Mazda MX-5 Miata banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi, was going to order one of these:


And going for the 13 row with a thermo sandwich plate, but not sure what temp thermostat to go for, so was wondering what you guys think?
They have the option of 80 degree or 92 degree.
It will be a road car mostly, occasional track use.
Td04-13, 220-250bhp target.
Thanks 馃憤馃憤馃憤馃憤馃榿
 

Registered
Joined
431 Posts
80deg is only just hot enough for the oil to be doing its job properly so definitely 92 minimum. However you should check with a temp gauge that you actually need an oil cooler, on a previous turbo car (not mx5) I fitted one and then the oil struggled to get up to temp - even with a thermostat, there's always some flow through the cooler.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
80deg is only just hot enough for the oil to be doing its job properly so definitely 92 minimum. However you should check with a temp gauge that you actually need an oil cooler, on a previous turbo car (not mx5) I fitted one and then the oil struggled to get up to temp - even with a thermostat, there's always some flow through the cooler.
OK thank you, yes I've been doing some reading, and yes 92 is alot more sensible than 80, in fact, I think I would prefer 100degs, but that's not an option.(from that ebay seller anyway) I was going to get a temp sender and guage and fit it to the car before fitting the oil cooler, see what temps I'm getting before cooler, and then after adding one, cos, as you say, some of the oil is still circulated through the cooler, but I guess it's just a question of how much...
And if it doesn't drop the temps, then it will just be sitting there ready for when it's needed. That was the plan anyway, as I'm running just one fan, have a thicker rad and no reroute. Was placing the cooler behind the rad.

Anyone know somewhere I can fit a temp sender to? The ones I've seen look long, and would prefer one I could use in-line.. As i will be taking the oil feed to the turbo from the rear of the head, wondered if I could use that port, and before I fit the turbo, could just allow the oil to flow straight into the sump? (I have the sump drilled and tapped with a return pipe capped off already sitting there waiting..)
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
+ does anyone know the inside diameter of the oil feed lines to a td04? (as if I use a temp gauge fitted into something like this: Aluminium Fuel/Oil Line Adaptor Block 8mm from Merlin Motorsport (if I can find a temp gauge short enough) in-line, I don't want it to act as a restrictor)

Or maybe something like this:

Although as the port at the rear of the head is already restricted, would this still be OK to check oil pressure also? I'm guessing oil temp should be OK, but as the outlet of the turbo is larger than the inlet, maybe I should stick to oil pressure from elsewhere?
Thanks... So much to consider 馃馃馃槵
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
as to oil temperature gauges, do you want a guide or high-accuracy reading?

gauge & sender combo's vary in quality & accuracy as well as price 馃き

Rich.
I was thinking about this:

As presumably its of decent quality and accuracy.. But there's no reason I can't take oil temp from the port at the rear of the head?
 

Banish a little rust a day people
Joined
4,913 Posts
Use the gauge as a guide, get used to what normal ranges are and just check to see if this is exceeded
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Use the gauge as a guide, get used to what normal ranges are and just check to see if this is exceeded
Problem is where I install a temperature sender. According to the Americans the oil feed to the turbo will be minimal and not enough to get a true reading from. - that's based on taking it from the side of the block on earlier engines. So, presumably this will be the case if taking from the rear of the head on my engine, especially if its already a restricted flow. So the only way I could get a proper reading would be a remote oil filter setup and add a T piece with sender installed. Can't use a sandwich plate on the oil filter as I may need one for a thermostat for oil cooler.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
OK, think I've decided the only options I have really are either a sump plug temp sender, or to stack sandwich plates. Seems that people argue that the sump plug sender will give a inaccurate reading due to the sump having cooling fins and give a cooler than true reading etc. And the temp changes won't be detected as fast as with a sandwich plate.
Has anyone stacked a sandwich plate under a mocal sandwich plate successfully? If so, what make you using? As I've read that it can be tight for room down there.. And one that doesn't leak would be nice.
 

layabout
Joined
2,260 Posts
the only way I could get a proper reading would be a remote oil filter setup and add a T piece with sender installed
^^ the only way to get an OIL temperature reading as opposed to reading the cylinderhead / sump / cylinderblock if fitted there...

also, sender needs to be in flowing oil not the sump as it's a reservoir....

if you're worried about oil temperature then spend a bit of cash on a Laminova & you will not need a thermostat as the coolant system* will regulate it for you ;)




*insert complaints about Mx5 overheating, needing larger radiators etc. here:rolleyes:

Rich.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
^^ the only way to get an OIL temperature reading as opposed to reading the cylinderhead / sump / cylinderblock if fitted there...

also, sender needs to be in flowing oil not the sump as it's a reservoir....

if you're worried about oil temperature then spend a bit of cash on a Laminova & you will not need a thermostat as the coolant system* will regulate it for you ;)




*insert complaints about Mx5 overheating, needing larger radiators etc. here:rolleyes:

Rich.
Wow, thanks for that, didn't know such things exist! Shows my lack of knowledge.. What size do you think would be sensible for 220-250 turbo used mostly for road use, but capable enough for when on track just a few times a year?
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
On second thoughts, can't seem to find an answer as to why the laminova setup doesn't just transfer all the heat from your oil to your water system? Too many questions now.

Think I'm just going to go for the two sandwich plates. One for the senders, and another for the cooler.
But, I really need to know if anyone has actually done this successfully on an NB using the mocal sensor and thermo sandwich plates? Is there enough room, and do they bolt together correctly? I've read numerous threads and that question never seems to get answered, people always run into problems then the threads go dead.
Thanks again 馃ぃ
 

layabout
Joined
2,260 Posts
can't seem to find an answer as to why the laminova setup doesn't just transfer all the heat from your oil to your water system?

thats the idea (y)

the (larger surface area) coolant / air heat exchanger (radiator) is more efficient at cooling than a (smaller) oil / air heat exchanger (radiator)

the Laminova brings the engine oil up to operating temprature quicker than oil / air exchangers as engine coolant warms first.
once up to temperature the oil transfers heat into the coolant then it's down to you coolant system / radiator* to loose the heat....


Laminova can fit in rad or heater hoses.
Laminova doesn't need airflow to cool so easier ducting for coolant radiators & intercoolers.
a 'medium' (180mm core) size Laminova is aparently equivilant to a 16 row oilcooler rad / exchanger.

It is difficult to come up with meaningful performance figures for the Laminova C43 range as these are dependent upon oil and coolant flow figures that are rarely known. As a guide the C43-90 would give similar performance to a 10 row oil to air cooler, a C43-180 to a 16 row and a C43-330 to a 25 row


mazda fitted a coolant / oil heat exchanger to the 1.8L mk1&2/2.5 Mx5's (but a cheaper & smaller, less efficient type)



*insert complaints about Mx5 overheating, needing larger radiators etc. here:rolleyes:

Laminova is expensive, the only downside:(

Rich.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
thats the idea (y)

the (larger surface area) coolant / air heat exchanger (radiator) is more efficient at cooling than a (smaller) oil / air heat exchanger (radiator)

the Laminova brings the engine oil up to operating temprature quicker than oil / air exchangers as engine coolant warms first.
once up to temperature the oil transfers heat into the coolant then it's down to you coolant system / radiator* to loose the heat....


Laminova can fit in rad or heater hoses.
Laminova doesn't need airflow to cool so easier ducting for coolant radiators & intercoolers.
a 'medium' (180mm core) size Laminova is aparently equivilant to a 16 row oilcooler rad / exchanger.





mazda fitted a coolant / oil heat exchanger to the 1.8L mk1&2/2.5 Mx5's (but a cheaper & smaller, less efficient type)



*insert complaints about Mx5 overheating, needing larger radiators etc. here:rolleyes:

Laminova is expensive, the only downside:(

Rich.
So, I have 50mm core rad. The engine has always seemed to seem/feel/smell hotter than other cars I've owned. - maybe my imagination, but the fan is also always on after going for a drive, even if relatively short. I have no underfloor shield atm, but was almost as bad before removing. So I'm wondering if the cooling is already near the limit without making it worse with the laminova? (I won't mention the cooling reroute stuff!) Surely cooling the oil via air is a better idea than using the water to cool if done correctly - ignoring the faster warmup times and benefit of not running oil too cool in winter - which is great, but should still be possible with the correct oil cooler setup?.... 馃槵
 

layabout
Joined
2,260 Posts
I have 50mm core rad.
if it's not efficient then it's possibly worse than a standard rado_O

just because it's thicker doesn't mean its more efficient;)


OEM manual 12mm thick, auto is 16mm. Most aftermarket OEM replacement radiators are the 16mm auto version. Thicker is always better up to a point. Too thick and the rear of the core isn鈥檛 getting enough airflow to efficiently reject heat. It ends up working more like a heat sink just radiating through convection more than conduction but every bit helps.
you can look at crossflow & twin-pass crossflow rads if you want to improve on Mazda's standard spec. vertical-flow...


BUT...

no engine undertray is a bad idea as the airflow will bypass the radiator & take the 'path of least resistance' - same for bumper to rad ducting, something commonly removed :rolleyes:

anyway, it's your car / money / choice, whatever you do don't fall down the rabbithole I've found:p馃き馃ぁ

Rich.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
if it's not efficient then it's possibly worse than a standard rado_O

just because it's thicker doesn't mean its more efficient;)




you can look at crossflow & twin-pass crossflow rads if you want to improve on Mazda's standard spec. vertical-flow...


BUT...

no engine undertray is a bad idea as the airflow will bypass the radiator & take the 'path of least resistance' - same for bumper to rad ducting, something commonly removed :rolleyes:

anyway, it's your car / money / choice, whatever you do don't fall down the rabbithole I've found:p馃き馃ぁ

Rich.
OK my mistake, 42mm rad: this is the one:

And as I said, the fan has always came on strangely early, before changing the rad and before (temporarily!馃榿) removing the undertray... (I have also kept the ducting to get as much flow as possible).
Plus, I do now have an intercooler blocking half the radiator,, meaning the coolent system is compromised as its?

I just wish there were some cases of people that have used them on mx5's that could comment and say that they have tried both, and the laminova worked better.. As I'm willing to spend the cash.... I've found a 180mm lavi for 拢200,, which isn't so bad.... Assuming the only other thing I need would be a sandwich plate to take the oil feed from, and some fittings etc. If it ended up that I then needed better water pumps and wotnot, then wouldn't bother.
 

layabout
Joined
2,260 Posts
I just wish there were some cases of people that have used them on mx5's that could comment and say that they have tried both, and the laminova worked better..
most people go for the common & cheaper option of an oil radiator, from what I've found there are some forum posts re. Laminova on Mx5's but they're few & far between & it all depends on the car's owner / builder using social-media / forumso_O)



have a read...

or, same poster & car in different conversation & 2 photos...

posts 17 & 18...



I'm plumbing mine in the heater pipework where the screenwash reservoir was origonally BUT thats in the oil flow to the drysump tank and with different pipework......

Rich.
 

Registered
Joined
191 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
o
most people go for the common & cheaper option of an oil radiator, from what I've found there are some forum posts re. Laminova on Mx5's but they're few & far between & it all depends on the car's owner / builder using social-media / forumso_O)



have a read...

or, same poster & car in different conversation & 2 photos...

posts 17 & 18...



I'm plumbing mine in the heater pipework where the screenwash reservoir was origonally BUT thats in the oil flow to the drysump tank and with different pipework......

Rich.
Thanks for posting those up, those threads were ones I was looking at earlier.. The first one was one of the reasons why I thought it might not be such a good idea for me personally. Maybe OK if you have some excess cooling capacity, but for me, without knowing 100% and leaning towards the likelyhood that I don't, I think the old way may be the best way, for me.

So, I'm kinda back to square one wondering if I can get 2 mocal sandwich plates stacked together without any probs.... 馃槶
 

layabout
Joined
2,260 Posts
I'm kinda back to square one wondering if I can get 2 mocal sandwich plates stacked together without any probs....
anything is possible but why?

just use one & drill it for the oilfeed / temp sender....

Rich.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top