Since my oil cooler decided to start leaking, and I plan to turbo my FB, I'm working on upgrading the whole cooling module. (My plan is to upgrade each area of the car as it goes bad until next summer, when I'll do the rest of the upgrade.)

Here's what I'm thinking of using:

Radiator: 19"H X 22"W aluminum, 2-row, double-pass (no-name-brand, on E-Bay)

Oil Cooler: GSL-SE unit, mounted in front of radiator

Intercooler: 9"H X 21"W X 3"D core (no-name-brand, on E-Bay)


Questions:

1. I want to mount the Intercooler on top of the oil cooler. I'm unfamiliar with the GSL-SE oil cooler. Does it mount low, so it touches the belly pan, or does it mount higher? Anybody have a picture?

2. Any problems with my parts selection?

 

If you have an 84/85 the mounts for the GSL-SE cooler should be there to use and it's a good oil cooler comparable to an S4/S5. If you don't have the mounts, go for an S4/S5 cooler as your install will be custom and they don't have the problem with the aluminum nozzles cracking and leaking. It does mount low.

Buy the best radiator you can. An ebay cheapo is not advisable. Especially if you are putting an intercooler in front of the radiator.

For the intercooler get one that allows free flow of air thru the intercooler, that way the radiator will get sufficient airflow.

A turbo FB runs hotter than a stock FB so these cooling precautions are well worth the effort. The stock SE radiator should be good to at least 220 HP. You need to determine what your HP goal is and pick your components for that goal.

HTH,

Scott

 

ok, ive been wondering this for a while, is there any way to buy like an airdam from mazdatrix with the foglight holes and run ducting frok one side to and I/C and another to an O/C therby avoiding the natural problems with stacking heat exchangers in front of each other

 

I do have an '84, so the mounts are there. Think I'll go with the 'SE oil cooler.

As far as the radiator is concerned, it's a Race Pro. It's a dual-pass design with double 1" cores. It has all welded construction with a billet filler neck. While I haven't tested it, the specs look good. I think the lower price may come from it being made in China, or someplace else with lower labor rates. The specs compare favorably to the ever-popular Griffin radiators that do cool well, but use epoxy, which can be a failure point (so I'm told).

As far as the flow through the intercooler, do you know of any brands/styles that are better than others?

My performance goal is 400RWHP. I will use the car for road race and street. The problem is finding somebody who knows what that translates into as far as cooling requirements.

For example: If the original '79-'82 under the radiator oil cooler was just adequate for the 100HP 12A engine, I should need about 4 1/2 of them for my application.

This same basic cooler was used in the FCs (all of them), making 200HP in the later year turbo models.
At that power level, I would need 2 1/4 of them.

The three sources I spoke to (Pettit, Tri-Point, and Alamo Rotary) all think that the original oil cooler will be fine for my application.

Bear in mind that all three oil coolers ('79-'82, 'SE, and FC) are all the same cooler, except for hose connections and mounting provisions.

Thanks for the info & keep the suggestions coming.

 

Make sure to mount the intercooler such that there is no air gap between the oil cooler and the I/C.

The problem with the GSL-SE oil cooler is that there's radiator behind it. Given the choice of going through an oil cooler + radiator, and just radiator, the air will choose the path of least resistance. The '79-82 style is actually better for oil cooling because of this. Coolant cooling is probably about even, since the air that *does* flow through the oil cooler is heated up and thus the bottom part of the radiator doesn't cool very well.

 

Sure, it could be done. I believe the FD R1s use two oil coolers mounted in the location you suggest. I think the idea is a good one, but we'd need larger openings to support high HP. Stacking the IC in front of the rad isn't so bad because the IC temps typically are low enough that the incoming air charge isn't heated as much as you'd expect

Another down side to this is that those areas wouldn't be available to cool the brakes, which is most important of all .