Talk Morgan

Air Intake improvements

Posted By: CooperMan

Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 09:03 AM

On the 3.7 Roadsters the only intake for air is via a hole cut onto the base of the Mustang airbox / filter housing here..



It's not very large in area and draws intake air from close to the back of the engine and the footwell bulkhead, and is only about 6 inches from the hot exhaust manifold

The filter sits flat in the top of the airbox & there's plenty of space below...





So I've cut some additional intake holes below the filter line to allow more air routes in, and hopefully some will be cooler air pushed in by the forward facing bonnet louvres, and I'm lining the 'box' with reflective foil tape





Next task is an air scoop to the back of the bonnet side louvres or a Naca duct
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 09:50 AM

Great stuff Jon. You can certainly hear the air being sucked through that single inlet hole when blipping the engine at idle.

I think it will be difficult to make any subjective assessment of improvement due to the great variations in air temp at the moment and driving conditions. Nevertheless would be very interested to hear your driving observations following the mod.

I assume the airbox is standard Ford although not Mustang as this picture, albeit of a V8 Mustang belonging to a relative, looks of similar design but better location.



The V6 version has similar intake plumbing placing air box on the same front nearside, in cool air stream away from exhaust. Indeed press hype mentions cold air induction system to enhance power and torque.
Posted By: Hamwich

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 10:22 AM

Going for more power from a Roadster 3.7? Respect!

Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 11:00 AM

I am wondering how big is the opening in diameter regarding the original V6 Mustang airbox, that could be a benchmark for your experiments.
And also, if it is the same or a similar box in the Morgan, how is the stream of fresh air directed in the Mustang. The shape of and the flow in the airbox is an important factor to insure a good intake.
I would also experiment how it works when you close the original opening because - it must not but it could - happen that the air gets unwanted turbulences when the different channels meet coming from different directions and from the side vs. the bottom.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 12:28 PM

This is best image of V6 Mustang airbox I could find.



You can just see the dirty air inlet is moulded to a roughly rectangular shape taking air from forward and away from radiator.

There seem to be several airbox conversions available in the US involving K & N style air filters within custom casings and claiming various improvements to power and torque. The gains seem to involve cleaner route for air inlet by replacement or removal of silencer compartments as seen above in clean air inlet.

Doesn't seem the Roadster variant has this silencing though.
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 12:34 PM

Originally Posted By Hamwich
Going for more power from a Roadster 3.7? Respect!



Tim, where on earth did you find that photo of me? pantsdown
Posted By: Deejay

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 05:27 PM

Colder the air, the denser it is and hence greater oxygen content. So that’s all to the good.
BUT, air box design is a bit more of a science than merely having as big a hole as possible. Boxes are designed by a combination of shape, volume and intake hole to achieve an optimum air flow at a resonant frequency designed to be at a point where torque might otherwise drop off due to engine characteristics. (Helmholtz Resonance principle)
So, don’t throw away the bits you’ve drilled out, you may wish to stick them back on!
Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 06:38 PM

Here’s mine, 1.6 Sigma engine though

Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 07:00 PM

Originally Posted By Deejay
Colder the air, the denser it is and hence greater oxygen content. So that’s all to the good.
BUT, air box design is a bit more of a science than merely having as big a hole as possible. Boxes are designed by a combination of shape, volume and intake hole to achieve an optimum air flow at a resonant frequency designed to be at a point where torque might otherwise drop off due to engine characteristics. (Helmholtz Resonance principle)
So, don’t throw away the bits you’ve drilled out, you may wish to stick them back on!


I fully agree to your point! But in case of the pics of the original airbox of the 3.7 Roadster shown above the input opening doesn't look really professional and calculated, but rather like someone sawed out a piece where there happened to be some space left.
Of course I could be wrong about that, I also believe that the disappointment is great when the resonance of the airbox is no longer right. You'll notice that e.g. when at low revs this acute impact is missing and the acceleration feels weak and without initial torque but also at higher revs something could just feel wrong.

Because of that I have kept the airbox of my 4/4, a first trial without it gave worse results even if the way to the TB was shorter.

I have just as much respect for the engineers' airbox calculations as I have for a well tuned bass reflex speaker. (even if the air is flowing in the airbox and only vibrates in the bass reflex box).
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 08:12 PM

Thanks for the comments Heinz & Deejay, but if you look at photo 1, the factory solution is just to saw off part of the bottom to create a hole, certainly doesn't look scientifically calculated to me

On the 3 ltr engines all the proper science took place after the throttle body in the intake tracts
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 08:15 PM

Originally Posted By Craig Jezz
Here’s mine, 1.6 Sigma engine though



Proper ram air effect thumbs
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 08:21 PM

I can't comment fully because I don't have a Roadster and the original Cooperman pics don't show the whole intake path. The V6 mustang is a better photo in that respect so if anyone has that perspective from the same model Roadster it would be nice to get that posted here.

However, IMHO what Cooperman has done will not spoil the tuning of the system because it's all on the dirty side of the intake and he has not altered the clean side at all.

By the time the resonance gets through the filter it's strength is gone anyway and as I say, from what I can see, there are no changes between the ports and the filter.

The dirty side of the airbox is there predominantly to make the system quieter and collect cool air.

I'd be interested to see where the throttle body is in the Roadster intake system.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 08:29 PM

Originally Posted By CooperMan
Thanks for the comments Heinz & Deejay, but if you look at photo 1, the factory solution is just to saw off part of the bottom to create a hole, certainly doesn't look scientifically calculated to me

On the 3 ltr engines all the proper science took place after the throttle body in the intake tracts


Thats what I said also, Jon. I later added some text concerning this issue.
Posted By: Deejay

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/12/18 11:24 PM

Originally Posted By IvorMog
I can't comment fully because I don't have a Roadster and the original Cooperman pics don't show the whole intake path. The V6 mustang is a better photo in that respect so if anyone has that perspective from the same model Roadster it would be nice to get that posted here.

However, IMHO what Cooperman has done will not spoil the tuning of the system because it's all on the dirty side of the intake and he has not altered the clean side at all.

By the time the resonance gets through the filter it's strength is gone anyway and as I say, from what I can see, there are no changes between the ports and the filter.

The dirty side of the airbox is there predominantly to make the system quieter and collect cool air.

I'd be interested to see where the throttle body is in the Roadster intake system.


I can’t profess to be an expert on this, but I agree that air boxes were originally introduced simply to diminish the induction noise. However, it was then taken a step further by mathematical design, to achieve resonance in the mid range, where torque may typically drop off due to valve overlap on modern engines. Resonant design means that air flow through the box is at a maximum, with little restriction. So that is all happening and remains happening within that particular rev range, on the dirty side, allowing maximum air flow in through the filter to engine. Any large holes cut in the box are bound to upset the point at which resonance occurs and could poorly affect torque where it is most needed. Possibly, what MMC have done by chopping a hole in the bottom is not very scientific but can’t help feeling that even more holes will destroy any resonant capabilities that may have existed.
The argument is easily settled of course by taking it for a thrash but to be more certain, by a dyno-test of before and after.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 08/12/18 12:08 AM

Pic here showing throttle body on 3.7 Roadster.



Short and sweet plumbing between air box and throttle. No silencing chambers. Filter box just beyond top centre. Intake manifold can just be seen bottom right.

Adding weight to the dirty air inlet design discussion its interesting to note that the several after market V6 Mustang cool air tuning kits I looked at all used a custom shaped airbox to enclose a K & N style fabric filter.

Here's a typical one.

Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 10/12/18 01:34 PM

Not very easy to photograph in a dim garage but this is the location of the factory air in

Bottom of the air filter box, quite a small oblong hole & only a couple of inches above the Clutch bellhousing which gets hot



and close to footwell bulkhead, which can't be good for a smooth flow of cool air



The airbox is pretty simple Ford item, the throttle body is just out of shot under the bonnet hinge



Here...

Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 10/12/18 07:55 PM

By modern automotive standards, the way Morgan have set up the air-box is relatively crude and I can't see why your mod should do any harm. Surely it will allow better quality, cooler air into the system and I really don't think it will affect the resonances of the system.

Is your throttle "fly by wire" and effectively co-located next to the MAF sensor because I can see the MAF but not what I call a conventional throttle body?
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 11/12/18 12:15 PM

Bob, yes it's fly by wire you can just see the black cable going in under the bonnet hinge line, the red security clip for the plug can just be seen (part covered)

I assume the problem with the 3.7 rev hang is difficult to cure because of the complexities of fly by wire via the ECU setup, at least on the 3.0 S1 it was cable, and hence driver controlled
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 11/12/18 12:31 PM

Thanks Jon,

Now I can understand also why the rev hang is such an issue.

The ECU controls the throttle opening and the fuel and ignition. Tricky.
Posted By: DaveW

Re: Air Intake improvements - 11/12/18 03:06 PM

The GDI is the same, but without the rev hanging.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 12/12/18 12:47 AM

Interesting stuff Jon. Although I haven't looked at my airbox yet, it would seem that any re-routing of dirty air feed would best be performed on a virgin airbox before MMC performed their butchery.

To that end do you or indeed anyone know the source of the airbox? It appears it may be a pre 2015 Mustang version as later ones had an angle feed from box to accomodate an air manifold that feeds from the front of engine not the rear as on Roadster.

ETA: if the source of airbox can be confirmed it's likely that a K & N slab filter would be available to replace the more restrictive paper one as below.

Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 02:00 PM

Can confirm that the early 2011-2014 Mustang 3.7 V6 air filter is the one for similar engined Roadsters.

The equivalent oiled cotton K & N panel filter version is part number 33-2431 and available from a couple of eBay sources including one linked above. It drops straight in to air box.

This is the sales hype on back of box.



Doubt if I'll notice the improvement but there will be some based on experience selling K & N filter conversion kits for Moto Guzzi's. Here we would supply in the kit size 5 richer main jets for carbs to compensate for increased air flow. In this case the ECU will compensate.
Posted By: sospan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 02:29 PM

I am not convinced that simply improving airflow in an ecu managed car would give noticeable improvement. The ecu would monitor airflow and temperature and change fuel injection to suit?
I will look up Graham Bell’s tests he has done. From memory very little, if any bhp increase. If any probably small and at higher revs...
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 03:15 PM

Originally Posted By sospan
I am not convinced that simply improving airflow in an ecu managed car would give noticeable improvement. The ecu would monitor airflow and temperature and change fuel injection to suit?
I will look up Graham Bell’s tests he has done. From memory very little, if any bhp increase. If any probably small and at higher revs...


Exactly that. To maintain correct fuel/air ratio more fuel provided so greater power. I agree the improvement will be small and only at the top end. Wouldn't be surprised if I get slight improvement in mpg for same driving style as well though.
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 03:20 PM

It all depends on where the restrictions are in the intake, if any.

If the air filter is a big restriction then changing could make a significant difference.

If however it's the MAF sensor or the clean side pipework that is the major pinch point then changing the filter will make little difference. Could also be the throttle body if you make big horsepower changes.

The only way to be sure is to instrument the intake system with a series of vacuum gauges and record the losses in the system at each point.

Worth the effort when developing a race engine but probably a bit OTT on a road going engine.

Alternatively, take both filters to a dyno and see what happens in the real world.

If the new filter does allow more airflow, the MAF sensor should pick that up and compensate with the fuelling map.

Posted By: Burgundymog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 05:17 PM

Originally Posted By sospan
I am not convinced that simply improving airflow in an ecu managed car would give noticeable improvement. The ecu would monitor airflow and temperature and change fuel injection to suit?
I will look up Graham Bell’s tests he has done. From memory very little, if any bhp increase. If any probably small and at higher revs...


Have to disagree, Cain recently fitted a K&N cone filter to my +4 I don't know if it increased the BHP but it certainly increased the low down punch.
Posted By: Gambalunga

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 05:22 PM

I don't mind washable dry filters but it has been shown that oiled filters are fine when they a fresh and clean but clog up quickly with the accumulation of dust.

My daughter's Guzzi caught fire when it backfired and set alight the oiled pod filters that I had fitted. Fortunately a quick thinker on the veranda of the pub that it was parked in front of put out the fire using his shaken up beer bottle as a fire extiguisher. Following that episode I fitted a conventional air box from a sports model.

Dyno testing that was done on on motorcycles fitted with various filters and exhaust systems actually sometimes showed a loss of power over standard unless a re-map was done to tune the system to the new configuration.

I don't know about the original Morgan ECUs but my Omex ECU is set to ignore the sonda lambda sensor fuel adjustments after 4000 rpm. From that point on it simply feeds the fuel as per the map so the fuel map has to be correct and for maximum performance and is normally set a little richer than stoichiometric air–fuel ratio as achieved by the closed loop feedback using the sensor.

If the airflow is dramatically improved it may mean that the engine is running too lean at high revs and driving for extended periods in that condition could damage the engine. Fortunately few Morgan owners would be travelling at more than 4,000 rpm for an extended period on public roads so damage would be rare. Something to keep in mind if a modified, and not remapped, road car is used for a track day.
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 06:20 PM

Peter,

If your OMEX is set up similarly to mine you won't have a MAF sensor and it works on a speed density principle rather than the OEM mass air flow principle.

Mine is set up such that the feed back loop maintains stoichiometric AFR up to 3500 rpm or half throttle, whichever comes in first.

Over those parameters, the ECU mapping takes over and runs richer according to a dyno developed map to get maximum performance.

The OEM ECU uses the MAF sensor to calculate the amount of air going into the engine and will therefore compensate to some degree for a less restrictive filter up to a point. The problem is that the MAF sensor itself is restrictive and will only work within certain parameters. Beyond that it can't compensate and it will run lean. (and probably throw up a warning light)

The problem with the MAF system is that you are stuck with whatever AFR the OEM chooses and that will probably be biased more towards fuel economy rather than power unless you get the OEM ECU re-flashed.

Because you have individual throttle bodies, you can't run a MAF system hence the change to the speed density type stand alone ECU's such as OMEX.

I changed to OMEX so that I could have control of the fuel and ignition map as I made modifications to the engine.

One problem of oiled filters is that they can contaminate the MAF sensor and then the ECU will get false readings. K&N dispute that by the way.
Posted By: Paul Grout

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 10:18 PM

I did away with the air turbulence inducing plastic airbox,filter and plastic tube on my 2015 Roaster and replaced with aluminum tube and K&N cone filter.Sealed it off from the engine bay and created and air intake that draws cooler ambient air from outside, not preheated by the manifold.
The result is: the engine breaths freely and is really responsive. at higher revs it is very loud and pulls like buggery. At times the noise of the air being sucked into the engine is louder than the outgoing gasses from the Librands sports exhaust. Love it!
Posted By: Gambalunga

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 10:47 PM

Originally Posted By IvorMog
Peter,

If your OMEX is set up similarly to mine you won't have a MAF sensor and it works on a speed density principle rather than the OEM mass air flow principle.

Mine is set up such that the feed back loop maintains stoichiometric AFR up to 3500 rpm or half throttle, whichever comes in first.

Over those parameters, the ECU mapping takes over and runs richer according to a dyno developed map to get maximum performance.

The OEM ECU uses the MAF sensor to calculate the amount of air going into the engine and will therefore compensate to some degree for a less restrictive filter up to a point. The problem is that the MAF sensor itself is restrictive and will only work within certain parameters. Beyond that it can't compensate and it will run lean. (and probably throw up a warning light)

The problem with the MAF system is that you are stuck with whatever AFR the OEM chooses and that will probably be biased more towards fuel economy rather than power unless you get the OEM ECU re-flashed.

Because you have individual throttle bodies, you can't run a MAF system hence the change to the speed density type stand alone ECU's such as OMEX.

I changed to OMEX so that I could have control of the fuel and ignition map as I made modifications to the engine.

One problem of oiled filters is that they can contaminate the MAF sensor and then the ECU will get false readings. K&N dispute that by the way.


Exactly. One of the main reasons that I changed is because the standard intake system could not be adapted to the sports exhaust fitted by Aero Racing from new. At that time there were no readily available re-flashes of the OEM ECU. With the throttle bodies and Omex ECU I was able to adjust all the engine parameters to get optimum results. Some work was done on a rolling road starting with Omex's base calibration but the final tweaking I have done using recorded logs on a portable PC. A challenge and great fun.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/12/18 11:17 PM

Originally Posted By Paul Grout
I did away with the air turbulence inducing plastic airbox,filter and plastic tube on my 2015 Roaster and replaced with aluminum tube and K&N cone filter.Sealed it off from the engine bay and created and air intake that draws cooler ambient air from outside, not preheated by the manifold.
The result is: the engine breaths freely and is really responsive. at higher revs it is very loud and pulls like buggery. At times the noise of the air being sucked into the engine is louder than the outgoing gasses from the Librands sports exhaust. Love it!


Interesting report Paul. Would love to see photo's of your Roadster air inlet installation. Maybe compare it with this ARV6 setup.

Posted By: sospan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 03:06 PM

My Rover V8 car gets very warm under the bonnet. I have done a couple of checks and the incoming air temp is > 20 degC higher than ambient. Based on the assumption of 1% more bhp per 7deg difference in theory I should get 2-3% more bhp. I may look to getting cool air in and see if I can feel a difference. The ultimate test would be a rolling road though. I wonder how the Gems system would react to the cooler air. That is the crux. The MAF is just after the filter box and no easy moving of it without fairly major surgery.
I am not chasing more bhp/torque but cooler air is beckoning.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 07:16 PM

Do you remember the thread when Lockheed Martin in the USA reported about the investigations in the wind tunnel? At that time, someone (an employee?) had his Rover Plus 8 tested there. The result was very interesting. The engineers' recommendation was to install a base plate in the front. In this way the air can flow through the radiator. This base plate should cover the area from the radiator to the engine.

Since I have an aluminum radiator in my 4/4, two things have changed. And I think it has something to do with the fact that this new radiator is wider and deeper.

The first thing I noticed was that now even more cold fresh air is being sucked up directly behind the radiator. That's good and really noticable during acceleration because my airbox is right behind the radiator...with the intake hole facing down.

The second thing I notice with my 4/4 is negative, but it's also an effect of the larger radiator: There's even less air flowing through the radiator, because the larger amount of fresh air coming from directly behind the radiator in form of an upstream from below will reduce the flow of air through the radiator even more. One air flow blocks the other.

So I notice quite clearly that the engine becomes much warmer at higher speeds, so from 140 km/h, than with the smaller original plastic radiator in the past. If it used to be 90 degrees, it's now 105 degrees.

This is a dilemma, and I want to experiment with a base plate in spring, to block the upstream so that more air flows through the radiator.

At the same time I want to make an opening with a pipe in this new base plate so that the airbox gets cold air, but the radiator continues to have air flowing through it.

In this way, the overall temperature in the engine compartment would have to drop, even in Plus 8.
Posted By: DaveW

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 07:56 PM

I fitted neoprene side panels inside my cowl to stop air passing either side of the radiator. That's a simple mod using polyethylene (high density) neoprene.

The front of the Trad is messy, and fitting an under-tray between the cross-head and engine was an early mod. All that takes is a piece of sheet aluminium (cut to shape). You don't need to drill the chassis because it can be fixed securely with overlapping penny washers.

When I ran my Roadster with a front spoiler, the ducted air was directed onto the bottom radiator tank, and the under-tray kept it in the engine bay until it could spill out around the exhausts.

At that time I didn't have the confidence to make a curved front valance. Once I could I removed the spoiler, but there's no obvious difference in cooling.

Cain has been experimenting with a super undertray around his engine, and talking to him it seems he's found a big difference.

So anything you can do to tidy up the messy airflow has a good chance of reducing temperature, and might even reduce drag!
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 08:14 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
Do you remember the thread when Lockheed Martin in the USA reported about the investigations in the wind tunnel? At that time, someone (an employee?) had his Rover Plus 8 tested there. The result was very interesting. The engineers' recommendation was to install a base plate in the front. In this way the air can flow through the radiator. This base plate should cover the area from the radiator to the engine.

Since I have an aluminum radiator in my 4/4, two things have changed. And I think it has something to do with the fact that this new radiator is wider and deeper.

The first thing I noticed was that now even more cold fresh air is being sucked up directly behind the radiator. That's good and really noticable during acceleration because my airbox is right behind the radiator...with the intake hole facing down.

The second thing I notice with my 4/4 is negative, but it's also an effect of the larger radiator: There's even less air flowing through the radiator, because the larger amount of fresh air coming from directly behind the radiator in form of an upstream from below will reduce the flow of air through the radiator even more. One air flow blocks the other.

So I notice quite clearly that the engine becomes much warmer at higher speeds, so from 140 km/h, than with the smaller original plastic radiator in the past. If it used to be 90 degrees, it's now 105 degrees.

This is a dilemma, and I want to experiment with a base plate in spring, to block the upstream so that more air flows through the radiator.

At the same time I want to make an opening with a pipe in this new base plate so that the airbox gets cold air, but the radiator continues to have air flowing through it.

In this way, the overall temperature in the engine compartment would have to drop, even in Plus 8.


Heinz, quick but maybe stupid question.
When you changed the radiator did you change anything else?
Thermostat maybe?
Hope my question doesn't seem insulting.
Posted By: Paul Grout

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 09:28 PM

HI Richard.
I would post you some photos if I could work out how to compress to the required size on my windows 7 lap top.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 21/12/18 09:29 PM

IvorMog, your Q is in no way insulting. All good:)
The thermostat remained and it works. It is just the new effect when I drive faster than lets say 130 km/h. There is a significant hotter engine temprature than with the original smaller radiator. Normally you will expect a better coolant capacitiy with the bigger surface of the new aluminium one. And this works as expected e.g. when being in a stop and go situation.
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 22/12/18 10:23 AM

I have the same problem but it's always been there, fitted an aluminium rad, still the same, fitted an aluminium block plate from the base of the intake behind the grill shaped down to the bottom of the rad to prevent spillage, not sure about the result of this because I did it recently after the cold weather started but it looks like it'll be the same so it's interesting to read about the air pressure build up in the engine bay, hadn't thought of that with all those louvres facing aft. I'll wait till warm weather and bear that in mind.
Posted By: Graham, G4FUJ

Re: Air Intake improvements - 22/12/18 10:48 AM

Originally Posted By Paul Grout
HI Richard.
I would post you some photos if I could work out how to compress to the required size on my windows 7 lap top.

Take a look here: https://www.tm-img.com/page/ifu
Join TM-IMG (if you don't have an alternative photo hosting site available) and post links to your photos stored there smile
Posted By: cerealsurfer

Re: Air Intake improvements - 22/12/18 01:52 PM

I ran a full valance (not just flap) and flat floor under the engine on my 4/4 racer. It makes a lot of positive difference in terms of managing airflow correctly.
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 28/12/18 07:47 PM

Update, been out today to try and test the airbox mods, only managed 30miles as the Derbyshire roads were too busy and lots of x-mas dawdlers

At road legal speeds it's difficult to feel a genuine difference, but it has stopped making the awful 'wheeze' when applying throttle in a high gear at low revs

It ran cooler, fan never cut in

And it now sounds superb, nice gurgle of induction

So for me it's a tick, but I will be working on a Naca duct to fit against the side louvre
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 01/01/19 08:32 PM

I've been thinking about this while driving today and watching the temp gauge rise to 100 at 70mph. The front wings are like a big funnel with their shape being sloped towards the back and I wonder if this causes the pressure in the engine bay. I will be investigating tomorrow unless SWMBO has different work instructions smile

Originally Posted By Heinz
Do you remember the thread when Lockheed Martin in the USA reported about the investigations in the wind tunnel? At that time, someone (an employee?) had his Rover Plus 8 tested there. The result was very interesting. The engineers' recommendation was to install a base plate in the front. In this way the air can flow through the radiator. This base plate should cover the area from the radiator to the engine.

Since I have an aluminum radiator in my 4/4, two things have changed. And I think it has something to do with the fact that this new radiator is wider and deeper.

The first thing I noticed was that now even more cold fresh air is being sucked up directly behind the radiator. That's good and really noticable during acceleration because my airbox is right behind the radiator...with the intake hole facing down.

The second thing I notice with my 4/4 is negative, but it's also an effect of the larger radiator: There's even less air flowing through the radiator, because the larger amount of fresh air coming from directly behind the radiator in form of an upstream from below will reduce the flow of air through the radiator even more. One air flow blocks the other.

So I notice quite clearly that the engine becomes much warmer at higher speeds, so from 140 km/h, than with the smaller original plastic radiator in the past. If it used to be 90 degrees, it's now 105 degrees.

This is a dilemma, and I want to experiment with a base plate in spring, to block the upstream so that more air flows through the radiator.

At the same time I want to make an opening with a pipe in this new base plate so that the airbox gets cold air, but the radiator continues to have air flowing through it.

In this way, the overall temperature in the engine compartment would have to drop, even in Plus 8.
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 01/01/19 08:37 PM

Interesting because your race prepared Morgan is producing WAY more HP than mine. I will check out my options tomorrow and try a plate from rad to engine as suggested Heinz earlier.

Originally Posted By cerealsurfer
I ran a full valance (not just flap) and flat floor under the engine on my 4/4 racer. It makes a lot of positive difference in terms of managing airflow correctly.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 02/01/19 02:09 AM

Luckily I have found the original report on Gomog (see below). It was not Lookheed Martin which I recalled but Freightliner in Portland, Oregon who did the exploration on a Morgan car in 1995. Very interesting that they could prove that the size of the (then used) radiator was totally ok and the issue has to be resolved by changing the airflow, not the radiator itself.

I only noticed that the even bigger size of my in other respects brilliant aluminium radiator emphasizes the issue of the airflow when blocking its effectivity at higher speeds and when the temparature rises accordingly.

Here is the article which is the initiator of my idea to repeat their procedere to mount a flat floor underneath the gap between radiator and engine which will become an early spring project for me.

http://www.gomog.com/BLAIR/tech/cooling/art020.html

tmg513 was so kind to post this link in May of 2018.
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 02/01/19 04:58 PM

Thanks Heinz, interesting reading. I've ordered a sheet of aluminium and will report back when done with findings.
Posted By: Button

Re: Air Intake improvements - 02/01/19 07:22 PM

I have done the Dwight Smith (Freightliner) modification on My '63 +4-4Str. It works, but not dramatic. However: I now have a Shroud around a engine driven plastic fan. The plastic fan blade is a universal unit that can be cut down and blades trimmed to reduce the noise. The shroud was designed by Bob Nogueira (Texas). Robert Couch helped me sort the Flex-A-Lite Plastic fan blade. If I could just figure out TM's picture system I would send more information. Flex-A-Lite has a Universal Electric Fan with a Plastic Shroud that will fit on the inside of a radiator. I have this on My '61 DHC. Win Mueling (A Canadian) who lives North of Me installed this on two +8's (1970 & 1986) with success (I hear).
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 02/01/19 07:39 PM

If it's true that the airflow hits the firewall and then forms a high pressure area under the bonnet then that high pressure could be an advantage for the engine air intake if you can pick it up in a reasonably cool area.
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 08:27 AM

Originally Posted By IvorMog
If it's true that the airflow hits the firewall and then forms a high pressure area under the bonnet then that high pressure could be an advantage for the engine air intake if you can pick it up in a reasonably cool area.



That's true, sort of free turbo charging - however - the reason for my concern on this topic is that a couple of years ago we drove down in to France via the channel tunnel. When we arrived at the tunnel there was a bit of a queue so we went from 70mph to stationary in quite a short distance. Unbeknown to me the fan relay had decided it wanted a day off and shortly after we stopped the engine overheated and most of the contents of the cooling system blew out. The header is just in front of the passenger side windscreen and whilst alarming it didn't cause any injury however if we had been travelling at motorway speeds it could have blown back in my wifes face and she wouldn't like that. This is why I'm keen to control the temperature whilst moving.
Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 11:42 AM

Originally Posted By Heinz
Do you remember the thread when Lockheed Martin in the USA reported about the investigations in the wind tunnel? At that time, someone (an employee?) had his Rover Plus 8 tested there. The result was very interesting. The engineers' recommendation was to install a base plate in the front. In this way the air can flow through the radiator. This base plate should cover the area from the radiator to the engine.

Since I have an aluminum radiator in my 4/4, two things have changed. And I think it has something to do with the fact that this new radiator is wider and deeper.

The first thing I noticed was that now even more cold fresh air is being sucked up directly behind the radiator. That's good and really noticable during acceleration because my airbox is right behind the radiator...with the intake hole facing down.

The second thing I notice with my 4/4 is negative, but it's also an effect of the larger radiator: There's even less air flowing through the radiator, because the larger amount of fresh air coming from directly behind the radiator in form of an upstream from below will reduce the flow of air through the radiator even more. One air flow blocks the other.

So I notice quite clearly that the engine becomes much warmer at higher speeds, so from 140 km/h, than with the smaller original plastic radiator in the past. If it used to be 90 degrees, it's now 105 degrees.

This is a dilemma, and I want to experiment with a base plate in spring, to block the upstream so that more air flows through the radiator.

At the same time I want to make an opening with a pipe in this new base plate so that the airbox gets cold air, but the radiator continues to have air flowing through it.

In this way, the overall temperature in the engine compartment would have to drop, even in Plus 8.


My air intake now comes in from above the radiator










Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 02:06 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
Luckily I have found the original report on Gomog (see below). It was not Lookheed Martin which I recalled but Freightliner in Portland, Oregon who did the exploration on a Morgan car in 1995. Very interesting that they could prove that the size of the (then used) radiator was totally ok and the issue has to be resolved by changing the airflow, not the radiator itself.

I only noticed that the even bigger size of my in other respects brilliant aluminium radiator emphasizes the issue of the airflow when blocking its effectivity at higher speeds and when the temparature rises accordingly.

Here is the article which is the initiator of my idea to repeat their procedere to mount a flat floor underneath the gap between radiator and engine which will become an early spring project for me.

http://www.gomog.com/BLAIR/tech/cooling/art020.html

tmg513 was so kind to post this link in May of 2018.


Since that article referred to tests on a 1972 +8, I wonder how or if airflow within the engine compartment has been improved since. Would have thought the variety of engines, body widths and particularly louvres between models in the following years would have affected results.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 02:38 PM

Richard, as far as I know the opening underneath between front and engine is unaltered open since the 70is. The amount of air in this region to suck upwards behind the radiator is much bigger than the louvres, different engine size etc., which in my view seems to be more a fine tuning in relation.

But it could perhaps happen that the above mentioned effect is even bigger since e.g. the 1.6 Sigma engine is even smaller and more backwards mounted than a Trad Plus 8 which should result in a correspondingly bigger air gap.

There was a short film somewhere here, I recall also an American one, where the airflow on the outside of the car was tested by using stripes of fabric and you could clearly see where is low pressure and where is more pressure. I can‘t find it. The cowl was in my remembering more a low pressure area and the region behind the front wheel over the wing where the louvres are was definitely a very low pressure area (regarding air intake solutions).

Interesting also what Button writes, perhaps one must „help“ the radiator to get air flow through it with such an additional radiator. But first I would see what Guten gets as a result of his additional floor plate because for me it would be the more elegant solution.

Let us remind this thread is partly about air intake and partly about engine coolant. My contribution here is about engine coolant with priority...in my case the air intake would have to be altered if the engine coolant would better by using a floor plate. But that would be the next story.

BTW its all about the fun, it feels in a positive way as if we would improve our model steam engines from 1970 smile

Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 03:35 PM

Thanks Heinz. Maybe this was video you were referring to.

https://youtu.be/uomfVKFBJ44
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 03:52 PM

Thanks Richard, yes it is the video.
Posted By: nick w

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 04:10 PM

There must be a reason why the factory changed the direction of the side louvres a few years ago..?
Nick
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 04:37 PM

They changed the louvres with the launch of the first Roadster series1. Only that car had an intake directly at the inside bonnet of the louvres.
My unimportant guess: MMC did some survey at that time, perhaps the airflow was better by changing the direction of the louvres. Then the following series had a different intake but now the tools for the bonnet had been altered and will still be used until today.
Posted By: meabh

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 05:15 PM

I know that i have mentioned this before but re: Craig's photo it is alledged that one can gain 12bhp by putting it there.
Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 07:53 PM

Originally Posted By meabh
I know that i have mentioned this before but re: Craig's photo it is alledged that one can gain 12bhp by putting it there.


I would say I’ve gained 12 bhp easy including the remap !
Posted By: KEVFITZ

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 07:56 PM

When I had my 2014 4/4 remapped by Cain and including a K+N filter in standard airbox it produced 14bhp increase as measured on rolling road.

Next increase to 136 bhp was fitting of Librands tubular manifold and sports exhaust.
Posted By: nick w

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 09:45 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
They changed the louvres with the launch of the first Roadster series1. Only that car had an intake directly at the inside bonnet of the louvres.
My unimportant guess: MMC did some survey at that time, perhaps the airflow was better by changing the direction of the louvres. Then the following series had a different intake but now the tools for the bonnet had been altered and will still be used until today.

Thanks Heinz, you've reminded me that the first time I saw inverted louvres was on my 2005 roadster mk1. Mine had no inner fitting to the louvres as some others had.
The thing is though, have any tests of airflow under there been made since the change?
Nick
Posted By: Gambalunga

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 10:36 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
They changed the louvres with the launch of the first Roadster series1. Only that car had an intake directly at the inside bonnet of the louvres.
My unimportant guess: MMC did some survey at that time, perhaps the airflow was better by changing the direction of the louvres. Then the following series had a different intake but now the tools for the bonnet had been altered and will still be used until today.

Funny thing. We had an ex bonnet maker here as a guest between Christmas and new year. I happened to mention the direction of the bonnet louvres in conversation about my bonnets and I had thought that it was to do with safety but he told me that it was changed specifically to accommodate the air intake on the first Roadsters. So there is your answer.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 03/01/19 11:31 PM

Very interesting, Peter. So it was some guy of the MMC staff you had as a guest?

When I think about it, MMC didn't actually need a new tool, they just machined the hood the other way around with the direction of the louvres. And if you compare pictures of old 1980 Plus 8 with a roadster, it's actually obvious that the new way of making the louvres draws the air in more effectively.
But...it remains a low pressure area.

I would say, however, that the air intake on the open scoop as on the P4Supersport or also on your Plus4 certainly has advantages. That's what I mean because the air intake is much more outside. If you look at the US video, then the area where the scoop is located is not in the direct negative pressure air area as where on the other side the Roadster opening is located. The scoop is located more in front and above where the fabric strips in the video are still blowing. So it is a good thing.

And I recall that the scoop was effective. Ones I changed the overall oval air filter against filter sockets on my former P4SS and the gain was dramatically lower. So, there comes in enough of fresh air to create such a difference.
Posted By: Rog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 07:42 AM

Originally Posted By Heinz
Since I have an aluminum radiator in my 4/4, two things have changed. And I think it has something to do with the fact that this new radiator is wider and deeper.

The first thing I noticed was that now even more cold fresh air is being sucked up directly behind the radiator. That's good and really noticable during acceleration because my airbox is right behind the radiator...with the intake hole facing down.

The second thing I notice with my 4/4 is negative, but it's also an effect of the larger radiator: There's even less air flowing through the radiator, because the larger amount of fresh air coming from directly behind the radiator in form of an upstream from below will reduce the flow of air through the radiator even more. One air flow blocks the other.

So I notice quite clearly that the engine becomes much warmer at higher speeds, so from 140 km/h, than with the smaller original plastic radiator in the past. If it used to be 90 degrees, it's now 105 degrees.

This is a dilemma, and I want to experiment with a base plate in spring, to block the upstream so that more air flows through the radiator.

I apologise for being a bit late and only just reading this thread but are you saying the bigger aluminium rad made your car run hotter?
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 08:37 AM

Roger, depending on the speed, I would say yes. At lower speed and in extreme situations like In a stop and go on a warm summer day you notice that the aluminium radiator has more capacity than the smaller OEM plastic one. The temperature keeps cooler for a longer time and the electric fan is still rarer used than it is anyway the case with the 4/4.
(I never changed to aluminium because I felt the need due to coolant issues, it was just a precaution action not to wait until the OEM plastic item blows off).

At higher speeds over an extended and even distance, e.g. 140 km/h in 5th gear, for more than 10 minutes on the same piece of road the car gets warmer than with the smaller OEM radiator also now in the winter time. The assumptions why this could be so are discussed above in the thread.
Posted By: Rog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 09:00 AM

I had this conundrum too. My car ran hotter as soon as I fitted a taller more efficient aluminium rad but it had this under tray on before and after.



My theory is its down to the thermal management on the modern Duratec engine (and maybe the Sigma too) that appears to be quite precarious. These engines are different to the older engines as they have their thermostats located at the bottom of the engine on the coolant input rather than more traditionally at the top on the cylinder head output.

On an engine with the stat on the coolant input the engine temp is regulated by a thermostat with 2 inputs. One input comes from the cooler coolant exiting the rad and the other is the hot engine by-pass coolant path. The stat response to the combine temp of both coolant paths.


So if you add a bigger more efficient rad the engine has to run hotter to raise the by-pass coolant temp to offset the cooling improvement in order to open the stat and regulate engine temp i.e. the stat will open later.


Just a theory, please feel free to shoot it down.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 09:04 AM

Sounds spot on Roger and consistent with yours and others findings.

Many modern engines seem to have this thermostat location, some even with ECU controlled override to provide quicker cooling reaction to sudden increase in power demand.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 10:33 AM

A very interesting thought, Roger, about which I have a few questions below.

Ok, the Freightliner considerations at that time resulted in findings about the air flow, which I only transferred hypothetically to the current situation with the aluminium cooler. Up to now no one has realized the idea with the underbody plate to see what it does.
But for me it sounds reasonable even if I have only one clue for it, namely the noticeably better air supply of the air filter, which is placed directly behind the radiator.

Now if we leave (for a moment or may be longer) the ideas of the changed air flow and concentrate only on the thermostat idea.

Sorry if my questions let clearly see that I‘m just a curious layman.

If that's true as you write, Roger, then with one and the same radiator in winter, the average temperature of the engine would also have to rise?

Could a larger radiator (one which works effectively and delivers cooler water at its output) damage the engine because the engine has to run too warm for too long due to the compensation heat of the by-pass hose?

And is there a danger of too much resulting total heat when the thermostat is mounted on the bottom at the cold water inlet side? I wonder if at some point the bypass temperature must be reacted to by a wider opening of the cold part of the mix.

In a Ford service manual I once saw that the thermostat is electrically controlled on some models and, as Richard says, directly controlled by the ECU.
But I know that with the 4/4 the thermostat is purely mechanical. Therefore perhaps all works slower?

I have seen when a Thermostat on a 4/4 had to be replaced that it has a 82 degrees C temperatur mark on it. Being located at the cool side of the engine that would plausibly mean that the engine is intended to run a bit hotter than this „starting“ temperature, I would guess around 88 to 90 degrees C as I read the temperature on an OBD but I will recheck this readings.
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 10:42 AM

Is the OEM radiator copper core or aluminium core?

My old rad was copper core but I don't know about the later models.

Copper has a much better heat transfer value than aluminium so even though the radiator is bigger it won't have the same proportionate increase in cooling.

I changed my rad for reliability (and looks) rather than extra cooling.
Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 11:05 AM

Since having my SIFAB alloy radiator fitted to my 4/4 Sigma engine, I now notice my fan doesn’t cut in as much, even on real hot days I would need to leave the car running at standstill for quite a while before the fan cuts in.

With the original black plastic coated radiator it used to come on all
the time...

I’m not sure if this is a good thing or not ? ...

I only changed it becoaue quite a few on here have had failures with the factory radiators .
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 12:27 PM

Craig, for the same reason did I also change the radiator. I think it is a good sign if the fan does not cut in so often as before.
Posted By: Eddie Cairns

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 12:45 PM

From an efficiency point of view the engine is more efficient the higher the temperature it runs at within it's allowed temperature limits.

If the engine has not come to grief in the past and now the fan no longer cuts in as often, then the engine is working less efficiently.

If the engine did use watter due to it's higher temperature and now uses less than this may be a better long term reliabilty modification.

If the car did not use any real amount of water from the cooling system with the old radiator, the engine would be more efficient than it is now.
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 12:58 PM

Originally Posted By Eddie Cairns

If the engine has not come to grief in the past and now the fan no longer cuts in as often, then the engine is working less efficiently.


Sorry but I don't agree. The fan should only come on when the temperature has gone over the optimum temperature and then bring it back down into the correct temperature range.

In normal conditions when the car is moving at anything more than a crawl then the fan shouldn't be needed if the cooling system is adequate and working properly.

I should probably have prefaced this post with IMHO.
Posted By: Hamwich

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 02:30 PM

I agree with Bob. If the fan is on, the engine is too hot. That's the purpose of the fan. The fan not cutting in is not an indication of the engine running less efficiently, it's an indication of the temperature not being too high.

If the engine is running too cool then yes, the engine may not be working as efficiently as it could, but the water temperature gauge should show this. If the water in the head is at around 100ºC then all should be fine, if the revised cooling system is capable of pulling more heat out of the engine than the old system then all that will happen is that the thermostat will cycle more frequently to keep the water in the head at the correct temperature.

My radiator fan hardly ever cuts in except in slow-moving or stationary traffic in very hot weather. Normally the water in the head sits at 100ºC and the water entering the radiator is at 90ºC.
Posted By: Rog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 04:26 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
A very interesting thought, Roger, about which I have a few questions below.

Ok, the Freightliner considerations at that time resulted in findings about the air flow, which I only transferred hypothetically to the current situation with the aluminium cooler. Up to now no one has realized the idea with the underbody plate to see what it does.
But for me it sounds reasonable even if I have only one clue for it, namely the noticeably better air supply of the air filter, which is placed directly behind the radiator.

Now if we leave (for a moment or may be longer) the ideas of the changed air flow and concentrate only on the thermostat idea.

Sorry if my questions let clearly see that I‘m just a curious layman.
Heinz please we are all layman here debating and sharing our thoughts and experiences. These are just my observations and it could all be wrong smile

If that's true as you write, Roger, then with one and the same radiator in winter, the average temperature of the engine would also have to rise?
Yes. I have had my bigger aluminium rad in for a few seasons now and yes the car runs hotter in the winter. The fan runs much more in the winter and guess what, the stat stays closed with the fan running. Perversely the fan can run with the stat shut when the stat is on the cool side of the engine (it’s an easy check because you can feel the temp of the bottom hose whilst the fan is running). In the summer at 30C the fan doesn’t run much at all but the stat will often be open.

Could a larger radiator (one which works effectively and delivers cooler water at its output) damage the engine because the engine has to run too warm for too long due to the compensation heat of the by-pass hose?
Yes I think possibly so. I suspect Ford match the rads quite carefully.

And is there a danger of too much resulting total heat when the thermostat is mounted on the bottom at the cold water inlet side? I wonder if at some point the bypass temperature must be reacted to by a wider opening of the cold part of the mix.
Yes. I have done 2 to things to reduce my engine temp in an attempt to restore the balance since fitting the bigger rad. I’ve replaced the standard 90C stat with a Burton Power 82C stat. Also I’ve de-tuned my rad by putting a plate in front to reduce the surface area (pic below). I’m very happy with my engine temp in both summer and winter now. It happily stays mostly between 94 to 100C. I regularly check it with a scan tool.

In a Ford service manual I once saw that the thermostat is electrically controlled on some models and, as Richard says, directly controlled by the ECU.
But I know that with the 4/4 the thermostat is purely mechanical. Therefore perhaps all works slower?
On the first 1.8/2.0 early Duratec the stat housing had an ecu controlled heater embedded. I believe it was needed because there is a huge lag or disconnect between the head temp under load and stat opening at the bottom of the engine. To open the stat quicker the ecu would monitor the head temp and open the stat when necessary.

I assume this did not work very well as Ford dropped it on the Duratec around 2004. They did away with the heater and went back to pure mechanical and also changed the stat from a 98C to the 90C that we see in all the Duratec Morgans. The Duratec/Morgan ECU’s still have the pinouts for the heater but it is not used.


I have seen when a Thermostat on a 4/4 had to be replaced that it has a 82 degrees C temperatur mark on it. Being located at the cool side of the engine that would plausibly mean that the engine is intended to run a bit hotter than this „starting“ temperature, I would guess around 88 to 90 degrees C as I read the temperature on an OBD but I will recheck this readings.
Yes. When the stat is on the cold side the stat ‘cracking’ temp is not the same as the engine or cylinder head temp.


Air flow restrictor

Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 04:41 PM

Originally Posted By Hamwich
I agree with Bob. If the fan is on, the engine is too hot. That's the purpose of the fan. The fan not cutting in is not an indication of the engine running less efficiently, it's an indication of the temperature not being too high.

If the engine is running too cool then yes, the engine may not be working as efficiently as it could, but the water temperature gauge should show this. If the water in the head is at around 100ºC then all should be fine, if the revised cooling system is capable of pulling more heat out of the engine than the old system then all that will happen is that the thermostat will cycle more frequently to keep the water in the head at the correct temperature.

My radiator fan hardly ever cuts in except in slow-moving or stationary traffic in very hot weather. Normally the water in the head sits at 100ºC and the water entering the radiator is at 90ºC.



That makes sense Tim, my water temperature gauge remains the same as before at around 100, so the new alloy radiator helps maintain the correct running temperature without the use of the fan as much ?
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 05:59 PM

I have wondered too about the positioning in the circuit of the temperature sensor for the gauge and the thermostat. I wondered if the stat is controlling the temperature as normal and the gauge is sensing the outlet temperature from the engine - BUT, I've renewed the stat on mine to make sure it is working OK (made no difference so I assume the one I took out was fine) and it is as you would expect a standard fitment SO in a normal saloon car it would only be on very rare occasions you would see the temperature gauge move let alone rise significantly no matter what speed. The rad I have is a Mulfab one (I fitted it because the standard one developed a leak, replaced it with a standard one and that one didn't last long either so I thought the Mulfab one would kill two stones with one bird). That being the case it is larger and so if the air flow is OK why would the coolant temperature vafry depending on the speed other than the speed itself causing an air flow restriction. I don't understand why this should be as there are plenty of louvres but it is. We'll see what happens.
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 06:19 PM

Roger, thanks for your detailed answers. It should not ne too difficult when I cut some cardboard to reduce the efficiency of the aluminium radiator, which consequently to your thoughts should help to lower the water temperature of the engine.

I have understood the consequences and effects but I haven't really fully understood how it works and how the connection between the warm bypass water and the cooler radiator water come together.

I assume that both water hoses meet before the thermostat. But how is the mix determined, and why does too little cold water seem to come into the circuit towards the engine behind the stat when the new radiator cools so well, better than the old smaller plastic radiator? But the engine runs hotter...
Posted By: Heinz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 06:23 PM

Simon, the stat thought is different than the air flow thought. The thermostat theory assumes that the radiator actually works even better, but exactly for this reason, the engine gets warmer. As you say, we will see. I will test both approaches.
Posted By: Craig Jezz

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 07:20 PM

Originally Posted By Guten
I have wondered too about the positioning in the circuit of the temperature sensor for the gauge and the thermostat. I wondered if the stat is controlling the temperature as normal and the gauge is sensing the outlet temperature from the engine - BUT, I've renewed the stat on mine to make sure it is working OK (made no difference so I assume the one I took out was fine) and it is as you would expect a standard fitment SO in a normal saloon car it would only be on very rare occasions you would see the temperature gauge move let alone rise significantly no matter what speed. The rad I have is a Mulfab one (I fitted it because the standard one developed a leak, replaced it with a standard one and that one didn't last long either so I thought the Mulfab one would kill two stones with one bird). That being the case it is larger and so if the air flow is OK why would the coolant temperature vafry depending on the speed other than the speed itself causing an air flow restriction. I don't understand why this should be as there are plenty of louvres but it is. We'll see what happens.


The way I understand it, aluminium radiators provide more cooling, due to the fact aluminium is an efficient heat rejection. Hence the reason the fan does less work
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 08:42 PM

Originally Posted By Craig Jezz
Originally Posted By Guten
I have wondered too about the positioning in the circuit of the temperature sensor for the gauge and the thermostat. I wondered if the stat is controlling the temperature as normal and the gauge is sensing the outlet temperature from the engine - BUT, I've renewed the stat on mine to make sure it is working OK (made no difference so I assume the one I took out was fine) and it is as you would expect a standard fitment SO in a normal saloon car it would only be on very rare occasions you would see the temperature gauge move let alone rise significantly no matter what speed. The rad I have is a Mulfab one (I fitted it because the standard one developed a leak, replaced it with a standard one and that one didn't last long either so I thought the Mulfab one would kill two stones with one bird). That being the case it is larger and so if the air flow is OK why would the coolant temperature vafry depending on the speed other than the speed itself causing an air flow restriction. I don't understand why this should be as there are plenty of louvres but it is. We'll see what happens.


The way I understand it, aluminium radiators provide more cooling, due to the fact aluminium is an efficient heat rejection. Hence the reason the fan does less work


True but the fan IS doing the same amount of work
Posted By: IvorMog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 08:45 PM

Originally Posted By Craig Jezz
Originally Posted By Guten
I have wondered too about the positioning in the circuit of the temperature sensor for the gauge and the thermostat. I wondered if the stat is controlling the temperature as normal and the gauge is sensing the outlet temperature from the engine - BUT, I've renewed the stat on mine to make sure it is working OK (made no difference so I assume the one I took out was fine) and it is as you would expect a standard fitment SO in a normal saloon car it would only be on very rare occasions you would see the temperature gauge move let alone rise significantly no matter what speed. The rad I have is a Mulfab one (I fitted it because the standard one developed a leak, replaced it with a standard one and that one didn't last long either so I thought the Mulfab one would kill two stones with one bird). That being the case it is larger and so if the air flow is OK why would the coolant temperature vafry depending on the speed other than the speed itself causing an air flow restriction. I don't understand why this should be as there are plenty of louvres but it is. We'll see what happens.


The way I understand it, aluminium radiators provide more cooling, due to the fact aluminium is an efficient heat rejection. Hence the reason the fan does less work


Copper is a much better transmitter of heat than aluminium which is why I asked earlier if the later radiator cores were copper or aluminium.

My original Zetec rad was copper I think but because my new ally rad is bigger and has more fins it does a very good job.

Copper has almost double the thermal conductivity of aluminium.

Simon of Sifab is the expert though so I will stand by to be corrected.
Posted By: Rog

Re: Air Intake improvements - 04/01/19 10:38 PM

Originally Posted By Heinz
Roger, thanks for your detailed answers. It should not ne too difficult when I cut some cardboard to reduce the efficiency of the aluminium radiator, which consequently to your thoughts should help to lower the water temperature of the engine.

I have understood the consequences and effects but I haven't really fully understood how it works and how the connection between the warm bypass water and the cooler radiator water come together.

I assume that both water hoses meet before the thermostat. But how is the mix determined, and why does too little cold water seem to come into the circuit towards the engine behind the stat when the new radiator cools so well, better than the old smaller plastic radiator? But the engine runs hotter...


Your cardboard experiment will be interesting.

I don’t know the detail of the Sigma so can only attempt an explanation on the Duratec.

Below is a pic of the Duratec showing the coolant paths and how they mix at the stat housing. Also a pic of my old 90deg stat. Note the stat is a double valve arrangement. The primary valve is pretty standard. The secondary valve is the plunger at the end that seals against a seat in the block. When the primary valve opens to let the rad coolant into the block the secondary valve closes off the hot by-pass coolant.

As said before it looks like it is dependent on a precarious temperature balance between the hot and cooled coolants that might hold the answer. Just a wacky theory…… smile
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 05/01/19 09:35 AM

FWIW the coolant bypass whether it's integrated into the block or an external pipe, is always a narrower bore than main rad cooling circuit.

This is the case with conventional cylinder head or rad return thermostat location.
Posted By: BertR

Re: Air Intake improvements - 05/01/19 11:03 AM

When I replaced broken radiator with a Mulfab alluminium one, I noticed a drop in the cooling water temperature. This must be because the Mulfab one being made from alluminium and being larger. As I did not like the esthetics of the new radiator sticking out from below the front, I got a stubby valance from Wolff Engineering, to cover it up as well as to get some extra protection. Result is that the running temperature is slightly up again.
In order to lower the under bonnet temperature, I installed bonnet extenders from John Taylor. This also provides some extra free volume around the itg air filter, which should help breathing. An additional bennefit is the increased sound level from the air intake.

I wonder if closing the gap at the bottom between radiator and front of engine (as mentioned earlier in this discussion) would be of additional help to help both air intake temperature and flow (given the bonnet extenders).
Cheers,
Bert
Posted By: DaveW

Re: Air Intake improvements - 05/01/19 11:59 AM

It's not a difficult job Bert, because you can start with a flat sheet of aluminium, and improvise. I've done it on each of mine. Of course it's impossible to really evaluate the outcome, but none of mine have run hot, even last summer.
Posted By: Guten

Re: Air Intake improvements - 07/01/19 01:17 PM

I had a good run today and I'd say the new deflector plate made no difference whatsoever. Still gives an indicated 96 once fully warmed up at 40 to 50 and got up to 102 at 70 on a long gentle hill, just about 100 at 70. The fan didn't come on as far as I could tell. I will leave the plate there to see what happens in the summer.
It seems like the thermostat is controlling the inlet temperature to the engine and the dashboard water temperature gauge is reporting the outlet i.e. 88 deg inlet constant but the more the load the higher the outlet temperature.

crazy2
Posted By: sid

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 19/06/19 10:52 AM

Originally Posted By CooperMan
On the 3.7 Roadsters the only intake for air is via a hole cut onto the base of the Mustang airbox / filter housing here..



It's not very large in area and draws intake air from close to the back of the engine and the footwell bulkhead, and is only about 6 inches from the hot exhaust manifold

The filter sits flat in the top of the airbox & there's plenty of space below...





So I've cut some additional intake holes below the filter line to allow more air routes in, and hopefully some will be cooler air pushed in by the forward facing bonnet louvres, and I'm lining the 'box' with reflective foil tape





Next task is an air scoop to the back of the bonnet side louvres or a Naca duct


Inspired by Jon's much earlier posts relating to getting more cooler air into the 3.7 Roadster's air box, I've also cut a 4" hole in the box but then used a ducting elbow that came from Screwfix to help draw cool air from the side vents in the bonnet.
A quick spray of matt black and I think it looks quite tidy.




I've left the original hole in the base of the box open, but I'm hoping that this - very cheap! - addition may improve things.

Only a proper dyno test will confirm one way or the other whether there's any difference in performance, as I must say I can't notice any, but I just feel that anything's got to be better than the standard arrangement.
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 19/06/19 03:50 PM

Sid, looks a good idea

My MK2 version now has a scoop fitted above the rad which feeds air via a duct direct into the front airbox hole

The engine deffo runs cooler as the fan cuts in a lot less
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 08:13 AM

Sid, photos of Mk2 upgrade



Intake scoop mounted on top of rad



Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 09:38 AM

Neat job Jon. I feel if I was to do the same I would need to start with an unbutchered airbox as that is what the MMC mod is IMO.

Do you happen to know the source of (intact) airbox?

My investigations revealed there were two 3.7 V6 Mustang airbox variants, and the OE slab filter (replaced with K&N) on mine matches the 2011-2014 one with straight not angled outlet. Even then it would have had a hole at the front to accept the rectangular cold air inlet pipe (see my photo further up this thread) which would be sited just behind left hand bank on Morgan, so maybe yet another Ford airbox variant.
Posted By: sid

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 11:36 AM

Nice idea, Jon. Interesting to hear that the car now runs cooler, too.
Maybe your design restricts some of the airflow that would normally have by-passed the radiator, but is now forcing more air to go through it?

Anyway, you've now prompted me to experiment with installing a blanking plate above the rad, as the cooling fan certainly kicks in a lot more than it ever did on my old +4.

So thanks for that, as it's given me more excuses to disappear into the garage for some more tinkering...!
Posted By: sid

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 11:44 AM

I think the lower section of the airbox could be unique to Morgan, Richard.
The top section is certainly Ford, but the lower section seems to have been specifically designed to fit the available space and shape on the Roadster.
Then the Morgan boffins, rather than devise a more complex (and probably more efficient) inlet tract, just took a hacksaw to the base of it.
Posted By: Richard Wood

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 03:24 PM

Interesting thought Sid. I initially thought MMC wouldn't have the volume to justify a dedicated airbox moulding but then realised they do have one for the intake manifold complete with Morgan logo.

It still doesn't make sense for them to have a custom made airbox then take a hacksaw to it though. As well as the two Mustang airbox variants there were other cars fitted with the same Cyclone engine, Mazda, Lincoln, Ford Edge, F-150 and Transit even a Ginetta .... I wonder innocent
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: Air Intake improvements - 20/06/19 03:48 PM

Umm, been to Ginetta a few years ago & they make quite a lot of custom parts in house, they even have their own Carbon Fibre shop

Might be worth a call Richard ?
Posted By: series1

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 22/06/19 04:08 PM

Jon where did you get the plastic scoop from that you have put under the cowl I,have experimented with a made up scoop on my 2014 plus 4. The existing air duct just being strewn under the cowl ,with the scoop on it seemed to make a difference in acceleration,and low down power,so would be good to get a purpose made scoop
Posted By: CooperMan

Re: 3.7 Roadster Air Intake improvements - 28/06/19 08:13 AM

Series1, try Car Builder Solutions & Demon Tweeks, sometimes you also have to modify by cutting flanges off or warming with a hot air gun and deforming to fit
© 2019 Talk Morgan - Morgan Sports Car Discussion Forum, Community and News