Trans cooler
- Thread starter N2BRK
- Start date
Those 90* fittings are HORRIBLE at fluid flow. They are a significant restriction in its self even if the inside was the correct diameter.
Well can’t say we didn’t see it comin. And free shit is free shit! It would make a heck of a power steering cooler
I was hopeful at first because when I went down there, they said that it was their intention to make a performance cooler that would work well beyond stock. But, even as just a hobby mechanic, I was immediately seeing things that I didn’t like. I tried to help and no one listened. I called Mike L and he gave great advice, as well as offering to talk to them to help them make a better product. They never called him.
They are a huge company and maybe it’s just fine, but it’s not for me. I think that once winter rolls around, they will get calls about leaks. (At least)
They are a huge company and maybe it’s just fine, but it’s not for me. I think that once winter rolls around, they will get calls about leaks. (At least)
Whats really sad is that there is a large sector of our hobby who will buy that and think its the best thing since sliced bread, clamped fittings and all.
Those 90s look like painted brass plumbing fittings....not good for high pressure fluid flow. I personally would not run it.
Those 90s look like painted brass plumbing fittings....not good for high pressure fluid flow. I personally would not run it.
I'm not going to outright state that that is false, because a better design surely would be "better", but I'm not sure that you'd even be able to quantify it.
The sharp right-angle port inside the bellhousing leading to the cooler fittings is the exact same 0.460" diameter as these fittings. So these fittings aren't any worse than what the fluid is already flowing through. Not ideal, but not worse.
The fittings are billet aluminium, anodized black. I work with / in a machine shop making random, custom parts like this, and can tell you: they are extremely well-made pieces.
The hose clamps are of fairly low quality, which is a disappointment, but I expected that going in before I bought mine; legit, high-quality worm-screw hose clamps are very difficult to come by. $20 worth of t-bolt clamps fixes the issue.
And I'm not concerned in the least of a properly t-bolted connection leaking or blowing off; I've had several fluid engineers (not from the company selling this product), as well as a couple prominent transmission builders, tell me that they see no issue with a properly clamped hose bead connection at these pressures. Beaded fittings like this, that you can purchase anywhere, are usually rated to at least 300 psi, and that's with a pretty healthy safety factor. Time may prove me wrong, but I'm not very concerned about it right now.
As mentioned above, the fittings are certainly not "ideal" for fluid flow, but they're not any worse than what the oil is already going through in the bellhousing. (And if I think about it, I need to check the separator plate and where the fluid is coming from, before heading to the cooler, to see if there's any further restrictions there.)
I bought the cooler knowing that I was deviating from the known "standard" product (the Mike L. cooler), but I'm an entrepreneurial type of guy, and thought I'd like to try a new product and see how it performs. The overall design didn't seem bad to me, and now that I've got the parts in my hands, the actual build quality is pretty decent (minus the hose clamps). Combined with a nice pre-sale discount, I thought I'd give it a whirl and see how it turns out.
smaller orifice size and 90 degree is terrible. I recall reading to expect a 10% reduction in flow with a 90, and that was in pipe with a radius instead of a hard 90* change of direction. I could conisider running it if I cut all fittings and put a parker fitting at each end for hose, but that won't increase the ID of the cooler itself, and Mike thinks it will starve the trans.
I bucked the norm years ago when my buddy's OEM cooler blew and he didn't have the $$ for Mike's. I sourced a large cooler from an aftermarket Allison dealer that was rated at 300psi working and had very little delta p and proper fittings. He's now lifted and in FL and his trans runs cooler than mine here in NJ, LOL. So it's not impossible, but these guys missed the mark IMHO and had their fingers in their ears while sound advice was being spoon-fed to them. I'm not angry, but disappointed in the final product.
I bucked the norm years ago when my buddy's OEM cooler blew and he didn't have the $$ for Mike's. I sourced a large cooler from an aftermarket Allison dealer that was rated at 300psi working and had very little delta p and proper fittings. He's now lifted and in FL and his trans runs cooler than mine here in NJ, LOL. So it's not impossible, but these guys missed the mark IMHO and had their fingers in their ears while sound advice was being spoon-fed to them. I'm not angry, but disappointed in the final product.
Smaller and terrible relative to what?
The orifice in the bellhousing, behind the cooler fittings, is the exact same size diameter as these fittings. Therefore, the diameter of these fittings provide a 0% reduction in flow.
The orifice in the bellhousing is also a sharp 90 degree turn. A 10% loss is indeed a typical number from no restrictions to a single 90. But the losses drop dramatically after the first 90. If one 90 drops it 10%, it can take anywhere from 5-10 more 90s to get another 10%. With the bellhousing design, we're going from 2 sharp 90s to 4. As I said, it's definitely not ideal, as ideal would be keeping it at 2. But the losses going from 2 to 4 are pretty small.
When you get yours installed take it for a hard drive with a trailer and give temp readings from top and bottom across the core. I'm interested to see how the cooler does about even flow from top to bottom. I'd like to see what the temp drop is from inlet to outlet also.