Air - fluid coolers ?
 

Does it make any sense to use an automotive style (all copper or aluminum) air/liquid cooler for P/S or even transmission oil? I'm just looking for simpler routing/less fluid connections on the raw water side. It seems with proper venting and placement there would be plenty of airflow under the hatch.

Thanks, Randy

Most engine compartments are limited on the vents allowing air in and out of the space. If you place a cooler in front of that vent you are now restricting air flow designed to ventilate heat and fumes out and also bring in fresh air. Water is also cooler than air temp being more efficient at taking away heat. They are actually a heat exchanger more than a cooler. Same end result. By blocking up the compartment ventilation you also run the risk of some other major disasters happening. My 2ct's says NO.

Randy,
I have thought about the same thing recently. It would only make sense that if that type of remote cooler would work in a vehicle why not a boat. Location would play a big part of it. With that being said I would have to agree with fireboat. Your thought is worth while asking about though. It not only would simplify matters the cost are a fraction of the price than marine (water cooled). Somewhere along the line there is a boat load of money made on those things.

Maybe I'll try it anyways
 

Thanks for the responses. I might give it a try for the P/S cooler and take some fluid temperatures to see if they are acceptable, but that's the only system I'm willing to try it on. If worse comes to worse, I'll just have a good excuse to upgrade to full hydraulic :evilb:

Randy

Thanks! After this question I thought about it some more and spoke with my brother who is a mech. engineer. His explaination was simple. The cool water is THE most efficient way of removing heat from a surface, only bettered by a refrigeraton type system. Air moving over the surface would be another choice but maybe 60% as efficient as water. If automobiles ect had a water supply it would surely be used. The water absorbs the heat and removes it from the source. It is also usually cooler than ambient air temp. So more efficient and cooler to begin with seems like a better choice. When you consider the cost of an engine, I'll stick with the water system at whatever the cost.

Commercially available tube sizes and fittings, small stampings, a furnace brazing setup, and simple test fixtures. Yep, lots of markup somewhere in that supply chain.

I think as long as you can get a good source of air to it it would work just as good as a water based cooler.. Hell my front mount on my truck keeps my IAT's well under 108 deg on a 100 deg day... Give it a shot... :)

John jr