Type-IV oil cooler conversion

jet-set · Post by **jet-set** » Mon Nov 19, 2001 10:02 pm

I finally have all the parts and will be assembling my new 1776 as soon as this semester ends, I'll be posting pictures when its done. My car is a 61' bug that is rather solid and clean so I hate to make serious alterations. I want to use a type 4 oil cooler that I have but it doesnt look like it will clear the back of the engine compartment without smashing the firewall back a little. I have checked other early cars using the type 1 doghouse cooler and there is minimal space between the back of the cooler and the firewall (maybe 1/2"). I have an early vert decklid that will go on when I install the new motor which should help control heat yet I live in South Florida and it is really hot nearly all year. I also have a thing fan shroud that I don't want to cut unless it is really worth it. I have all the parts to do it so there is no added cost except my time. If anyone has upgraded to this larger cooler let me know how it works and if you think that it is worth it.
Cheers,
Josh

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Mon Nov 19, 2001 10:50 pm

It will clear the engine compt.

The problem I have seen with this set up is that you have a larger cooler, with more surface area, but no more air volume, or pressure to move it all through the larger cooler.....

I actually found that on even a smaller engine, after a while at high speed situations that the cooler actually was less efficient than stock!

------------------
Jake Raby
Raby's Aircooled Technology
www.aircooledtechnology.com

jet-set · Post by **jet-set** » Mon Nov 19, 2001 11:11 pm

I would assume that the larger doghouse fan would produce sufficiant airflow through the extra rows on the cooler, but then I guess thats how VW designed it and thats how it works best. How did you determine that it was less efficient? I use the car daily so it sees some highway use.

Ed Brewer · Post by **Ed Brewer** » Tue Nov 20, 2001 5:10 am

Here's another problem I have thought about with this set up: If the larger cooler does allow more air to flow over it, then less air is flowing over the cylinders and heads. Keeping the oil cool is important, but I don't think at the expense of cooling the heads. I see that Jake's experience shows that no more air flows over the cooler anyway, so this may not be a valid point. But as he pointed out, in that case the air speed is too low for efficient heat transfer. So either way it seems like this may be comprimising the cooling system.

jet-set · Post by **jet-set** » Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:29 am

Jake you mentioned that "on even a smaller engine, after a while at high speed situations that the cooler actually was less efficient than stock!" and that there is no increase in air volume to keep up with the added rows on the cooler. Was that a stocker? My motor is a 1776 with headwork, dual webers, header, etc....and most of the time it will be spinning faster than the stock 1600 that VW designed. Wouldn't the higher RPMs spin the fan quicker; thus, cause more air pressure in the fan to pass through the cooler and over the heads? I already mention that I will be using a vert decklid so there should be plenty of fresh cool air for the fan to suck in and cool the motor. I still would like to hear from other people who have tried this conversion.

Sidewalk · Post by **Sidewalk** » Tue Nov 20, 2001 12:38 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by danimal:
[Bif that wasn't enuf, i'd then go to the scoop that john plow has outlined on the cal-look website... he has had xlnt results with that, because pressurized air will blow past the rotating fan, and increase the overall cooling of the engine.

dan
oceanstreetvideo.com[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What is the address?

------------------
'59 Bug-A few tricks here and there.
Stella

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Tue Nov 20, 2001 11:22 pm

>>>Wouldn't the higher RPMs spin the fan quicker; thus, cause more air pressure in the fan to pass through the cooler and over the heads?<<<

assuming stock pulley ratios, higher rpm's will cause continually increasing airflow until the fan cavitates at around 6k engine rpm's... according to the testing gene berg did.

so there is a much larger volume of air passing thru the oil cooler at freeway speeds; it's obvious that the more surface area you present to that airflow, the better the cooling will be.

but without factory engineering data, we will never know exactly what the best airflow vs. surface area is for any cooler... so efficiency comparisons are pure guesswork.

likewise for conjecture about cooler backpressure affecting the airflow over the heads... afaik, the design of the fan shroud will negate that possibility to a large extent.

i have run the type 4 cooler for over 5k miles on the 2007cc turbo motor, along with the f.i. fan shroud... i have found that this combo is an improvement over the stock doghouse cooling system, which is what i ran in my 2110's for over 100k miles.

with any n/a motor, i wouldn't go thru the type 4 cooler hassle without first making sure ALL the factory-only tinware was installed, including the sealing frame, factory shroud, and factory cylinder tin.

if that wasn't enuf, i'd then go to the scoop that john plow has outlined on the cal-look website... he has had xlnt results with that, because pressurized air will blow past the rotating fan, and increase the overall cooling of the engine.

dan
oceanstreetvideo.com

jet-set · Post by **jet-set** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 12:36 am

I would still like to hear some more responses from people that are using or have used this setup. I know Jake is not the only one out there who has done the conversion.

Bruce2 · Post by **Bruce2** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 2:57 am

I did it to my 2110 in my 75 and there's lots of clearance even with the factory sound deadening insulation still there. I can't say how it'll fit with your older car.

One thing you should check out is the passage the air must take to get from the fan to the cooler. I've seen three different versions on factory doghouse shrouds. Look at the aperature leading to the cooler. There's a short 1"x3" long one, a long 1"x10"long one and the long one with a scoop spot welded behind it. I''ve only seen one of the short ones and it was a VW Industrial engine shroud. The long slot is on all car shrouds, and I've seen some 74 shrouds without the scoop to direct air into the cooler. IMO, you want the scoop.
I think the conversion is well worth doing. When you are welding things up, pay attention to all the other holes in the shroud, and weld them up too. Don't forget the cylinder covers too, weld up any unused holes like the one for the heatriser cover screw.

Paul (Der Bahnstormerz) · Thu Nov 22, 2001 12:00 pm

I ran this on my 1776, oil temps never got above 100c. It fitted fine, I built my own out of a stock fanshroud.

I can't comment on back to back tests as when I did it I also wound up the CR, but it never ran hotter than the lower cr w/ stock cooler.

JohnConnolly · Post by **JohnConnolly** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:19 pm

I'm using a stock doghouse system with stock T-1 cooler on my new 2443 supercharged/EFI engine. Of course, I'll be running an aftermarket cooler and fan also.

I didn't see the point in wasting $ on the T-4 cooler since I was already adding a huge cooler to the system (save the $ and time for elsewhere). I do think the T-4 cooler is a good idea if you aren't adding an additional cooler.

Checking results is simple enough; check oil and head temps before/after a T-1 ----> T-4 cooler is added, not difficult. I found the T-4 cooler helped about 10 degrees on oil, and no change in head temps, but what the hell do I know.

John
Aircooled.Net Inc

MASSIVE TYPE IV · Post by **MASSIVE TYPE IV** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 1:55 pm

John,
I guess that makes us twin dumbasses, atleast here on this forum...

BTW, someone in a previous post asked if increased RPM would drop the temps. I have noticed that more RPM cools the heads, and the faster moving pistons heat up the oil...so the answer is yes, No and maybe.

------------------
Jake Raby
Raby's Aircooled Technology
www.aircooledtechnology.com

oldbugs · Post by **oldbugs** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 2:10 pm

Hey Jet-Set I see your from Parkland,I'm just east of you in Deerfield.I have a 64 beetle on 17s with a 1776. I have an external cooler with a fan and was thinking of taking it off to do a T-4 cooler conversion too,some say it runs cooler and some say not but I'm going to give it a shot.The external cooler keeps temps down,but a pain when removing the engine and such.You ever go to Towershops in Davie on friday night?

jet-set · Post by **jet-set** » Thu Nov 22, 2001 6:38 pm

I decided that I will go ahead and use the type 4 cooler when I assemble the motor. I am running full flow and 1.5 quart sump but no external cooler, just a filter. I am also going to use higher compression than originally planned around 8.2:1. Oldbugs, I think I know your car. You were about four cars to the right of my brothers bus at Bug Jam we were in the 60' westy with the full roof rack. Are you friends with Vinny, the guy with the black primer bug? If your wife's name is Jackie, I had class with her at bcc about two or three years ago. I go to tower shops every once in a while, we should meet, send me an email. Thanks for the responses everyone!