Cold Case Radiators

[Dustdevil]

It’s unethical to not care about the customer.

Please define “care about the customer”.

 

[UglyDuck]

Please define “care about the customer”.

Here’s a product that doesn’t meet your wants/needs, but hey we’re making enough money to be happy so…too bad for you.

 

[Dustdevil]

Here’s a product that doesn’t meet your wants/needs, but hey we’re making enough money to be happy so…too bad for you.

I understand that. So, a three core radiator does not work? They are essentially boat anchors?

 

[Dustdevil]

I share a near identical mindset. When an OEM Mopar gets over 250 bucks, there has to be room for a copy that is the same in performance.

Bingo! The solution to a dwindling supply, despite strong demand, in the free (relatively speaking) free marketplace, is competition. This is how free markets are SUPPOSED to work. I think if you’re motivated to do so, you should pursue the option to become a supplier. Your reputation in brakes and some other areas of Jeep upgrades should promote a new business venture. The problem is the huge up-front investment in design, tooling, and production. Some sort of private label agreement with someone who already has this capability could be a good bridge to producing your own designs.

 

[freedom_in_4low]

I understand that. So, a three core radiator does not work? They are essentially boat anchors?

with a cross flow heat exchanger as our radiators are, additional cores without additional core depth only take away from primary HX surface and actually lose performance vs an otherwise identical single core. This isn't to say that single core is always better than multi-core, it's just one design consideration within the big picture. A situation where a multicore might outperform a single even given the same core depth would be where there were partitions in the tanks forcing the coolant to go through one core, turn around, come back through another. Shrinking the passages and effectively doubling their length might allow for more even flow distribution or the increased velocity might bring a laminar or transitional flow regime into fully turbulent (which improves heat transfer). But even this wouldn't be something you'd want to swap into a system designed around a single core, because it would more than 2x the pressure drop and cut the flow rate of the entire system.

 

[Dustdevil]

with a cross flow heat exchanger as our radiators are, additional cores without additional core depth only take away from primary HX surface and actually lose performance vs an otherwise identical single core. This isn't to say that single core is always better than multi-core, it's just one design consideration within the big picture. A situation where a multicore might outperform a single even given the same core depth would be where there were partitions in the tanks forcing the coolant to go through one core, turn around, come back through another. Shrinking the passages and effectively doubling their length might allow for more even flow distribution or the increased velocity might bring a laminar or transitional flow regime into fully turbulent (which improves heat transfer). But even this wouldn't be something you'd want to swap into a system designed around a single core, because it would more than 2x the pressure drop and cut the flow rate of the entire system.

Ok, in the interest of understanding without two dozen additional posts, here’s my dilemma. And I’m no expert in automotive cooling systems, but I do understand the concept of industrial heat exchange, in general, very well. If the conclusion is that companies who produce a multi core radiator are not acting ethically requires several assumptions I don’t necessarily agree with (although I can be convinced with additional understanding). Educate me. And perhaps everyone else in the process.

First, MY assumption is that the design has to be a balance of coolant flow vs air flow vs surface area. Restrict any of the three too much, and efficiency suffers. Hence, a balance. My additional assumption is that adding more tubes (2x or 3x or 4x) allows an increase in both coolant flow and surface area, but can potentially restrict air flow. Unless, of course, one designs additional space by using a thicker core. My Mishimoto is definitely a thicker core than the two Mopar OEM units I have used.

I think it’s safe to assume MFGS of multi core radiators are not deliberately TRYING to offer an inferior product, else they would likely be bankrupt very quickly. If they didn’t cool, nobody would buy them. My Mishimoto cools the same as my original Mopar units did. I think the knock on Mishimoto has been reliability. Mine has been great for at least two or three years. That’s about the life I got from the latest OEM unit I installed new prior. Leaked at the crimped tank junction. So, my experience has been that Mishimoto is at least as reliable as OEM Mopar, at least in 2022.

The market clearly prefers multi core designs, in general. It is the reason the Champion guys cited that as their primary reason above for not offering single core designs. In today’s marketplace, some customers are clearly far more educated than a generation ago, and so they often know exactly what they want. The other half of the market, just the opposite. So, if the issue is efficiency, what I don’t understand is how offering the market what it demands, even if less efficient, is unethical? Especially when the efficiency appears to be a very subjective thing. Again, my Mishimoto for all intents and purposes, is as efficient in my application as was the OEM unit.
Im fully aware there are manufacturers who offer better quality designs and builds than others. I just don’t get why a multi core unit is automatically an inferior product across the board, especially when this particular Mfg is clearly basing their designs on market demand. I also realize that mystification about what is the “best” approach abounds, and markets can be wrong. From here, doesn’t appear that Champion is misrepresenting anything about their product. As an analogy: hardcover books are generally better than paperbacks. But if the market demands paperbacks, you either produce paperbacks, or you buck the trend and produce hardcover books at the risk of not producing adequate revenue. Either way, with all due respect, I don’t see it as an ethical issue.

 

[psrivats]

So, my experience has been that Mishimoto is at least as reliable as OEM Mopar, at least in 2022.

Your case is an outlier. Mopar radiators are FAR better in terms of reliability. Don't let a sample size of one distort your judgement.

Im fully aware there are manufacturers who offer better quality designs and builds than others. I just don’t get why a multi core unit is automatically an inferior product across the board, especially when this particular Mfg is clearly basing their designs on market demand. I also realize that mystification about what is the “best” approach abounds, and markets can be wrong. From here, doesn’t appear that Champion is misrepresenting anything about their product. As an analogy: hardcover books are generally better than paperbacks. But if the market demands paperbacks, you either produce paperbacks, or you buck the trend and produce hardcover books at the risk of not producing adequate revenue. Either way, with all due respect, I don’t see it as an ethical issue.

It is an ethics issues in a way that most people do not think about. They knowingly play into the catch-22 of customer want vs customer need. They would probably make money either way, but they choose to do what they do. It's easier for them to churn out what everyone else does, and not take the effort to educate and do the right thing - even when they have both the knowledge and the know-how to do different. That does not stand well with me and many other folks. Either they believe what they make is the best, in which case they would be too stubborn to change, or they know what they make is non-optimal and still continue because it is easier to do so and so, will not change.

If you go read every spring/shock thread or short arm/long arm thread, you will see the same kind of dissonance in philosophies of different companies. Blaine never has, and never will, do anything that is not good for the end customer, no matter the monies involved. Who you associate with tells who you are - and it is next to impossible to change fundamental philosophy differences with companies like these. Just my 2c.

 

[Blackjack]

They did make the cores, overseas, and the division that deals with that is also overseas. The stateside division of Valeo wants nothing to do with even asking the overseas division if they will do a run of them.

Could also be the same crap Ford gave Dana in that they do not want them using the original tooling for the aftermarket and would threaten contracts.

 

[freedom_in_4low]

Ok, in the interest of understanding without two dozen additional posts, here’s my dilemma. And I’m no expert in automotive cooling systems, but I do understand the concept of industrial heat exchange, in general, very well. If the conclusion is that companies who produce a multi core radiator are not acting ethically requires several assumptions I don’t necessarily agree with (although I can be convinced with additional understanding). Educate me. And perhaps everyone else in the process.

First, MY assumption is that the design has to be a balance of coolant flow vs air flow vs surface area. Restrict any of the three too much, and efficiency suffers. Hence, a balance. My additional assumption is that adding more tubes (2x or 3x or 4x) allows an increase in both coolant flow and surface area, but can potentially restrict air flow. Unless, of course, one designs additional space by using a thicker core. My Mishimoto is definitely a thicker core than the two Mopar OEM units I have used.

To keep in context with the big picture, my comments were specific to the plethora of replacement suppliers out there that simply keep the original thickness but divide the tube in half and call it a two core. Also, there is another issue that I've mentioned before that plays a bigger role in the reduced performance than splitting the core and that's the use of significantly fewer tubes than mopar. I had a 2 core in a previous TJ that ran warm, and it's certain that the use of 44 tubes where Mopar used 55 was a much more significant contributor to the reduced performance than splitting the core in half.

Also to clear something up, I hadn't had my coffee yet and misspoke in my earlier post. Splitting the core doesn't reduce primary hx surface area, it (slightly) reduces cross sectional area of the tube. It's still a marginal performance reduction but through a different mechanism.

I think it’s safe to assume MFGS of multi core radiators are not deliberately TRYING to offer an inferior product, else they would likely be bankrupt very quickly. If they didn’t cool, nobody would buy them. My Mishimoto cools the same as my original Mopar units did. I think the knock on Mishimoto has been reliability. Mine has been great for at least two or three years. That’s about the life I got from the latest OEM unit I installed new prior. Leaked at the crimped tank junction. So, my experience has been that Mishimoto is at least as reliable as OEM Mopar, at least in 2022.

The market clearly prefers multi core designs, in general. It is the reason the Champion guys cited that as their primary reason above for not offering single core designs. In today’s marketplace, some customers are clearly far more educated than a generation ago, and so they often know exactly what they want. The other half of the market, just the opposite. So, if the issue is efficiency, what I don’t understand is how offering the market what it demands, even if less efficient, is unethical? Especially when the efficiency appears to be a very subjective thing. Again, my Mishimoto for all intents and purposes, is as efficient in my application as was the OEM unit.
Im fully aware there are manufacturers who offer better quality designs and builds than others. I just don’t get why a multi core unit is automatically an inferior product across the board, especially when this particular Mfg is clearly basing their designs on market demand. I also realize that mystification about what is the “best” approach abounds, and markets can be wrong. From here, doesn’t appear that Champion is misrepresenting anything about their product. As an analogy: hardcover books are generally better than paperbacks. But if the market demands paperbacks, you either produce paperbacks, or you buck the trend and produce hardcover books at the risk of not producing adequate revenue. Either way, with all due respect, I don’t see it as an ethical issue.

I don't really, either. I don't think it's realistic to compare the replacement radiator market, which are basically a commodity at this point, to the performance off-road suspension market. It's not realistic to expect a radiator manufacturer in a sea of radiator manufacturers who sells through distributors and retailers with no direct channel to the consumer to "educate" anybody. They're doing what they need to do to stay in business, and that is selling what the market demands.

 

[freedom_in_4low]

Wonder how they would react to a private label idea, where they build to your single-core design for your retail sale? I may be in left field on this, but seems plausible that a single core design might be a bit less expensive to tool and produce?

The more important feature would be to match Mopars tube count. Even if they split the core in half, if they fit 55 of them in the width of a TJ radiator it will probably cool just fine.

I suspect a lot of the companies selling multicore replacement radiators probably reduce the tube count because they think having 2 cores lets them get away with it.

 

[mrblaine]

Ok, in the interest of understanding without two dozen additional posts, here’s my dilemma. And I’m no expert in automotive cooling systems, but I do understand the concept of industrial heat exchange, in general, very well. If the conclusion is that companies who produce a multi core radiator are not acting ethically requires several assumptions I don’t necessarily agree with (although I can be convinced with additional understanding). Educate me. And perhaps everyone else in the process.

First, MY assumption is that the design has to be a balance of coolant flow vs air flow vs surface area. Restrict any of the three too much, and efficiency suffers. Hence, a balance. My additional assumption is that adding more tubes (2x or 3x or 4x) allows an increase in both coolant flow and surface area, but can potentially restrict air flow. Unless, of course, one designs additional space by using a thicker core. My Mishimoto is definitely a thicker core than the two Mopar OEM units I have used.

I think it’s safe to assume MFGS of multi core radiators are not deliberately TRYING to offer an inferior product, else they would likely be bankrupt very quickly. If they didn’t cool, nobody would buy them. My Mishimoto cools the same as my original Mopar units did. I think the knock on Mishimoto has been reliability. Mine has been great for at least two or three years. That’s about the life I got from the latest OEM unit I installed new prior. Leaked at the crimped tank junction. So, my experience has been that Mishimoto is at least as reliable as OEM Mopar, at least in 2022.

The market clearly prefers multi core designs, in general. It is the reason the Champion guys cited that as their primary reason above for not offering single core designs. In today’s marketplace, some customers are clearly far more educated than a generation ago, and so they often know exactly what they want. The other half of the market, just the opposite. So, if the issue is efficiency, what I don’t understand is how offering the market what it demands, even if less efficient, is unethical? Especially when the efficiency appears to be a very subjective thing. Again, my Mishimoto for all intents and purposes, is as efficient in my application as was the OEM unit.
Im fully aware there are manufacturers who offer better quality designs and builds than others. I just don’t get why a multi core unit is automatically an inferior product across the board, especially when this particular Mfg is clearly basing their designs on market demand. I also realize that mystification about what is the “best” approach abounds, and markets can be wrong. From here, doesn’t appear that Champion is misrepresenting anything about their product. As an analogy: hardcover books are generally better than paperbacks. But if the market demands paperbacks, you either produce paperbacks, or you buck the trend and produce hardcover books at the risk of not producing adequate revenue. Either way, with all due respect, I don’t see it as an ethical issue.

This is easy. I would not trade you 20 NIB Mishimoto pieces of shit for a single lightly used low mileage OEM Mopar. You have a statistical sample of one. I have experience with several, all with issues, I refuse to install one. I will also give you a bit more credibility when you learn there is no such thing as a multi core radiator for a TJ.

 

[mrblaine]

The more important feature would be to match Mopars tube count. Even if they split the core in half, if they fit 55 of them in the width of a TJ radiator it will probably cool just fine.

I suspect a lot of the companies selling multicore replacement radiators probably reduce the tube count because they think having 2 cores lets them get away with it.

Will ya'll please stop referring to them as multi-core and get back to the correct multi-row core terminology? Please?

 

[freedom_in_4low]

Will ya'll please stop referring to them as multi-core and get back to the correct multi-row core terminology? Please?

Happy to, haha. Technically multicore would imply actual multiple cores with an air gap between them.

I'm even hesitant to term these as multi row since all they're doing (at least the ones I've seen) is including a partition at the halfway point of the major width of the tube.

 

[Dustdevil]

Ok, learning a bit on the subject now that there is some clarification. I have two issues. First is ethical. Companies are under no ethical obligation to provide an “education” to their customers. While I agree it may be to their advantage to do so, it in no way implies they are acting unethically if they don’t. Kudos to Blaine for doing so. Educating customers is something I choose to do also. Because my product is superior, and because my competitors rarely do it, it is to MY advantage, as well as that of my customer for me to do so when afforded the opportunity. But I reject the assertion that I am being unethical if I don’t always have the time or willing audience to do so.

Secondly, my “sample size of one” actually contains two parts. One is the fact that my brand new factory in-the-box OEM radiator lasted 2 years of relatively moderate use. My aftermarket “piece of shit” Mishimoto has outlasted the OEM already, in much harder use, and with any luck will continue. I don’t throw the balls and strikes. I merely call what I see.

Actually, there is a third issue. When someone is seeking advice on one of these topics, it usually pays to be a bit patient with them. Being curt and abrasive unnecessarily can eclipse the best of reputations, no matter the product or service. Not having specific and esoteric knowledge on such a narrow topic does not make one stupid. It is ok to disagree without being disagreeable.

I appreciate the opinions expressed here.

 

[macleanflood]

So maybe we should put up a post with some poll questions and get a larger sample size and judge market interest.

I found this interesting... Agility apparently is making the current batch of Napa radiators.

http://agilityautoparts.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/High-Efficiency-Core-Tech-Brief.pdf
-Mac

 

[mrblaine]

Ok, learning a bit on the subject now that there is some clarification. I have two issues. First is ethical. Companies are under no ethical obligation to provide an “education” to their customers. While I agree it may be to their advantage to do so, it in no way implies they are acting unethically if they don’t. Kudos to Blaine for doing so. Educating customers is something I choose to do also. Because my product is superior, and because my competitors rarely do it, it is to MY advantage, as well as that of my customer for me to do so when afforded the opportunity. But I reject the assertion that I am being unethical if I don’t always have the time or willing audience to do so.

That isn't the same thing at all.

Secondly, my “sample size of one” actually contains two parts. One is the fact that my brand new factory in-the-box OEM radiator lasted 2 years of relatively moderate use. My aftermarket “piece of shit” Mishimoto has outlasted the OEM already, in much harder use, and with any luck will continue. I don’t throw the balls and strikes. I merely call what I see.

You are the victim of statistical anomalies. If the OEM only lasted 2 years, you would not see the support for them from myself and so many others with vastly different and much higher levels of success. If the Mishimoto crap lasted 2 years or better, you would see more support for it.

Actually, there is a third issue. When someone is seeking advice on one of these topics, it usually pays to be a bit patient with them. Being curt and abrasive unnecessarily can eclipse the best of reputations, no matter the product or service. Not having specific and esoteric knowledge on such a narrow topic does not make one stupid. It is ok to disagree without being disagreeable.

I appreciate the opinions expressed here.

I am more than a bit offended that you believe I would support an OEM product with a lifespan of 2 years or less.

 

[L J]

Actually, there is a third issue.

IMO, that's a non-issue. I am thankful for being able to gain understanding from those with years of experience on TJs. I am not concerned with the fee-fees of sensitive types being bruised.

 

[Dustdevil]

Amazing.

 

[Dustdevil]

IMO, that's a non-issue. I am thankful for being able to gain understanding from those with years of experience on TJs. I am not concerned with the fee-fees of sensitive types being bruised.

Nobody has a monopoly on either experience nor knowledge. I’ll choose to seek my help from people who are here to be helpful, as opposed to people who are here for self-promotion and ego.

 

[Dustdevil]

That isn't the same thing at all.

You are the victim of statistical anomalies. If the OEM only lasted 2 years, you would not see the support for them from myself and so many others with vastly different and much higher levels of success. If the Mishimoto crap lasted 2 years or better, you would see more support for it.



I am more than a bit offended that you believe I would support an OEM product with a lifespan of 2 years or less.

And yet, here we are. Just be decent and respectful, and nobody has a problem.