>I know the earlier Jensen-Healey Roadsters used fixed plastic fans,
>maybe the same as the TR6, however, the GT viscous fan was larger in
>diameter (17") as well as being viscous, and cooling (a problem on the
>aluminum 907's) was improved. Later cars also came stock with oil coolers.
>
>I'm more comfortable than ever with my decision to go electric with the
>TR4, and in fact will do some research about eliminating the Viscous fan
>on the GT and adding an electric to that car as well. I know the
>electric fan in pusher mode is an option that has been chosen by many
>J-H's, but usually in addition to the stock fan.
>
As it happens I was just looking a the definition of a viscous fan in
R&T's automotive dictionary... As I understand the way the Vfan works
is on air flow... as long as the air flow through the rad is
sufficient to be eqivalent to what the fan would draw (were it
running full speed) the fan "freewheels" with no power other than the
airflow coming throght the rad. When the car's speed falls (e.g.
traveling slowly or stopped for traffic) the viscous coupling drives
the fan to a speed to compensate for the lack of airflow.
Regardless of that, my opinion is you would be still ahead in the
weight saved by ridding yourself of the TR fan and pedestal, and
going for the electric fan. While I haven't weighed my set up, I'm
positive the harmonic balancer, electric fan, wiring and aluminum
mounts for all of the above are lighter than the pedestal, pulley and
fan assembly I removed.
Greg Petrolati Champaign, Illinois 1962 TR4 (CT4852L)
That's not a leak... My car's just marking its territory...
_________________________________________________________________
///
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
///
|