ajhehr, very nice ducting BTW... I plan on doing the same

 

although you make it sound like you know what you're talking about...

pusher fans lose airflow by the basic need that they have to grab air and force it through where pullers suck air through, testing has shown that pullers are more effective but the difference depends on how they are setup.

your setup is less than desirable also, circular shaped fans lose about 30% of the surface of the radiator for cooling, i am a fan(no pun intended) of fully cowled fans as they cool the complete surface of the radiator for maximum efficiency.

swapping pully load for electrical load is basically the same, while the fan is operating the electrical load is basically the same as a mechanical water pump or clutch fan but is less reliable because electricals tend to fail more than mechanical parts do. why would a single speed water pump be more effective than a mechanical one? higher RPMs generally = more heat generated by the motor, a single RPM pump will either be working too much at idle or not enough at high RPMs to keep up with the cooling needed, a belt driven water pump supplies more flow as needed. you are describing more of a drag car than a street driven daily driver, which isn't appropriate because it is giving people the impression it is something they should do.

a fan should also be matched to the requirements needed, an overly large e-fan can actually put more of a load on the engine than the stock clutch fan would when the fan is on.

the main thing is, you shouldn't install an e-fan unless it is absolutely necessary.

 

Ever seen a Shelby Cobra?

 

Shelby Cobra? that's 60's technology. they didn't even know what aerodynamics were back then and you're gonna trust the way they felt like installing radiator fans? The only smart thing he did was put a big motor in a tiny car. The only thing he did after that was get old.

Puller ownz pusher. Yes, CFM's are CFM's. but that's most likely measured under no load conditions. I guarantee any fan will PULL more CFM's than PUSH.

 

Is it really necessary to sacrifice cooling at speed with a duct that limits flow for more cooling at idle? The engine doesn't give off enough heat at idle to warrant this. In order for the air to get through the entire radiator with a duct it would have to turn at a right angle in a puller config, and it wouldn't even touch parts in a pusher config so... Which really offers more even cooling where it counts?

 

by duct you mean shrouding around the fan? if the fan is big enough, then the shrouding won't have an adverse effect on cooling at speed. at least, i had no problems with my fiero fan/shroud setup.

 

You can't dyno test a thermoclutch fan because you can't control it's operation, so there's no way to get an accurate comparison between a thermoclutch fan and an e-fan on a dyno. If the dyno has a decent cooling fan the thermoclutch fan should be putting very little load on the engine anyway, certainly not anywhere near 8hp (3% of 250hp). I don't know how you conducted that test, but it's of little relevance to FC's.

Your two "benefits" completely contradict one another and are both wrong anyway. The fact that an e-fan cycles on and off means the airflow is not even close to steady and neither is engine temp. Unlike a thermoclutch fan, the temp has to rise up to the temp switch's set point before it turns on and then run until the temp has dropped a few degrees. At low speed the engine temp rises and falls as the fan cycles on and off. A thermoclutch engages as the temp starts to rise, so the fan speed is much more closely matched to the actual cooling requirements and thus the engine temp is far more stable. I'm not saying this is necessarily an advantage or disadvantage, only that what you claimed was wrong.

 

Oh i was just goffing around. The cab over truck I work with most of the time have puller fans because the rad is behind the motor.

 

this is what I gathered so far:

use it as a puller...
duct the front air intake portion...
and possibly shroud this 16" fan...