I suppose that's a point, but the old engine-driven fan already had a
fanbelt, so this isn't adding anything. I imagine it would be a relatively
low-tension, toothed belt, anyway.
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires
on 6/21/07 9:44 AM, Paul Root at ptrmgb@gmail.com wrote:
> 190 to 200 doesn't really sound like a problem to me either.
>
> The problem with the remote motor would be required maintenance of adjusting
> the
> belt. We all know that most Americans can't be bothered doing basic
> maintenance
> on cars. Now your adding something more to do?
>
>
> On 6/21/07, Max Heim <max_heim@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> 1. I'm not sure I'm convinced that 190 to 200 on "hot" days is any kind of
>> a
>> problem.
>>
>> 2. If you are trying to reduce the engine temp at highway speed, you
>> aren't
>> going to address that with a fan. Above 35-40mph, the fan is just blocking
>> airflow. The electric pusher would be much worse in this regard than the
>> engine-driven fan.
>>
>> The main advantage of an electric fan is that it continues to turn at high
>> speed when the car is stationary and idling.
>>
>> The thing you can do is try to ensure that all the airflow through the
>> grill
>> is directed through the radiator core. This might mean finding a new
>> source
>> of 'cold' air for the carburetors.
>>
>> Pondering this issue of the large electric motor blocking airflow, I am
>> somewhat surprised no one has come up with a kit that has the motor
>> located
>> at the corner of the radiator, driving the fan with a belt to a small
>> diameter pulley. This would have advantages in fitting a "puller" fan to a
>> shallow depth situation, and in improved airflow.
_______________________________________________
Edit your replies
Mgs@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/mgs
|