Thats a lame argument. Think about it.

KH

You're right. There's no difference between a cow and a horse, either. Both are
mammals, walk on four legs, eat grass, and are commonly domesticated. Just as
devices designed to transfer heat to the atmosphere and devices designed to
transfer heat from one liquid to another are not different in concept and one
term is properly interchangeable with the other, so it is also a waste of time
to nitpick whether an animal is a cow or a horse. (At least until you want to
go for a ride or get some milk to make butter and cheese).

(Gould 0738) wrote in message ...
Thats a lame argument. Think about it.

KH

You're right. There's no difference between a cow and a horse, either. Both are
mammals, walk on four legs, eat grass, and are commonly domesticated. Just as
devices designed to transfer heat to the atmosphere and devices designed to
transfer heat from one liquid to another are not different in concept and one
term is properly interchangeable with the other, so it is also a waste of time
to nitpick whether an animal is a cow or a horse. (At least until you want to
go for a ride or get some milk to make butter and cheese).

I gotta come to KH's defense. As an engineer let me explain that
there is no difference at all between a "radiator" and heat exchanger.
They are both heat exchangers. The physical principles that govern
their operation are identical. One is a water to air heat exchanger
and one is a water to water heat exchanger. They just use different
fluids. This distinction only alters a few of the variables in a
machine designers calculations. The principal means of heat transfer
in both is conduction and convection. Radiation plays such an
insignificant part that it would be ignored by all but the most anal
engineers. It's not the difference between a horse and cow, it's the
difference between an arabian and a quarter horse. Same basic animal,
different applications. If a radiator actually radiated energy away
as the sun radiates energy to earth, why must it be put in front of
the car with air forced through it? www.howstuffworks.com will back
me up on this. Look up "car cooling system" and click on the radiator
link. In the first sentence it calls it a heat exchanger. You can
prove it to yourself on your car by blocking the grille with cardboard
and disabling your radiator fan, get on the highway and watch the
temperature gauge.

Just as
devices designed to transfer heat to the atmosphere and devices designed to
transfer heat from one liquid to another are not different in concept

rebutted with:

One is a water to air heat exchanger
and one is a water to water heat exchanger.

Same statement.

Chris,
I believe that you are correct in your assessment, but common usage
would indicate otherwise. No car company I know of calls the finned cooling
device a heat exchanger nor have I heard of a boat manufacturer referring to
a radiator in their vessel. As you say they could call them either way but
that would just be confusing. IMHO
Paul

"Chris" wrote in message
om...
(Gould 0738) wrote in message
...
Thats a lame argument. Think about it.

KH

You're right. There's no difference between a cow and a horse, either.
Both are
mammals, walk on four legs, eat grass, and are commonly domesticated.
Just as
devices designed to transfer heat to the atmosphere and devices designed
to
transfer heat from one liquid to another are not different in concept
and one
term is properly interchangeable with the other, so it is also a waste
of time
to nitpick whether an animal is a cow or a horse. (At least until you
want to
go for a ride or get some milk to make butter and cheese).

I gotta come to KH's defense. As an engineer let me explain that
there is no difference at all between a "radiator" and heat exchanger.
They are both heat exchangers. The physical principles that govern
their operation are identical. One is a water to air heat exchanger
and one is a water to water heat exchanger. They just use different
fluids. This distinction only alters a few of the variables in a
machine designers calculations. The principal means of heat transfer
in both is conduction and convection. Radiation plays such an
insignificant part that it would be ignored by all but the most anal
engineers. It's not the difference between a horse and cow, it's the
difference between an arabian and a quarter horse. Same basic animal,
different applications. If a radiator actually radiated energy away
as the sun radiates energy to earth, why must it be put in front of
the car with air forced through it? www.howstuffworks.com will back
me up on this. Look up "car cooling system" and click on the radiator
link. In the first sentence it calls it a heat exchanger. You can
prove it to yourself on your car by blocking the grille with cardboard
and disabling your radiator fan, get on the highway and watch the
temperature gauge.

OK, Radiators, heat exchangers, air to fluid, fluid to fluid, air to air,
blah, blah blah. They all get rid of heat or absorb it, whatever - there's
a transfer of heat from something "hot" to something less hot. or vice
versa.

The original question was really asking why are there not car type
"radiators" on boats. This semantical stuff, while interesting (NOT), is
irrelevant, imho.

Has anyone yet pointed out that it simply works better to exchange motor
heat with an unlimited supply of cool liquid rather than air? Cars first
take the heat from the block with liquid for this very reason. Air cooled
engines are generally very small in comparison.

In a car, however, the liquid is limited because it's a closed system and
therefore the next step is to transfer to the only unlimited cool thing
around, the air.

Boats goe through an unlimited supply of cool liquid which is better at
taking away the heat than an air-based "radiator". Therefore, the use of a
small fluid-fluid heat exchanger rather than a large fluid-air heat
exchanger. Some bypass this also with lake or ocean water cooling through
the block w/o exchanger.

Air boats, being the main exception to this use car type heat exchangers,
aka "radiators" because (1) they *can* (space and air movement allows them)
and (2) they don't have an outboard or outdrive leg, or jet intake to
easily suck in the water. Sure they could have a water inlet like a
straight inboard, but because of (1) above, they don't have to.

Just mho,

Cam