What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

(Junkyard crawl) Found a Factory oil cooler, new Parker lines.

Stomis said:
IMO run braided stainless or bust. Its not that expensive, you can service them yourself, theyre super rub/wear resistant on the exterior and carrying a roll of line can make it so you can field service any fitting on the truck that size.

I used to not like stainless braided stuff, but after successfully using it in a few applications I would take that over pushlok anything or crimped rubber lines any day of the week.



As far as needing the oil cooler, Im with Martin. Oil coolers come into play more so with diesels and some newer gas stuff when the oil is actually used to cool the combustion under the pistons. The oil is going to run the radiant temp of the engine. Keep the engine at the proper temp and the oil in turn will stay at the proper temp. The 400s running hot is a myth derived from people replacing the heads and no properly accommodating the steam holes.
Click to expand...

I don't use that push lock crap. Hate it. Braided or bust is correct.
As far as the keeping the engine the proper temp and what I agree 100% as well.

I am still at a loss on why this was a factory thing....? Emissions?

And as far as the 400 goes I agree, people just think they run hot, poor maintenance, wrong heads, tons of reasons that add to the evil 400 myth. I had one in a daily for yrs. and it was always fine. (In a cutlass no less:) )I have been playing with them for 15 years, I am a 400 guy. Have a bunch "in stock" for a rainy day.

My hold up is that this will be a new setup for me. With different variables then before, and since I will be in there wrenching, there is the "might as well" aspect for me.
 
Perhaps the oil cooler was to aid with the detriments of ****ty early factory smog? In the day of the 400 Im sure the EGR wasnt the most calculating thing and that this added to the heat soak factor in the motor. Not to mention them deliberately running engines hotter for emissions and not countering this until reverse flow cooling came around, plus EFI controlling the EGR more accurately.

Idk just speculations.
 
Yes, the E-curve will work with a box, I have not hooked up my 6AL that I already had, so no feedback on that.

I smiled at your stash of 400's, I have 2 in storage besides the 2 that are around here in trucks.
 
Stomis said:
Perhaps the oil cooler was to aid with the detriments of ****ty early factory smog? In the day of the 400 Im sure the EGR wasnt the most calculating thing and that this added to the heat soak factor in the motor. Not to mention them deliberately running engines hotter for emissions and not countering this until reverse flow cooling came around, plus EFI controlling the EGR more accurately.

Idk just speculations.
Click to expand...

Yep I was thinking a rounds those lines as well.
 
6872xtc said:
Yes, the E-curve will work with a box, I have not hooked up my 6AL that I already had, so no feedback on that.

I smiled at your stash of 400's, I have 2 in storage besides the 2 that are around here in trucks.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was raised old school, and have been a big inch guy as well. In all my days of rodding (cars or trucks) I don't think I have ever passed on buying a sbc 400.
Or bbc for that matter. Saddens me the glory days of the Bbc are over, my crawl on Friday yielded 3 454 sitting in the yard. I am just not sure it's worth getting them anymore, even for a 200$ engine price tag (after core) 89 c2500, 91 k2500 and an 86 c20 - what a shame. Right now my stash of sbc is 4 strong, 5 if you count my current build. I have sent a few down the road over the years as well. The best one I have now is a freebie from camper with 18,000 miles, a buddy wanted some camper parts for a rebuild of his camper and gave the engine to me when the chassis was going to scrap. Score!
 
So I am not disagreeing with those points, but I don't think the factory would keep using oil coolers, even on 4.3 and 5.3 engines, if it was not beneficial to overall cooling. I don't know what gas engines have oil squirter for the pistons. I know some do now, but I believe that is very recent. Just more food for thought.
And look at the life expectancy of late model engines. I don't believe it can all be due to EFI. Also remember that oil is all that cools the valve springs. What else might it help cool when you are pulling hard?
 
6872xtc said:
So I am not disagreeing with those points, but I don't think the factory would keep using oil coolers, even on 4.3 and 5.3 engines, if it was not beneficial to overall cooling. I don't know what gas engines have oil squirter for the pistons. I know some do now, but I believe that is very recent. Just more food for thought.
And look at the life expectancy of late model engines. I don't believe it can all be due to EFI. Also remember that oil is all that cools the valve springs. What else might it help cool when you are pulling hard?
Click to expand...

True on the squirters. Im not going to say an oil cooler does nothing, and someone whos done the homework on what they accomplish could probably make a really good pro cooler argument for them.

However I will generally attest to the fact that engine longevity now is 90% from EFI and maybe the other 10% from reverse flow cooling. As a lot of us have probably witnessed first hand, tear down on a 150,000miles LS engine that was taken care of vs a 150,000mile carb'd motor is night and day.
 
Well I stopped by the yard tonight and grabbed it. 28.80$ out the door.
Worth it? maybe - or maybe not.
Need it? maybe - or maybe not.
Want it? Yep

Went ahead a got the whole thing. I think I can work with it.
Going to boil or steam clean the cooler, adapter and hard lines and then run the lines to Parker to replace the hose part. With some nice high quality/ high temp stainless lines. Replace the o rings in the fittings and buy the little bent line from the rubber hose to the cooler I tweeked. I like the hard line part and see no reason why the hard lines won't be fine.

Will I have more money in this then a new set up for 125$? Maybe. But I don't really care, this is the best part of hot rodding/wheeling/wrenching. It's also how I like to build things, buying a combo of new and old parts, building my own and rehabbing someone else's junk, even different makes of things in order to build what I believe is the best thing I can. Making my stuff to perform to my needs. It's in the spirt of true roddin'.

image.jpg
 
Last edited:
beags86 said:
Well I stopped by the yard tonight and grabbed it. 28.80$ out the door.
Worth it? maybe - or maybe not.
Need it? maybe - or maybe not.
Want it? Yep

Going to boil or steam clean the cooler, adapter and hard lines and then run the lines to Parker to replace the hose part. With some nice high quality/ high temp stainless lines. Replace the o rings in the fittings and buy the little bent line from the rubber hose to the cooler I tweeked. I like the hard line part and see no reason why the hard lines won't be fine.

Will I have more money in this then a new set up for 125$? Maybe. But I don't really care, this is the best part of hot rodding/wheeling/wrenching. It's also how I like to build things, buying a combo of new and old parts, building my own and rehabbing someone else's junk, even different makes of things in order to build what I believe is the best thing I can. Making my stuff to perform to my needs. It's in the spirt of true roddin'.
Click to expand...

solid lines will not last long, need something to flex
 
beags86 said:
Going to boil or steam clean the cooler, adapter and hard lines and then run the lines to Parker to replace the hose part. With some nice high quality/ high temp stainless lines.
Click to expand...

Not sure if this is where my miscommunication is or not, but they won't be solid, they will still have the factory hose part as highlighted here. I am going to have Parker run me new hoses. High quality/high presser/high temp stainless steel braided, rubber enclosed line.
:dunno:

So yeah they will be able to flex:D
 
Last edited:
The factory lines have a rubber part forward of the motor mount. I fail to see why the hard line from the filter adapter to the rubber part is an issue.
 
I'd agree with the sentiments prior that GM wouldn't have used the coolers as long as they did if they didn't serve some benefit. Kind of like quad shocks...they had them because that was the only viable option at the time.

Splash oil cooling is apparently one of the "methods" to controlling piston temp, if an engine is working hard and/or running a bit lean, it makes sense that the oil temp could increase out of proportion to coolant temp if the piston is getting hot.

One of my projects is to eventually measure the difference in oil temp with cooler vs. no cooler (in my case it's for watching for oil temp spikes while intentionally running the engine lean). It's relatively easy to do even with the stock engine temp gauge, the hardest part is figuring out a way to get a GM coolant temp sensor into the oil pan. A machinist could PROBABLY turn one of the stock coolant temp senders down to the oil drain thread diameter. Not something to run long term, but for a concrete answer as to cooler effectiveness, measuring oil temp is the only way to do it.

Oh...and I'm not a fan of the later rubber oil cooler hoses, good on replacing them. I've got the earlier OEM braided stainless ones, and they don't leak a drop. I've removed and installed them numerous times, still no leaks. The later rubber ones, if they don't leak initially, seem to leak as soon as you disconnect then reconnect them.
 
I think the junk OEM oil cooler hoses GM used were responsible for destroying more engines,than having the oil cooler "saved"...
I never saw the need for an oil cooler on a daily driver grocery getter or light duty pickup myself..

The oil cooler hoses on my 6.2 looked OK from the outside--but one day while under the truck,I looked at the crimped aluminum collars where they screwed into the block--the entire back side was GONE!--completely dissolved by road salt I guess!...it was a miracle the hoses did not just blow off the fittings,and let the engine run dry, and kill it...

The rest of the tubing the hoses screwed onto that pass behind the radiator were rusty and looked ready to pop,so I decided to make a loop of 3/8" copper tubing to join the two hose ports in the block--and delete the oil cooler..

Though I dont drive the truck far or push it that hard,I haven't noticed any real difference not having the cooler--another strange thing I noticed was there seemed to be NO oil in the hoses or cooler!--even after I put my air gun in one hose and blew thru it...the stacked plate cooler in a 6.2 radiator isn't all that big,and the passages in it are easily clogged up..I suspect mine never let any oil pass thru it!..

(I have cut a few 6.2 OEM coolers out when scrapping radiators and thought "what a joke",when I saw how big it was--an automatic tranny cooler in the radiator is larger..)..

I was worried that by-passing the oil cooler might cause troubles,but after a friend told me he has just put pipe plugs in the cooler hose ports in the block on several fleet trucks he maintains at a cranberry bog (which is supposedly NOT the right way to do it,the by-pass valve in the engine will still allow some oil to pass to the bearings,etc,but at reduced pressure and volume--its best to "loop" the ports together instead)--he said they loaded those trucks with tons of berries several years now,drive them at 65 mph for an hour to the processing plants,and never had an engine let go from oiling issues yet...so I'm not too worried about mine...
 
dyeager535 said:
I'd agree with the sentiments prior that GM wouldn't have used the coolers as long as they did if they didn't serve some benefit. Kind of like quad shocks...they had them because that was the only viable option at the time.

Splash oil cooling is apparently one of the "methods" to controlling piston temp, if an engine is working hard and/or running a bit lean, it makes sense that the oil temp could increase out of proportion to coolant temp if the piston is getting hot.

One of my projects is to eventually measure the difference in oil temp with cooler vs. no cooler (in my case it's for watching for oil temp spikes while intentionally running the engine lean). It's relatively easy to do even with the stock engine temp gauge, the hardest part is figuring out a way to get a GM coolant temp sensor into the oil pan. A machinist could PROBABLY turn one of the stock coolant temp senders down to the oil drain thread diameter. Not something to run long term, but for a concrete answer as to cooler effectiveness, measuring oil temp is the only way to do it.

Oh...and I'm not a fan of the later rubber oil cooler hoses, good on replacing them. I've got the earlier OEM braided stainless ones, and they don't leak a drop. I've removed and installed them numerous times, still no leaks. The later rubber ones, if they don't leak initially, seem to leak as soon as you disconnect then reconnect them.
Click to expand...


I am planing on running a oil temp gauge to my oil pan sump, I will prob have to weld in a bung for the sender. On the side of the pan. That was my plan. Will have an engine temp gauge as well.

The hoses on here were braided enclosed in rubber, I thought I was going to cut them to make the pull quicker, I put my box cutter knife on them and nope. :doah:sh*t! now I have to do the right way!
 
If you get the chance, run the setup before and after under conditions you can repeat.

Really need a good baseline to measure cooling effectiveness, and IMO you are only going to see a noticeable change (if it exists) under heavy load such as towing or climbing a steep hill, and possibly immediately after load decreases.

Going to be hard to get good numbers with an analog gauge and an inability to accurately measure time.

I've got an ECM that will allow me to log a temperature probe, so understanding the relationship of load vs temp vs time will be easy. When I ever get around to the hard part of converting to a different ECM.
 
dyeager535 said:
If you get the chance, run the setup before and after under conditions you can repeat.

Really need a good baseline to measure cooling effectiveness, and IMO you are only going to see a noticeable change (if it exists) under heavy load such as towing or climbing a steep hill, and possibly immediately after load decreases.

Going to be hard to get good numbers with an analog gauge and an inability to accurately measure time.

I've got an ECM that will allow me to log a temperature probe, so understanding the relationship of load vs temp vs time will be easy. When I ever get around to the hard part of converting to a different ECM.
Click to expand...

Stomis said:
I'd be curious to see the results of a real comparison like that. Maybe it will change my feelings on them :waytogo:
Click to expand...

I think will do this, but unfortunately it will be quite aways off, my engine is scheduled to run on the engine dyno on Friday April 3. Of course install into truck.
And My truck then needs a handful of other things. Finish x-over steering, fast efi install w/ k5 fuel tank, need to re-gear the read end, and of course all the little things that go with those bigger projects, and who knows what I might I dream up after or during that. I will need to properly break in the new 406 and get converted over to synthetic oil before I start running the mountain passes and pulling.

It would be fun to real-world test the difference between conventional oil/synthetic oil/cooler/no-cooler.

Anyway, it wouldn't be with an ECM, just a good ol' auto meter and some eyeballs.

Anyway, my plan is to have it ready for fall for our yearly 10 day expo run. Going to toss the RTT on the back and head up to Banff National Park. Campin', wheelin', and explorin' the whole way. Woot:woot:Woot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom