I'm glad to hear it's working out for you Josh. Just one qestion though, why? You are a smart guy and therefore of course understand that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but can only change form. If you are moving X amount of air, depending of course on the efficiency of the blade design, it will require Y amount of energy. Period. You cannont replace direct mechanical energy with electrical, which incurs greater losses through the <75% efficient conversion from mech-elect.-mech (alternator-motor-fan) than it would through the highly efficient and reliable stock clutch type fan. Maybe your clutch was shot, mine kicks off from a cold start in about 30 secs, and I don't hear it roaring again ever here in Iceland. Even there in the desert it should operate the same way, basically freewheeling at normal operating temps. I think the parasitic losses from mechanical fans are mostly fiction created to sell black magic junk. I have heard great stuff about OEM type fans like the Taurus one you have though, If I ever had a need for an electric you would see me at the pick and pull :-) Stay cool <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />
I've been thinking about this for a while now and I can't disagree with the logic. Good ole thermodynamics. But, I guess it boils down to the validity of the assumptions and whether the losses from a mechanical fan are really insignificant.
In the summer (100F+) I'd assume the clutch is pretty well locked up most of the time. Since the aerodynamic drag from the fan goes up with the square of the fan speed, at high RPMs that could be rather significant.
In the winter, the electric fan may be completly off at times so there are no parasitic losses.
Anyways, this is all kinda academic since we don't really have a good way of measuring the losses, but interesting none the less.
