adam81

How do you know where it mounts or how it is mounted? Do you have instructions to it? I think the Ford Racing team just might knows what it is doing.... But you discovered a major design flaw from a picture of parts! They need to hire you as a consultant

nota4re

Here I go defending Ford Racing's design.....

Their bracket does NOT block any air flow. The bracket shown mounts up against the main radiator support structure and the cooler "hangs" down from it. As such, the bracket will not impede air flow. The Cool Tech cooler mounts in a very similar way.

adam81

Thanks Kendall. That is how I thought it was mounted. But I wasn't sure enough to post because really what can you tell from a picture of a bunch of parts....???? Unless of course if you're Al...

For everyone: Notice that Kendall just defended a competitor's product. This is one of the many reasons they get my business.

2012-LS134

Adam - My mistake.

Kendall - thanks for clarifying

What I thought what was attachment ears on the side of the cooler in the FRPP photo are probably mounting isolators.



Perhaps if the picture looked like this I wouldn't have stepped in it.



Back to my hole...

nota4re

Yes, you are right. These are merely isolators. The bracket is "on edge" nestled up to the horizontal radiator support and the cooler hangs on it via the isolators. It is actually quite sturdy and when the lines are connected they actually make it that much more rigid.

adam81

I saw the exact same thing at first and like you it didn't make any sense. That is when I noticed the mounting holes on the top of the cooler and thought it must mount to to the radiator support bracket and hang down.

No harm, no foul.

steveespo

Kendall
Are you 100% sure that adapter doesen't have a thermostatic bimetallic spring in the round hole? The adapter I had on my '87 GT looke just like it and I find it hard to believe Ford Racing didn't take oil warm up into account. I may be wrong again but could we get a Ford rep to comment? You guys have some connections.
Steve

nota4re

There are few things I am 100% sure on!! LOL. I did speak with some gentlemen throughout last year and I know that they were not intending to have a thermostat in their solution. Second, I can tell you that from the picture of the component in their picture, they are using the same supplier that we want to use... and they have some bigger buying power than us.

But, here's the bombshell....

The Ford Racing Cooler is designed to be in SERIES to the OEM oil-to-water cooler! You will NOT replace the existing cooler.... you will simply add this cooler on. Without going too far, I can only say that there is compelling data that adding to the existing cooler can be even more effective than replacing the existing cooling system. As such, we are in process to make a small change to our kit to allow for keeping the OEM cooler and running the TWO coolers in series. (We are updating those who already purchased our kit free of charge, BTW.) All new Cool Tech kits will also be in series to the OEM cooler. This will make installation MUCH easier - no need to drain or fiddle with the cooling system or radiator hoses. Also, from a cost perspective - there will be no added cost to our kit as the new component (similar to Ford's) is slightly LESS expensive than the block adapter that we were including.

So, as of this writing, BOTH the Ford Racing Kit and the Cool Tech kit will run in series with the OEM cooler. The differences in the kits as I enumerated in the table a few posts ago are all valid. The specifications (cooling capacity, retail cooler prices, pressure drops, etc.) are straight from Setrab. The biggest difference in the two systems is that Ford has chosen to run 2 coolers in series with no thermostatic control on either. We will run the OEM cooler "as is" and will bring the much larger Setrab cooler "on-line" at 180 degrees.

Finally, as I said a couple of months ago - and we will follow through.... we intend to have a second offering that is NOT thermostatically controlled and with no remote filter relocation in order to compete price-wise with the solution from Ford Racing. This second alternative from Cool Tech will retain the larger (3x more expensive)cooler, but it allows us to eliminate the remote filter / thermostat, 2 lines, & 4 fittings. As such, we can offer 2 solutions at two different price points.

steveespo

Kendall
Thanks for the info, I was sure that they would have us remove stock Boss cooler. You are very honest giving us this info and not trying to put down a competitor's product but highlighting some of their good points. I am not going to pull the trigger yet so I woukd like to see where your Cool Tech units shake out price and feature wise.

BTW any news on your roll cage kits, I am in the market for a 4 point.
Thanks again
Steve

adam81

What sort of changes in temperatures are you predicting with the new setup? You have dating suggesting temps will be in the 230s with the current setup. I can't remember if this was with a grille mod or just the oil cooler..... Regardless more and more of us are picking up the Tiger Racing hood which should lower the temps even more. What is the motor designed to run at? Is there a concern of running it to cold?

RJorge1950

Hi Kendall,
Can you tell me, in your research of this cooler, which is the most effective cooling option regardless of price?
I just changed my oil and was surprized to find out that the large Ford Racing oil filter would not fit my car, it uses a smaller one.
Perhaps your remote oil filter option would allow the larger filter.
Thanks again for all the reseach that you do which ultimately benefits all Boss 302 owners.
Rob

2012-LS134

Kendall,

+1 Thanks for the info about the new air-to-oil cooler being in series with the stock water-to-oil cooler.

Since you have knowledgeable contacts about the development of the FRPP setup, do you have any insight you could share of why they chose not to include a thermostat in their kit?

As you have already proven, having a thermostat improves engine warm-up times. With the Boss stock cooler the water initially heats the oil as the engine and cooling systems warm up to operating temperature. Sitting in the staging area with the engine idling while waiting to go on track can take a long time to warm up the engine, coolant and oil – with the oil being the last to reach operating temperature – so quicker oil warm up times would be a good thing.

I thought maybe it was a space limitation with the oil filter adapter. From the FRPP parts picture their oil filter sandwich plate adapter looks very similar to a Canton 22-549 which is about 1 ¼” thick. The MOCAL SP1GT oil filter sandwich plate adapter has a built in 180 degree thermostat, with ½” oil ports and is about 1 5/16” thick. The MOCAL SP1GT is about $10 to $15 more expensive than a Canton 22-549 depending on where you buy it. So from only a size and cost point of view the adapter plate with a thermostat would appear to be no brainer. – unless there is another reason for dumping the thermostat. The MOCAL oil thermostats by-pass approximately 90% of the flow when cold (10% to the cooler) and 10% when hot (90% to the cooler). Perhaps the thermostat not used because they wanted 100% of the flow directed to the air-to-oil cooler?

Maybe the inclusion of a sandwich plate adapter w/ thermostat would be an interesting option for your 2nd generation, lower cost oil cooler kit.

Since the two coolers are in series with the air-to-oil cooler serving a “trim cooler” to the primary water-to-oil cooler, could that be why FRPP chose a cooler with a 27,000 to 39,000 but/hr duty (250-350 hp range) instead of a larger cooler like in your kit? Or asked another way, is the extra 20,000 btu/hr duty of the Setrab 72 row, Series 1 exchanger you are using going to be utilized with the coolers in series? The Setrab 50 row, Series 1 cooler has a similar duty and a similar low pressure drop advantage over Setrab 15 row, Series 9 cooler in the FRPP kit. The 50 row cooler is 7 inches shorter than the 72 row cooler and would require different support brackets, but if the 50 row cooler has adequate heat removal duty, it too could be an intere$ting option for your 2nd generation lower cost oil cooler kit.

cloud9

As soon as my car rolls off the trailer I let it run for about 15 minutes until it's up to full operating temperature. Once there, it doesn't take long to warm up before each session the rest of the day. It's always a good idea to let your engine warm up before running it hard on the track or the street.

nota4re

Adam - Water temps are all over the map with so many factors influencing them. Ambient temp, humidity, track layout, driving style, etc. You can still generate peaks in the 230F range but these excursions will be more short-lived. More importantly, while Boss owners were seeing "High" water temp gauge readings and LS owners were seeing 230+ on a more granular gauge - neither owner can see the silent killer - engine oil temps! As I said before, we witnessed oil temps somewhat easily exceeding 300F on hot days when the car was driven hard. Unlike water temps, oil temps take a LONG time to recover (if ever). While limp-mode was a real inconvenience, these excessive oil temps were really the bigger concern. The bottom line is that the in-series design of the coolers will virtually preclude oil temps from crossing 300F.... and a very welcomed side benefit will be the avoidance of limp mode on the water temp side.

Al-
Many good observations. If a thermostatic sandwhich adapter is utilized it must: 1) Fit (proper threads); 2. Have large ports (1/2NPT is small); 3. Have the right perceived reliability. No available sandwhich-style thermostat satisfied us and we made the decision to go remote. I can't speak for FRPP.

Both of our kits will employ the same cooler to retain the same mounting and to provide superior BTU performance AND much better flow which eases the oil pump burden. Pics, prices, and descriptions of both options by Saturday.

Always good advice, Gary. 15 minutes of idle time combined with a warm-up lap is probably a great practice. (Just the idle tim would bring water temps up but you'd likely be surprised on how slow oil temps to react - especially when the rpm's are low!)



Hi Rob! Hope all is great with you! Since we are both using Setrab coolers and -10 AN lines, I think the specs on the coolers clearly show a differentiation. Being a small company with low overhead and virtually no marketing costs, etc, etc, allows us to use a much more expensive, better spec'd cooler and give it to you at the same price.

Apollo

Guys I know I have mentioned this before, but I have to interject a bit here. Kendall is one of those guys, (actually engineers), that goes above and beyond to understand and improve on not only his products, but also existing products even though they may be potential competitors. Case and point, the stock block speed records for the Ford GT in the mile and overall high end speed were held by TT/SC versions of bolt on moifications. Kendall knew theory well and worked on an existing TT only design for the GT and designed simple but extremely effective modifications for an existing TT only package. His system improvements made for a package that made incredible low end torque, as well as screaming performance on top end. He made a car that beat the exotics on high end, and yet matched the most docile of daily drivers on a day to day use. Two of his modified cars broke all of the existing records in one day! The really amazing thing is that these cars should have been at a distinct disadvantage because of the altitude of the event. His input had helped make a car that was as easy to drive as a Honda accord around town, and yet would literally embarass a Bugatti Veyron in any performance test. Kendall and his son Ryan are a huge asset to us all, we are lucky to have them!

adam81

Thanks Kendall. I understand the importance of the oil temp, and the purpose of the cooler to directly influence it with an added indirect benefit of lowering coolant temps.

Some people have the 302s radiator, and most who will be your main consumers of the product will have the 302s grille (or another higher flowing grille) and the 302s hood. I am just curious to know if there is a possibility of OVER cooling the engine. I imagine this would only be possible for street use if it were to happen at all. When doing your testing it would be great to see oil and coolant temps in normal street drving as well of course as the track.

Keep up the good work!


Agree completely!!!

cloud9

This comparison data presumably shows the FRPP cooler run on its own versus in series with the factory cooler as it was designed. Otherwise it wouldn't be able to cool the 302Rs and 302Ss adequately to help them win races.

nota4re

That's correct, Gary. The chart is comparing the Setrab specs of the two coolers.

RJorge1950

Ok Kendall I am getting a little confused (that's easy for me) which setup is more efficient, running your cooler in series with the stock one or just your cooler alone ?

As a side note, when we run the CF6-50 C2 or any of our other jet engines for that matter to make sure the engine achieves T/O power we have to throttle back very slowly to make sure the oil temp will not overshoot and allow the fuel/oil cooler enough time to cool the oil.

P.S. Do you have enough room to use the large Ford Racing oil filter with your system ?

Best regards,

Rob

nota4re

In series. That's the only way our kit will come.

Our kit with the remote oil filter uses the FL400s filter. I submit to you that there's absolutely no benefit of a larger than OEM filter unless you are contemplating running many more miles between recommended oil changes. (Note: Any oil filter that has the threads of the FL400s will work on our remote system... but my point is that there is no need.)