Parallel flow condensers any better than what Ames sells?
 

1971 LEMans. Are the parallel flow condensers that Original Air sells much better than stock? It’s about a $60 difference in the cost. The original condenser looks like a parallel flow— what’s the difference between a OA “parallel” flow and stock. Thanks.

I wasn't aware they made parallel flow condensers back in the early 70's. I thought this was a newer design. Not sure what they called the old ones. I do have Old Air's new style now though.

PF (parallel flow) condensers are a fairly new thing, like in the last 25 years or so.

The original condensers are round-tube serpentine flow; so, yes, the tubes are parallel to each other, but that's not how the flowpath works.

PF condensers route refrigerant through multiple flat tubes at once, hence the PF name. But the main benefit of PF is the hugely bigger surface area of the flat tubes with microchannels allowing much more heat transfer than round tube units. This is more important for R-134a than R-12, which liberates heat better than 134a.

So, if you're going to use R-12 in your car, then the original round-tube unit will work fine, but the PF will still work better. If going with R-134a, then get a PF for sure.

Also remember that if using either/both R-134a and PF condensers, you need significantly less refrigerant than the OEM amount of R-12.

As H said, the parallel condensers didn't come out until 134A was implemented.

You can tell a parallel condenser by the common tube running up the side. All cross tubes intersect with this tube.

A series condenser is one continuous tube from end to end. In my 71 T/A I have run 123A since 2002, first with the original condenser and then with a parallel. The parallel has more fins per inch by a big margin and I saw absolutely no appreciable difference in performance between the two. Both were ice cold.

Thanks everyone, great information!