Electric Fan Install

[bobbywalter]

well. it is in fact about 10 hp....likely more once in full warm..


that is provable on a dyno 100 percent of the time...


but that is also at an engine speed you will never use for any period of time save for cruise.

and its the opposite...usually more noticeable on a smaller engine to free it from a 5 pound fan then a 350 v8.

unless someone is going for max economy I don't suggest dicking with the cooling system on a ranger. they work well.

simply put, whether or not there is a substantial gain is drive cycle dependant.


there is potential...no gaurantee.

a properly setup electric system from oem componentry is in fact more reliable then a standard style clutch fan. anybody that pushes a cooling system off roading with a ranger finds out that mechanical clutch fans fail more often then electric ones. you can drive around for years with a whipped unit....first time you push it...its hot.

 

[Rearanger]

well. it is in fact about 10 hp....likely more once in full warm..

that is provable on a dyno 100 percent of the time...

Be glad to look at dyno numbers - never seen any other than butt dyno.

and its the opposite...usually more noticeable on a smaller engine to free it from a 5 pound fan then a 350 v8.

I didn't notice any on my 3.0L. It's only 5lb at startup, once it's spinning the momentum change does not equal 5lb. As well at speed the fan is not in lockup so the CFM load is quite a bit less. And no one ever knows the CFM of the factory fan to give a fair comparison to HP needed to run an electric at the same CFM.

The real savings are in the electric fan not running at all at speed, where as there is some constant load on the clutch fan - even in non-lockup.

As for reliability, I still have my clutch fan for when the fan controller fails.

 

[91stranger]

What the hell does "YMMV" mean? I read this whole thread and that is what threw me off lol.

 

[ericbphoto]

"Your mileage may vary"

In other words, results are not always the same for everyone.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Rearanger]

So THIS is interesting.

As has been stated the higher the rpm the more HP loss. Also the clutch fan here has metal blades, not the plastic as my Ranger has, and we don't know the total weight of the fan.

 

[pjtoledo]

OK, so its been proven that at 5000 rpms in still air the energy to spin a fan is significate.

what if the speed of the fan is tuned to match the air flow coming thru the radiator at 70 mph? then the fan would be approaching free wheeling and should use considerably less energy to spin.

what if the clutch in the fan is a variable 1-way design? that could be where its temperature dependent and the 1-way portion would have the engine driving the fan but if the air flow was greater the fan would be released to spin faster.

anybody up on fluid dynamics and have a super computer laying around?

maybe red-neck engineering will work, strap a fan to the roof and see how fast it spins at 70 then change pulley sizes to match it at cruising rpms.

 

[bobbywalter]

nice video. I hope that humbles people.

Be glad to look at dyno numbers - never seen any other than butt dyno.



I didn't notice any on my 3.0L. It's only 5lb at startup, once it's spinning the momentum change does not equal 5lb. As well at speed the fan is not in lockup so the CFM load is quite a bit less. And no one ever knows the CFM of the factory fan to give a fair comparison to HP needed to run an electric at the same CFM.

The real savings are in the electric fan not running at all at speed, where as there is some constant load on the clutch fan - even in non-lockup.

As for reliability, I still have my clutch fan for when the fan controller fails.

I assume you wrote this before watching that video you posted.

think of the assumptions you had and why.

OK, so its been proven that at 5000 rpms in still air the energy to spin a fan is significate.

what if the speed of the fan is tuned to match the air flow coming thru the radiator at 70 mph? then the fan would be approaching free wheeling and should use considerably less energy to spin.

what if the clutch in the fan is a variable 1-way design? that could be where its temperature dependent and the 1-way portion would have the engine driving the fan but if the air flow was greater the fan would be released to spin faster.

anybody up on fluid dynamics and have a super computer laying around?

maybe red-neck engineering will work, strap a fan to the roof and see how fast it spins at 70 then change pulley sizes to match it at cruising rpms.

and thus the age old debate...and stupid that comes of it. assumptions and misapplied math. I know the end result...from doing it.


we have had some silly ass debates concerning electric fans over the last 20 years on here. I know people in the oem that I begged to bring the data here...because I want good information here and it is the reason I will spar with the debate.

I am not a computer whiz...not a math whiz. not formerly educated.

but I do build engines...I have extensive time dealing with dyno tuning and parameter changes over the last 30 years...

most of my close family works in product development and r&d...and most of that with ford.

somebody will put some efficiency conversion loss formula up....but like listed above and what you guys are thinking or at least were thinking...

somehow people with a formula explaining electrical conversion loss believe momentum provided by the running engine will take the energy required to move a mass 30 times that of an electric fan blade magically away. it is fukking ridiculous.... same with air speed. the formula is right but what is not understood it is also better then the mechanical frictions involved...


I know just having the belt on a stock 302 in gt dress with no load on the alternator or power steering costs 12 pk hp. with no fan. that's just the mass of the systems pullies and belts in free wheel!!! even after momentum is supposedly going to magically take away the requirement somehow...once everything is spinning...

and people will argue the clutch fan cant take power because of inertia...



as to the going 70 mph thing...the other big magical unicorn GOTCHA...


the turbulence caused in the engine compartment actually increases the fan drag in many situations....easily proved with a fuel meter via bsfc measurements. its so old and outdated ....this information... you would think it would be readily available.


the electric fan offers maximum efficiency provided it is set up correctly. you guys already know this for the right reasons. its only on when it needs to be.


the clutch fan is regarded industry wide as using about 1 hp full off...which is around 10 percent lockup. so no matter what its more then an electric fan running constantly.

the mechanical/electrical hybrids can 100 percent deactivate and have near 0 fan blade drag....problem is they still use 1 hp from mass....but can have a ridiculously powerful fan that actually works at 60 mph and pulls 30-40 hp....but WORKS LIKE A MOFO. the mass it takes to support that fan costs some power...but nothing like it used to. problem is they are very complex, expensive and a reliability issue.


electric fans are more expensive then mechanical fans. everything is electric now because max efficiency demands it.


but like I said before...no guarantee for gain....but I can say you wont lose power.

the fact that rearanger noticed no gain just proves that 10 hp don't fawkin matter unless your a max mpg guy.

I can notice a few hp on a 150 hp engine wringing It out....I cant on a 700 hp engine.

so your butt dyno is not calibratedthe same asmine....the ol ymmv

 

[pjtoledo]

I think we need to help Bobby with his blood pressure. whaddaya say we rekindle the old argument that a big fan on the roof will generate enough power to keep an electric vehicle running?


I can't run very fast anymore, one of you young skinny guys needs to tell him.

 

[Craig0320]

But Bobby you forgot to mention that it takes more hp to turn a mechanical fan in cold air more than warm air because cold air is thicker and more dense. Especially if it has more fan blades.

 

[91stranger]

"Your mileage may vary"

In other words, results are not always the same for everyone.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

THANK YOU! that was driving me crazy yesterday. I was saying everything I could think of and none of it was making sense. lol. good to know.

 

[ericbphoto]

whaddaya say we rekindle the old argument that a big fan on the roof will generate enough power to keep an electric vehicle running?

That kind of silliness reminds me of the Roadkill episode where they did forced induction using a bunch of leaf blowers on a trailer behind the car. Those guys are my heroes.

 

[Rearanger]

I assume you wrote this before watching that video you posted. think of the assumptions you had and why.

I never assumed there was no gain, my own MPG calculations proved there is. I'm just not there that the gain is all that much. And as you stated, the size of the gain is determined by the RPM, as is the HP. I can't read the dyno chart to see what is gained at the more reasonable 2K to 3K rpm range. And that fan is not my ranger fan. And in all those tests no one compares CFM.

This is why I added the Efan for engine heat, not HP.

 

[bobbywalter]

I think we need to help Bobby with his blood pressure. whaddaya say we rekindle the old argument that a big fan on the roof will generate enough power to keep an electric vehicle running?


I can't run very fast anymore, one of you young skinny guys needs to tell him.

I am old.....not gonna run....you say it from 15 feet away with both middle fingers up and your good.


I can see after re-reading that post, it seems like a foaming at the mouth rant..but it is not.

blood pressure....not elevated. not even aggravated. just shocked people are still this ignorant. the video made me lol though. all you have to do is lift the hood of any regular rwd vehicle the last 20 years to know what the deal is...


where I have frustration is due to experience.

I know from the people I have dealt with on engineering side what has been done and why. things I learned since the 80s from the oem, it was proven to be the top option. by a long shot. just not cost effective.


I learned a hard lesson thinking it was a bad idea. but I was wrong. there was a time I refused to put an electric fan on a ranger conversion. cause I am dumb. you would think I would study math. but dumb has sort of been working...



like you guys say in mockery....cold air, or more blades ect...its just stupid. these are points to be made and explored....but fuel metering and load testing are the "what really happened". many like to say butt dyno but don't do anything in regard to implementation and think they know what the fawk the truth is...that is also frustrating for sure when you actually use dyno's.. and it is not free to use one.

the fans I mentioned in my previous post that are found on the diesels are ridiculous in capacity and complexity....but it takes quite a bit to cool 500 hp and 900 ft pounds under load. I had an 06 diesel for awhile..with much lower rated power then current trucks. it wiped a fan bearing...less then 150 k on it...it was 400 bux to replace the clutch and fan for just parts, they should be replaced together past 50k miles according to them due to thermal loading ect...I have blown apart my fair share of plastic fans so I did what was suggested. my 95 powerstroke has even less power and that clutch is 100 bux for a shitty one, 200 for a good one.

trust me I can junkyard a cooling system for half of that that will work better on any normal vehicle.

theory, what really happens, corrected theory by properly applied and revised math I can not help with. me.....not so good at maths...so wont be explaining that way. been waiting for someone to put it up though.


with that said....again with a stockish powered truck...I would not dick with it.

but note...most trucks over 100-130 k miles wont handle high loads off road without a fresh clutch. thing is...most people...the vast majority don't ever push their trucks that hard. so no reason to mess with a rangers cooling unless it bites ya.


I drive a mechanical v8 diesel ford ranger and wring the fawker out and always push the heat to the line no matter what engine was in it...2.9, 302, 351 6.5 or 6.2...I always manage to get it hot...no matter what fan it has..currently it has a Lincoln v8 intech fan system on it...

in certain situations I do indeed keep a mechanical fan with me. the reason I do this is because my truck don't need electricity to run if push comes to shove...

and I have destroyed more then one alternator in a day 4 wheeling.

if your in a slow moving situation with no alternator your fawked with an electric fan.

so when adventuring....at the very least even a cheap flex fan could save your bacon. using the amps to run the fuel pump and pcm will get you a long way with a healthy battery. so my fan system is easy to remove and service.

 

[Craig0320]

like you guys say in mockery....cold air, or more blades ect...its just stupid.

Lol just having some fun with you brother. I'm sorry if you thought I was being serious.

 

[bobbywalter]

I do the same thing...the mockery is good.....there are so many variables it is hysterical.

what matters and what don't is the key. mockery points the way.


the 3.0 fan and clutch assemblies I have weighed were a bit under 5 pounds....the ones on my 2.9 and 4.0 were over 6 pounds for the big one and less then 5 for the small one.. there is more then one fan.

the YMMV applies here...my scale could be way wrong at lower weights....my 6.5 diesel fan/clutch assembly is over 9 pounds