Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » Electric Radiator fans
| Electric Radiator fans [message #92766] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 03:04  |
aaaa
Messages: 13
Registered: April 2010
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
When our coaches were built there were not many options as far as cooling our engines, The first part of this month July 7th, 8th, and 9th I made a trial run through the Mohave from the Central Valley of California to Maricopa Arizona. On the 8th leaving Maricopa it was 115 seemed hotter where I was at a storage unit with nothing but black asphalt and metal buildings. Yes I have faith in the work I've done on the 1978 Birchaven all new belts hoses fuel lines, aluminum water pump and pressure tested radiator. The coach ran great, but when the thermostatic fan kicks in it sounds like a 747 on takeoff and noticeably slows the coach, Id estimate with consistent throttle pressure 3-4mph. The only other issues were in the 100 degree plus weather was fuel boiling out of the carb and starving for fuel until enough air was blowing thru the engine compartment. Anyway who has installed electric cooling fans I think the desert guys running 700hp engines in the Baja 1000 have radiators mounted in the back of the trucks with the fans blowing up, around 5500 cfm fans if I recall. Surely this is more than enough to handle a 225 hp car engine in a motorhome. I've also heard of GMC people running 7lb radiator caps? Why sacrifice 24-1/2 degrees over a 14lb cap and have your engine boil sooner? I will deal with the fuel boiling out of the carb separately. As I belie it is part exhaust Cross over and the heat from the front of the engine on the metal fuel line.
Ken Morris
Modesto California
1978 Birchaven
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans [message #92775 is a reply to message #92766] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 06:37  |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ken,
The reason folks run those caps is the original radiators and heater
cores were designed for those caps. The new alum radiators can handle
higher pressure caps but that still leaves the old heater core
limitations.
Nearly all of us here on the net have either switched to the new alum
rockwell intake with no crossovers, or have installed block off plates
between the heads and the crossover passages for the very reasons you
describe.
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Ken Morris <ken@aaaaimage.com> wrote:
>
>
> When our coaches were built there were not many options as far as cooling our engines, The first part of this month July 7th, 8th, and 9th I made a trial run through the Mohave from the Central Valley of California to Maricopa Arizona. On the 8th leaving Maricopa it was 115 seemed hotter where I was at a storage unit with nothing but black asphalt and metal buildings. Yes I have faith in the work I've done on the 1978 Birchaven all new belts hoses fuel lines, aluminum water pump and pressure tested radiator. The coach ran great, but when the thermostatic fan kicks in it sounds like a 747 on takeoff and noticeably slows the coach, Id estimate with consistent throttle pressure 3-4mph. The only other issues were in the 100 degree plus weather was fuel boiling out of the carb and starving for fuel until enough air was blowing thru the engine compartment. Anyway who has installed electric cooling fans I think the desert guys running 700hp engines in the Baja 1000 have radiator
> s mounted in the back of the trucks with the fans blowing up, around 5500 cfm fans if I recall. Surely this is more than enough to handle a 225 hp car engine in a motorhome. I've also heard of GMC people running 7lb radiator caps? Why sacrifice 24-1/2 degrees over a 14lb cap and have your engine boil sooner? I will deal with the fuel boiling out of the carb separately. As I belie it is part exhaust Cross over and the heat from the front of the engine on the metal fuel line.
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Steve Ferguson
'76 EII
Sierra Vista, AZ
Urethane bushing source
www.bdub.net/ferguson/
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Electric Radiator fans [message #92796 is a reply to message #92766] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 10:03 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
| aaaa wrote on Wed, 21 July 2010 02:04 |
When our coaches were built there were not many options as far as cooling our engines, The first part of this month July 7th, 8th, and 9th I made a trial run through the Mohave from the Central Valley of California to Maricopa Arizona. On the 8th leaving Maricopa it was 115 seemed hotter where I was at a storage unit with nothing but black asphalt and metal buildings. Yes I have faith in the work I've done on the 1978 Birchaven all new belts hoses fuel lines, aluminum water pump and pressure tested radiator. The coach ran great, but when the thermostatic fan kicks in it sounds like a 747 on takeoff and noticeably slows the coach, Id estimate with consistent throttle pressure 3-4mph. The only other issues were in the 100 degree plus weather was fuel boiling out of the carb and starving for fuel until enough air was blowing thru the engine compartment. Anyway who has installed electric cooling fans I think the desert guys running 700hp engines in the Baja 1000 have radiators mounted in the back of the trucks with the fans blowing up, around 5500 cfm fans if I recall. Surely this is more than enough to handle a 225 hp car engine in a motorhome. I've also heard of GMC people running 7lb radiator caps? Why sacrifice 24-1/2 degrees over a 14lb cap and have your engine boil sooner? I will deal with the fuel boiling out of the carb separately. As I belie it is part exhaust Cross over and the heat from the front of the engine on the metal fuel line.
|
Yes the mechanical fan is noisy when it kicks in. There's been a lot of progress on fan blade design and newer ones are much quieter. It's still an efficient way to go. On an electric fan, you still consume energy and you have a double conversion--mechanical to electrical, and then electrical back to mechanical. Electric fans became popular due to transverse engine installations. Many modern fore-aft vehicles still use belt driven fans, although they also use electronically operated clutches to provide more precise control.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| [GMCnet] Antifreeze boil out protection and radiator caps [message #92804 is a reply to message #92792] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 11:44 |
emerystora
Messages: 4442
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 13
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Jul 21, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Paul Leavitt wrote:
>
>
> I have a cap/rad tester I can bring with me to duquoin if anyboby wants,,,,PL
That last time I brought my tester to a rally I made a bet with someone that at least half of the caps that I would check would be bad.
I was wrong! Out of about 20 that I checked 16 of them (80%) were bad. The next rally that I did that at over 70% were bad.
Radiator caps make so many cycles opening and closing that the spring will get weakened and the rubber seals will crack or otherwise deteriorate from the heat, so they usually only last about one year. So, if anyone here hasn't changed their cap in the last couple of years they probably don't have any pressure protection from their cap.
Most people use a 50/50 mixture. It goes to -34 freeze point but it give a boiling point protection of 225 deg. F. Then when you add about 9 psi of pressure with the GMC 9# cap the boiling point goes to about 250 degrees.
You can see that the pressure cap has a large effect on the boiling point. It will raise the boiling point almost 3 degrees per pound of pressure.
You can increase the amount of antifreeze up to a maximum of 70% and get additional boil over protection but you only gain about 10 or 12 degrees and a 70% mixture is not as good a heat transfer medium as a 50% mixture. I feel that 250 degrees boil out protection is enough for most people. If you live in an extremely hot area (probably hotter than Houston) you could go to the 70% but water transfers heat better than ethylene glycol so I suggest that most people stay with the 50% mixture.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Santa Fe, NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans [message #92806 is a reply to message #92796] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 12:06 |
Kosier
Messages: 834
Registered: February 2008
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Bob,
Down in the basement, I've got an accessory fan clutch for a
flathead Ford, electrically operated, 6-volt. It seems Ford did
have a better idea back then. Of course, since it's still new,
it didn't sell back then.
Gary Kosier
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob de Kruyff" <NEXT2POOL@AOL.COM>
To: <gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans
>
>
> aaaa wrote on Wed, 21 July 2010 02:04
>> When our coaches were built there were not many options as far
>> as cooling our engines, The first part of this month July 7th,
>> 8th, and 9th I made a trial run through the Mohave from the
>> Central Valley of California to Maricopa Arizona. On the 8th
>> leaving Maricopa it was 115 seemed hotter where I was at a
>> storage unit with nothing but black asphalt and metal
>> buildings. Yes I have faith in the work I've done on the 1978
>> Birchaven all new belts hoses fuel lines, aluminum water pump
>> and pressure tested radiator. The coach ran great, but when
>> the thermostatic fan kicks in it sounds like a 747 on takeoff
>> and noticeably slows the coach, Id estimate with consistent
>> throttle pressure 3-4mph. The only other issues were in the
>> 100 degree plus weather was fuel boiling out of the carb and
>> starving for fuel until enough air was blowing thru the engine
>> compartment. Anyway who has installed electric cooling fans
>> I think the desert guys running 700hp engines in the Baja 1000
>> have radiat
> ors mounted in the back of the trucks with the fans blowing up,
> around 5500 cfm fans if I recall. Surely this is more than
> enough to handle a 225 hp car engine in a motorhome. I've also
> heard of GMC people running 7lb radiator caps? Why sacrifice
> 24-1/2 degrees over a 14lb cap and have your engine boil
> sooner? I will deal with the fuel boiling out of the carb
> separately. As I belie it is part exhaust Cross over and the
> heat from the front of the engine on the metal fuel line.
>
> Yes the mechanical fan is noisy when it kicks in. There's been
> a lot of progress on fan blade design and newer ones are much
> quieter. It's still an efficient way to go. On an electric fan,
> you still consume energy and you have a double
> conversion--mechanical to electrical, and then electrical back
> to mechanical. Electric fans became popular due to transverse
> engine installations. Many modern fore-aft vehicles still use
> belt driven fans, although they also use electronically
> operated clutches to provide more precise control.
> --
> Bob de Kruyff
> 78 Eleganza
> Chandler, AZ
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: Electric Radiator fans [message #92810 is a reply to message #92796] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 12:40 |
|
|
I'm sure a dyno would prove that a belt driven fan sapps more power from the engine then an electric fan for a comparable amount of air. That's why a lot of high hp cars opt for a high power electric fan. Just because it came from the factory with a belt fan doesn't mean it was the best solution, but rather the best economical solution to the manufacturer...
| Bob de Kruyff wrote on Wed, 21 July 2010 10:03 |
| aaaa wrote on Wed, 21 July 2010 02:04 |
When our coaches were built there were not many options as far as cooling our engines, The first part of this month July 7th, 8th, and 9th I made a trial run through the Mohave from the Central Valley of California to Maricopa Arizona. On the 8th leaving Maricopa it was 115 seemed hotter where I was at a storage unit with nothing but black asphalt and metal buildings. Yes I have faith in the work I've done on the 1978 Birchaven all new belts hoses fuel lines, aluminum water pump and pressure tested radiator. The coach ran great, but when the thermostatic fan kicks in it sounds like a 747 on takeoff and noticeably slows the coach, Id estimate with consistent throttle pressure 3-4mph. The only other issues were in the 100 degree plus weather was fuel boiling out of the carb and starving for fuel until enough air was blowing thru the engine compartment. Anyway who has installed electric cooling fans I think the desert guys running 700hp engines in the Baja 1000 have radiators mounted in the back of the trucks with the fans blowing up, around 5500 cfm fans if I recall. Surely this is more than enough to handle a 225 hp car engine in a motorhome. I've also heard of GMC people running 7lb radiator caps? Why sacrifice 24-1/2 degrees over a 14lb cap and have your engine boil sooner? I will deal with the fuel boiling out of the carb separately. As I belie it is part exhaust Cross over and the heat from the front of the engine on the metal fuel line.
|
Yes the mechanical fan is noisy when it kicks in. There's been a lot of progress on fan blade design and newer ones are much quieter. It's still an efficient way to go. On an electric fan, you still consume energy and you have a double conversion--mechanical to electrical, and then electrical back to mechanical. Electric fans became popular due to transverse engine installations. Many modern fore-aft vehicles still use belt driven fans, although they also use electronically operated clutches to provide more precise control.
|
73 Canyon Lands, (a.k.a. The Yellow Submarine) West Los Angeles CA
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Antifreeze boil out protection and radiator caps [message #92812 is a reply to message #92804] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 13:18 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
""That last time I brought my tester to a rally I made a bet with someone that at least half of the caps that I would check would be bad.
I was wrong! Out of about 20 that I checked 16 of them (80%) were bad. The next rally that I did that at over 70% were bad.
""
Emery--in what fashion were they bad? pressure, venting? Just curious.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans [message #92813 is a reply to message #92806] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 13:20 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
""Hey Bob,
Down in the basement, I've got an accessory fan clutch for a
flathead Ford, electrically operated, 6-volt. It seems Ford did
have a better idea back then. Of course, since it's still new,
it didn't sell back then.
Gary Kosier
"" Wow--that's cool!! I remember my old Peugeot 403 and 404 had electromagnetic fan clutches. Worked great, but they were on or off, nothing in between.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: Electric Radiator fans [message #92815 is a reply to message #92810] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 13:26 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'm not picking sides on which one is better, but the energy has to come from somehwere. It seems that electric fans have more flexibility for packing efficiency and contollability, esp when you consider AC needs. Even though fuel economy and efficiency are top dog these days, mechanical fans still seem to survive on fore-aft installations. With the huge sums of money spent on fuel economy improvements, I can't believe mechanicla fans survive just because they are cheap. My STS still has a mechanical fan.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans [message #92817 is a reply to message #92810] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 13:34 |
emerystora
Messages: 4442
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 13
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Shan Rose wrote:
>
>
> I'm sure a dyno would prove that a belt driven fan sapps more power from the engine then an electric fan for a comparable amount of air. That's why a lot of high hp cars opt for a high power electric fan. Just because it came from the factory with a belt fan doesn't mean it was the best solution, but rather the best economical solution to the manufacturer...
>
Paul
I sincerely doubt that. I would guess the opposite. Power is power. For an electric fan your engine converts mechanical energy to electrical energy in the alternator. Then the fan motor converts electrical energy back to mechanical energy. Each step is not 100% efficient and you use extra power in the two conversions. The belt driver fan is mechanical and doesn't require the change in form of energy.
Having said that, if you were to not refer to the instantaneous power measured on a dyno, but instead refer to long term energy use then the electrical fan might have an advantage over the mechanically driven one -- IF the electrical one only came on once in a while at highway speeds. The mechanical one runs all the time except the fan clutch is there to stop it from drawing power, or at least as much power, when it isn't needed.
Both fans block air flow so they reduce the efficiency of the cooling system when they are idled either by the power being off to the electrical one and the fan clutch being disengaged on the mechanical one.
Now, if you could design a system that moved the electrical one away from in front of the radiator when it was not being used it would increase its overall efficiency.
I would not convert to an electrical one because I agree with Bill Bryant's email that it adds extra parts and components which means that more things can go wrong. Of course, my cooling system works very well. If you are considering changing to an electrical fan system to improve your cooling I think that you possibly should be trying to find out why you need to do that. Something else is probably not right with your cooling system.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Santa Fe, NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans [message #92820 is a reply to message #92817] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 14:54 |
k2gkk
Messages: 4452
Registered: November 2009
Karma: -8
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I strongly suspect that a "CORRECTLY" controlled electric
fan would have a bit of advantage over either an always-on
or an incorrectly functioning thermostatically-controlled
version.
With an adequate battery and charging system, the peak load
on the engine would be reduced due to the contribution of
the battery.
Under these circumstances, I doubt that the operator would
notice much, if any, "bog-down" of the engine, especially
at highway speeds.
Notwithstanding all the above, there would automatically be
SOME loss of overall energy efficiency with conversion from
mechanical to electrical back to mechanical status. I see
the best option to be a properly functioning original system.
I.E., the fan is free-wheeling (with very minimal drag and
energy consumption) ONLY when airflow through the radiator
is insufficient to keep coolant temperature within tolerable
limits.
I would also estimate that removal of the fan might provide
less lateral loading on the water pump, giving SOME ease to
that pump's bearings. Assuming that a belt (belts) can be
obtained with that setup, it MIGHT be possible that the
belt(s) would have shorter unsupported sections.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Mac Macdonald ~
~ Oklahoma City ~
~~ "Money Pit" ~~
~ '76 ex - P.B. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
From: emerystora@mac.com
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:34:26 -0600
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Shan Rose wrote:
I'm sure a dyno would prove that a belt driven fan saps more
power from the engine then an electric fan for a comparable
amount of air. That's why a lot of high hp cars opt for a
high power electric fan. Just because it came from the
factory with a belt fan doesn't mean it was the best solution,
but rather the best economical solution to the manufacturer...
Paul
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx
I sincerely doubt that. I would guess the opposite. Power is
power. For an electric fan your engine converts mechanical
energy to electrical energy in the alternator. Then the fan
motor converts electrical energy back to mechanical energy.
Each step is not 100% efficient and you use extra power in the
two conversions. The belt driver fan is mechanical and doesn't
require the change in form of energy.
Having said that, if you were to not refer to the instantaneous
power measured on a dyno, but instead refer to long term energy
use then the electrical fan might have an advantage over the
mechanically driven one -- IF the electrical one only came on
once in a while at highway speeds. The mechanical one runs all
the time except the fan clutch is there to stop it from drawing
power, or at least as much power, when it isn't needed.
Both fans block air flow so they reduce the efficiency of the
cooling system when they are idled either by the power being
off to the electrical one and the fan clutch being disengaged
on the mechanical one.
Now, if you could design a system that moved the electrical one
away from in front of the radiator when it was not being used
it would increase its overall efficiency.
I would not convert to an electrical one because I agree with
Bill Bryant's email that it adds extra parts and components
which means that more things can go wrong. Of course, my cooling
system works very well. If you are considering changing to an
electrical fan system to improve your cooling I think that you
possibly should be trying to find out why you need to do that.
Something else is probably not right with your cooling systeM.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Santa Fe, NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| [GMCnet] Correction to: Electric Radiator fans [message #92821 is a reply to message #92820] |
Wed, 21 July 2010 15:03 |
k2gkk
Messages: 4452
Registered: November 2009
Karma: -8
|
Senior Member |
|
|
After sending this, I realized that I had failed to complete one sentence.
The correction to the fourth paragraph is now inserted between the
brackets.
As Maxwell Smart would have said, "Sorry about that, Chief."
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Mac Macdonald ~
~ Oklahoma City ~
~~ "Money Pit" ~~
~ '76 ex - P.B. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
From: k2gkk@hotmail.com
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:54:56 -0500
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans
I strongly suspect that a "CORRECTLY" controlled electric
fan would have a bit of advantage over either an always-on
or an incorrectly functioning thermostatically-controlled
version.
With an adequate battery and charging system, the peak load
on the engine would be reduced due to the contribution of
the battery.
Under these circumstances, I doubt that the operator would
notice much, if any, "bog-down" of the engine, especially
at highway speeds.
Notwithstanding all the above, there would automatically be
SOME loss of overall energy efficiency with conversion from
mechanical to electrical back to mechanical status. I see
the best option to be a properly functioning original system.
I.E., the fan is free-wheeling (with very minimal drag and
energy consumption)
[when NATURAL airflow through radiator is adequate to control
coolant temperature]
and is engaged ONLY when airflow through the radiator
is insufficient to keep coolant temperature within tolerable
limits.
I would also estimate that removal of the fan might provide
less lateral loading on the water pump, giving SOME ease to
that pump's bearings. Assuming that a belt (belts) can be
obtained with that setup, it MIGHT be possible that the
belt(s) would have shorter unsupported sections.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Mac Macdonald ~
~ Oklahoma City ~
~~ "Money Pit" ~~
~ '76 ex - P.B. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
From: emerystora@mac.com
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:34:26 -0600
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Electric Radiator fans
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 21, 2010, at 11:40 AM, Shan Rose wrote:
I'm sure a dyno would prove that a belt driven fan saps more
power from the engine then an electric fan for a comparable
amount of air. That's why a lot of high hp cars opt for a
high power electric fan. Just because it came from the
factory with a belt fan doesn't mean it was the best solution,
but rather the best economical solution to the manufacturer...
Paul
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx
I sincerely doubt that. I would guess the opposite. Power is
power. For an electric fan your engine converts mechanical
energy to electrical energy in the alternator. Then the fan
motor converts electrical energy back to mechanical energy.
Each step is not 100% efficient and you use extra power in the
two conversions. The belt driver fan is mechanical and doesn't
require the change in form of energy.
Having said that, if you were to not refer to the instantaneous
power measured on a dyno, but instead refer to long term energy
use then the electrical fan might have an advantage over the
mechanically driven one -- IF the electrical one only came on
once in a while at highway speeds. The mechanical one runs all
the time except the fan clutch is there to stop it from drawing
power, or at least as much power, when it isn't needed.
Both fans block air flow so they reduce the efficiency of the
cooling system when they are idled either by the power being
off to the electrical one and the fan clutch being disengaged
on the mechanical one.
Now, if you could design a system that moved the electrical one
away from in front of the radiator when it was not being used
it would increase its overall efficiency.
I would not convert to an electrical one because I agree with
Bill Bryant's email that it adds extra parts and components
which means that more things can go wrong. Of course, my cooling
system works very well. If you are considering changing to an
electrical fan system to improve your cooling I think that you
possibly should be trying to find out why you need to do that.
Something else is probably not right with your cooling systeM.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Santa Fe, NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Oct 01 06:20:40 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01872 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
