The idea that if some is good, more is better is rampant. Sometimes it's true too. Like with money, when is more not better? But there are things where that ethic needs to be examined.

I'm thinking of radiators and the fact that nearly everyone thinks that if two rows of tubes are good then four rows have to be better. Not always the case. The front row, the one that gets hit with "first air" is the most efficient because the greater the temperature differential the greater the heat transfer from the radiator to the air. So ideally, the best radiator would be a one row radiator if it had a large enough volume to handle the heat load.

Each row back, being exposed to air already heated by the row(s) in front of it is less effective than the first because the air/coolant temperature differential is less.

Also to be considered is that each additional row restricts air flowing through the radiator overall.

There is no rule as to what is the best 'number of rows' in a radiator due to the differences in core design. The most common are the type with the serpentine fins that zigzag between the tubes. These are common because they are inexpensive, but less desirable because of the small 'fin to tube' contact. The more costly, and more efficient is the type where the 'fins' are sheets that go all the way across the radiator and are penetrated by the tubes. This provides the most 'fin to tube' contact. Also, this type of fin design is often punched with a great many micro louvers that increase the heat dissapating qualities.

In any case, the more rows the more restrictive to air flow. Bigger area is more efficient than more rows. Point being, there is a point of diminishing returns when adding more rows to the radiator.

 

Thread moved to Heating and Cooling forum.

-Matt

 

Interesting thought Bdox, I wonder at what point the efficientcy dramatically drops off? Charts Graphs? just kidding, Ford engineers?

 

I don't think you will find much. The answer would be different for different vehicles and variations for how it is equipped. (particularly A/C and any other coolers in front of the rad.) It usually makes sense to go with the radiator specified by the manufacturer. The local rad shop may try to "upgrade" you, which may not be doing you any favors.

 

I agree that a upgrade isn't always neccessary. Adverse conditions or non-typical use usually require an upgrade though. Most people drive their vehicles down the road and don't need an upgrade if they maintain the system. Neglect of a system makes it easier for the repair shop to say you need more. "See, the stock system is to small."

They say this will ignoring the fact the coolant has never been changed or the fins on the front core are all mashed in.

 

That is true. But ususally the best upgrade is to go to a higher quality radiator than to go to more 'rows.' A good radiator man will have proper info on this. So if your radiator supplier just wants to sell you more rows, find a guy who really knows his business.

 

Does anyone know who made the stock 1 row radiator for Ford in 1985? I have heard Modine and someone else told me Visteon. I would like to replace my radiator with a stock unit without going through Ford.

 

Don't really know, but there are direct replacements all over.

A lot has changed in the radiator industry since '85. Buyouts and mergers etc. as well as new plants opening and old ones closing down.

 

Wow and here I thought I was the only one who thought the area of the radiator core is more important to cooling then the number of rows. I believed this for years. Glad to see I'm not the only one. Now to figure out how to put that catapiler radiator in my camry.