Flowthrough Tank for track??
Flowthrough Tank for track??
I'm gonna try to make a flowthrough that will add more coolant to system..I've found the stu mod but I cant find a hose diagram for stock endplate with zzp h/e...Does anybody know how to route hoses correctly?
This is original I think I jus can't find clear instructions in it..https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/2-0l...ox-mod-166658/
Senior Member
Joined: 06-07-13
Posts: 675
Likes: 9
From: maryland
Junior Member
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
I've been thinking about doing a fabricated tank where the Option B goes... it would take up the entire side pocket where the current Option B tank goes, probably doubling or tripling the volume that the Option B adds.
I just did a winter lapping session @ Toronto Motorsports Park this weekend, and with ~32f IAT1, I was pushing ~155f IAT2. Not good. Bone stock SC and IC systems though, so I'm expecting a noticeable difference when I do the dual pass and Option B/fabbed tank.
I just did a winter lapping session @ Toronto Motorsports Park this weekend, and with ~32f IAT1, I was pushing ~155f IAT2. Not good. Bone stock SC and IC systems though, so I'm expecting a noticeable difference when I do the dual pass and Option B/fabbed tank.
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
So many people miss the actual point of Opt b....
It isnt there to add coolant volume. It is there to provide a constant bleed of the intercooling system which is very important to a properly working system.
Opt B, dual pass, Griffin.... all track tested, and work wonders.
Flow throughs can be nice if done right, but are really not "needed".
Thats your problem right there if tracking the car.
It isnt there to add coolant volume. It is there to provide a constant bleed of the intercooling system which is very important to a properly working system.
Opt B, dual pass, Griffin.... all track tested, and work wonders.
Flow throughs can be nice if done right, but are really not "needed".
I've been thinking about doing a fabricated tank where the Option B goes... it would take up the entire side pocket where the current Option B tank goes, probably doubling or tripling the volume that the Option B adds.
I just did a winter lapping session @ Toronto Motorsports Park this weekend, and with ~32f IAT1, I was pushing ~155f IAT2. Not good. Bone stock SC and IC systems though, so I'm expecting a noticeable difference when I do the dual pass and Option B/fabbed tank.
I just did a winter lapping session @ Toronto Motorsports Park this weekend, and with ~32f IAT1, I was pushing ~155f IAT2. Not good. Bone stock SC and IC systems though, so I'm expecting a noticeable difference when I do the dual pass and Option B/fabbed tank.
Junior Member
Joined: 04-18-14
Posts: 424
Likes: 7
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
So many people miss the actual point of Opt b....
It isnt there to add coolant volume. It is there to provide a constant bleed of the intercooling system which is very important to a properly working system.
Opt B, dual pass, Griffin.... all track tested, and work wonders.
Flow throughs can be nice if done right, but are really not "needed".
Thats your problem right there if tracking the car.
It isnt there to add coolant volume. It is there to provide a constant bleed of the intercooling system which is very important to a properly working system.
Opt B, dual pass, Griffin.... all track tested, and work wonders.
Flow throughs can be nice if done right, but are really not "needed".
Thats your problem right there if tracking the car.
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
I know that my particular issue is that I haven't done the Option B and Dual Pass, but I'm pretty sure a bigger Option B tank would help.... Mr.B always raves about increasing the volume of the intercooling system and incrasing the thermal capacity of the system just seems to make sense..... now would it be worth the cost of the filter neck and sheet metal? Hopefully lol.
Nothing wrong with trying things out.
Joined: 05-18-11
Posts: 39,564
Likes: 87
From: West Chicago, IL
I know that my particular issue is that I haven't done the Option B and Dual Pass, but I'm pretty sure a bigger Option B tank would help.... Mr.B always raves about increasing the volume of the intercooling system and incrasing the thermal capacity of the system just seems to make sense..... now would it be worth the cost of the filter neck and sheet metal? Hopefully lol.
The only issue i see with increased volume is that eventually your fluid will still reach a certain temperature, especially if the majority of that fluid is not in a aircooled core. Instead its flowing through a tank inside a hot engine bay, granted adding ice is nice but how often do you want to drain that and keep ice in it?
True it takes longer, but you need to think about the bigger picture. Doubling the volume will essentially double the time it takes the fluid to have the same temperature rise. That tank appears to have maybe double the volume of traditional option B, which is a very marginal volume gain in terms of the complete system. A more effective approach would be to rig up a way to pass the coolant through a heat exhanger to remove heat from the system. This would be more efficient than adding fluid imo.
yes, this tank may be twice the size of option b, but the fluid in the overflow tank with option b does not flow through the system, unless you lose fluid. its an overflow tank. it has one line out and no lines back in.
therefore going to a flowthru design will increase the amount of useable fluid, because it actually flows whats in the tank. so if your tank is double the size of the overflow tank, then you are actually increasing the fluid capacity by more than a factor of 2 compared to opt b
therefore going to a flowthru design will increase the amount of useable fluid, because it actually flows whats in the tank. so if your tank is double the size of the overflow tank, then you are actually increasing the fluid capacity by more than a factor of 2 compared to opt b
Last edited by southal cobalt; Apr 4, 2015 at 11:28 AM.
True it takes longer, but you need to think about the bigger picture. Doubling the volume will essentially double the time it takes the fluid to have the same temperature rise. That tank appears to have maybe double the volume of traditional option B, which is a very marginal volume gain in terms of the complete system. A more effective approach would be to rig up a way to pass the coolant through a heat exhanger to remove heat from the system. This would be more efficient than adding fluid imo.
Joined: 12-30-07
Posts: 14,079
Likes: 197
From: NEPA
yes, this tank may be twice the size of option b, but the fluid in the overflow tank with option b does not flow through the system, unless you lose fluid. its an overflow tank. it has one line out and no lines back in.
therefore going to a flowthru design will increase the amount of useable fluid, because it actually flows whats in the tank. so if your tank is double the size of the overflow tank, then you are actually increasing the fluid capacity by more than a factor of 2 compared to opt b
therefore going to a flowthru design will increase the amount of useable fluid, because it actually flows whats in the tank. so if your tank is double the size of the overflow tank, then you are actually increasing the fluid capacity by more than a factor of 2 compared to opt b
Stop comparing flow through tanks to opt b.
it could not constantly bleed the system if coolant did not flow through it
adding volume helps but just adding an extra quart wont do that much