OEM V6 Distributor: Any Options to Reduce Corrosion / Oxidization on the POLE PIECE? (Page 3/6)
Patrick JUN 01, 10:03 PM

quote
Originally posted by Vintage-Nut:

Given that the distributor was apart; I added more venting area plus a small heat sink for the ICM as many members posted ‘heat’ issues.

CLICK FOR FULL SIZE



I don't know if that heat sink is large enough to have much effect, but you've got the right idea, and it won't hurt.
theogre JUN 02, 01:44 AM

quote
Originally posted by reinhart:
Let's remember GM tried using an air blower on the distributor (and the alternator) and removed it in 88 because it wasn't doing anything. Notice they didn't even bother trying to add a heatsink. Surely that would have been cheaper than the blower motor, piping etc which they did try.

GM Deletion of the Engine Blower has 0 relation how it works.
88 V6 had CS130 w/ 2 fans to cool, 1 you see, 1 inside.
Also had other "minor" changes for 88 too.
GM change or deleted many things like engine blower just to save money. The blower and outlet pipes cost many Thousands for GM to have them made plus install cost and time on car factory line.
Patrick JUN 02, 02:42 AM

quote
Originally posted by theogre:

88 V6 had CS130 w/ 2 fans to cool, 1 you see, 1 inside.
Also had other "minor" changes for 88 too.



The insulating jacket on the 88's exhaust Y-pipe is also WAY more effective in keeping engine bay temps lower (than the '85-'87 little heat shields), especially in the vicinity of the distributor.

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 06-02-2023).]

reinhart JUN 03, 10:50 AM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:


If you understand anything about thermodynamics, you might accept the possibility of a thermal gradient existing between the ICM base and the engine block.



Sorry I don't have enough blind faith to believe there is a cool pocket of air that will cool a one pound piece of metal (with a 1 sq inch heatsink) solidly mounted to a 300 pound piece of metal.

If you want to conduct a before and after experiment by putting a heat sensor inside the distributor with and without this miraculous heatsink, I'd love to see it.
pmbrunelle JUN 03, 11:53 AM

quote
Originally posted by reinhart:


Sorry I don't have enough blind faith to believe there is a cool pocket of air that will cool a one pound piece of metal (with a 1 sq inch heatsink) solidly mounted to a 300 pound piece of metal.

If you want to conduct a before and after experiment by putting a heat sensor inside the distributor with and without this miraculous heatsink, I'd love to see it.



I don't have blind faith.

I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature may remain close to engine block temperature, as much as I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature retains some "independence" from engine block temperature, subject to external influences.

Unless you provide a bit more meat (paper analysis of thermal resistances, power sources, or physical test) to your argument, I think both ideas are worthy of consideration.

Personally, I'm happy living with this ambiguity about the distributor base temperature influencability.

Declaring something to be true, does not make it true.

[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 06-03-2023).]

theogre JUN 03, 12:40 PM

quote
Originally posted by Patrick:
The insulating jacket on the 88's exhaust Y-pipe is also WAY more effective in keeping engine bay temps lower (than the '85-'87 little heat shields), especially in the vicinity of the distributor.

That too. Main Point is saying "GM deleted the blower for 88" means nothing to older models but most still believe that crap as "gospel."

But at same time... Heat shields block IR from Exhaust "lighting up" whatever behind. So don't = part may get some convection heat to mean shield to little or nothing.
Is why Simple shield(s) between exhaust pipes (and cat for Fiero and some others) and Starter is often way better protection then insulation wrap on the starter. Plus since Shields allow air flow on both sides so Starter gets air to cool after it runs.

Fiero have a lot of air flow in the engine bay any time the car is moving just 5-10MPH vs many cars then and now. (actual temps see http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/141784.html )
When in slow traffic or stop at long lights etc... you may have more hot spots from Convection or IR getting other things hot and lack of air flow those can't cool off. But all other vehicles have same problem here.
theogre JUN 03, 02:59 PM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
I don't have blind faith.

I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature may remain close to engine block temperature, as much as I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature retains some "independence" from engine block temperature, subject to external influences.

Unless you provide a bit more meat (paper analysis of thermal resistances, power sources, or physical test) to your argument, I think both ideas are worthy of consideration.

Personally, I'm happy living with this ambiguity about the distributor base temperature influencability.

Declaring something to be true, does not make it true.

While the Distributor gets some Convection and Contact heat mounted to the Engine... It gets Air Cooling like many others because of Air Flow when car is moving as said above.

So "Thin" base plate isn't easy to get engine heat to the ICM. If attach HS there right, can put heat down then air flow cools.
If you think any Heat Sink won't work... Duke DIS Brick has very small ones cast into the tray Bolted directly to the Block and ICM for later models.
May not help a lot but GM spend Big money to redesign this part means more that you claim does nothing.



Where it lives is "buried" under the Intake...

Note that New ones are flat same as old ones where hits the engine. I drilled some divots to reduce metal contact at those spots. Maybe other ways even "better" ways but have own issues and in a bad way like if insulation is crush shrink etc. because the Tray sets CPS clearance to the crank wheel.

Correctly attaching thermal couples etc right to "prove" a point is way beyond most people. I could mod the kit for heat v bay link above because have K-type Tcouple interface but not going to mod my spares or someone's dist to get temp at bottom of ICM then attach HS and repeat test.

[This message has been edited by theogre (edited 06-03-2023).]

reinhart JUN 04, 02:17 AM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:


I don't have blind faith.

I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature may remain close to engine block temperature, as much as I accept the possibility that the distributor base temperature retains some "independence" from engine block temperature, subject to external influences.

Unless you provide a bit more meat (paper analysis of thermal resistances, power sources, or physical test) to your argument, I think both ideas are worthy of consideration.

Personally, I'm happy living with this ambiguity about the distributor base temperature influencability.

Declaring something to be true, does not make it true.




The claim is: "Adding a 1 sq inch heatsink to the underside of the distributor is an improvement to the factory design".

Those that believe this need to prove the point that they are wiser than the GM engineers. It's really a tough point to make because the cost of said heatsink would have been probably 25c at the time of production. So yes the burden of proof is on those that are trying to "improve" the factory design which was made by hundreds of automotive engineers that would have to weigh whether a 25c addition would significantly decrease distributor temps and thereby increase reliability and reputation of the car. We're talking a design that was in place on dozens of cars over all GM divisions and over a course of decades, yet I'm unaware of any GM car or any other manufacturer for that matter putting a 25c heatsink on their distributors. Now Ogre has pointed out that on DIS systems some engineers added some fins to the base. That then begs the question, why wasn't that attempted on the distributors just a few years earlier if it also would have helped distributed systems? It was undoubtedly thought of, even tested and it didn't do anything....it might have actually made it hotter by pulling in heat from exhaust pipe heated ambient air.

Further, the fact that engineers chose to add a fan and piping in earlier V6 models shows that (at a cost of probably $25 rather than 25c for the heatsink):
1) They were aware of the distributor IM being sensitive to heat failure,
2) They attempted to try to find a way to cool it.
3) Surely there would have been one engineer in that meeting discussing cooling methods where the fan and piping system was hashed out, that would have thought to put a heatsink on the distributor base if they thought there was a chance to make it cooler and at a drastically smaller cost...yet they didn't.
Patrick JUN 04, 02:37 AM

quote
Originally posted by reinhart:

The claim is: "Adding a 1 sq inch heatsink to the underside of the distributor is an improvement to the factory design".



Show us where that claim has been made.

And while you're at it, show us this "1 sq inch heatsink" you've referred to numerous times.


quote
Originally posted by reinhart:

Surely there would have been one engineer in that meeting discussing cooling methods where the fan and piping system was hashed out, that would have thought to put a heatsink on the distributor base if they thought there was a chance to make it cooler and at a drastically smaller cost...yet they didn't.



They needed to address multiple heat related issues. Just putting a heat sink on the distributor would've done dick all to cool the ignition coil and alternator.

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 06-04-2023).]

Vintage-Nut JUN 04, 04:45 PM

quote
Tony A. Gaskins Jr.
“Too many people have full opinions, with half the facts”



Please get your facts straight reinhart and this is YOUR claim, not mine:

quote
Originally posted by reinhart:
The claim is: "Adding a 1 sq inch heatsink to the underside of the distributor is an improvement to the factory design".



I agree with theogre about “Air Cooling”

I suppose many will remember air cooled motorcycles from the ‘70s. The cylinders and the heads had long fins to ‘cool’ the engine which air flow draws out the heat. When not moving, they got overheated, but a FEW mph of air was enough!

Back to the “1 sq inch heat sink”
A few ‘real’ facts – it’s 1” x 2” and has 72 ‘fins’ which the total fin square area is nearly 3.5 inches.


quote
Originally posted by theogre:
Fiero have a lot of air flow in the engine bay any time the car is moving just 5-10MPH



So to me, I believe that air flow in the engine bay and my ‘tiny’ heat sink (compared with Patrick’s HS) will STILL be assisting to transfer heat away from the ICM; or as Patrick said: “it won't hurt”.
VN