Um... isnt that bung location lower than the oil level in the pan? AKA not where you want the turbo oil drain. It should be higher up the pan.

Its on the side of the pan behind the AC compressor bracket rather than in front where BEGI and FM say to put it. So, no? :dunno: I mean, if I failed that badly I'd love to hear about it... in my build thread.

Lets keep this one on track with oil cooler tech rather than my copious failures.

Installed the 25-row cooler (thanks Andrew!) a few months ago and it works great. Spent the weekend at Road America with temps in the low-mid 80s and not once did my oil get above 218*f and that's with a passenger and chasing a Mustang. My ducting is not the greatest but the bumper is sealed to the radiator. Oil cooler is sandwiched between IC and radiator.

Wrap the braided lines with tape and there are no worries about it sawing through anything. I used
One thing that's not mentioned on the product description that is totally awesome - the M22-AN10 90* fittings are single piece. There is no separate AN10 elbow and M22-AN10 fitting. Shorter fitting height and the just look really damn cool.

good info! im waiting on my oil cooler to ship already have my mocal sammich plate so gotta find fittings and lines. my car is a 91 boosted at 8lbs. i had oil pressure issues up at grange drifting in 118 degree weather so need an oil cooler for sure.

Laminova?
 

Unless I missed it, nobody has mentioned oil-water intercooling?

I run one, and so far it has worked really well. It gets the oil up to temperature quickly (well, more quickly, especially in cooler weather) and seems to hold temperature to around 80-85 even in hot weather.

It is mounted on the radiator outlet so it gets the coolest water, and water temperature has never been an issue. This is the medium size of the three available.

http://edcory.smugmug.com/Other/Phot...IMGP8105-M.jpg

So you are heating up the cool water before it goes into your engine? So your engine runs hotter water through it the whole time? That doesn't sound so good.

You are looking at the wrong end of the system. The critical point is the water exiting the engine at the correct temperature.

Yes, it is heating up the water entering the engine, the engine heats it up some more, the thermostat regulates the temperature of the water exiting the engine, and then the radiator cools the water.

If the radiator hasn't enough cooling capacity to remove both the oil and engine heat absorbed by the water, there will be an overheat. This has not happened to me (yet) even on 30+ days. The car has a radiator out of an SE (your Mazdaspeed?), and makes 120+rwkw.

If you are marginal on cooling, this would not be a good idea, unless you were moving to a bigger radiator anyway.

It's just not as effective as a dedicated air-cooled unit, and it shifts the load onto the radiator which is not at all desirable in the majority of applications.

Savington, it has pegged back the 120+ temps that I had previously (without any cooling) so I have no problem with its effectiveness. But the big benefit to me was the ability to get the oil temperature up quickly, without lots of idling etc.

Like I said above, you need the surplus cooling capacity. If you have it, I do not understand the 'not desirable' comment?

I am not preaching here. You don't like it, I never said it was for everyone. But it is an option, and it is working for me.

LOLOLOLOL.

You mean 86F?

Here's the rule for this thread . . . only posters that push flat-out in TX, AZ, SOCAL or the Middle East at peak heat in August are allowed to opine.

That little thing of yours wouldn't last 5 minutes on my track. It was 40 (exactly) in the shade today, and that felt really good compared to the track (except the track was more fun).

OK, to be fair, those of you tracking in milder climates may do OK with other compromises.

So how necessary is this for a setup like mine. 300 +/- HP, no hood vents, well sealed radiator cowling. I know that doesn't affect oil temps as much but I'm just giving you an idea of what I'm working with.

I won't be doing a ton of track days due to travelling/access, but what is the potential of damage while doing the occasional track day?

I do plan on getting this eventually, just trying to decide if I should put money towards this or some Wilwood calipers for the front first.

There is nothing in principle wrong with the laminova coolers for our application. It is quite possible to build flat-out naturally aspirated miatas that have significant, sometimes problematic excess radiator cooling capacity - witness Crusher. Relating anything to Crusher is somewhat risky, because it was quite specialized, and Thunderhill in December is quite cold. But if you duct the incoming air properly, extract the resulting hot air properly, and run a reroute, you can have more cooling capacity than you need.

120wk is ~ 160hp, which is pretty healthy. I am assuming naturally aspirated?

I think there's room for reasonable debate on how best to plumb one of these into our cars. It's a different design approach than running multiple dedicated air heat exchangers. I lack enough detailed information to make a reasonable decision. Yes, running the radiator outlet through the laminova heats the water going into the engine - but he has a point. If you're seeing thermostat-temp water exiting the engine, everything's fine in terms of total heat.

Gee- where are you currently measuring coolant and oil temperatures?

On my car, the ECU (stock sender location) on a ~28C day reported 102C(204) max water temps, and about 115C(240) on oil. This is with no oil cooling whatsoever. I would not consider my car to have the necessary headroom on radiator capacity to install a laminova.

However, given an effective enough radiator solution, the end resulting temp of water entering the engine from a radiator --> laminova --> engine path may be no greater than it was before with a less effective radiator solution.

I'm sure your unit works well to bring oil temps up. I've never seen the need to add a unit specifically for that reason, especially since the stock 1.8L unit does the exact same job at ~$0 cost to most owners.

If you have surplus cooling capacity with an MSM radiator, you may not need an oil cooler at all. Most of the users in this section (Race Prep) are capable of badly overheating a stock Miata with a stock MSM radiator, let alone a 120kw+ car with the same unit. IOW, most of us do not have surplus cooling capacity. Even 55mm Koyos are not enough for some of the 40*C days we run in California/Texas/etc. Hence my comment: For most applications, pushing the oil cooling load onto the engine coolant system is not desirable.

I'm sure your unit works well, for your application. Your application is clearly unique (light track use in moderate temps with an emphasis on fast warmup for road use) and is likely not applicable to many users here. Nothing against you, just commenting on why your setup may be ideal for you and totally wrong for someone else.

Great thread, I've been researching this topic off and on for months and it's great to have more real-world info.

Andrew mentions earlier that the sandwich plate is an adequate alternative to the sump location, but how close are they? Has anyone ever measured oil temp at the sandwich plate vs sump in the same vehicle? Either at the same time, or different times under similar conditions? I'm curious as to whether there's a few degrees difference, or something more significant.

My car is not a track car, but I beat on it mercilessly in the mountains. I'm measuring at a sandwich plate and seeing temperatures similar to what williams805 mentioned earlier (260*+) when I'm out driving. If for instance it's actually 20* warmer at the plate than average, then I'm not going to sweat it. If it's <5*, then I guess it's time to install a cooler.

Installing a Laminova to make it perfect for all possible cases is hard.

The is one special case where it can be unwise to place it in the coolant path controlled by the thermostat. Extreme cold rallying have showed that you can overheat the oil since the water flow is too small with a closed thermostat.

There are always special cases...

If you install a too big Laminova on the water path into the radiator, you will never overcool the oil, regardless of condition.

Tracking when 100-110F in the shade sounds brutal. Simple solution, don't! :D

That's not how we roll :party:

Curious about this myself. My assumption (emphasis on assumption) is that the sandwich plate would measure about 10F+ hotter. I say this because our oil pans are finned and exposed to the air and an oil pan temp sensor is probably in an area of more stagnant oil vs. the actively circulating oil in the sandwich plate. Would love to know for sure.

"Don't" means staying off the track for a large part of the year. Not gonna' happen. Plus, I have lots of good, hispanic Melanin in my skin blondie! :party:

Andrew do you have any pictures of this installed . Would there be any issue mounting this in the opening in the bumper in front of condenser ? I currently have the fog light holes supplying air to my brake ducts and I use the a/c once in a blue moon .

Yes

Oil temp measured at the remote filter (on exit from engine), water on coolant reroute piping after thermostat.

Not in my experience - they may work on the same principle, but that is about as far as it goes. The Laminova has lots more heating/cooling capacity, and that was reflected in the temperatures I was seeing before/after the installation, and the increased speed of heating of the oil on startup.

I agree that it is not for everyone, and in the case you describe I probably would never have seriously considered it.

My recollection of various m.net threads in the past was that people have seen +20F at the oil filter location compared to the sump. A quick use of my google fu found one of the threads I remembered: Oil temperature differences between the sump and the oil filter

An oil filter sandwich plate appears to be the place to measure oil temp if you are wanting peak live temp readings. The sump reads lower and fluctuates less.

That makes me feel pretty darn good about my oil cooler install then. TX track approved and tested in temperatures exceeding 40C. In these extremely hot conditions, oil temp stabilizes at 240F (read at the sandwich plate) and water temp stabilizes at 205F. Oil pressure steady at 50psi all the way to the end of 30 minute sessions.

Basic design theory, use the biggest darn cooler I could find and put it in an accessible, easy-to-mount/service location:
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1405906254

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1405906254

My shopping list:
Oil Cooler: $125 (Canton Racing Products 23-520 Canton Racing Oil Coolers - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Thermostatic Sandwich Plate: $35 (Derale 15732 Derale Remote Oil Filter Kits, Mounts, and Adapters - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Hose: $24 (JEGS Performance Products 110930 JEGS Pro-Flo 350 Series Nylon Braided Hose - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Sandwich Plate Fittings: 2 x $6 (JEGS Performance Products 110108 JEGS AN to NPT Adapter Fittings - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Oil Cooler Fittings: 2 x $6 (JEGS Performance Products 110110 JEGS AN to NPT Adapter Fittings - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Sandwich Plate Hose End Fittings: 2 x $19 (JEGS Performance Products 110013 JEGS AN Hose End Fittings - Black - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Oil Cooler Hose End Fittings: 2 x $20 (JEGS Performance Products 110023 JEGS AN Hose End Fittings - Black - Free Shipping on All Orders @ JEGS)

Total: $286 + Free S&H

Some other notes about this setup:
1. Use a Wix 51626 or NAPA Gold 1626 Oil Filter.
2. Fill with 5 Qts (both the cooler and the filter are large).
3. Check oil level within 1 hour of last running engine. Because the oil cooler is bottom fed, some have reported that it could drain after long periods of time leading to a high oil level indication (I haven't observed this myself).

Thanks for that Rick!

That make me wonder. I have my FM rad shroud spaced pretty far out. Wonder if I could fit a cooler under the shroud and us the fan for when the oil gets to hot in the MS.

I'm going to say no, don't do that. For best airflow, fans need an airspace surrounding them. The FM shroud is spaced out from the rad to provide that airspace. The fan(s) then creates a more uniform low pressure zone across the back of the radiator.

By placing a heat exchanger in there, you have done two things - increased the resistance to flow for air moving through, and decreased the efficiency of the fan trying to pull air through. You will effectively stall the fan.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. This is what I think will happen.

I think Richard is right. I would say for track use, especially if you've removed your AC condenser, go ahead and get rid of the AC fan to open up that space. It will provide better radiator flow too. Fans are great for slow driving or sitting, but nothing beats the airflow that forward motion and good ducting provide.

Thanks for the link! I found another post by the OP of that thread from a few weeks later where he says the differences are more like 30*. Perhaps he had another couple of track days in between the posts and saw a more distinct difference. Link.

Great info, thanks for sharing.

I think you are right about this being a no-no, but honestly I don't think those SPAL fans that come with the FM shroud give a damn, expecially if its the stage 2, I don't know much about TZ's setup.

Those fans have a much more linear airflow vs. static pressure curve compared to other fans. They still flow a great deal even with a bunch of heat exchangers from what I have read, so I wouldn't use the word "stall" unless they are bolted to a wall. They pull a manly amount of amps. Also, different fans reach peak efficiency at different static pressures, but in general peak efficiency is reached when the fan is placed under a decent resistance, about 1/3-1/2 of the static pressure where the fan reaches 0 airflow(stall). There is even a chance that the extra resistance will place the fan into its peak efficiency static pressure. Peak efficiency for the fan does not mean peak performance though.

Overall, I think you are right though, there definately isn't a reason to introduce this compromise into the system unless there is nowhere else for the oil cooler to be mounted. For peak performance, even though those fans pull a lot of air, I would say it's not as much as a well ducted system without the FM shroud and fans, unless the fans are even stonger than I think they are.

They are not; I have the full FM Stage 2 airflow kit. With the shroud spaced as far out as I could get it (one set of the spacers, couldn't stack two of them) along with ok-but-not-great ducting, I couldn't keep the coolant temps from climbing on warm track days.

2012 : 70F ambient day : 228F reported on my Scangauge on track.

Next step was to remove the shroud and second fan, and improve the ducting.
2013: 82F ambient day : 215F reported on my Scangauge on track.

Further improved my ducting (minor gains), removed the AC
2014: 90F ambient day : 207F reported on my Scangauge on track.

I'm not knocking FM's airflow kit at all, it's nice and well made. But it's a solution for a different problem than that of on-track cooling. The airflow obstruction from a radiator shroud is simply enormous.

Edited for timeline change data.

^ :werd:

Props given for this data, because it is very relevant to me as I was thinking about using their stage 2 kit for dual duty in the distant future, taking out the second fan for the track. I'm thinking this isn't a good idea now.

It seems you wouldn't want to mount the oil cooler inside the FM shroud because that would further reduce the effectiveness of a kit that already isn't effective enough for some users on track.

First hand experience wins. How much improvement do you think was netted from A/C condenser removal? I can't decide how large of an obstruction it is, but for daily driving in TX, the car simply has to have A/C. My ideal setup would still have A/C, but a reroute, really efficient radiator, ducting, louvers from Singular Motorsports :party:, and now I'm thinking to skip the FM shroud and just mount a couple fans on the radiator, which should be enough for the street, and remove one fan when I get to the track.

I'm really grateful for threads like this and the cooling system one, even though recently this has drifted more towards overall cooling system and not just oil coolers.

Since this is the oil cooler thread, I think oil selection may be a decent topic. Recently, I switched to the Rotella T6 that is so popular here. Strange thing though, my engine seems to not like it very much. The car now has a light stumble at about 2200 RPM when the oil is cold, such as starting my first drive of the day. It has no issue when warm at all. My car is a 2004 w/VVT, I think it is the VVT actuator complaining, but I don't see why because shouldn't the RT6 5W-40 behave the about the same(when cold) as the 5W-20 M1 I was running? Anyone have experience with your car not liking RT6?

Edited post #88 to reflect timeline change data.

The AC condenser removal was worth quite a bit as you can see. There is the removal of the raw airflow obstruction of course, but also the ducting is simpler and more effective without it. No aggravating holes for the condenser lines etc.

Edit. To bring this full circle back to oil specifically, I now have room to mount an oil cooler to the back of the radiator as Mr. Hyde has done. I had plans to mount a small one on the passenger side exterior frame rail in the front bumper, but have abandoned those. Oil line routing would have put the lines at significant risk of abrasion plus I'm not sure the tiny snowmobile-based oil cooler I selected for the job will flow enough. I tried to find data but simply couldn't. So in the best mt.net tradition I will follow a path proven by others. Singular Motorsports hood louvers (thanks Ryan!) should ensure I have plenty of overall heat rejection capacity.

I like the backside of the radiator for two reasons. 1) it's easy and convenient for hose routing. 2) There is some built-in moderation of oil temps using that air. I only want to knock 20-30F or so off my peak oil temps, and under normal freeway driving conditions the oil won't be over-cooled. Maybe in freezing temps I will put a blockoff plate on it.

I'm finding with mine that oil temps stay right at 180F (thermostat temperature) during street driving. Haven't run in any cold weather yet.

I think you want to turn the oil cooler over so the fittings are on the top to prevent gravity drain back into the pan. Alternately, a loop in the lines would also work (top of the loop higher than the cooler).

As it is now, each time you restart after the cooler has drained back in to the oil pan, you are effectively performing a dry start until you displace all the air and again pressurize the system with oil.

How long does it take to build oil pressure following a hour or longer off time?

Oil pressure indication is almost immediate, can't really tell any difference from before. The bypass is open and the large oil filter with drainback provisions is still there holding a bunch of oil. Bottom line, not an issue.

That would be a nice spot for an oil cooler but my boosted miata still had over heating issues with two fans one staying on permanently. Then again this was in 118 degree weather. I might put it above my intercooler in front of the radiator. I just don't want to cover too much air flow to the radiator. Anyone ever put one into the cowl? Maybe even put hood risers to pull the heat?

I basically copied MR. Hyde's setup and ditched one of my fans and ran my oil cooler behind the radiator. I don't have an oil temp gauge but I did notice that going from no oil cooler to cooler that I had more consistent oil pressure as the car got hot during a session, this was on 2 different days where the ambient temperature was hovering around 90. I like this solution because it doesn't block flow to the radiator and for the pacific NW which isn't consistently hot like CA or Texas it helps bring the oil up to temp faster on cooler days which are quite common. I plan to add a temp gauge over the winter to monitor it.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1408540872
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1408540872
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1408540872

The cooler itself is a small Setrab unit that I purchased used from Roush Yates for a killer deal. It has high density foam on the leading edges to seal it against the radiator.
http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/p...psxsfvy4g4.jpg

I'd agree. Oil coolers come like this OE (i.e.: MB Cosworth powered 190e 2.3 & 2.5-16). I ran mine like this for over 3k miles w/o issue- and oil pressure was instant on startup. And I've seen countless race cars like this. That said, there are numerous sources out there that state ports should either be vertical, or on top, but not on bottom for the reason stated. Personal choice I suppose.

re: greddygalant - and it even looks like a low profile smaller fan could fit on the back of the oil cooler if needed for a street car. In my fan research I ran across OE compact 5-9" ATV/motorcycle fans that pulled 300-500cfm and were cheap used on eBay.

Can an FM oil cooler (or any oil cooler) increase oil PSI? I installed one when I was preparing for FI. Next I installed gauges. My oil pressure is 20-25 at idle once the synthetic oil is warmed up but my running PSI is 75 PSI. Since I didn't have gauges BEFORE I installed the FM oil cooler I can't be sure if it has anything to do with it. My sensor is in one of the lines to the oil cooler right at the filter location. I'm wondering if the cooler lines are too small

It would really be better to monitor oil pressure at the oil galley port like the factory does it. The location you've chosen could be influenced by restrictions in the oil cooler/lines/filter.

Are you saying the TS rad isn't man enough? ;)

I'm sure I could do that, I still street drive this car occasionally and I drive it to the track. The cooler actually is positioned nicely for heat extraction since I have a hood vent there as well.

I think he's saying the majority of applications are not running a TSE Radiator :brain: Of course, pumping heat into the cooling system via the coolant return to the engine is going to decrease the efficiency if any setup, regardless of radiator.

Many race cars are plumbed poorly, from what I've seen.

An oil cooler mounted so that its ports are on the bottom will trap air inside it. The issue here is that the cooler is not being fully utilized, since there's a big ol' air spring inside it preventing the top-most rows from being filled with oil.

Orienting the cooler so that the ports are at the top (or on the side, with the bottom port as the entrance and the top one as the exit) will purge the air from the cooler.

Hood risers bad. High pressure zone at base of windshield means you will actually decrease the pressure differential across the heat exchangers. Bad.

Hood vents/louvers, OTOH, will help. See aerodynamics threads here on mt.net and the singular motorsports hood louvers thread for more data.

118 is hot. If the car is street driven and has AC you may require dual fans to handle slow/stopped conditions. Tough to also have viable on track cooling while also supporting that requirement.

From a reputable source (see http://www.thinkauto.com/plist010106gweb.pdf page 8):

"Oil coolers may be mounted anyway up and are self bleeding, the resistance to oil flow through the matrix means that tanks will fill up evenly pushing out the air before the oil flows through."

Confirmed by numerous OEMs, racers and personal experience. Let us know when you have any direct, verifiable experience with engine oil coolers to the contrary.

I don't necessarily need for you to believe it for my life to be fulfilled :) , but I have personally witnessed this phenomenon. The top of the automatic transmission cooler, full of air, was drastically cooler than the bottom of the cooler where the oil was actually flowing across from inlet to outlet. This could be replicated by others that wish to test it themselves using a Harbor Freight infrared thermometer or simply their bare hands as I did.

I imagine a scenario where the thick oil could flow with enough volume to force the column of air downward through the outlet and this could certainly be the case with some of the systems out there. But even with the volume of coolant that our water pumps move there is a reason coolant radiators all have vents and purge openings at their top.

If given the opportunity to design an optimum oil cooler placement I would also have the inlet and outlet at the top to discourage drainback and the possibility of an extended dry start before the cooler is filled and the oil finally gets to the rotating and sliding engine components.

lol @ arguing with JKav

I agree with this, of all the people on this forum JKav is one of the very few that I will trust above all others.

There is, however, a slight viscosity difference between motor oil vs. ATF/Water at startup. That's key.

On my install the temp at top and bottom of the cooler is the same, verified with an IR thermometer (since I'll admit I was initially worried about it). The routing/short hose length advantages are compelling -- at least to me.

Can some comment on the differences between the Trackspeed, Flyin Miata, Moss Miata, and other available kits?

My car is a 1.6 and the available spacer for Plug and play install is appealing. Is their mounting location adequate? It's hard to tell from their pics how much airflow that area gets and if it may need any ducting.

I have a friend that bought and installed the FM kit for track use. He saw about a 10psi loss in oil pressure on track. He wasn't running an oil temperature gauge though, so don't know if that was related to not cooling well or -8 hoses. He did try to get additional air to the cooler. He wasn't very happy with it.

No direct experience with the others. The TSE kit sure looks like it has better parts than the others though.

I upgraded from the FM kit to TSE 25-row kit. Based on my experience with it (mostly track car, little street driving), YMMV...

FM Pros:
Super easy install
With ducting it does help quite a bit
Cheaper

FM Cons:
-8an lines
3-5psi drop at idle compared to TSE
Difficult to duct without exposing it to rocks and other debris
Did not keep oil temps under control under any track conditions
Cooler is mounted as one of the lowest points on the car

TSE Pros:
-10an lines
Installs wherever you want
Gobs and gobs of cooling
Seriously, it works very, very well
Your choice of cooler size based on needs

TSE Cons:
Requires minimal fab work for cooler mounting and line construction
Over-cooling with street driving unless the cooler is blocked off
More expensive


The TSE kit is 100% off-the-shelf parts neatly packed in a box, seriously TSE does some of the best packaging jobs I've ever seen. Nothing is custom to the Miata.
FM kit includes pre-assembled lines and model-specific mounting brackets with an off-the-shelf cooler and adapter. Both kits use the same Mocal thermostat adapter plate and both use (different sized) high quality Setrab coolers.

Just going off of what I have read, TSE and FM both use Setrab oil coolers, which already puts them ahead of others. TSE uses -10AN, while FM uses -08AN. This means the TSE kit will have less oil pressure loss. TSE's kit is a DIY install. FM's kit has brackets and pre-cut lines with fittings already attached, ready to rock, and also ready to be damaged due to its mounting location.

I cannot comment on the Moss kit, but I promise the heat exchanger they use is sub-par compared to the Setrab units, and the lines aren't the abrasion resistant braided stainless used in the FM and TSE kit. Also, I don't think their sandwich plate has a thermostat. For the moss kit: Don't even bother. Nothing in this kit is of the same quality as the TSE and FM parts.

I don't know of any other kits, but I would think the TSE and FM will trump them in both function and quality if it is in the same price range. I would go with the TSE kit if I needed a cooler at this time. Plus, you can readily choose the size oil cooler you require.

Seems like a no brainer here.

Can you elaborate on this? Were you seeing temperatures lower than the thermostat temperature? I haven't driven my install in cooler weather yet and am a bit worried about this.

Has anyone used a Setrab oil sandwich plate?

I am trying to find a comparison to the Mocal unit, but I can't find anything. I guess they are both awesome and reliable, but I'm just curious because everything in the TSE kit is Setrab, except for the Mocal oil sandwich plate, and I figured there must be a good reason for this.

Andrew, any particular reason for this?

Thanks for the input to those who commented. Maybe the simpler solution would be a 1.8 engine swap rather than figuring out the spacer :party:

+1. I was under the impression this is why we use the Mocal thermo plate.

I believe this type of thermostat never fully blocks off flow, there will always be flow through the oil cooler as long as there is oil pressure.

Considering this, with an effective oil cooler and very low flow volumes, the oil coming out of the cooler is going to be very close to ambient air temps, and even if the volume is very low, this will decrease oil temps, even when the thermostat is closed.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

You're correct. The passages to the oil cooler are never blocked with a sandwich plate. The thermostatic element only opens a bypass. This is failsafe but might overcool, so I'd really like to hear MidPack's experience.

I've always had good luck with Mocal, so that's what I used for the kits. Which Setrab adapter are you specifically referring to? Got a link?