MG MGB and MGB GT Tech Talk
Why on earth did MG mount the upper hose inlet & lower hose outlet on the same end of the radiator? It makes absolutely no sense unless you live in Antarctica or somewhere it wont ever get to hot. Has anyone moved the upper to the opposite end to achieve optimum cross flow?
It works though, on 95 deg days mine runs below the N. Now in the winter I need to block of 1/4 to 1/2 of the radiator to get heat, and thats with the correct thermostat. It works and well.
I thought they was a baffle mid tank, but have never opend a MG radiator
They probably used something already in production at the time as they did with many other components.
Pete.
If the radiator is horizontally cored instead of vertically cored like US cars typically are the fluid pattern would be different I would think
Early MGB radiators had the top hose on the right side of radiator. In 68 US market cars had a smog
pump added to the right side of the engine. Maybe the hose on the older style radiators wouldn't.
have cleared the smog pump. It doesn't matter which side it's on with a down flow radiator as Lee
mentioned. With the hose on either side or the center the coolant will flow through the top header
tank and flow down through the radiator tubes to the lower header tank.
A true cross flow radiator has the tanks on the sides of the radiator and the hoses must be on
opposite sides for the radiator to work.
Clifton
Also, the radiator should have the original baffle in the top tank that distributes the flow across the radiator before going down the vertical core.
Thank you Clifton for the correction. a cross flow would need horizontal flow. What my point is that with both inlet and outlet on the same side on a down flow radiator it just doesn't seem like it would be very efficient. I think I'm going to move my upper to the opposite end. It will work better for the KA24 anyways.
If you have heating problems, it isn't the design of the radiator.
no baffle. none needed.
just think about it a little more... picture the flow tubes and the volume of coolant being returned to the radiator... ...try and recall your high school knowledge on convection flow and eddie swirls in liquids etc...
Yeah, we just went through the bad design thread. Generally, it is considered a bad design if it didn't work, not because it made it inconvenient for us enthusiasts to work on the car.
We also went through the wheel shim discussion with some camps saying they aren't needed, the other saying that they are needed to compress the load on the spindle for the proper design strength. I'm in the latter camp, knowing that the factory's reluctance to put something on the car that cost money and wasn't needed, even if it was just a couple of inexpensive shims.
I do not think it will make a measurable difference. THOUGHT MAP FOLLOWS:
The hot water *wants* to be at the top of the radiator and the cool water *wants* to be at the bottom. The pump encourages motion of the water but is not responsible for pressurizing it, that is a function of temperature rise.
Therefore, water "rises" in the block and head, flows to the radiator and "sinks" in the radiator and is *helped* into the block by the water pump to repeat the process.
So, if the water is hot (less dense) it stays in the upper part of the radiator until it cools and flows through it or is forced down by more incoming "hotter" water. The flow of the water tends to create a flow across the top tank and leads to turbulence, etc.
If you have cold spots in the radiator, it is from plugged tubes, not "short circuits."
David
I am not sure whether you are lumping me together with Duane and why.
My post was about trying to use my limited knowledge of hydraulics and convection to support an argument that states that - on a non crossflow radiator - having inlet and outlet on the same side does not really matter. Pressurising the system makes it matter ( the not really part ) even less.
The observation that it changed with the air pump just means that the (re)designer took in a factor that does matter ( space for hoses ) and ignored the factor that does not really matter ( inlet /outlet position ) to make a SOUND design decision within the available parameters.
Some may argue that this is a compromise, however compromise means accepting an acceptable reduction in performance. I still choose to assert that inlet position does not reduce performance and therefore it is just a valid design choice (driven by space needs).
Again folks, there is a baffle in the standard top tank that directs water across the tank. To check: remove the radiator cap and look in the hole. If you can see the core there's no baffle, if you see flat metal, that's the baffle.
This may not apply to the RB radiators.
i agree there is nothing wrong with the inlet and outlet being on the same side my DD suzuki samurai is the same way and in 100 F and up weather with a worn out clutch fan it still stays smack dab in the middle at 180F i ask the same question a while back about the zuk and got the same responses as the ones here
my philosophy is if it aint broke dont fix it... unless its spewing coolant dont worry about it when and if the Rad goes out then you can upgrade to a late model rad
