2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

Idea for water temp sender location (turbo cars)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 6, 2005 | 10:15 PM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Full Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: Omaha
Idea for water temp sender location (turbo cars)

Ok, on the turbo II cars, the stock turbo is oil and water cooled. The water that comes from the lower intake manifold needs to be blocked when you get an only oil cooled turbo.
My question is, is that port, off the LIM, before the thermostat or after? It would be nice to be able to put the water temp sender there.
Thanks
Tyler
Reply
Old Feb 7, 2005 | 02:48 AM
  #2  
HeffBoost's Avatar
Keep Right Except to Pass
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 984
Likes: 1
From: Seattle
The only thing cut out of the loop by the thermostat is the radiator.
Attached Thumbnails Idea for water temp sender location (turbo cars)-coolantpath.jpg  
Reply
Old Feb 7, 2005 | 02:50 AM
  #3  
RETed's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,664
Likes: 22
From: n
Why?
If you're going to block it off, then it's sorta like a dead end.
We stuff the aftermarket water temp sensor right after the thermostat cause it's the hottest parts of the engine and will tend to show the most accurate water temps.


-Ted
Reply
Old Feb 7, 2005 | 05:55 AM
  #4  
NZConvertible's Avatar
I'm a boost creep...
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 8
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Originally Posted by Goodbar6
...the stock turbo is oil and water cooled.
Actually it's oil lubricated and water cooled. The water does the bulk of the cooling and the turbo would quickly fry without it even with the oil flowing.

...is that port, off the LIM, before the thermostat or after? It would be nice to be able to put the water temp sender there.
As Ted said, it would be a dead end and hence would not resond properly to actual engine temps. Bad idea.
Reply
Old Feb 7, 2005 | 06:28 AM
  #5  
White_FC's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
From: Darwin, NT, Australia
Originally Posted by NZConvertible
Actually it's oil lubricated and water cooled. The water does the bulk of the cooling and the turbo would quickly fry without it even with the oil flowing.

As much as i'd hate to disagree with someone across the tasman, the oil does cool the turbo quite sufficiently.
I ran mine without it for a couple of months, no ill effect on the bearings.
Same with a cousin of mine, did it to his for a good year or so.
Reply
Old Feb 8, 2005 | 03:30 AM
  #6  
NZConvertible's Avatar
I'm a boost creep...
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 8
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Interesting to hear. I still wouldn't call it "sufficient" cooling though, since water-cooled turbos have much lower oil flow than older air/oil-cooled turbos. I certainly wouldn't do it or recommend it.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cam_7779
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
9
Aug 18, 2015 07:48 AM
LMBTG
New Member RX-7 Technical
7
Aug 15, 2015 01:43 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.