0piston

iTrader: (8)

I have seen some diagrams that state that the proper way to mount a oil cooler is with the 2 male open ends on top. But wouldn't it make more sense to have the 2 male ends on the bottom of the oil cooler? I figure that way you wouldn't have to fight against gravity.

Silkworm

Considering the pressure the oil is under, gravity is the least of your problems

I don't think it matters that much, IMHO

PaulC

tims

with ends down the oil from the cooler will drain back to the pan. best to have cooler primed at all times so that a proper oil level can be maintained.

HedgeHog

mine's mounted fittings down...however, most info i've read recommends fittings up to avoid possible snagging of the lines/fittings when an unexpected off-road excursion occurs.

BTW, wrt 2 ur email: Mine sez Mocal on the coolers too.

0piston

iTrader: (8)

Thanks for the replies!

Hed: It looks like Mocal now outsources to International Radiator and Serck Speed.... I ended up calling the blokes

sbaker25

The crookedwillow kit instructions say they should point down. I've seen coolers mounted in various orientations and I don't think it matters.

Gravity is a complete non issue.

maxpesce

Also the PRIMING issue is moot because the COOLERS are/or should be DOWNSTREAM of the engine and then drain back into the Sump, IE the coolers are/should NOT (be) between the PUMP and the Lubricated parts of the engine. the advantage to BOTTOM mount hoses (for a street car) is that oil does not get trapped in the coolers, thus allowing more complete oil changes.

RX-Midget

FWIW
I installed my cooler to have the fittings on the side. Input is on the bottom, exit is on top. I did this to get rid of any trapped air when oil pressure is primed before starting after oil change.

sbaker25

Where do you get that from? The stock setup on a 3rd gen runs the oil through the coolers directly from the pump even before hitting the filter.

Based on your logic, the cooling ability would vary based on the oil level. But cooler efficiency would be better if they were cooling when the oil was at its hottest. This seems like a very good thing, but I just haven't seen it in practice (which doesn't mean very much).

Honestly, I think you might be right for a dry sump and possibly a wet sump, but I'm not sure. In a wet sump, the oil may wind up soaking heat in the pan. Also, the pump itself may heat the oil up a lot. I've never measured these things, just food for thought.

The bottom mount is not going to help oil drainage unless you install a drain at the fitting (a drain could be put in the cooler regardless of fitting orientation) or disconnect them every time. I.e., it is not going to result in more drainage through the oil pan.... at least not very much on a 3rd gen configuration. Of course, this entirely depends on the routing of the plumbing. It could make a big difference in other configurations.

Finally, there is one significant problem with having both the inlet and outlet mounted on the bottom which is trapped air. A cooler that is half filled with air isn't doing as much as it could.