duke1n said:So I'm doing something similar using a single pusher mounted on the front of the intercooler and getting rid of stock fan. I found I could drive around with no problems with no fan whatsoever. The only time it got warm would be crawling up my lengthy driveway or sitting in stop and go traffic. Being able to flip on the fan in those circumstances should do the trick. That said how do they figure they free up power. You either drive the fan straight off the engine or you drive the fan off the battery which is charged by driving the alternator straight off the engine. Takes the same power no matter how you get it for the same ~fan. Reminds me of people who think driving an electric car someone uses less energy. They forget that when they plug it in the electricity didn't just grow on a tree and was probably generated from a coal fired steam generator. You can't get something for nothing. If it takes 27hp for the engine to spin the fan then an electric fan will take the same 27hp but will just get it from the battery which is charged by the alternator which will take 27hp to supply the battery that power lol. I should be a freakin Oracle!
duke1n said:Well duh. So does the oem fan take 27hp to run? When you replace it with an electric that produces the same flow, does it also take 27hp? Think carefully before you answer.
I think you missed one point on your thesis here dukey. the battery is a STORAGE DEVICE. tha alt keeps the battery charged fully by maintence, hence a slight demand all the time. the engine driven fan has the most drag at max rpms. so in fact you are right about each fan requires the same power,(if you could get two equal comparisons,but i think you would need more electric fans than possible to equal an engine driven fan) but its how that power is derived that makes the difference.duke1n said:Well duh. So does the oem fan take 27hp to run? When you replace it with an electric that produces the same flow, does it also take 27hp? Think carefully before you answer.
Nah I didn't miss anything. Both fans are engine driven and both derive their energy from the engine. The stock fan derives it's energy via the belt which is driven off the crankshaft. The electric fan derives it's energy via the belt which drives the alternator which produces energy which is stored in the battery and drawn by the fan. If anything there is more energy loss doing it that way than direct belt drive. The only difference would be that the electric manages it energy usage by turning on and off and the belt driven manages it's usage via the fan clutch and turning faster or slower depending on rpms. In the end if they move the same amount of air, they use the same energy to do so and probably a little more if it's done via an electric fan.SINNER said:I think you missed one point on your thesis here dukey. the battery is a STORAGE DEVICE. tha alt keeps the battery charged fully by maintence, hence a slight demand all the time. the engine driven fan has the most drag at max rpms. so in fact you are right about each fan requires the same power,(if you could get two equal comparisons,but i think you would need more electric fans than possible to equal an engine driven fan) but its how that power is derived that makes the difference.
btw. i heard an informal study group found that per mile an electric car produced 3 times the emmisions of a gas powered car. the electric generated
in coal plants is one of the biggest gross polluters in our country.