

| Subject: | Re: 1.9 > 2.1 cooling kit? |
| From: | David Beierl |
| Date: | Thu, 2 Sep 2010 22:33:59 -0400 |
I wrote: >It hooks two hoses together. It hooks two more hoses together. It >physically supports both hoses as they cross the firewall. I >*believe* nylon hose barbs would fit the bill. > >And it makes a restricted bleeder connection with a shutoff valve >from I forget where to I forget which one of the hoses. Might need >to drill one of the barbs and screw/bolt in a small valve and nipple >for the bleed. If you didn't want to mess with an actual >valve, just inserting a small nipple and pinching off the little >bleed hose ought to take care of it. The original had/has a little >folded sheet metal gizmo inside the small hose nipple. Conceivably >that might be a bubble separator. But the whole thing only comes >into play when you're bleeding the system. Correction: The bleeder actually connects the two big hoses together. In Bentley 19.9 they show a setup where there are two nipples coming from the big hoses/pipes, with a separate bleeder fitting with three nipples -- two for the big hoses and a third going to the heater crossover pipe. There's a decent schematic of this arrangement on 19.10. This and 19.19 show the always-open connection to the heater crossover to be to the lower big hose, the one that carries flow from the thermostat to the radiator. In production they apparently changed to the existing setup, where the big hoses are divided by the big bulkhead fitting which has an internal bleed connection between the two sections. This is not illustrated in Bentley, but I'll send you an illustration. The curious thing is that in the revised setup the illustration shows the heater connection coming vertically off the top of the fitting, *and apparently connecting to the (upper) return hose from the radiator back to the thermostat.* Now my recollection of my own such device on Dutiful Passage was that the heater nipple came out horizontally, but still from the upper hose -- a better lead to the heater pipe but functionally the same. I still say you could fake it functionally without great trouble. Yours, David
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »