Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo
I guess no one forgot to take their azzhole pill today...
GM's research was specifically to address coolant issues with high horsepower engines being developed for the Corvette. (not that high horsepower engines have anything to do with Cobra's) Since emissions dictate not running rich (which would lower detonation problems) they addressed the "real" problem: the steam pockets that develop in any engine's coolant passenges above the cumbustion chamber. (turns out steam is a lousy conductor of heat, go figure) The problems you stated ie: valve spring fatigue and cylinder bore wear are a direct result of combustion chamber temps, not block temp.
There is a huge difference in your cumbustion chamber temp and your coolant temp. Why do you think your recovery tank level varies so much between hot and cold (the liquid coolant only expands slightly) that's how much steam is in your cylinder heads and upper block.
|
This scientific discourse may be true when you lecture the forth-graders on
your planet, but here on Earth,
no one is having steam pocket-itis. Even Patrick. You correctly state (contradicting your planet's science) that the chamber temps are higher than the 'recovery' tank. On
Earth that is true -about 700 deg. F difference, but we on Earth have a miracle cooling substance know as
water which negates the much feared and dreaded 'steam-pocket formation' syndrome.
For the second time however, you brought it up but failed to explain why GM is not using the magic coolant you promote, in every 'high horsepower' (or low for that matter) Corvette. Or Malibu, Traverse, Silverado or Volt. You're having a credibility problem Dude.
And Undy will use his magnifying glass to read this thread more carefully because he obviously missed your 'block coolant ports' solution to his problem.