On Jul 13, 7:08 pm, Dave S wrote:
Dave S wrote:
wrote:

I have never understood why the manufacturer would plumb the oil temp
sender after the cooler, it gives a false reading. If the cooler was
very efficient it could shed 50+ degrees. So lets say the after cooler
temp was 220 degrees after a long climb out during hot weather, that
would mean the actual oil temp in the pan of the motor was 270+. Funny
the FAA lets the certified planes get away with it plumbed that way.

Thats how it is in our Mazda's... we measure the coolant temp before the
rad, but the oil temp AFTER the cooler.

What makes you think someone is "getting away" with something?

Dave

Let me rephrase my reply a bit..

Oil flow is from the pan, to the pump, to the cooler, to the engine. The
temp going IN to the engine is what counts, from a viscosity and cooling
standpoint. The temp in the pan is NOT reflective of the temp going INTO
the engine.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The temp in the pan is true state of affairs in the engine. Hell, I
could plumb several oil coolers in series and dissapate most of the
heat, install the oil temp probe just before the cool oil re-enters
the motor and tell everyone my my oil temp only runs 110 degrees, of
course that would be smoke and mirrors and only fools would buy it. My
point was and is, if someone wants to really know how hard a motor is
working use the true heat numbers it is creating. not the altered
numbers. By going with your concept,why don't we use the temp of the
coolant coming back from the radiator instead of the true temp as is
passes through the thermostat housing on the way to the radiatior?

Ben
www.haaspowerair.com