Finally got round to plumbing in the oil cooler today.

I utilized a spare cooler I had from a Rover T16 motor from a 220 GTi...




A waxstat was employed to ensure that the oil only went through the cooler when it hit 80 deg C..




The waxstat comes with a simple mounting bracket. I used existing holes in the bulkhead below the headlamp and secured with M10 nuts and bolts..


This shows the waxstat fitted and hoses connected. Not a lot of room!


And the other ends connected to the cooler core...


And the view from underneath...


The hose take off adapter was fitted next...


And the hoses were fitted to complete the 'circuit'..


Once all done, the engine was refilled and then cranked over with the main ignition lead disconnected to ensure oil pressure was safely reached. Once done, motor was fired and and connections checked for any leaks. Once satisfied, a spin round the block showed all to be okay.
Gary

yo thats pretty gangster. Good write up

quick question. can that waxstat be used with a trans cooler too?

What is the benefit of the waxstat not letting any oil through below 90°C?

>

Quck reply. Why?

>

Optimum operating temperature. No cooler (or an inefficent one compared to power output) will potentially see the oil temp increase to levels where the oil will start to break down.
Run oil though a cooler full time and the oil has the potential not to reach it's operating temperature. That way, the oil remains 'thicker' and doesn't work as it should.
A waxstat is a good way of ensuring the the oil reaches its temp and ensuring that it doesn't get overcooked.
Gary

>
because on the hottest days of summer when i have th AC on my trans begins to shift somewhat sloppily. changing the fluid helped some but when its 90+F out and the AC is on the trans fluid cooler cant dump enough heat into the radiator fluid to keep it shifting smoothly. i was thinking about adding a small trans cooler but i dont want it to lower the trans fluid below operating temp in the winter (-5 isnt that uncommon around chicagoland). so thats why i want to know, the low temperatures are whats stopping me from doing it.

i cant seem to find one for sale, where did you buy that one?

This post has been edited by Bitter: Apr 9, 2006 - 8:49 PM

Very nice gt4wrc

abcde

This post has been edited by Wolf_tm: Apr 14, 2006 - 1:12 AM

nice write-up...very helpful...maybe i'll do this once i upgrade a few things

bboy

>

You are getting all confused with this false information. The engine wasn't brand new. It had simply unergone an oil change. If you are trying to say that you need to do that every time you change your oil


>

Please enlighten me with evidence as to why this is necessary. Take into consideration, before you reply, that the adapter plate is manufactured by one of the world's leading producers of this type of equipment and it is used in road and race cars worldwide. Are you saying that the plate that Mocal produces is a load of rubbish and unsuitable as standard?
Gary

abcde

This post has been edited by Wolf_tm: Apr 14, 2006 - 1:13 AM

Well, having owned many cars over the years and having done numerous oil changes, as have many other people out there that I know, I have never ever heard of anyone removing the spark plugs and cranking the motor over after a simple oil filter renewal. And that includes professional mechanics.
Okay, there may well be a theoretical arguement, but theory is often not a reason to change practice. And it certainly doesn't offer any proof to back up your 'arguement'. I can just see all the GT-Four owners out there going to such great lengths by removing the WAI unit to get to the spark plugs each time they change their oil and filter

Neither does your sandwich plate post. Perhaps your one was a 'one off' which missed being caught in the quality control process. Mine was absolutely fine. And as for never using 90 deg elbows, you may wish to also tell many others out there who use the same on their cars without any issues.

Just because it is 'written in a book' or 'posetd on the internet' does not mean that it is correct.

Gary