Best place for a cooling fan switch
12-15-2018, 07:38 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Best place for a cooling fan switch
So, I've done an e-fan conversion on my 4runner with a 3.4 swap. I'm using a 2speed 16" Volvo fan. It uses the same motor as the mercury villager fan. It's on a steel fan shroud on a three core radiator and has a relay setup to control high an low. I use a temperature switch from a BMW attaches to an m14 brass nut soldered to a brass freeze plug.
Recently my cheap temperature switch lost low control. Upon replacing it, the nut broke right off the freeze plug because the solder had corroded from the inside out. This happened within about only six months. Because of that, I pounded in a new normal plug and manually run the fan for now rather than making a new plug. I'm thinking about moving the temp switch to the radiator and just have a bung welded on to one of the tanks.
The fan switch is available in two different temps. Low on 195 off at 185 and high on 210 off at 195. The other comes low on 176 off 165 and high on 190 off 176.
my question is which tank should I use and what switch. I'm worried that if I put the hot switch in the top tank it might come on a little too late and the cold switch might never turn off. I'm thinking the cold switch in the bottom tank will be the best option but I'm unsure it will be cold enough. Do you guys think 176 is a cold enough radiator outlet temperature to sufficiently cool the motor. I'm using a factory 185 thermostat.
Recently my cheap temperature switch lost low control. Upon replacing it, the nut broke right off the freeze plug because the solder had corroded from the inside out. This happened within about only six months. Because of that, I pounded in a new normal plug and manually run the fan for now rather than making a new plug. I'm thinking about moving the temp switch to the radiator and just have a bung welded on to one of the tanks.
The fan switch is available in two different temps. Low on 195 off at 185 and high on 210 off at 195. The other comes low on 176 off 165 and high on 190 off 176.
my question is which tank should I use and what switch. I'm worried that if I put the hot switch in the top tank it might come on a little too late and the cold switch might never turn off. I'm thinking the cold switch in the bottom tank will be the best option but I'm unsure it will be cold enough. Do you guys think 176 is a cold enough radiator outlet temperature to sufficiently cool the motor. I'm using a factory 185 thermostat.
Last edited by Kolton5543; 12-16-2018 at 01:42 PM.
12-15-2018, 08:56 PM
#2
Which transmission, if it's an automatic you definitely should go with the lower temp settings, it makes a difference..
Fan sensors are typically block side, I would try to get them back in the flow there somewhere. Regardless of input or output side of the pump the thermostat governing water flow to the radiator is going to come I to play here in the switch choice, what do you have I'm there?
Mixing zinc, copper, brass, steel, and electrolytes are a recipe for disaster. You can tap a freeze plug, or braze it (use the same filler and fitting metal), but solder is a bad idea which you learned.
Fan sensors are typically block side, I would try to get them back in the flow there somewhere. Regardless of input or output side of the pump the thermostat governing water flow to the radiator is going to come I to play here in the switch choice, what do you have I'm there?
Mixing zinc, copper, brass, steel, and electrolytes are a recipe for disaster. You can tap a freeze plug, or braze it (use the same filler and fitting metal), but solder is a bad idea which you learned.
Last edited by Co_94_PU; 12-16-2018 at 07:22 AM.
12-15-2018, 09:04 PM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
It's an oe 185 stat. I figured the solder would have been fine considering the original radiators come brazed and soldered together but I guess not. It is a manual truck so the auto cooler isn't something I gotta worry about.
I would like to put it back in the block but the m14 thread and relatively large switch provides some difficulty. I have a 1/4 npt bung on the lower tank for the drain already. I think I'm gonna put a temp gauge in there and compare it to engine temp. And see if using the cold switch in the lower tank would be cold enough.
I would like to put it back in the block but the m14 thread and relatively large switch provides some difficulty. I have a 1/4 npt bung on the lower tank for the drain already. I think I'm gonna put a temp gauge in there and compare it to engine temp. And see if using the cold switch in the lower tank would be cold enough.
Last edited by Kolton5543; 12-15-2018 at 09:46 PM.
12-16-2018, 08:47 PM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
So I went ahead and put a temp sensor in the lower radiator tank to measure coolant there. Boy was I surprised. No doubt I'm gonna put the fan sensor there and I'm instead gonna get an adjustable controller from HPC instead of the switch.
I have manual switch under the hood that allows me to turn the fan on high or low in case I needed it. I also have a kill switch in the cabin primarily for water crossings. I turned the manual on low and just controlled the fan in the cabin.
What I found is the radiator outlet can get to be within 20 to 15 degrees of engine temp before engine temp starts to rise. No matter the load. Turning the fan on at 175 like the cold switch would do put the engine at about 195. 190 at the radiator puts the engine at about 205. This makes for pretty much exactly the control of the hot switch being in the engine. Seems like the cold switch on the bottom tank would be an effective solution.
Something else I found is the thermostat almost never let the engine drop below about 187 meaning the hot switch in the engine would never let the fan turn off. Mine did however, which leads me to believe that block temperatures can be much cooler than head outlet temperatures. This might explain some of my random temp fluctuations I've been chasing down for a while.
I experimented some more and found if I turned the fan on low at 160 radiator and off at 150 I could very consistently keep engine temp down in the thermostat range. I tested this between anywhere from idler to under load at low speeds. I even drove it up Mt. Graham for about 20 miles. This mountain is one of the steepest mountain roads in arizona. Average speed is about 20 with lots of switch backs. Controlling the fan to come on at 160 rad the temp never really climbed past 195 eng. On a couple of the switch backs I saw 201 with the rad reaching about 180. I never actually used high fan. On the way back down, I never used the fan all the way home.Radiator temp came as low as 100. Averaged 140 through town and 125 on the highway.
From what I can tell I can use the fan to mainly regulate radiator temperature and let the thermostat do it's job of regulating the engine temp. This makes more sense to me than letting the thermostat open and let the fan try and regulate engine temp. Doing this way, the fan can automatically run and turn on low or high long before engine temp actually starts to rise above normal. It might cycle a little more often but actually run for shorter periods of time. It also will ensure it won't be running while cruising down the highway just because the thermostat doesn't feel like getting quite cold enough to shut it off.
So, all in all, I think this might actually be a much more accurate, safe, and reliable configuration than reading block or head temperature for the fan. The available cold switch isn't quite as cold as I'd like however. I'd like low on at 160 and high at 170. That will get the fan going right before engine temp will start to rise above the the thermostats regulating temperature. Because of this, I'm gunna get the fan controller from HPC. It should work really well and be real easy to "retrofit" into my current relay setup without having to really modify anything I already have done.
I have manual switch under the hood that allows me to turn the fan on high or low in case I needed it. I also have a kill switch in the cabin primarily for water crossings. I turned the manual on low and just controlled the fan in the cabin.
What I found is the radiator outlet can get to be within 20 to 15 degrees of engine temp before engine temp starts to rise. No matter the load. Turning the fan on at 175 like the cold switch would do put the engine at about 195. 190 at the radiator puts the engine at about 205. This makes for pretty much exactly the control of the hot switch being in the engine. Seems like the cold switch on the bottom tank would be an effective solution.
Something else I found is the thermostat almost never let the engine drop below about 187 meaning the hot switch in the engine would never let the fan turn off. Mine did however, which leads me to believe that block temperatures can be much cooler than head outlet temperatures. This might explain some of my random temp fluctuations I've been chasing down for a while.
I experimented some more and found if I turned the fan on low at 160 radiator and off at 150 I could very consistently keep engine temp down in the thermostat range. I tested this between anywhere from idler to under load at low speeds. I even drove it up Mt. Graham for about 20 miles. This mountain is one of the steepest mountain roads in arizona. Average speed is about 20 with lots of switch backs. Controlling the fan to come on at 160 rad the temp never really climbed past 195 eng. On a couple of the switch backs I saw 201 with the rad reaching about 180. I never actually used high fan. On the way back down, I never used the fan all the way home.Radiator temp came as low as 100. Averaged 140 through town and 125 on the highway.
From what I can tell I can use the fan to mainly regulate radiator temperature and let the thermostat do it's job of regulating the engine temp. This makes more sense to me than letting the thermostat open and let the fan try and regulate engine temp. Doing this way, the fan can automatically run and turn on low or high long before engine temp actually starts to rise above normal. It might cycle a little more often but actually run for shorter periods of time. It also will ensure it won't be running while cruising down the highway just because the thermostat doesn't feel like getting quite cold enough to shut it off.
So, all in all, I think this might actually be a much more accurate, safe, and reliable configuration than reading block or head temperature for the fan. The available cold switch isn't quite as cold as I'd like however. I'd like low on at 160 and high at 170. That will get the fan going right before engine temp will start to rise above the the thermostats regulating temperature. Because of this, I'm gunna get the fan controller from HPC. It should work really well and be real easy to "retrofit" into my current relay setup without having to really modify anything I already have done.
Last edited by Kolton5543; 12-16-2018 at 08:49 PM.
12-17-2018, 07:17 AM
#5
Registered User
So I went ahead and put a temp sensor in the lower radiator tank to measure coolant there. Boy was I surprised. No doubt I'm gonna put the fan sensor there and I'm instead gonna get an adjustable controller from HPC instead of the switch.
I have manual switch under the hood that allows me to turn the fan on high or low in case I needed it. I also have a kill switch in the cabin primarily for water crossings. I turned the manual on low and just controlled the fan in the cabin.
What I found is the radiator outlet can get to be within 20 to 15 degrees of engine temp before engine temp starts to rise. No matter the load. Turning the fan on at 175 like the cold switch would do put the engine at about 195. 190 at the radiator puts the engine at about 205. This makes for pretty much exactly the control of the hot switch being in the engine. Seems like the cold switch on the bottom tank would be an effective solution.
Something else I found is the thermostat almost never let the engine drop below about 187 meaning the hot switch in the engine would never let the fan turn off. Mine did however, which leads me to believe that block temperatures can be much cooler than head outlet temperatures. This might explain some of my random temp fluctuations I've been chasing down for a while.
I experimented some more and found if I turned the fan on low at 160 radiator and off at 150 I could very consistently keep engine temp down in the thermostat range. I tested this between anywhere from idler to under load at low speeds. I even drove it up Mt. Graham for about 20 miles. This mountain is one of the steepest mountain roads in arizona. Average speed is about 20 with lots of switch backs. Controlling the fan to come on at 160 rad the temp never really climbed past 195 eng. On a couple of the switch backs I saw 201 with the rad reaching about 180. I never actually used high fan. On the way back down, I never used the fan all the way home.Radiator temp came as low as 100. Averaged 140 through town and 125 on the highway.
From what I can tell I can use the fan to mainly regulate radiator temperature and let the thermostat do it's job of regulating the engine temp. This makes more sense to me than letting the thermostat open and let the fan try and regulate engine temp. Doing this way, the fan can automatically run and turn on low or high long before engine temp actually starts to rise above normal. It might cycle a little more often but actually run for shorter periods of time. It also will ensure it won't be running while cruising down the highway just because the thermostat doesn't feel like getting quite cold enough to shut it off.
So, all in all, I think this might actually be a much more accurate, safe, and reliable configuration than reading block or head temperature for the fan. The available cold switch isn't quite as cold as I'd like however. I'd like low on at 160 and high at 170. That will get the fan going right before engine temp will start to rise above the the thermostats regulating temperature. Because of this, I'm gunna get the fan controller from HPC. It should work really well and be real easy to "retrofit" into my current relay setup without having to really modify anything I already have done.
I have manual switch under the hood that allows me to turn the fan on high or low in case I needed it. I also have a kill switch in the cabin primarily for water crossings. I turned the manual on low and just controlled the fan in the cabin.
What I found is the radiator outlet can get to be within 20 to 15 degrees of engine temp before engine temp starts to rise. No matter the load. Turning the fan on at 175 like the cold switch would do put the engine at about 195. 190 at the radiator puts the engine at about 205. This makes for pretty much exactly the control of the hot switch being in the engine. Seems like the cold switch on the bottom tank would be an effective solution.
Something else I found is the thermostat almost never let the engine drop below about 187 meaning the hot switch in the engine would never let the fan turn off. Mine did however, which leads me to believe that block temperatures can be much cooler than head outlet temperatures. This might explain some of my random temp fluctuations I've been chasing down for a while.
I experimented some more and found if I turned the fan on low at 160 radiator and off at 150 I could very consistently keep engine temp down in the thermostat range. I tested this between anywhere from idler to under load at low speeds. I even drove it up Mt. Graham for about 20 miles. This mountain is one of the steepest mountain roads in arizona. Average speed is about 20 with lots of switch backs. Controlling the fan to come on at 160 rad the temp never really climbed past 195 eng. On a couple of the switch backs I saw 201 with the rad reaching about 180. I never actually used high fan. On the way back down, I never used the fan all the way home.Radiator temp came as low as 100. Averaged 140 through town and 125 on the highway.
From what I can tell I can use the fan to mainly regulate radiator temperature and let the thermostat do it's job of regulating the engine temp. This makes more sense to me than letting the thermostat open and let the fan try and regulate engine temp. Doing this way, the fan can automatically run and turn on low or high long before engine temp actually starts to rise above normal. It might cycle a little more often but actually run for shorter periods of time. It also will ensure it won't be running while cruising down the highway just because the thermostat doesn't feel like getting quite cold enough to shut it off.
So, all in all, I think this might actually be a much more accurate, safe, and reliable configuration than reading block or head temperature for the fan. The available cold switch isn't quite as cold as I'd like however. I'd like low on at 160 and high at 170. That will get the fan going right before engine temp will start to rise above the the thermostats regulating temperature. Because of this, I'm gunna get the fan controller from HPC. It should work really well and be real easy to "retrofit" into my current relay setup without having to really modify anything I already have done.
What you are trying to control is engine temperature which can only be accurately sensed at the point of highest coolant temperature (near the thermostat or upper radiator hose).
12-17-2018, 10:42 AM
#6
Registered User
Thread Starter
From what I understand, the engine doesn't care what the ambient temperature is, so long as the coolant coming in is cold enough to absorb the heat produced by the engine. The ambient temp dictates how much airflow through the radiator is needed to hit cool the coolant to that temperature. In my case, about 175 is the max under heavy load. Any higher then engine temps begins to rise above normal temp. I don't feel there is any reason for the fan to be running while doing 65 down the highway and the radiator outlet is at 120. It should supplement the airflow if there isn't already enough. Not be the primary source of airflow.
It also doesn't cycle all that often. I checked the amount of time it takes for the outlet temp to change between fan cycle temps. Fan low would turn on at 160 and off at 150. With a ~75 ambient temp the low fan would cool it down to 150 in 54 seconds. it would then idle for 2m48s to warm back up to 160. With out the fan it would take an additional 26 seconds to get to 170. High fan would then cool it back to 160 in only 42 seconds and then to 150 in only 11 more seconds. The entire time, engine temp stayed around 190. Never hotter. These times are pretty comparable to how often the fan cycled with the sensor in the block. The only difference is the engine temp never rose higher than 190. As ambient temp would rise the fan will have to cycle more of course but it also will when measuring temp from the engine.
Overall, what I understand is if radiator outlet temps can be held the engine temp should stay steady. I don't see why it won't work fine, if not better. Its the thermostats job to regulate engine temp and should be the fans job to regulate rad temp right? It seems to work good for manufactures like BMW and VW.
It also doesn't cycle all that often. I checked the amount of time it takes for the outlet temp to change between fan cycle temps. Fan low would turn on at 160 and off at 150. With a ~75 ambient temp the low fan would cool it down to 150 in 54 seconds. it would then idle for 2m48s to warm back up to 160. With out the fan it would take an additional 26 seconds to get to 170. High fan would then cool it back to 160 in only 42 seconds and then to 150 in only 11 more seconds. The entire time, engine temp stayed around 190. Never hotter. These times are pretty comparable to how often the fan cycled with the sensor in the block. The only difference is the engine temp never rose higher than 190. As ambient temp would rise the fan will have to cycle more of course but it also will when measuring temp from the engine.
Overall, what I understand is if radiator outlet temps can be held the engine temp should stay steady. I don't see why it won't work fine, if not better. Its the thermostats job to regulate engine temp and should be the fans job to regulate rad temp right? It seems to work good for manufactures like BMW and VW.
The following users liked this post:
jimbote (08-04-2022)
12-18-2018, 05:25 AM
#7
Registered User
From what I understand, the engine doesn't care what the ambient temperature is, so long as the coolant coming in is cold enough to absorb the heat produced by the engine. The ambient temp dictates how much airflow through the radiator is needed to hit cool the coolant to that temperature. In my case, about 175 is the max under heavy load. Any higher then engine temps begins to rise above normal temp. I don't feel there is any reason for the fan to be running while doing 65 down the highway and the radiator outlet is at 120. It should supplement the airflow if there isn't already enough. Not be the primary source of airflow.
It also doesn't cycle all that often. I checked the amount of time it takes for the outlet temp to change between fan cycle temps. Fan low would turn on at 160 and off at 150. With a ~75 ambient temp the low fan would cool it down to 150 in 54 seconds. it would then idle for 2m48s to warm back up to 160. With out the fan it would take an additional 26 seconds to get to 170. High fan would then cool it back to 160 in only 42 seconds and then to 150 in only 11 more seconds. The entire time, engine temp stayed around 190. Never hotter. These times are pretty comparable to how often the fan cycled with the sensor in the block. The only difference is the engine temp never rose higher than 190. As ambient temp would rise the fan will have to cycle more of course but it also will when measuring temp from the engine.
Overall, what I understand is if radiator outlet temps can be held the engine temp should stay steady. I don't see why it won't work fine, if not better. Its the thermostats job to regulate engine temp and should be the fans job to regulate rad temp right? It seems to work good for manufactures like BMW and VW.
It also doesn't cycle all that often. I checked the amount of time it takes for the outlet temp to change between fan cycle temps. Fan low would turn on at 160 and off at 150. With a ~75 ambient temp the low fan would cool it down to 150 in 54 seconds. it would then idle for 2m48s to warm back up to 160. With out the fan it would take an additional 26 seconds to get to 170. High fan would then cool it back to 160 in only 42 seconds and then to 150 in only 11 more seconds. The entire time, engine temp stayed around 190. Never hotter. These times are pretty comparable to how often the fan cycled with the sensor in the block. The only difference is the engine temp never rose higher than 190. As ambient temp would rise the fan will have to cycle more of course but it also will when measuring temp from the engine.
Overall, what I understand is if radiator outlet temps can be held the engine temp should stay steady. I don't see why it won't work fine, if not better. Its the thermostats job to regulate engine temp and should be the fans job to regulate rad temp right? It seems to work good for manufactures like BMW and VW.
By the way, I am an Instrumentation Technician and I'm paid to study control systems and in your case in hot weather your radiator may struggle to drop the temperature enough to kick on your fans off whereas in cold weather it may kick them off early or not kick them on at all. I'm not familiar with BMW or VW, but if their fans are controlled by the ECM they are also measuring ambient temperature and taking that into account. They are also not climbing muddy hills at 3 mph with full throttle and tire speeds of 50+ mph. good luck!
Trending Topics
12-18-2018, 06:46 AM
#8
Registered User
Large thermal gradients are not good for engines, so there is good reason to be interested in controlling radiator outlet temps, especially in cold weather, when overcooling is the is most liable to occur.
The thermostat holds closed on the hot end until its control temp is reached while coolant temps at the cold outlet of the radiator might be 50 degrees or more colder. Not good.
This problem is addressed in large diesel trucks with radiator shutters that control air thruput. Such truck radiators and engine cooling systems are designed with very substantial overcapacity with the idea
that coolant temps might be regulated to only 15 or 20 degrees difference between hot out and cold in. This makes engines happier and more long lived.
The thermostat holds closed on the hot end until its control temp is reached while coolant temps at the cold outlet of the radiator might be 50 degrees or more colder. Not good.
This problem is addressed in large diesel trucks with radiator shutters that control air thruput. Such truck radiators and engine cooling systems are designed with very substantial overcapacity with the idea
that coolant temps might be regulated to only 15 or 20 degrees difference between hot out and cold in. This makes engines happier and more long lived.
Last edited by millball; 12-18-2018 at 07:18 AM.
12-18-2018, 07:13 AM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Look, I'm not trying start an argument. I'm just trying to provoke some thought. What you do for a living doesn't matter to me. I fix every kind of car for a living but that doesn't make me an expert on anything. Im just trying to get in touch with somebody who has a little more experience on this subject than I do. If you believe your more experienced, then actually give some details as to why rather than just telling me I'm wrong.
I agree with millball. His statement makes sense to me. The fans don't cool the engine. They cool the radiator and the temperature that comes out of the radiator outlet directly defines the effectiveness of the fans. If the engine is overheating the fans will still come on unless there is no coolant flow to and from the radiator. In that case it won't make a difference either way, right. If the weather is too hot for the fans to shut off from radiator temp then what makes you think the engine will be any cooler? As for cold weather, they should turn off at 150. 150 is 150. How can it be too soon? Also BMW and VW control the fans from the radiator. Nothing else taken into account with the exception of the A/C of course.
If I'm wrong on anything above, please explain to me why with details and facts. Maybe even some good examples.
I agree with millball. His statement makes sense to me. The fans don't cool the engine. They cool the radiator and the temperature that comes out of the radiator outlet directly defines the effectiveness of the fans. If the engine is overheating the fans will still come on unless there is no coolant flow to and from the radiator. In that case it won't make a difference either way, right. If the weather is too hot for the fans to shut off from radiator temp then what makes you think the engine will be any cooler? As for cold weather, they should turn off at 150. 150 is 150. How can it be too soon? Also BMW and VW control the fans from the radiator. Nothing else taken into account with the exception of the A/C of course.
If I'm wrong on anything above, please explain to me why with details and facts. Maybe even some good examples.
12-19-2018, 01:07 AM
#10
I have worked with the VW fan switches, I think mounting one in the lower or middle of the radiator is your best bet. There are a good variety of temperatures with the VW fan switches, which gives you more flexibility. I have mounted them in the hot side using a hose adapter in the upper radiator hose, but I dropped down to a 15 degree cooler thermostat... This was not on a Toyota and not an originally mechanical fan vehicle. Since the original fan with the 3.4 was a mechanical one, you would be running hotter trying to use a fan switch on the hot side without using a significantly cooler thermostat than the oem one. But I have no idea what the ideal operating temperature parameters are for the 3.4 engine. My 22R runs better with a 180 stat and I have the oem mechanical fan, but I have a large plug gap. Also I have an automatic transmission.
12-19-2018, 07:49 PM
#11
Registered User
Look, I'm not trying start an argument. I'm just trying to provoke some thought. What you do for a living doesn't matter to me. I fix every kind of car for a living but that doesn't make me an expert on anything. Im just trying to get in touch with somebody who has a little more experience on this subject than I do. If you believe your more experienced, then actually give some details as to why rather than just telling me I'm wrong.
I agree with millball. His statement makes sense to me. The fans don't cool the engine. They cool the radiator and the temperature that comes out of the radiator outlet directly defines the effectiveness of the fans. If the engine is overheating the fans will still come on unless there is no coolant flow to and from the radiator. In that case it won't make a difference either way, right. If the weather is too hot for the fans to shut off from radiator temp then what makes you think the engine will be any cooler? As for cold weather, they should turn off at 150. 150 is 150. How can it be too soon? Also BMW and VW control the fans from the radiator. Nothing else taken into account with the exception of the A/C of course.
If I'm wrong on anything above, please explain to me why with details and facts. Maybe even some good examples.
I agree with millball. His statement makes sense to me. The fans don't cool the engine. They cool the radiator and the temperature that comes out of the radiator outlet directly defines the effectiveness of the fans. If the engine is overheating the fans will still come on unless there is no coolant flow to and from the radiator. In that case it won't make a difference either way, right. If the weather is too hot for the fans to shut off from radiator temp then what makes you think the engine will be any cooler? As for cold weather, they should turn off at 150. 150 is 150. How can it be too soon? Also BMW and VW control the fans from the radiator. Nothing else taken into account with the exception of the A/C of course.
If I'm wrong on anything above, please explain to me why with details and facts. Maybe even some good examples.
12-20-2018, 02:38 PM
#12
I agree that most folks are better off sticking with the factory mechanical fan. It is durable, reliable, and requires less maintenance. However, there are some advantages to having electric fan(s). If I am starting a cold vehicle in subzero temperatures, I wouldn't be too thrilled about a mechanical fan moving air around in the engine compartment. Also, if I am idling in traffic in Phoenix and it is 115 degrees outside, I wonder if the Taurus fan is going to do a better job keeping the engine from running hot. Someone on another forum mentioned if you were crossing a stream you could pull the fuse on your Taurus fan to protect the fan blade. None of these are issues I would normally deal with operating my 2wd pickup in Georgia, but who knows the weather extremes, zombie apocalypse may be right around the corner.
12-20-2018, 03:13 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
I never cared for the mechanical fan. My biggest reason for going electric was for water crossings. I try to stay out of the water but sometimes it's inevitable. I actually had to cross the river earlier this summer and ruined my radiator because of it. That's when I bumped up to the 3 core rad and the electric with a kill switch in the cabin. I do think an electric could work better at idle but it might not. I've never found any real airflow numbers to actually back it up but the possibility is certainly there.
Any ways, I've done some more driving manually controlling it 160 on 150 off and it continues to seem to work great. I ordered up an HPC fan controller. Unfortunately it's coming from Canada and isn't supposed to be here till later next month.
Any ways, I've done some more driving manually controlling it 160 on 150 off and it continues to seem to work great. I ordered up an HPC fan controller. Unfortunately it's coming from Canada and isn't supposed to be here till later next month.
Last edited by Kolton5543; 12-20-2018 at 03:15 PM.
12-30-2018, 11:00 AM
#14
Registered User
Thread Starter
Well, the fan controller showed up earlier than expected. I got it installed yesterday with the temp switch in the lower radiator tank. I have to fine tune the temp setting a little more but so far it's working perfect. I'll let yak know if it gives me any issues. After I see how it holds up in the summer I might do a product review on it.
Last edited by Kolton5543; 12-30-2018 at 07:31 PM.
12-30-2018, 05:16 PM
#15
Registered User
Well, the fan controller showed up earlier than expected. I got it installed yesterday with the temp switch in the lower radiator tank. I have to fine tune the temp setting a little more but so far it's working perfect. I'll let yak know if it gives meme any issues. After I see how it holds up in the summer I might do a product review on it.
12-30-2018, 07:34 PM
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
I don't see how that's a dare. I very well intend to just for the sake of determining reliability. As of right now the temperature isn't getting much above 40f outside so it's gunna have to wait a few months. I plan on stress testing it come August if it's still in there by then.
01-04-2019, 09:46 PM
#18
What I have found that works well with an electric cooling fan system is having more than one fan and more than one control system, and performing routine maintenance like inspecting and oiling the fan motors. On my 22R, I recently lost my gas and temperature gauge. Fortunately, I got them back by reinstalling the fuse. But, It made me start thinking about something I was exploring earlier. I was looking in to installing a thermal switch, relay, and indicator light. The idea being that I would have a light come on in the cab if I was running hotter than I should be. On my 22R, there are two plugged coolant holes that are available near the thermostat. I am trying to find a thermal switch of the right temperature and with the right threads to fit one of the holes. I've been looking at the specs on a SW546. But more to the point, if you are using the Taurus fan set up, you might want to use a system to warn you if you are running too hot, with an electric fan system you can have a relay or thermal switch malfunction as well as the fan motor. https://wasteadvantagemag.com/studie...-cooling-tech/
Last edited by chuckross1957; 01-06-2019 at 10:43 PM.
04-26-2019, 01:47 PM
#19
Registered User
I don't see how that's a dare. I very well intend to just for the sake of determining reliability. As of right now the temperature isn't getting much above 40f outside so it's gunna have to wait a few months. I plan on stress testing it come August if it's still in there by then.
3 fans plus the stock A/C fan for a total of 4 fans flailing the air and running down the local beach was only doable if I was headed into the wind or doing 30 mph. And, it's only 45 degrees outside.
04-26-2019, 01:53 PM
#20
Registered User
Any update Kolton? I just threw the kitchen sink at mine and it still overheats if I'm going slow on soft ground or uphill.
3 fans plus the stock A/C fan for a total of 4 fans flailing the air and running down the local beach was only doable if I was headed into the wind or doing 30 mph. And, it's only 45 degrees outside.
3 fans plus the stock A/C fan for a total of 4 fans flailing the air and running down the local beach was only doable if I was headed into the wind or doing 30 mph. And, it's only 45 degrees outside.
