Thread: Radiator and Cond combo unit

Tweet

Has anyone here used the rad -condenser combo. I was wondering if it is enough to keep a mild 302 cool and the condenser being large enough to cool a 31 Model A sedan . This unit would save a delima of mounting a condenser somewhere. The one i seen was put out by Coolcraft .

Product must be to new

According to Coolcraft, the condenser combo works well, however I have heard from more than one source that a separate condenser is preferred. I have just ordered my radiator today and chose to not combine the two.

Bobby, I wish I had some info for you, but have never seen one of these, and it looks like that is the case with the others too. I don't put air in my cars, so they are foreign to me, but I think some guys mount a remote condenser in the rear so that there is none in front of the radiator in like a Model A.

I would contact one of the aftermarket ac companies (what are the names, Vintage Air? and some others) and ask them what they feel. Usually, although they have a prejudice toward their products, they will still give you a pretty straight answer on other products. Not always, but mostly.

Don

thats where I`m at also,what is a good spacing between the rad and condensor? (running electric fan) thnx in advance

John If i was selling a product mine would be the best . True a condenser by its self has been the history but i would like to see a car with the combo unit and see it in function .

Don this combo unit is allmost as much as a complete unit from Vintage and alike . Also some cars dont even have a top right . LOL thats some modern air .


The combo is the same size as a rad for a 31 . To me this would split them 50-50 and something has to give . I dont want the engine running warm or the A/C . I know the idea would be great if they functioned like 2 seperate units . The exhaust will take up so much room i dont think i could mount one under body by frame . Then the calculation for additional freon would have to be done for a correct operating A/C .

33 i would say basically as long as they dont rub thats about the standard . I would say 1/2 inch maybe 3/4 at the most and brackets would give that dimension

as small as ur sedan is i'd look at some of the small import car condensers, some of those things are small & they cool those cars just fine w/134. my question is this though, if u have a condenser about the same size as ur radiator & running a grill on ur car i'd think it'd be almost impossible to see or am i missing something here(other then my brain ) ..joe

Let us not forget that R134 is more expansive than the old R12. In hot climates, you need as much condensor for effectiveness. In cooler climates you can really get by with a smaller unit to do the job and make look astheticlly pleasing. I said this for those who struggle for a good system in their cars especially in warmer climates. Always double check the effectiveness of your expansion valve beacause of the flow and expansion characteristics, the valves are different and generic 1 size fits all can bite you later. Big difference when working with R134 on a tight system like these.

Nitro thanks for the info something to remember i see.

Why not consider a '32 grille shell and insert. They are for all intents and purposes, a direct bolt on. The AC condenser is virtually hidden but is in a direct air stream. Unless you really like the '31 grill, this is an option. My avatar shows my '31 roadster with AC, and a 32 shell installed. The insert has also been fitted. I found that there were no after market '31 shells available and the '30s were mediocre at best. I did have a fair '31 OEM shell but it, too needed a lot of work. Yes, I know - a roadster??, with AC ?? - a wifely necessity !!!

Originally Posted by nitrowarrior

Let us not forget that R134 is more expansive than the old R12. In hot climates, you need as much condensor for effectiveness. In cooler climates you can really get by with a smaller unit to do the job and make look astheticlly pleasing. I said this for those who struggle for a good system in their cars especially in warmer climates. Always double check the effectiveness of your expansion valve beacause of the flow and expansion characteristics, the valves are different and generic 1 size fits all can bite you later. Big difference when working with R134 on a tight system like these.

yes i know this && the import cars still cool fine w/a small condensor w/134. && w/as small as his car is (hell its smaller inside then some import cars) i wouldnt see why a smaller one wouldnt work & why it wouldnt cool just fine...joe

Thanks Joe.....smaller cars use smaller amounts of gas because they can. If we could all take 2-2.5 lbs compared to 3.5-4 lbs for our bigger systems we wouldn't have as much to condense and cool to make our ride comfortable. They can do it because they are not only running much less gas, but more efficient compressors etc. Which is something I should've have brought to the discussion. It's a shame that it has taken the manufacturer's so long to ge us something to work for our cars. By the way, wanna open pandora's box? Did you realize the 134 is more harmful to your health, the ozone layer and more disruptive to our eco system? Food for thought. I like getting thought processes going further.

Originally Posted by nitrowarrior

By the way, wanna open pandora's box? Did you realize the 134 is more harmful to your health, the ozone layer and more disruptive to our eco system? Food for thought. I like getting thought processes going further.

yeppp i knew that, seems odd they say it destroys our ozone since freon is heavier then air and what gets me is our own goverment produces more pollution then any company & they have the balls to not only preach to us but also lie , "Did I say That" ...joe


EPA Lies

from the above link

The best source of scientific and common sense data on the following report are two books published by Dr. Dixie Lee Ray, TRASHING THE PLANET and ENVIRONMENTAL OVERKILL. These works and many others were summarized and reported in a scientific and professional manner by the NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL BALANCE. (This group was chaired by Dr. I.W. Tucker, a retired professor from the University of Louisville.)

The excuse used by the EPA for the ban on Freon was it somehow seeps into the atmosphere and depletes the Ozone in our air. There is no scientific data available, in or out of government, to describe this "claimed" process. Freon is one of the most useful substances ever created by man; and it has many uses. In refrigeration, its prime usage is as the substance inside the sealed refrigeration systems that allows cooling to take place during the evaporator operation, and heating during the high temperature condensing part of the refrigeration cycles. Without Freon or some similar substance, refrigeration cannot occur, and the best known alternate would be to return to ice boxes.

Freon was developed and patented by the DuPont Company. Ironically, the DuPont patents on Freon ran out at about the same time the government decrees to ban the use of Freon were issued. The leading replacement substances for Freon were also developed by DuPont. The Freon (HCFC) substances are far more costly and far more complex, to the extent that DuPont stands to make untold billions of dollars on the change out of this substance, and consumers will have an inferior product. Further, the DuPont substitutes have no supporting data to prove they meet environmental needs.

Freon, the "villain", is an odorless, tasteless, chemically neutral substance, which is HEAVIER THAN AIR, and by the laws of physics cannot rise into the atmosphere. If is spilled on the ground, it will settle in the soil and become plant food. It meets the Biblical standard of "ashes to ashes and dust to dust." Freon can be commercially produced at a very low cost of $.50 to $1.00 per pound. Some recent news reports indicate that since the banning, it is now one of the leading items sold in the worlds black markets. Some reported costs of Freon on the black market run as high as $50.00 per pound.

With the expiration of the DuPont patents, Freon would have been readily available as an air conditioning and refrigeration substance for the entire world, including Third World Countries, at affordable rates. According to THE FACT FINDER, P.O. Box A, Scottsdale, AZ 85252, (1/16/95), DuPont owners have direct ties to the NEW AGE-ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT which, in turn has ties to the EPA and such luminaries as Vice President Al Gore. Gore has ties to THE NEW WORLD ORDER of George Bush and Bill Clinton. According to THE FACT FINDER, Charles Bronfman of Seagrams, who controls the Board of Directors of DuPont, led the fight against Freon, his own product, because the DuPont patents to control Freon had run out.

Our upper atmosphere does contain Ozone (O3) (a compound made up of three oxygen atoms) as claimed by government and new age people. The atmosphere also contains a large amount of natural oxygen (O2) (made up of two oxygen atoms) in its natural state. About twenty per cent of the air we breath is Natural Oxygen (O2). Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by a break up on natural oxygen molecules (O2). This break up occurs in the atmosphere when certain ultraviolet sun rays strike Oxygen molecules and split them in half. The split single Oxygen atoms (O1) are very unstable, and quickly attach themselves to other natural occurring Oxygen molecules (O2) with two Oxygen atoms to form Ozone (O3). At any given time, there are several tons of Ozone produced every second in the atmosphere five to twenty five miles above the earth. As long as there is natural Oxygen molecules (O2) and sun light, there will be Ozone (O3), a natural law of basic science.

Ozone, itself, is very unstable chemically. When formed, it quickly attaches itself to other substances in the air. The upper air contains a number of impurities such as chlorine monoxide, an unstable substance reported by several government agencies. These same government agencies claim this chloride substance is chemically derived from Freon and other similar man made substances.

However, as already reported by Dr. Ray and others, Freon cannot rise into the atmosphere because it is heavier than air by a minimum of a four-to-one ratio. Freon cannot defy the laws of physics or gravity. So, what is the source of atmospheric chlorine? Most of it comes form the natural evaporation of sea water which contains salt, a compound containing chlorides. The other major source of chlorides is from volcanic eruptions, which are not controlled by man. Dr. Ray’s data shows that the upper atmosphere at any given time contains 50 to 60 times as much chloride as is produced annually by all processes in use by man. Sea water evaporation alone produces 600 million tons of chlorides per year as compared to 750,000 tons per year of Freon type production. This alone is a ratio of 800 to 1. The sea water evaporation and volcanic eruptions have been going on since God created the earth.

Now we come to the much discussed "Ozone Hole" in the Antarctic (South Pole) area. Studies by a number of sources show that, each year, at the end of the dark, cold (-80F) Antarctic winter an Ozone Hole (thin area) appears, lasts for three to five weeks, and then disappears. Let us now recall that Ozone forms when sun light strikes Oxygen molecules. Very few rays from the sun reach the Antarctic during Antarctic winters. When there is no sun light, Ozone will not be formed in the upper air.

Unfortunately, the current Ozone Hole Theory is being pushed by an ignorant, arrogant group of ENVIRONMENTAL ELITISTS working daily to promote a socialist plan of PEOPLE CONTROL. They are supported by radical environmental groups with no interest in the welfare of American citizens and who are atheistic in their outlook. These ELITISTS draw support from the news media, tax free foundations, and many special interests.

New age leaders of industries such as DuPont fall in line, as long as they are protected by government decrees to cover their BOTTOM LINE PROFITS. As reported in INSIGHT MAGAZINE 1/30/95, "in spite of repeated claims of Ozone loss because of Freon (CFC) emissions, there is no sound evidence to support this assertion. The basic data seems to be contaminated."

MACHINE DESIGN MAGAZINE, 1/24/94, referred to the CFC ban as a world wide $5 trillion mistake. My experience over twenty seven years of refrigeration is that it is a $5 trillion fraud brought about by NEW AGE SOCIALISTS. The people who are to blame are very small in number. There are environmental extremists who prompt all of the expensive regulations that are faced by industry and the people at large. These extremists have powerful friends in high places in government, the news media, tax free foundations, industry and others.

GE Appliance Leadership did not have the knowledge or the courage to stand up to be counted in this, another $1 billion plus boondoggle for GE Refrigeration, in the early nineties. The Freon ban has increased appliance costs significantly, and adversely affected productivity and quality of refrigeration products."

Now who do you believe

from the above site

Fortunately, Freon does not have serious long term health consequences. It is not a carcinogen, teratogen, or mutagen, and it does not damage the liver. When it is inhaled, it is rapidly excreted by exhalation, and it is not significantly accumulated in the body. This means that breathing low concentrations of freon from a leaking refrigerator or air conditioner over a long period of time is unlikely to have a cumulative effect, and thus few, if any, long term health effects.
Second, Freon is about 4 times heavier than air, so it is going to sink to the floor initially.

I do want to keep my 31 grill shell makes the car a little different then most . You go to car nut theres 126 pics of chopped fendered Tudor's id say 99 % have a 32 grille shell . Walker is also making a combo unit in there Z lines for rods . It would be great if they got the science down and this unit funtions .