opinions/help with electric fan mod
 

so im really wanting to swap over to electric fans to save some MPG's, especially since im going up a little in tire size. but i cant spend the $600 on the flex-a-lite set. looking to do it as cheaply as possible. itll be for a 2000 F150, 5.4L

thanks!

so ive run across this set, and it seems like a decent set. opinions?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2-12-...#ht_2775wt_939

Going cheap would probably be more hassle in the end then its worth. get quality stuff or you'll regret it.
http://www.troyerperformance.com/cgi...alogno=PPI-EFK

X2 - You won't find many "problem" thread relating to the FAL kits - if you do, user install generally plays a roll. I picked up my FAL270 about 2 months back for $350 NIB - never opened or installed, still under the 1-year warranty.
I picked up about 1-3 MPG depending on the type of driving.

i might consider going that route. i think i might try doing 2 flex-a-lite fans on a custom mount, or possibly put a fan in the stock shroud. or modify it to fit 2 fans. lots of options, gonna do some thinking.

Using your web browser, go to modmyf150.com. they have great simple write-ups on several mods for f150's. one is a fairly easy and cheap Lincoln e-fan swap that probably will work well.

thanks man, i'll go check it out now!

this guy did basically exactly what i was thinking

http://www.modmyf150.com/2010/02/15/...or-cooling-fan

glad to help.

If the fan alone costs $350, and it requires a $100 controller, and you get at least 12mpg now, and the best you can get is 3mpg increase (which I don't believe, but we'll just use it), and gas costs an average of $3/gal, that means you'd have to drive at PEAK economy for 9000mi just to pay for the parts. But you've gotta figure in labor even if you DIY, and you can't drive that efficiently all the time, so just plan on this being a losing investment for at least 2 years. And if you get more MPG than 12 right now, it'll take even longer.

But an e-fan is NOT more fuel-efficient than a mechanical fan UNLESS the PCM is programmed to turn it off when it's not needed. An aftermarket fan controller can't do that.

So if your only goal is to save money, leave the mech fan on.

They do more then save gas the give you a little bit of power to so that helps make them worth it to.
E-fans would be independently controlled they are not controlled by the pcm.

I did my set up with the fans on a 98ish ford windstar (13" and 15") with a cheapo controller for less than $100 and that was 3 years ago now. Just an FYI.

The reason they're not more fuel-efficient is that they take MORE power from the engine than a mech fan, when they're moving the same amount of air.My '94 CV's e-fan is PCM-controlled because I swapped in the complete engine, wiring harness, e-fan, & PCM from a '00 MGM. So mine is actually more efficient than the original '94 engine & mech fan.

How would you figure they take more power to run then a mechanical fan? They run off the alternator thats always being turned. Please explain the logic there?
Most E fan conversions are not PCM controlled they come on when the temperature reaches a certain point via temp sending units. Turn of when the temp reaches a set level. most kits set up for one fan to come on when the A/C is on. Thats it.
The whole idea is gaining power and fuel economy by reducing parasitic power loss.. Loosing the mechanical fan gains horsepower (dyno proven gains of 15-20 hp)

Efans are a nice power saver, 15-20 hp as posted, which does translate into a Wow on the first drive with them installed.

Two of these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/DER-16516/

Two of these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/DER-16759/

Start reading here: https://www.f150online.com/forums/ot...fan-setup.html

I know how most e-fans are done - that's what I'm talking about.

And the alternator doesn't "always turn". It only turns when it's taking power from the engine thru the belt. If the engine isn't burning gas, then the alt can't turn. And JUST like removing the mech fan, if there was no alt, the engine would be able to send more power to the wheels. Why? Because the alt takes power from the engine & converts it to electrical power. And like all conversions of energy, there is a loss of energy (as heat). That's why the alt gets hotter than the surrounding air, and hotter than the bosses on the engine that it's mounted to - it's also why every alt has a fan. So now you've lost a little energy going from the crankshaft to the belt, and again going from the belt to the alt shaft (but the belt coversion is VERY efficient), and more going from mechanical to electrical in the alt. And we all know there's resistance in all wires & connectors, so you lose more as the electricity flows from the alt to the battery, where even more is lost as it gets converted from electrical to chemical energy (inside the lead storage battery). And when the e-fan comes on, you lose more converting back from chemical to electrical; more flowing thru wires, connectors, & relay contacts; and finally a LOT more converting from electrical BACK to mechanical energy in the fan motor. And you never get allllllllllllllll those little losses back - they just blow away as heat that you burned gas to generate.

But if you just leave it as mechanical energy going thru the EFFICIENT (very little loss) belt to a mech fan, there's almost no waste.

And with a thermal clutch on that fan, it automatically DISconnects from the pulley when it's not needed, so there's NO extra load on the engine, JUST like when the e-fan relay is off. But the e-fan mfrs. don't tell you that - they only do their dyno tests with the e-fan locked in, and they probably use an oversized, inefficient fan to make the numbers as dramatic as possible so you'll fall for it and buy $450 worth of stuff you don't need, and which won't do what you want (save money).

The only reason to add an e-fan to a vehicle that doesn't have PCM control is so the driver can turn the fan off when he wants (like for driving thru deep water, which is why my '83 Bronco has an e-fan). But it STILL won't save any gas, or increase average power to the wheels, unless you leave it off when it needs to be on.

So I guess you saying the Alternator will cause as much parasitic power loss as the fans.. The alternator that is always spinning anyway that when called for energy simple gives it by way of the voltage regulator?
There are just to many guys on this board who have reported power gains and fuel economy gains for your argument to be taken very seriously.. E-fans will save a little gas they will give a little extra power.. There maybe an argument as to weather or not they are worth the hassle compared to the reliability of the mechanical fan and all but that's it.

Banshee...one little something to think about since you mentioned it...

One elextric fan, even in the stock shroud somehow, will not do the job of that mechanical fan. Electrical fans do not cool better than the stock set up and one will not do the job. It will take two in tough, hot situations. Just a tip.

So , with that reasoning, I guess if I dont use any electrical accessories, such as the radio or heater motor. I will get better gas milage. and a power increase. The thermal clutch mechanical fan still puts load on the engine when it is disengaged, the belt and pulley are still being spun by the motor. I agree that to recoup the costs of an efan set up and ones labor will take some time. That cash could just be spent on fuel. the fuel savings are probally minimal. comparable to putting on a torneau cover or keeping your windows up. but who wouldnt want a little more power.

No, the alt draws a few hundred times what a mech fan does. And it has to take roughly 4x from the engine what the e-fans put into the airstream due to all the losses. So to make it economical, you have to run the e-fan(s) 1/4 as much as a mech fan, and only a well-programmed PCM knows when it can get away with that.How do you figure the alternator is "always spinning anyway" but the fan isn't??? They BOTH take energy from the engine to spin. If you throw the belt while the engine is running, does the alternator just keep spinning & putting out power? NO. It comes to a SUDDEN stop. The fan, on the other hand, will keep spinning until you get below ~30mph. Why? Because the wind coming thru the radiator makes it spin. So how much power is it taking from the engine while the vehicle is moving at 60mph? NONE. But the alt ALWAYS needs power to spin, even if it's not putting out any electricity.You really have no comprehension of how an alternator works, do you? :fyi: It doesn't put out anything thru the VR.Yeah, and think of all those guys who reported that the Earth was flat, AND the center of the universe. And all those guys with Tornados & fuel line magnets & hydrogen generators who report power & economy gains. :thumbsup: Most people who "upgrade" their own vehicles have no real understanding of what they're actually doing, or how to interpret the results. So doing the same pointless mod as 100,000 other people doesn't validate the mod. :rocker:

You get more performance & economy gain by dropping 20 lbs of steel from the bumpers than from switching to an e-fan with a dumb controller. Want proof? No one has made a passenger vehicle with a 5mph steel bumper for over 20 years. But until they went to PCM control, most axially-mounted engines still had mechanical fans. :coffee:Right. Every bit of energy used by the vehicle, whether for propulsion, lights, sound, A/C, or anything else, comes out of the gasoline in the tank. ALL OF IT. So the less you waste (whether electrically or otherwise), the more you have for propulsion, or the less gas you have to burn for the same propulsion. That's why race cars don't have A/C, stereos, PW/PL/PM/PAnt/PS... The only energy you can get for free is the flow energy of the exhaust, which is why a turbo is used more often than a blower.

^^^^^^^^^ OK, now that's funny.

Lots of misconceptions in this thread. An alternator produces power on demand. By this I mean the more you ask of it the harder it works to give you what it needs. If you demand more current to power more items the field of the electromagnet around rotating mass gets stronger which means there is more load on the engine to produce the power. It is always turning with the rpms of the engine but how hard it works depends on what you ask of it. The voltage regulator just insures that the voltage never goes above a pre-determined voltage so that your electrical devices do not get fried. Most electric fans have a large current demand to start them but once spinning the load is not as bad. Remember there is no such thing as a free lunch. There is always a catch.

On your truck the clutch fan weighs about 15 pounds so getting that off the crankshaft can be a good thing. As Steve said you will not get your money back for a while but that is not a reason not to do it. Your engine spins up faster without the 15 pound fan mounted to it. Most E-fans are quieter than the clutch fan. The 1 or 2 MPG gain is of course beneficial in other ways besides your wallet. I think e-fans are worth it as do most manufacturers.

Guess you need to explan to the masses here why most new vehicles are being produced with electric fans including the Fords. Time to put this to rest, the majority of the members here with an elect fan are the winners. Oh, and by the way, the engine mounted fan on the 150s have an electrically controlled clutch

Yep.

Better cooling (if sized properly), ice-cold A/C, more room in the engine bay, quieter, etc ... good enough for me.


And - there is nothing Magical about factory PCM efan control - the Factory PCM e-fan control is still pretty 'dumb' - it still is just a basic On/Off controller based upon engine temps.

The only additional advantage is perhaps the ability to integrate into vehicle speed, A/C pressure, etc primaily for A/C control. But for basic engine cooling? Not sophisticated at all.

Like this LS1 controller, fer example: PCM driving relays - woohoo - no wizardry here ....

http://www.ls1fc.com/images/ls1coolingfansbu6.gif

Even the 2010 F150 is an on/off affair, even if it may have Canbus involvement ( SWAG here, lol )

Advanced controllers like DCControl FK-50P, Spal PWM-V3, etc offer soft-start to alleviate inrush, and will proportionally control the fan speeds based upon cooling demands. In most cases, using properly sized/rated fans the things rarely ramp up to full speed, except in gridlock or low-speed, high load conditions. But the mech fan will be running full-out here as well.

This last part is crucial - folks using mis-rated Fleabay crappola cheapo efans (you know, the ones marketed as being +2500cfm each but are only a fraction of that in real-world usage - they also come in nice ricey colours, lol) will incur a much higher fan duty cycle largely because the things are just not up to doing the same job as a bonfide large high-quality air-mover would.

A personal choice - not for the faint-of-heart as this is, after all yer engine cooling system you are affecting - if it's not 100% bullet-proof, don't go there. And - always carry spares and/or know how to quickly bypass for manual control.

:beers:
MGD

i love my fans!!! didnt do it for the MPG gain. i really like having ICE COLD AC at idle. do that with a mech fan... and the engine spins up faster than with the mech fan..

It takes a 10 hp engine to run a 4200 watt 220 volt generator.
Running a 14 volt alternator at MAXIMUM DRAW only takes MAYBE 2 horsepower.
This is a silly argument beyond that.

The two do not correlate. Generators are different than alternators. It is a moot point anyway however as the benefits of the E-fan still outweigh the extra work placed on your alternator.:beers:

How much extra work? in HP? I think you would be hard pressed to find solid data to support a loss of more then .5 hp. I bet its less then that.

Doesn't matter really as it is still extra work. There is no free power in your vehicle. Doesn't matter if you add an iPod charger or a 5000 watt sound system, the electricity comes from more work performed by the alternator which is of course powered by your engine. The alternator acts like an electro-magnetic brake on your engine. The more power you demand the stronger the braking effect.

I would still install electric fans because I feel the benefits are worth the little bit of extra work.

OK then.

I am sure if you really wanted numbers you could google. I would bet that an alternator manufacturer has done this testing on their products at one time or another. I have seen charts for this but I cannot recall where. It may have been on a car audio site. I have heard it is about 1 HP for every 25 amps but I am sure it varies by alternator size.

I'm not the one(s) claiming the alternator draws away a large quantity of HP in a Electric fan conversion. Make the claim back it up with data that's the way these arguments generally go. I have Googled already.

For the reason I stated in my FIRST post in this thread. :thumbsup:Know why? Same as for the PSTD: because it's too expensive to produce a fan motor & alternator system capable of pushing THAT MUCH air. So they use the mech drive with an electrically-assisted clutch until an efficient hi-power motor can be produced.Not even close. It involves a LOT more parameters. Read the PCED.Wrong again, on both counts. Fan speed varies from 5-100% based on a discrete PWM circuit (not CANbus) from the PCM, similar to the FPDM. Except the driver is integrated into the fan motor, unlike the separate driver for the pump. That's why the newest e-fans are so much better than the previous ones with relays & resistors. The aftermarket will never be able to offer a retrofit fan with that technology functioning with that level of effectiveness & efficiency.My data is driving around all over the roads: e-fans weren't used on most axial engines even after CAFE laws, until they became PCM-controlled, which proves they weren't efficient enough. Where's yours?

Okay Steve - I'm intruiged - please elaborate on the "more parameters" - besides the obvious ones involving A/C cooling needs. What else does there need to be to maintain cooling effectiveness and promote efficiency?

As for the newest fans - the evidence suggests otherwise - as the 2010 F150 fans are being driven by members right now using an aftermarket variable speed controller (FKxxp) with no ill effects. So I can't see how there is an integrated driver. And these things are less than $200 for the whole assembly. Given the FPDM costs it's seems very low for a component that would contain two drivers ....

Any 2010 owners want to check to see if their fan speeds are variable?

Good discussion - let's keep it civil shall we? I am honestly curious.

:beers:
MGD

I see your point. I thought you were just interested in data and not trying to keep an argument going. I will leave that between you and Steve.:thumbsup:

I thought you had access to the PCED/EVTM/service manuals. No? Lemme see if I can dig it up, but I don't have access to the '08-11 stuff from home. I might have some older info already uploaded...

The 2010 fans are simple on/off devices. Any decent PWM controller will do the job. The fans have only a ground and positive line per fan and the only way to vary their speed is via either current or PWM.

I just changed a fan on an '06-10 Ford a couple of weeks ago and it was variable (2 big wires; 1 small). But I was wrong about it being on a truck - it must have been a car fan. I'd have thought the trucks would use similar fans by now.

Anyway - here's some info from the '07 PCED:

I was looking for more details about the parameters used to set fan speed, but I haven't found anything more specific or newer than that. But so far, we know it's based on:
coolant temp
oil temp
trans temp
air temp
A/C demand
A/C pressure
and more...