Carrier Rad Elbow Question

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

I'm doing some rad work on my carrier and thought it was a good time to plumb the overflow tube I didn't do the first time around. This pic is of the brass elbow that is mounted on the engine cover just to the right of the rad cap. The wide end takes a rubber tube right off the rad cap and the threaded end takes a copper tube running to a water condenser can on the rear deck.

My question is what thread does the threaded end use? It is 1/2" but doesn't match any fittings I have available here in Canada.

Do any UK MLU carrier people know what this thread might be and if there is a source for a fitting I might be able to get?

[Jim Burrill]

Bruce, Did you try BSP threads?

I am not sure if that part is in the carrier I have here, but I have a bunch of BSP, BSF and BSW tap and dies. I will see if I have the apart, and then see if something I have fits it.

Likely though some others on the list may know off the top of their heads.....

[Ron Pier]

I've just had a quick look at mine and I'm quite sure it 1/4" BSP (British Standard Pipe) It looks like 5/16" copper pipe, so you need to get the correct nuts and nipples (No 354). I get my fittings over here in UK from this firm.

http://www.vintagecarparts.co.uk/search?query=bsp+pipe

Ron

[kevin powles]

I think it's the same thread size as the thread on the fuel pick up pipe on the fuel tank. Follow Rons advice, Bruce mate if your in no hurry I can get you a suitable fitting and post to you later in the week.

Kevin

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

That would be terrific. No hurry, it's one of those touch up details that always seem to get done....eventually.

Originally Posted by kevin powles

I think it's the same thread size as the thread on the fuel pick up pipe on the fuel tank. Follow Rons advice, Bruce mate if your in no hurry I can get you a suitable fitting and post to you later in the week.

Kevin

[kevin powles]

Bruce, you need it to couple to copper tube?, I assume you do. Will post a few out with the 11 set dial cover on Friday.

Kevin.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Yes, I probably do. I'm not sure if it's a soldered joint or a compression fitting. And the mystery goes on from there. I know the overflow went from that elbow near the rad, along a copper tube under the right, top engine cover angle iron to the front right water can on the back deck. But what about carriers that weren't equipped with those extra water can racks? Later Canadian Carriers (Mk.II and II*) used a Ford CMP type overflow can mounted above the battery, but I'm not sure about early Mk.I* carriers. I'm also not sure how the copper pipe gets from the inside of the engine cover to the outside water can.

Looking at the threads, I agree it's the same as the fuel tank fittings, except there is an adapter fitting that converts the British thread to North American at the back of the fuel tap. From there to the fuel pump it's standard stuff (at least to us Canadians).

Originally Posted by kevin powles

Bruce, you need it to couple to copper tube?, I assume you do. Will post a few out with the 11 set dial cover on Friday.

Kevin.

[kevin powles]

Bruce, follow this link, if you study the pictures you can work out the pipe run.
https://picasaweb.google.com/m/viewe...53747234929330

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

Originally Posted by kevin powles

Bruce, follow this link, if you study the pictures you can work out the pipe run.
https://picasaweb.google.com/m/viewe...53747234929330

Link won't work!!!

[kevin powles]

Will email it to you bruce

[Jim Burrill]

Bruce, the Mk1 I had before had the copper tube follow the engine cover frome on the top right side out the back and down and simply dumped out the right of the two square holes by the differential. It didn't connect to a catch overflow can.

The old tubing was saved from that project (in two pieces) as reference, when I ran all new pipe when I restored the carrier. I intend to do the same on my current Mk1 project. (unless new information comes to light).

[Ron Pier]

On my MK2* the overflow expansion tank is on the left hand side on the lower bulkhead below the ducting. On the left in this picture. The original was rotted out so I had a copy made in stainless. Ron

[Lynn Eades]

I think if you go through Jordan Bakers carrier rebuild thread, you will find that it runs down to a couple of very small funnels that the engine drain cocks run to. Not 100% sure but I think this is how a MkI* Universal is set up.

[Bruce Parker (RIP)]

I went to back to the parts book and manual (plus Kevin's pics) and here's what I think. The first Mk. 1* carriers had the elbow and copper tubing running along the inside, right angle iron of the engine cover held on by clips. When it got to the back it was bent 90 degrees down, through one more clip on the rear plate (attached to one of the W/T battery box bolts I figure) and out the right hand air hole. If the rad sucked the overflow water in the tube back, great...if not it was spilled out the back onto the ground. Attached are pics 1 and 2 that show the tube assembly in the manual and where I think the tube would run.

From serial 12106 (says the parts book) the tube went to a condenser can with an adapter. From the pic it looks like a standard 2 gallon water can and cap with a fitting to take the pipe. Pics 3 is from the parts book and pic 4 is my best guess how the pipe would run. If this is correct it may imply carriers starting at serial 12106 had the extra racks on the back for water cans.

[Jordan Baker]

Lynn, the small cup/funnels you mention are for the radiator drain cocks on the engine. They are seperate from the rad overflow tank.

As for the rad overflow on a Mk1*, on my carrier, it followed the right side angle iron of the engine deck and then went down and out the right side ventilation hole in the lower rear plate. I do remember seeing a picture that seemed to show the tube just exiting in the area of the rear differential. There was no condenser can and it simply vented to atmospher.

Bruce, your description is what I've seen. As for your setup with the extra water can carriers on the rear that makes sense having the tube go to one of them. However it just seems that the tube would be extremely exposed going up and over the rear plate. Saying this I don't really see any other alternative.

[Lynn Eades]

Jordan and Bruce, thanks for the clarification.