[Chrysler300] Rime of the ancient ME
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Chrysler300] Rime of the ancient ME





A quick look at the 1964 and 1970-71 Parts Catalogs indicates that (each year) for the water pump assembly, repair kit and impeller—one size fits all 361-440 with the major difference being with and without A/C—with the 300K receiving the A/C pump and parts with or without A/C.  There are different parts numbers for the different years.  No internal plates are shown for any of the exploded views—except for the ’64 six-banger.

 

There are lots of different radiator cores for the different-sized engines.  The big Dodge and all Chryslers with 413 had the same core if A/C or high-altitude.  The water pumps may also be spun at different ratios to crankshaft, also.  And, the number of fan blades increases for A/C cars.

 

180-degree thermostats for all Chryslers in 1964—going up to 185-195 degrees by 1970-71.

 

Our ’63 Newport with hang-on A/C and 361 never overheated.  A ’67 Belvedere II Plymouth with 383 two-barrel, FA/C and TT pkg overheated above 60 MPH going west across NE on I-80 in 105++ weather.  Could drive 80 MPH w/o A/C or 60 MPH with A/C on.  That was disappointing.  Not the most exciting drive anyway.  I would have thought that testing in AZ summers at the test tracks there would have revealed this limitation and led to an improved design.

 

Stating the obvious—heat exchange from the combustion chamber to the air-flow through the radiator is huge, complex and subject to change with fouling of heat transfer surfaces.   Heat transfer surface costs the driver money once-when purchased.  Paying for the energy to drive fans and water pumps will be paid by the driver forever after.  Pay up front or pay later. The amount of heat of combustion that must be rejected to airflow is about the same as is actually used to propel the vehicle and drive its accessories.  A similar amount of energy blasts out the exhaust.  Most manufacturers would be happy with a 33% efficient Otto-cycle engine with 20% being a common value for the heyday of our letter cars.  Dr. Diesel’s engines can push 40%, thereby their generally-higher fuel mileage. 

 

Many of the improvements in fuel economy have come from operating at higher combustion, coolant and exhaust temperatures; better internal engine design for cooling and managing fan power consumption with electric fans.  Most all radiators are boxed now to achieve well-known benefits for forced convection near the corners of the rectangular radiator.

 

Finally, wind-turbine blading size, number and RPM seem to have significant design limitations due to bird kill.  Nothing seems to work to prevent birds from flying through the rotating blades.  One less problem to deal with under the hood of our letter cars.  We must keep the cooling fins of the A/C condenser and radiator free of ingested bugs, birds, cottonwood fuzz & etc., though.

 

Rich Barber

Brentwood, CA  (Heating up—atmospherically (80+), cost of power (20 cents/kWh) and politically (98.6+))

 

 

 

From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Grady jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300]
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 8:31 AM
To: chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Fwd: Allan's 2nd To John's Re: [Chrysler300] Follow up on cooling issue on my F

 

 



Sent from my iPhone


Begin forwarded message:

I wondered same thing . On ac. From engineering perspective you want a water pump to take lowest power it can , to do the job. Mpg etc . And not cavitate at any rpm. ( low pressure inside pump causes low temp boiling-pump can then stall , cannot pump vapor )   . So maybe fewer fins on ac allow more water in, move more , but take more hp. If not needed , put a lesser pump. More fins is not for sure more flow . Especially at high rpm . Purposely made originally to be very efficient , over a wide rpm  range -- may get inefficient at high rpm on purpose ,  that is ok still enough moves. Otherwise would be a huge flow. Too much outlet pressure . The wide rpm range makes design of it hard . 

 

This with no ac , , then they found ? inadequate at mid or idle rpm on ac? Mpg drops with ac. Anyway . So a pump that takes more hp is ok . 

Same thinking why are huge windmills 2or 3 blades ? The old water pump disc ones were 20 or more blades --seems no brainer to add more get more . Not true at all . Those 2-3 blade windmills bother me, still . Even though I know factually from involvement with power industry they are the most efficient possible . Same deal ?

 

 Germans built one with 1 blade and a big counterweight . It had adherents. 

Also says to me an ac pump is better for cooling ..., even a non ac car  . Must move more water . Net . At idle and cruise rpm . Has to . 

Glad you saw the plate too . Some want to dispute that . Not always there ... if not is casting different ? Must be . Different pump? Ac casting ? ( doubt that)    More to dig up about all this... all these " my 413 runs hot" complaints  cannot be just airware? 440 pumps, by rebuilder ? Plate or not? Swapped mix and match casting ? 55 years ... 
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 29, 2017, at 9:40 PM, Allan <agmoon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John.

 

Don't think that I have ever had a vague heads-up before.  Think that you may have coined something here.

 

But all are good thoughts here.

 

So we need to have a lot of people to look closely at there various 413, 440, 383? water pumps and record casting #'s and parts # if known.

 

+ the plate information.  I'm pretty sure that I know the mild steel? plate that you are talking about.  Have noticed it on and off over the years, even back in the day (I think).  Always looked weird in a cast iron part. 

 

Need to check Hollanders to see what they say.  It is amazingly correct for so many things.  Must have had junkyard EXPERTS put them together.  Who else could have known that HUGE amount of information?  And be right most of the time on top of that!!!

 

* One thing though.  I never figured out why AC pumps have one LESS impeller blade, for lack of a better word, than non-AC pumps.  On the surface this appears counterintuitive.  Any ideas about this?

 

See you at Geneva!

 

A&G

 

 

 

   

----- Original Message -----

From: John Grady

To: Allan

Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 7:44 PM

Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Follow up on cooling issue on my F

 

Apparently Some had stamped metal plates behind the rotor some do not -- I believe rotor depth and mount casting depth varied . And to allow plate or not. But all pumps look the same at front . The plate probably was to balance output side to side or help heater flow? Or HD cooling? Who knows . I do not know , but it seemed to be 100% factory changes, plus AC or not. Not a parts supply thing . They ac or not are same depth within a back casting family I think. Also it will work ok if wrong -- probably until a max stress day , the temporal sequence or rationale is lost to time. Back in the day you give at parts store the year , ac or not , heavy cooling etc etc you get right pump . Today you get most likely a 440 or 383 pump for 413 , like in late 60's 440 up -- and that may be right for some 413 . It was long ago this happened to me . Car ran a little hot , figured old radiator , but got hot easy on long hills . I noticed plate in back , inside casting another motor did not have it. Maybe we measure depth it sticks out as I said vs part number , or check an early water pump on E or F  Is it close to casting at back when replacing ??  If 1/4 gap? Clearly not right.  Water will go around rotor . 

Part number guru might chase down or Hollander ? Not trying to inject confusion, but if you do not know about this obviously can drive you crazy . Call it a vague heads up ... 
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 29, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Allan <agmoon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John, we have heard this before but is it true?

 

Is it just SOME 440 pumps?  It's possible but not likely SOME are this way.  Different vendors made different pumps?  Mid run design changes for some vendors?  Or what?

 

The Hurst blew a pump coming home from a meet.  It was Labor Day and a parts house just happened to be doing inventory.  They were good enough to sell us a replacement pump but it was a 440 pump and was all they had on the shelf that Sunday.  We put it in on their parking lot and drove it for many years thereafter with no overheating problems.  Others have also run 440's for years with no problems.

 

SO WHAT IS THE FACTUAL ANSWER TO THIS SITUATION?  Considering all of the brilliance within this Club, there is an answer to this question.

 

See you at the meet! [knock on wood].

 

A&G

 

 

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 7:54 AM

Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Follow up on cooling issue on my F

 

 

See also an earlier thread on wrong pumps. If still hassling you . They will sell you 440 pumps for 413 sometimes back spacing inside housing is wrong , they varied . Engine rebuilder might not know. Sometimes a steel plate in there .wrong pump fits fine. Too complex to get into here , but FYI . I am not sure of answer to this , beyond say aftermarket aluminum pump and matching housing , or measure from bolt flange face to back of impeller on a known correct 413 pump  ( depth into correct 413 housing ) club needs to get into this at some point . Easy to get wrong = poor flow. Due to gap at back ? Plus ac or not issue. ? = 2 more pumps . 

Maybe someone else knows specifics , years etc . 

Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 29, 2017, at 6:06 AM, Sandy Beard sbeard2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300] <Chrysler300-norep ly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Good Saturday morning 300 ites

Just wanted to thank everyone who provided input on my cooling issue.

New water pump, thermostat, sending unit, flushed radiator 2 times. dash gauge still reads close to hot. Installed a under dash H20 temp gauge

Been raining so I have not had the F out to see what the engine reads when driving. Idling in the barn around 180ish

Bought an infrared  meter  (great tool)

Have a great weekend and see those going to NY next week

Steve Beard

300 F

Delaware, Ohio

 

 



__._,_.___

Posted by: "Rich Barber" <c300@xxxxxxx>


To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
go to https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/all/manage/edit

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm

For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang





__,_._,___


Home Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network Archive Sitemap