radiator leak

I've got a 93 SL2 with a radiator leak. The ends of the radiator are
made of hard rubber, and there is a pinhole leak on one end. Anyone
know if the ends can be replaced, or do I need to get a whole new
radiator? I just epoxied the thing up so I can get around a little.

Mephistopheles Jones wrote:
> I've got a 93 SL2 with a radiator leak. The ends of the radiator are
> made of hard rubber, and there is a pinhole leak on one end. Anyone
> know if the ends can be replaced, or do I need to get a whole new
> radiator? I just epoxied the thing up so I can get around a little.
>


Nope, you need a new one. You really need to change the DEXcool in
those things every 2-3 years in spite of the advertised "5 year"
long-life coolant used.

Fortunately, that radiator isn't terribly expensive and it's pretty easy
to change.

Cheers,

On Mon, 15 May 2006 22:44:00 -0400, Ritz > wrote:

>Nope, you need a new one. You really need to change the DEXcool in
>those things every 2-3 years in spite of the advertised "5 year"
>long-life coolant used.


A good radiator shop can replace the tanks on it but it may cost as
much as a new unit. Also, if you do not stay with the 50.50 locic
(which is not really enough in a aluminum engine) and run 60/40 or
70/30 (anitfreeze to water) you will find tht it lasts a LOT longer.
I run 70/30 is several vehicle here dexi and non dexiand even after 5
or more years the coolant is still clean and so is overflow tank. I
have a 89 4x4 burb that I have had since new and it has had 70/30 in
it for about 15 years in it and the raditor is still clean as day one
and so is overflow tank and it has not been changed for about 7 or 8
years now.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

SnoMan wrote:
> On Mon, 15 May 2006 22:44:00 -0400, Ritz > wrote:
>
>> Nope, you need a new one. You really need to change the DEXcool in
>> those things every 2-3 years in spite of the advertised "5 year"
>> long-life coolant used.
>
>
> A good radiator shop can replace the tanks on it but it may cost as
> much as a new unit. Also, if you do not stay with the 50.50 locic
> (which is not really enough in a aluminum engine) and run 60/40 or
> 70/30 (anitfreeze to water) you will find tht it lasts a LOT longer.
> I run 70/30 is several vehicle here dexi and non dexiand even after 5
> or more years the coolant is still clean and so is overflow tank. I
> have a 89 4x4 burb that I have had since new and it has had 70/30 in
> it for about 15 years in it and the raditor is still clean as day one
> and so is overflow tank and it has not been changed for about 7 or 8
> years now.


It's practically impossible to change the plastic end tanks on these
aluminum radiators in a cost effective manner. Just get a new one.

Also, the chemical agents in ANY antifreeze are consumed over time so
I'd recommend not taking the advice above and flush/refill on or before
the recommended intervals (I usually go 2-3 years). Also, if you change
the ratio to use a higher percentage of coolant, the cooling performance
actually diminishes. Water is a better conductor of heat than antifreeze.

Cheers,

On Tue, 16 May 2006 09:02:38 -0400, Ritz > wrote:

>It's practically impossible to change the plastic end tanks on these
>aluminum radiators in a cost effective manner. Just get a new one.

Not, the can be replaced and have new one clamped on just like the
tanks can be recored

>
>Also, the chemical agents in ANY antifreeze are consumed over time so
>I'd recommend not taking the advice above and flush/refill on or before
>the recommended intervals (I usually go 2-3 years). Also, if you change
>the ratio to use a higher percentage of coolant, the cooling performance
>actually diminishes. Water is a better conductor of heat than antifreeze.

You are miss informed. Water is HIGHLY reactive with aluminum and the
more of it is is the more reaction for anitfreeze to suppress, the
less the bettter. Also water is not a better heat conductor actauly
anitfreeze is because it has a higher boil/gas point when it contact
hot block surface and it bonds to it better to take heat from it.
Gylcol does have a lower specific heat (the amout of BTU required to
heat the same volume of it as water but not by much) but this rerally
has no bearing in a properly designed seal cooling system. BTW, I
also run 7PSI caps on most of my vehicles with 70/30 and I have had
not cooling problems at all and never even exceed 210 in 105 degree
outside temps with A/C on or towing.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

I agree with Ritz advice and also disagree with SnoMan.

Flush and fill to keep the radiator, heater core, engine block, and head
clean and free of deposits that can clog the passages.

And, although water is indeed more corrosive and has a lower boiling point,
it is in fact the better conductor of heat, so a 70/30 mix of
antifreeze/water will be less effective in cooling the engine than a 50/50
mixture.

SnoMan, If you believe this information is not correct, then please cite
your source so we can become as knowledgeable as you. Thanks much.

Bob

"SnoMan" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 16 May 2006 09:02:38 -0400, Ritz > wrote:
>
>>It's practically impossible to change the plastic end tanks on these
>>aluminum radiators in a cost effective manner. Just get a new one.
>
> Not, the can be replaced and have new one clamped on just like the
> tanks can be recored
>
>>
>>Also, the chemical agents in ANY antifreeze are consumed over time so
>>I'd recommend not taking the advice above and flush/refill on or before
>>the recommended intervals (I usually go 2-3 years). Also, if you change
>>the ratio to use a higher percentage of coolant, the cooling performance
>>actually diminishes. Water is a better conductor of heat than antifreeze.
>
> You are miss informed. Water is HIGHLY reactive with aluminum and the
> more of it is is the more reaction for anitfreeze to suppress, the
> less the bettter. Also water is not a better heat conductor actauly
> anitfreeze is because it has a higher boil/gas point when it contact
> hot block surface and it bonds to it better to take heat from it.
> Gylcol does have a lower specific heat (the amout of BTU required to
> heat the same volume of it as water but not by much) but this rerally
> has no bearing in a properly designed seal cooling system. BTW, I
> also run 7PSI caps on most of my vehicles with 70/30 and I have had
> not cooling problems at all and never even exceed 210 in 105 degree
> outside temps with A/C on or towing.
> -----------------
> The SnoMan
> www.thesnoman.com

On Tue, 16 May 2006 16:18:12 GMT, "Bob Shuman"
> wrote:

>And, although water is indeed more corrosive and has a lower boiling point,
>it is in fact the better conductor of heat, so a 70/30 mix of
>antifreeze/water will be less effective in cooling the engine than a 50/50
>mixture.


Again this is in error. A coolant has to remove heat from a hot
surface and transfer it to another area. At the microscopic level,
water gases in tiny bubble on contact with a hot surface and this gas
bearier reduces heat transfer to coolant. (also known as surface
tension) Also antifreeze is denser and can absorb more heat per
gallon than pure water or 50/50. Where water has gotten the reputation
as a better cooler is from the fact that it will boil at about 210
without a cap and given the energy required to boil it it can keep
engine from overheating until coolant has boiled off. Pure anit freeze
boils around 350 degress and you would not even need a pressure cap on
radiator if you used pure anitfreeze like you need with water. People
will spend 20 or 30k and more for e vehicle and yet scrimp on adding
extra antifreeze and complain when there is a problem. Maza recognized
the problem long ago and when they first marketed aluminum rotory
engine, they recommanded 90/10 mixture level. You are free to believe
that your 50/50 mixture protects you modern engine best but it does
and 60/40 should be the minimumm here in todays reactive cooling
systems.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

SnoMan wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2006 09:02:38 -0400, Ritz > wrote:
>
>> It's practically impossible to change the plastic end tanks on these
>> aluminum radiators in a cost effective manner. Just get a new one.
>
> Not, the can be replaced and have new one clamped on just like the
> tanks can be recored


Sure, it's technically possible, but I don't know of any shops that
actually do it. And even if they did, it would likely be more expensive
than actually buying a new part. By that reasoning, it's also possible
to rebuild your water pump when it fails, but most people just buy a new
one and only try to fix an old one if a new part is no longer available.


>> Also, the chemical agents in ANY antifreeze are consumed over time so
>> I'd recommend not taking the advice above and flush/refill on or before
>> the recommended intervals (I usually go 2-3 years). Also, if you change
>> the ratio to use a higher percentage of coolant, the cooling performance
>> actually diminishes. Water is a better conductor of heat than antifreeze.
>
> You are miss informed.


I'm not misinformed at all. I'm quite aware of the chemistry of
water/antifreeze/aluminum/iron in a typical cooling system. You seem to
be a bit misinformed though.


Water is HIGHLY reactive with aluminum and the
> more of it is is the more reaction for anitfreeze to suppress, the
> less the bettter.


Heh. Water is the conduit for removing heat from the system.
Antifreeze is added for 2 reasons:

1. To keep the water from freezing in the winter.
2. The supply additives to stop the corrosion process.

Adding "extra" of either one of these components doesn't help you. If
there are enough additives to prevent corrosion and enough ethylene
glycol to prevent freezing, doubling or tripling that amount isn't going
to improve the situation. What it WILL do is displace water which is a
much better remover of heat.


Also water is not a better heat conductor actauly
> anitfreeze is because it has a higher boil/gas point when it contact
> hot block surface and it bonds to it better to take heat from it.


You're simply wrong here.


> Gylcol does have a lower specific heat (the amout of BTU required to
> heat the same volume of it as water but not by much) but this rerally
> has no bearing in a properly designed seal cooling system. BTW, I


And you seem to acknowledge that here. Strange...


> also run 7PSI caps on most of my vehicles with 70/30 and I have had
> not cooling problems at all and never even exceed 210 in 105 degree
> outside temps with A/C on or towing.


Which is rather irrelevant to the discussion, but I'm glad it works for
you. This has gotten somewhat far afield from whether or not the
original poster can get his radiator fixed (in cased you missed it, that
answer is "no" unless he/she wants to pay more than the cost of a new one).

Best regards,

SnoMan wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2006 16:18:12 GMT, "Bob Shuman"
> > wrote:
>
>> And, although water is indeed more corrosive and has a lower boiling point,
>> it is in fact the better conductor of heat, so a 70/30 mix of
>> antifreeze/water will be less effective in cooling the engine than a 50/50
>> mixture.
>
>
> Again this is in error. A coolant has to remove heat from a hot
> surface and transfer it to another area. At the microscopic level,
> water gases in tiny bubble on contact with a hot surface and this gas
> bearier reduces heat transfer to coolant. (also known as surface
> tension) Also antifreeze is denser and can absorb more heat per
> gallon than pure water or 50/50. Where water has gotten the reputation
> as a better cooler is from the fact that it will boil at about 210
> without a cap and given the energy required to boil it it can keep
> engine from overheating until coolant has boiled off. Pure anit freeze
> boils around 350 degress and you would not even need a pressure cap on
> radiator if you used pure anitfreeze like you need with water. People
> will spend 20 or 30k and more for e vehicle and yet scrimp on adding
> extra antifreeze and complain when there is a problem. Maza recognized
> the problem long ago and when they first marketed aluminum rotory
> engine, they recommanded 90/10 mixture level. You are free to believe
> that your 50/50 mixture protects you modern engine best but it does
> and 60/40 should be the minimumm here in todays reactive cooling
> systems.


Um...this is just patently wrong. I don't know where you're getting
your information from, but it's simply not correct. If you're getting
it from some "reliable source" I'd love to see the original source's
explanation.

Best regards,

On Tue, 16 May 2006 19:06:13 -0400, Ritz > wrote:

>Um...this is just patently wrong. I don't know where you're getting
>your information from, but it's simply not correct. If you're getting
>it from some "reliable source" I'd love to see the original source's
>explanation.


The error here is yours, mine is based on science not hearsay and if
you can read a news group you can easily find the data to support my
comments on the web if you know how to use a search engine. I do not
make claims that are not based on fact or science unlike some others
do. You can ignore the science if you want but it will not change the
facts of it. GM sticks with 50/50 because their bean counters have
figured out how many millions of dollars a year they can save on
coolant and that it will last long enough for warranty and the when it
goes bad you can either pay their dealers to service it or buy a new
car and start the cycle all over. Do you think that they are going to
sell you a vehicle with the proper coolant mixture at most cost to
them and that will require less servicing and repair or need for
replacement parts/ Get real it is planned obsolessence so that they
can sell you another one or part for current one. No profit in build a
vehicle that lasts too long. Wake up!!
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com