Retaining waterflow to core

[fireplug]

I posted up about the Fluidyne rad I picked up cheap a week ago. Well I really bought it based on the size only, and had a buddy that lived close pick it up for me.

Well neither of us noticed for days, that it doesn't have the fitting for the heater core. Living in Canada, running without heat is not an option.

Can I just plumb the heater core from the pump and or manifold? Are there fittings made for this application?

Any ideas? Or am I reselling this thing?

 

[4xcrazy]

yup, one off the pump, one on the manifold, it's a secondary setup that can be used, that's the way my 76 Nova was setup, and worked fine.

Haven't messed with it in some time, some will chime in and correct me if i am wrong,,,,they always do , but i believe the pump is the return line, and the one on the intake is the "feed"

 

[fireplug]

yup, one off the pump, one on the manifold, it's a secondary setup that can be used, that's the way my 76 Nova was setup, and worked fine.

Haven't messed with it in some time, some will chime in and correct me if i am wrong,,,,they always do , but i believe the pump is the return line, and the one on the intake is the "feed"

Cool! That's good news, I really want to use this thing.

I'll have to snoop around some catalogues and see what is available.

Any other insight is welcomed!

 

[4X4HIGH]

You could always have someone tig weld a fitting on the tank for you and use it as original.

 

[fireplug]

You could always have someone tig weld a fitting on the tank for you and use it as original.

True enough. At that point though, I'll just dump it. Should be easy to recoup my cash, and get an application specific rad.

 

[4X4HIGH]

There is nothing wrong with using the waterpump and intake manifold fittings. That is how all the GM cars are set up and about half the trucks as well.

 

[fireplug]

There is nothing wrong with using the waterpump and intake manifold fittings. That is how all the GM cars are set up and about half the trucks as well.

What is the idea of having them routed to the rad at all then?

 

[4X4HIGH]

I have no definative answer but it doesn't matter where it returns to really.

 

[sled_dog]

My 84 K5 was setup with heater hoses going to the manifold and waterpump.

See on top of the waterpump(sorry its black and hard to see) there is a fitting there for the one heater hose.

 

[sled_dog]

What is the idea of having them routed to the rad at all then?

My 84 went to the water pump. My 89 went to the radiator. Pretty certain the 89 had to because of the big brackets for the serpentine setup, hose routing would have been stupid.

 

[fireplug]

Ok great, thanks. Now I checked out my summit catalogue and it didn't have anything. What would the connection at the manifold consist of?

And just to clarify, the route is manifold to heater core to water pump?

 

[sled_dog]

yes. manifold connection would be the same as it is now, no need to change.

 

[fireplug]

Awesome! Thanks everyone!

 

[ntsqd]

If your intake has the port(s), pulling the heater water off the back of the cyl head seemed to get warm faster than off the front, at least on the one vehicle I've tried that way.

 

[fireplug]

If your intake has the port(s), pulling the heater water off the back of the cyl head seemed to get warm faster than off the front, at least on the one vehicle I've tried that way.

Interesting...

 

[sled_dog]

that is the way the factory application is setup if I remember correctly... Think on my 89 where it returned to the radiator, the inlet to the heatercore pulled off of the back of the manifold. Where as on my 84 where it returned to the water pump, the inlet to the heatercore was off of the front of the intake.

 

[fireplug]

I've been going off of memory because my truck is not with me. I was confusing my '89 TBI 350 Sub with the truck in question, my Blazer which is a carb'd '76 350.

I was looking at it today, and the Blazer heater core is connected to the front of the manifold, and the water pump of course.