Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: neilbardsley May 20 2024, 06:59 AM

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/165865762191?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=Pdg7-dGBRDO&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=xFc-PSj2RR2&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

Is this kit compatible with the type 4 filter? Seems like pretty easy add on?

I would prefer a coupling that didn't use the external filter until 180f but can't find a complete kit.

Posted by: technicalninja May 20 2024, 07:06 AM

Pricey but BAD ASS!

https://tangerineracing.com/shop/ols/products/remote-oil-cooler-kits/v/OIL-CLR-KIT-2

That might not work for you as you're in Europe...

I DO NOT use Chinese parts in the repair of appliance cars.

I detest "come backs"...

I sure as hell won't use them in my "special" cars.

What happens when your Chinese oil cooler assembly takes out your $$$ engine?

I'd make any level of bet you'd like that they WILL NOT pay you for your engine.

Posted by: GregAmy May 20 2024, 07:43 AM

Yup, that's what's in my street car. Race car has a front cooler but I don't really recommend that for the street for a 4-banger, it's a lot of work and is overkill.

Do it right, do it once. - GA

Posted by: neilbardsley May 20 2024, 07:57 AM

I would really appreciate someone answering the question about if this adapter fits please. My question is more about the fit. I'm not asking for recommendations for kits. It's not economically viable to buy products from American.

Posted by: GregAmy May 20 2024, 08:10 AM

Highly doubtful that anyone here can reasonably remotely answer that, with any confidence that it won't frag your engine.

Ask the manufacturer. They're the ones that will be supporting you on this product.

Posted by: technicalninja May 20 2024, 08:17 AM

There's your answer!

If it fits it will leak, I've NEVER had a Chinese AN fitting work properly.

There's probably good stuff available across the pond. Hopefully someone in Europe can provide sources.

Mocal stuff can be had in Europe.

https://trackday.eu/en/mocal-oil-cooler-adapter-with-thermostat-3-4

Find something like that and add your own cooler and lines.

It has a T-stat in it!

I "see" Mocal as good stuff...

Posted by: neilbardsley May 20 2024, 08:44 AM

That isn't the question I'm asking. Before everyone gets too excited. I'm asking what the specifics are for the size of the sandwich adaptor. I now understand from the other item posted that AN10 is the hose thread specific but how do I know which adaptor fits on the type 4 engine? With this information I can then make a decision on quality

Posted by: technicalninja May 20 2024, 09:08 AM

Ah! you're looking for application data.

It mounts underneath the oil filter and the filter size diameter, thread size and diameter is often the deciding factor. In the 914 clearance for the lines might be critical.

AN is the normal "aftermarket" line fitting. Very few OEM used it and AN will not work well with OEM flare (37vs45 degrees If I remember correctly). I would expect AN on decent stuff and if the lines and cooler is not stock anyways flare angle is not a concern. It will ALL be AN.

I'd contact the seller and ask "will this fit on a T4 in a 914 application".

I don't know the exact data for the 914 but I'm going to bet that mount was used in a significant number of vehicles and will be readily available.

Now, when you actually get serious about creating a good system check out the Tangerine adaptor. It's on the factory oil cooler mount. There are multiple really good reasons for this.
This is what a dedicated imaginative expert came up with after a lifetime of screwing with these puppies...

There's your "quality" target.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 20 2024, 09:46 AM

3/4 x 16tpi threads are what is on the 914 oil filter console.

The adapter you’ve linked to will “fit”

I’ll leave it to you to judge the applicability for your use.

Here’s a link to similar sandwich adapters for your consideration.
http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=226767&st=20

Posted by: ChrisFoley May 20 2024, 11:57 AM

I hate sandwich adapters on a T4 engine.

Edit: "hate" is too strong a word. I intensely dislike sandwich adapters on a T4 engine.

Posted by: Shivers May 20 2024, 12:39 PM

BAS makes an adapter for the internal cooler. 100 lbs. so 127.12 in US dollars. I may go that route and add a thermostat.

Posted by: 930cabman May 20 2024, 01:14 PM

If Chris puts his name on it, it's got my vote for sure. I am considering one of these for my /4, she runs around 210 - 220 on a hot day.

Posted by: neilbardsley May 20 2024, 01:39 PM

Thank you. That is the information I was looking for

Posted by: VaccaRabite May 20 2024, 02:51 PM

That’s perfect. Why would you change anything?! You don’t need additional oil cooling.

Zach

Posted by: 930cabman May 20 2024, 02:58 PM

When I run at 85 or so MPH, she gets a bit over 230.

Posted by: GregAmy May 20 2024, 03:45 PM

I nice reference that I keep a link for. Sometimes we worry too much...

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=29206&st=0&p=377466&#entry377466

(lol'ing @85......need to go faster, more airflow...)

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 20 2024, 06:00 PM

The horror

Lots of modern sports cars will push 250-270 under load and that’s with an oil to water cooler. Air cooled motorcycles pushed hard will run 300.

Trying to make air cooled engines run 180 under load is folly and isn’t even desirable.

Just my $0.02 based on decades of testing modern cars as a day job and messing with air cooled engines since I was a kid.

Zach nailed it.

Posted by: Dave_Darling May 20 2024, 06:06 PM

I found that the straight-out fittings on the sandwich plate do not fit very well in the 914's location. I wound up needing a couple of 90-degree fittings to clear the other stuff that's in the area. I also removed at least some of the heater parts from the right-side heat exchanger to make room.

Here's a post that shows what I did-- http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?s=&showtopic=189603&view=findpost&p=1705443

--DD

Posted by: neilbardsley May 21 2024, 02:44 AM

So my idea in adding this was to bring my oil temp down when cruising at higher speeds. I use a good quality oil so I'm not worried about it breaking down but my engine builder told me that the 180 is the optimal performance temp. He also said that head temperature is more important.

Those that have an external oil cooler. How much extra oil did you add? Fill to the normal line. Run to warm then top up so it's back at the line?

Posted by: Olympic 914 May 21 2024, 06:45 AM

Used a sandwich adapter and plumbed to a oil thermostat then back to the aux oil cooler.


running through the upper engine compartment keeps the valve covers clear for adjustments.

Posted by: neilbardsley May 21 2024, 07:50 AM

Lots very clean. Like the rubber connectors. I guess they dampen any vibration

Posted by: technicalninja May 21 2024, 09:15 AM

Unless you're running a dedicated track car at WOT you WANT the oil to hit at LEAST 220 to vaporize the moisture in it.

Most folks don't realize when you burn a gallon of gasoline you produce ALMOST a gallon of water vapor in the exhaust. Some of that get past the rings and will dilute the oil after time.

I would spec a 210/220degree T-sat on most street applications but ONLY AFTER installing both and accurate oil temp sender and an accurate CHT (on an aircooled) and verifying I needed the extra complication that an external oil system creates.

I'd want to see constant temps above 250 before I started adding coolers.
I would use fully synthetic oil as it has increased temperature resistance.
A short run up to 280-290 would not cause me to "shut down".

A streetcar that only hit 180 would bug the crap out of me.
It would require 3 times the oil changes that a 230 degree system needs.

OP, you are in England. I'd bet you don't need anything more than the stock cooler (a good one in clean shape) unless you were putting it under severe load for extended periods of time.
Properly diagnosis is the first step.

You need temp sensors and 4 hours of driving data before you need additional cooling...

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 21 2024, 09:40 AM

To double down on what Ninja posted, I think it’s important to provide sources so that you’re not just taking advice from a random lunatic on the web (referring to myself).

Excerpt below - sourced from Mackerle book on the engineering design principles of air cooled automotive engines; 1972 edition.

Note: modern oils have expanded the thermal performance envelope since this engineering book was published.

Note: The T4 engine does have an oil cooler that is completely adequate for stock engines.

Note: 110F= 230F ; 120C = 248F

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 21 2024, 09:54 AM

Probably time to roll this out again too.

Look at temperature gauge calibration and where the red zone begins. The OEM designed the gauges, engines were dyno tested for durability, etc. This is not speculation and internet mythology.

Note: OEM sender is the 200C sender. The other calibrations were provided to show how the gauge calibration changes due to vehicles having swapped oil temp sensors over the years due to ignorance or unavailability.

Posted by: technicalninja May 21 2024, 10:08 AM

A Superhawk catch! An understatement...
Superhawk is NOT a "random lunitic"
His stuff is pretty good.
He's the first poster to provide the answer to your first question.

My first thought after reading his post was "Old info- numbers aren't right now-a days"

Read it again and find the disclaimer...

The Hawk snatches victory again!

My numbers today are 10-15 degrees C HIGHER.

At 280F oil temp I'd "abort the run" and select high engine speed and almost no load.
High cruise in 3rd or 4th.
If that didn't have nearly immediate temperature drop, I'd be worried.
Constantly touching 250 on every single drive would bother me.

One point to not forget. I live in N Texas. My outlook is in "hellish" conditions.
Weeks above 105 are common. I've seen 117 many times.
In England I would expect the 914 to need less cooling as you seldom exceeded 100F.
Am I right?
I've never been to England.
I assume England averages 20F cooler than Texas.

Posted by: 930cabman May 21 2024, 10:10 AM

250F is too hot for me, 210 - 230 is a good range

AFAIK engine speed/load are the main factors determining oil temp.

Posted by: neilbardsley May 21 2024, 10:28 AM

I completely agree for most local journeys this is overkill.

Most take such short trips that don't get the oil warm enough.

However, here I'm talking about longer journeys. Like our drive to Florence last year. I would like to cruise at 180/210 not 220/250. I think that water will heat quicker than oil so the vapour will boil off before oil gets to 210?

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 21 2024, 11:11 AM

There is so much misunderstanding of oil and temps that it’s hard to get folks to forget what they were told by grandpa, their father, or what they have read for years.

The problem is that 180F oil will not “boil” off water condensed in the oil. Not to be pedantic but water boils at 212F (sea level). So no, water will not boil water off and out of oil at 180F.

In fact oil at 180F oil promotes condensation in a running engine.

Why?

As Ninja stated, you have water vapor (212F +) entering the crankcase as ring blow by. The temperature of that water vapor is well above 212F.

So now that hot water vapor hits 180F oil in the case. What happens?

If you said that the hot water vapor condenses, onto, and because of the cool 180F oil you would be correct.

So not only are you not removing water vapor at 180F, you are promoting condensation into it.

I know that I’ll not likely change anyone’s mind that has already made it up based on mythology but physics is physics and it doesn’t change based on personal opinions.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 21 2024, 11:18 AM

Here is what happens to an engine that has been run too cold with excessive condensation causing rust up in the oil breather.





As always, it’s your car and your decision what to do based on personal opinion. Bear in mind that physics doesn’t care, and there are consequences to not running oil hot enough to drive out the condensation.

Posted by: ChrisFoley May 21 2024, 11:27 AM

In my experience on the race track, continuous operating at oil temps much above 225F was detrimental to oil pressure. Not sure if it was change in viscosity or larger bearing clearances or some combination of the two.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 21 2024, 11:46 AM

Within limits viscosity can be addressed. When I used to crew, it was common to run thicker oil to account for the viscosity loss. The problem was on cool mornings that meant heating the oil sump and the engine block before starting to keep from starving the bearings when oil was cold. It’s all just trade-offs.

Regarding gauge pressure - it isn’t the be all end all. As long as there is sufficient oil being supplied to the bearing, the hydrodynamic oil wedge will be maintained and the bearing and crank will be protected.

To put some numbers to this, if oil pressure is nominally 60 psi at 5000 rpm with 210F oil, and things get hot, oil viscosity decreases and oil pressure (gauge) drops to 50 psi, there will still be plenty of hydrodynamic pressure within the bearing to support the crank loads.

If on the other hand the supply pressure (gauge) drops to 25 psi at 5500 RPM, sure there is going to be a loss of the oil wedge and increased bearing and/or crank wear.

This is getting pretty far off topic into the realm of racing, high engine loads, and RPMs that most engines only see momentarily. I don’t mean to discount your observation on track.

However, track use shouldn’t be taken to be the same as street use of extend high speed driving at legal posted limits plus some long arm of the law fudge factor.

Anecdotally my 1st 914 was a 1911cc and I used to cruise at 80-85. Midwest summer temps into 90s and low triple digit are the norm. Stock oil cooler. That engine ran 100k miles. Was it down on power at the end? Sure, but what engine isn’t by then.

Posted by: technicalninja May 21 2024, 12:10 PM

Superhawk's pictures and diagrams are worth a thousand words...


ChrisFoley's car is a "science project" into thermodynamics...

One of his better mods is what I refer to as the "racoon habitrail".

He's got a tube, a BIG one, running from the front of the car through the passenger compartment and ending at the entrance to the engine fan.
A racoon would fit!

Big ass tube helps in many ways, all of them related to cooling...

Posted by: black73 May 22 2024, 03:41 AM

Fact or opinion? How do you verify that to be the cause?


A little different take from the https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/what-oil-temp-is-needed-to-remove-moisture.7322/ forum.

Posted by: neilbardsley May 22 2024, 05:16 AM

I'm aware that water doesn't boil below it boiling point but for oil to heat up to 180 there is a temperature source that is hotter? I'm just claiming the water will heat up quicker than oil and boil off before the oil gets to 210?

Posted by: neilbardsley May 22 2024, 05:32 AM

This is to do with oil quality. The stability/viscosity index is only measured to 100c so it not a good measure of stability at higher temperatures.

If you look at Motul's 300v racing oil they state the viscosity at 150c. I believe you want a figure above 4. This is where good modern synthetic oil will out performance a mineral.

https://raceandrally.com/motul-300v-chrono-10w-40-fully-synthetic-ester-racing-engine-oil-2l

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 22 2024, 06:04 AM

I’m not sure I understand your question.

One fluid does not warm faster than the other. If we have oil and water mixed (emulsified) and heat the fluid, the whole fluid heats at a uniform rate. Even if the oil and water were not emulsified and the two are separated into layers, both layers will heat at a uniform rate. As the fluid approaches the boiling point of water, yes, the water will boil, turn into vapor, and it will eventually be boiled off at which point the temperature of the oil can rise past 212F once the temperature water is expelled.

Don’t try this at home. Hopefully everyone has experienced the effect of a drop of water entering hot oil above 212F. It immediately vaporizes the water and that light, rapidly expanding vapor is explosively expelled from the oil. Very dangerous.

Setting aside boiling temp, vapor pressure, evaporation, etc., it is a question of equilibrium. If water vapor is entering the oil quicker than it can be expelled, oil sludges and emulsifies. It is an established fact that the hotter the oil is run, the less risk there is of sludging and oil contamination by water, and even fuel if run rich enough and cool enough.

The thing that is so odd to me is why so many try to make an air cooled engine run oil at 180F when their daily driver, modern car isn’t running at 180F.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 22 2024, 06:21 AM

That engine when torn down was run without cooling flaps and with a cobbled deflector to the oil cooler. This caused the engine and oil to have extended warm up and to run cooler than it was designed to run. I don’t know the drive cycles it was subject to. However, if this was run infrequently and run on short trips, that would only make matters worse. Based on the amount of rust and sludge that was in the sump, and the condition of the breather, I’d guess lots of short trips.

For those old enough to recall the 80’s, removal of cooling flaps was a “fix” applied to many 914’s that were thought to be running hot by well meaning but misguided folks that tried to make air cooled engines run at the same oil temps as water pumpers.

Removal of cooling flaps not only results in delayed initial warm up, but overheating at high load because the oil cooler airflow is practically non-existent.

When some finally realized that these engines are actually air AND oil cooled, they got even more creative (in the case of this engine) and removed the flaps but made a deflector to force air to get the cooler at all times - presumably to avoid the aforementioned tendency to overheat under high load.

The 80s and 90s generally were not kind to 914’s. Lots of these cars end up in the hands of people that didn’t understand air cooling and whom were too broke to maintain them properly. They were considered cheap and disposable.

Posted by: neilbardsley May 22 2024, 07:09 AM

I take it back. It water needs more energy input than oil to heat.

Posted by: GregAmy May 22 2024, 07:38 AM

We have similar discussions in General Aviation flying circles. They may be 360 cubic inches (or 320, or 540, or whatever) but they're just big air-cooled engines.

The general mindset is that you don't want to fire it up unless you're going to fly it. The general rule of thumb is to get the oil to at least 180 degrees* and run it for a half hour. I've seen some smaller Lycoming engines where someone loved to do short trips, like fire up his airplane after work each day for a few trips around the pattern, and it had crusty stuff like the above (his condensate relief tube was actually blocked).

I actually use that rule-of-thumb in all my cars, 914 and otherwise. I'll push any car around in the drive/garage instead of quick-firing to move it. Just gives my brain the crusties firing up a car and shutting it down 30 seconds later.

So here is your reason for randomly grabbing the keys and taking nice long drives in the 914: it's for dependability, improved service, reduced repairs, reduced costs, and ultimately, for the safety of children everywhere and of mankind as a whole.

You are doing a great service for this country. Thank you. - GA

* You don't have to "boil off" the condensation at 212, it'll evaporate just fine at lower temps, it just takes longer. Ask the sweat glands on your arm if you disagree...

Posted by: neilbardsley May 22 2024, 07:47 AM

Thank you. Your point is well made. More wear on the engine at startup than other times. Impact I've started to not press/pump the gas pedal after mine has been sitting for a bit so that some oil can circulate before the engine starts

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 22 2024, 08:00 AM

Having lived in the humid Midwest and the Gulf Coast - sweat doesn’t evaporate particularly well in humid environments where the dew point is sky high.

Now here’s an experiment you can do at home.

Put water in two containers. One with just water. The other with water with a layer of oil on top. Let me know which evaporates first. Water emulsified into oil doesn’t behave like sweat.

Ideally you would do this with an emulsion of water and oil but that emulsified mix is hard to maintain in a simple home experiment without using your wife’s blender

To further that point, if you’ve ever seen creamy whitish / yellow water emulsified oil sludge, how long does it take for the water to evaporate out and for it to return to pure oil? Long, long, time. As in, it really doesn’t.

I totally agree with your comment about not doing super short trips. For anyone that doesn’t remember, look up the class action lawsuit Toyota settled in 2007. The lawsuit was related to oil sludge and the propensity to sludge even worse when used on short daily commutes and when oil wasn’t changed as frequently as it should have been considering that sort of usage.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 22 2024, 08:10 AM

I feel like I’ve dragged this debate for far too long and have stolen the OP’s thread.

I apologize.

Posted by: technicalninja May 22 2024, 09:00 AM

You provided the first correct answer to the OPs initial question and then showed WHY water emulsion is a bad thing with accurate pictures.

AFAIAC you kicked ass!

No apology needed!

One final point from me...

After you've gotten the water to evaporate from the oil you SHOULD also have some type of water trap in the crankcase ventilation and this system should be vacuum/intake scavenged via the engine for a STREETCAR application.

Race car is totally different!
I'm with Chris regarding loss of oil pressure past a certain temp. That would be my upper limit as well. The fact that that point was past 212 works well IMO.
Water entrainment is far less of a problem here as the service life of race oil is NOT usually long enough to have condensation issues.

Posted by: Superhawk996 May 22 2024, 09:33 AM

I also said “I’ll leave it to you to judge the applicability for your use.”

And then proceeded to go on a multi-page rant about oil temps.