite
(plastic) tanks with an aluminum core. The plastic tanks transfer about 1,000
BTU/hour; considerably less than the traditional brass construction. Next we
come to aluminum radiators. It might surprise you to learn that the typical,
smooth aftermarket aluminum radiator tanks dissipate heat at a rate of about
only 700 BTU/hour! Thats less than half the BTU of brass sidetanks!"

Anyway, the common wisdom is that core design and not material is what matters
most.
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: "David Nock BCS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:38:08 -0700

I was skeptical when going to the aluminum radiator as well I had been told 
all the reasons not to use a alloy radiator.
But there is nothing better then actually using it a road testing it for 
your self. So I did.
All the findings over a 2000 mile trip were that the alloy radiator was far 
superior to the copper / brass radiator that I had
been using, and no it was not an old radiator. I had had it re cored several 
years ago and then to make sure it wasnbt a problem
I had it cleaned and inspected about 2 years ago.

Conclusion was that the installation of the alloy radiator cured a hot 
running engine. Proven by using it.

David Nock
British Car Specialists
209-948-8767
www.britishcarspecialists.com

-----Original Message----- 
From: Wilko2
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 4:04 PM
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

Actually for the materials, the ability to dissipate heat is easily measured
and aluminum in a similar configuration does not perform as well as brass. 
The
benefit of aluminum is weight savings and strength (which allows for better
designs).

here's a graphic that they use that highlights there extruded tank design 
with
more surface area out-performing all tanks.
www.flex-a-lite-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/radiator-heat-rejection.j
pg?w=285

They go on to say:
"Heat rejection is the term for measuring the ability of a material to
transfer heat to the air. This is what a radiators job boils down to: Take
engine heat that has been transferred to the engine coolant and transfer it 
to
the atmosphere. Heat rejection is measured by the amount of British Thermal
Units (BTU) per hour the system can dissipate. Higher BTU/hour means more 
heat
transfer and better cooling.
Brass radiators came in nearly all vehicles until the 80s. A typical
original-equipment brass radiator rejects heat at a rate of about 1,500
BTU/hour. Thats pretty good, and this is why brass was chosen as the 
material
for radiators. In the 80s, car manufactures wanted to reduce costs and 
lower
vehicle weight. This led to changing the radiator design to use composite
(plastic) tanks with an aluminum core. The plastic tanks transfer about 
1,000
BTU/hour; considerably less than the traditional brass construction. Next we
come to aluminum radiators. It might surprise you to learn that the typical,
smooth aftermarket aluminum radiator tanks dissipate heat at a rate of about
only 700 BTU/hour! Thats less than half the BTU of brass sidetanks!"

Anyway, the common wisdom is that core design and not material is what 
matters
most.
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked] 
_______________________________________________
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive

[email-masked]

---

From: Al Malin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:47:38 -0400

Does anyone know the weight difference between Healey aluminum and alloy radiators?

Al Malin
Tricarb
 
On Jul 15, 2014, at 11:38 AM, David Nock BCS <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I was skeptical when going to the aluminum radiator as well I had been told all the reasons not to use a alloy radiator.
> But there is nothing better then actually using it a road testing it for your self. So I did.
> All the findings over a 2000 mile trip were that the alloy radiator was far superior to the copper / brass radiator that I had
> been using, and no it was not an old radiator. I had had it re cored several years ago and then to make sure it wasnbt a problem
> Conclusion was that the installation of the alloy radiator cured a hot running engine. Proven by using it.
> 
> 
> 
> David Nock
> British Car Specialists
> 209-948-8767

[email-masked]

---

From: "David Nock BCS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:23:35 -0700

I have another one coming in  on thursday so I can check then and  let you 
know

David Nock
British Car Specialists
209-948-8767
-----Original Message----- 
From: Al Malin
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:47 AM
To: David Nock BCS
Cc: Wilko2 ; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

Does anyone know the weight difference between Healey aluminum and alloy 
radiators?

Al Malin
Tricarb

On Jul 15, 2014, at 11:38 AM, David Nock BCS <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

> I was skeptical when going to the aluminum radiator as well I had been 
> told all the reasons not to use a alloy radiator.
> All the findings over a 2000 mile trip were that the alloy radiator was 
> far superior to the copper / brass radiator that I had
> been using, and no it was not an old radiator. I had had it re cored 
> several years ago and then to make sure it wasnbt a problem

[email-masked]

---

From: Michael Oritt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 14:48:35 -0400

This decision may soon become academic as it becomes increasingly difficult
to find someone with the know-how to repair brass/copper radiators, and
since the new aluminum units are designed to be replaced rather than fixed
it is doubtful that anyone will acquire the skills in the future.

Here in Southern Maryland the one guy who ran an old-fashioned radiator
shop closed his doors several years ago.  It was neat to visit his
place--he had a couple of large immersion tanks for leak-testing radiators
and there was a naked gas flame always burning for--I guess--lighting up
his torch.

Best--Michael Oritt

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, David Nock BCS <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> -----Original Message----- From: Al Malin
>> several years ago and then to make sure it wasnb t a problem
> Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/
> options/healeys/[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: I Erbs <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:49:11 -0700

I had mine rebuilt. New more row core. Had my heater core checked out too.
it was clean... So my car now has original type but heavy duty radiator,
sleeved thermostat, and Texas cooler. It has never run as cool as it  does
now. Around 190 degrees. Of course it spikes when I shut it down. I ran an
electric fan when it was my daily driver in Los Angeles 20-30 years ago.

Ira Erbs
Portland, OR
   _______                                  _______
     (______ \____1960 BT7____/ _______)
         (_________________________)

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Michael Oritt <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/healeys/[email-masked]

[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:19:25 -0400 (EDT)

About 6 years ago I was evaluating purchasing a new aluminum radiator vs.
re-coring my original radiator with a new high efficiency copper core. I ask
Dennis Welch what their aluminum radiator weighed. I do not recall the actual
weights but the difference in weight between the new aluminum radiator & my
original radiator with original core was only approx. 2-3 Lbs.
I chose to have my original radiator re-cored & am very happy with the
improvement & I prefer the look of the original header tank with the Coventry
Radiator data plate.
Gary Hodson

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Malin <[email-masked]>
To: David Nock BCS <[email-masked]>
Cc: healeys <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tue, Jul 15, 2014 12:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

Al Malin
Tricarb

[email-masked]

---

From: HealeyRick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 11:48:15 -0400

David,

While searching for ways to cool my V8 Healey, I contacted a very reputable
custom aluminum radiator maker and told the tech support guy that I was
running an uprated Healey radiator and would like to get some additional
cooling.  He very candidly told me he could sell me a new radiator, but it
wouldn't make a big difference over what I already had.  Your real world
experience seems to have worked out a little differently.  My cooling is
what I'd call "adequate" for New England.  I have a 16" Maradyne electric
fan installed as a puller along with a shroud I fabricated.  (not possible
to do this without removing the shroud crossbrace and tilting the radiator
back)  I run between 190 and 210 degrees, which concerned me at first until
reading this is what 5.0L Mustang motors run stock.

[email-masked]

---

From: "David Nock BCS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:13:28 -0700

Just got one in
    alloy                          12.4 lbs
    Copper / Brass         21.5 lbs

David Nock
British Car Specialists
209-948-8767

-----Original Message----- 
From: Al Malin
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 10:47 AM
To: David Nock BCS
Cc: Wilko2 ; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Healeys] Aluminum vs Copper/Brass Radiator?

Al Malin
Tricarb

[email-masked]

---

From: I Erbs <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:26:29 -0700

what's the cost difference?

Ira Erbs
Portland, OR
   _______                                  _______

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:13 PM, David Nock BCS <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> options/healeys/[email-masked]

[email-masked]