On Sun, 2 Mar 1997 DANMAS@aol.com wrote:
> Chuck Lattimer wrote:
>
> "Your thoughts on the use of a shroud are mistaken. The shroud is
> designed to work with the fan when the car is moving slowly or not moving
> at all. As you probably know, at higher speeds a fan is not necessary,
> and neither is the shroud."
>
> I'm not sure I agree with your last sentence, Chuck. I agree a fan is not
> necessary at high speeds - in fact, it is a hinderance . As for the shroud, I
> think that is only true if the shroud is behind the radiater, surrounding the
> fan. As I understand it, a shroud in front of the radiater serves to ensure
> that all the air entering the grille aperature passes through the radiater
> instead of around it. Air passing around the radiater provides virtualy no
> cooling. A shroud behind the radiater ensures that the air moved by the fan
> is pulled through the radiater, and not just recirculated behind the it.
And I think I must agree. Compare the TR3A front apron with the earlier
TR3 or TR2 apron. The fibreboard shrouds only serve to "replace" the
original sheet metal shape that directed air intake to the radiator. I
suspect it's a classic case of a styling change not also being in itself
a worthwhile engineering change, hence the addition of shrouds.
By comparison to the Big Three in the U.S., Standard-Triumph may have
been little more than a cottage industry in some respects, but they did
have some rather talented engineers and other staff designing and
building these cars. No, a TR3A is by no means perfect, but then neither
is a 1958 DeSoto Fireflite, eh? ;-)
Oh great, now I'll get flamed by fans of push-button TorqueFlite
transmission and Virgil Exner fins! :-) :-)
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|