I've just had the radiator replaced on my vRS to fix a coolant leak. I was losing coolant so fast that it went from full (to the max level, not brimmed) to the warning light/alarm going during my 45 minute (26 mile) commute.
Having just driven about the same distance since collecting the car from the garage, the lights and sirens are back. Not impressed.
I lifted the bonnet, not expecting to see much, and was faced with what's clearly NOT a new radiator. It's dull coloured, generously marked with the sort of dents which aluminium radiators collect on their fragile fins, and encrusted with oil and dead flies.
I've quickly checked the forum and note that there are 2 radiators, one for coolant and one (a condenser) for the radiator. If I look at the back of the radiator, through the fan on the nearside, the grille I see looks new-ish. It's certainly shinier than I would expect of an old radiator and free from to . Am I looking at the back of the radiator, or condenser?
Since my receipt reads "radiator", not "condenser", and because it was coolant loss which necessitated the replacement, should the radiator I see when I look in the front be new and shiny?
And is it unfair of me to be suspicious that the rate of leakage I have now is, as near as I can tell, the same as before the work was done.
Thanks for any help on this.
weevil
PS I've just noticed my dismal spelling in the title of this post. Is it possible for me (or a kind moderator with nothing better to do) to change it?
