Radiator Dimensions

Technical Area for all the problems you have in the garage
Post Reply
jamesmacv8
T289R Member
T289R Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:13 pm

Radiator Dimensions

Post by jamesmacv8 »

Can anyone supply me with basic radiator dimensions to suit a Hawk 289? - I have the chance of obtaining a Sunbeam Tiger one and need to know if it will fit.

Thanks
James
User avatar
kdavies3
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:49 pm
Location: Cowbridge South Wales

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by kdavies3 »

Hi James, are going to put it in the nose or sloping back into the engine bay?
I've just done this recently.
I went with one of these.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FORD-TALL-RA ... 2749.l2649
With a 70mm core I hope it's enough for a mildly tuned 302.
It fits between the chassis legs just.
Sloping back into the engine bay too.
Kev Davies
DAX Mk4, 383 Chevy Stroker, Tremec. SOLD
Contemporary CCX 3-4028, 445ci Big Block FORD FE,TKO 600. SOLD
Dax De Dion LS2 and T56. SOLD
1965 Ford Mustang 289 Convertible SOLD
In build Hawk 289 (302) Sebring. Awaiting IVA:D
User avatar
peterc
T289R Member
T289R Member
Posts: 2041
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:05 am
Location: Surrey

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by peterc »

As always it depends on how authentic you want to be. As Kev relates - do you want it in the nose area or leaning back at the top. The originals leant back at the top with the top header close to the bonnet opening. From an practical point of view that actually compromises the airflow. Air does not like changing direction.
I have a Hawk supplied rad for a mildly tuned 4.6 Rover. Sizes are 60 wide x 41 tall x 6.5 thick and it works well enough. It sits tucked into the nose.
Peter C
jamesmacv8
T289R Member
T289R Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:13 pm

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by jamesmacv8 »

I'm not looking for authenticity for this build - It's actually for road/race 289 spec. so an indication of:
1. Angle from vertical (sloping back into engine bay as Kev suggested)
2. L x B x H
Concept Racing fabricate some very nice radiators so will get a quote from them...
James
User avatar
Roger King
Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by Roger King »

That's probably your best bet. My Tiger still had its original radiator and it wouldn't begin to fit a Hawk. You can't get close to the original radiator pattern in a Hawk because the front chassis structure gets in the way. An original radiator reaches right across the engine bay, and is braced off the steel tube passing along the front of the bonnet aperture, which stops it falling back onto the leafspring mount. It's a big rad, but cooling is still marginal... there's also more room in an original engine bay, as the engine is further back and lower than in a Hawk.
IMG_8164.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
jamesmacv8
T289R Member
T289R Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:13 pm

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by jamesmacv8 »

Thanks Roger,
So, the original AC radiator size won’t fit a Hawk? I was going to purchase a Fluidyne as used in appendix k historics. (I don’t have a chassis yet, so can’t measure up)
EEE32B15-0DE6-4B21-8012-312FDBD19ABB.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Roger King
Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by Roger King »

It's the restricted width that's the problem. From memory (and it's a long time ago now,) there are some substantial tubes lower down on a Hawk that aren't there on the AC. Given that the system is pretty marginal anyway, this can be an issue, especially in traffic. As you can see in my photo, cars came from the factory with the Ford Comet mechanical fan fitted as well as the electrically-operated one (although mine's a more modern Spal). Advice was to remove the mechanical fan once the engine was run in, but many owners chose to leave them there as even without any shrouding they do make a measurable difference at idle.
You could try having a rad custom-built to fit the available space in a Hawk, but an off-the-shelf rad to original dimensions will not fit. Gerry's down-the-nose setup works well.
I've found some old photos from my Hawk build, including this one of the front of the chassis:
Rebuild 012_2.jpg
Compared with a shot taken through the nose of my current car:



...and looking down from above:



The base of the radiator sits in front of the steering rack, located on two brackets with large grommets which accept the two large pins built into the base of the rad. It leans back towards the spring mount, and is retained at the top by the bracket in the centre of the tubing around the front of the bonnet aperture. There is a huge space here with none of the substantial tubing seen in the first photo, of the Hawk chassis. As ever, Gerry's setup works better.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Roger King
Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by Roger King »

Oh well. Sorry, the website took the first jpeg, which is 317kb, but won't take the others as they are 400kb, or too many pixels. I can't get them any smaller. You'll just have to take my word for it!
User avatar
Roger King
Posts: 4396
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:29 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by Roger King »

This is the error message I'm getting:

ERROR
The image must be at least 0 pixels wide, 0 pixels high and at most 1000 pixels wide and 1000 pixels high. The submitted image is 4000 pixels wide and 3000 pixels high.

How do I change the number of pixels on a 430kb image? Crop it? It's all getting a bit too time-consuming!
jamesmacv8
T289R Member
T289R Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:13 pm

Re: Radiator Dimensions

Post by jamesmacv8 »

Thanks for the information Roger, I can imagine what you mean without you having to change the pixels. :-)

James
Post Reply