rmgill
Active member
- 2,479
- 14
- 38
- Location
- Decatur, Ga
Why not install three or four smaller fans to get the clearances you need? You could stagger them to turn on at different temperatures for finer control of the temperature.
-
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
DISCUSSION - Slobbering Multifuel Cure?
- Thread starter FSBruva
- Start date
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Update on Fan Project...
This morning we removed the water pump fan and wired the electric fan For some stupid reason the Spal fan kit didn't include a temperature sensor so we wired the fan with a manual on/off switch.
I took a 20 mile drive to the grocery store in Cook MN --- 20 miles over & 20 miles back. For safety sake (first run) I turned on the fan and left it on. Ambient temperature today was 80 degrees. The truck was empty, (approx 10,700 lbs) GVW and speed was 55 mph or 2100 RPM. Post turbo EGTs ran 650 degrees with a boost range of 2 to 4 lbs.
On the first 20 mile leg (starting from a cold engine) the Spal fan kept the engine temp at 180 degrees.
On the way back, after the truck had sat shut down for approx 20 minutes, the temp increased 195 degrees.
About half way home I switched the fan off to see if the 55 MPH "breeze" blowing through the radiator would be sufficient to keep the temp at 195 or if I need the fan.
Upon switching off the fan the temp started going above 195 so I switched the fan back on. The temp want back down two or three degrees and setteled in at 195 degrees. (I'm running a stock temp gauge)
When I arrived home I let the truck idle for five minutes and the fan took the temp down to 180 degrees which was obviously bumping up against the thermostat.
Engine "cab" noise is GREATLY reduced --- even with the electric fan on.
I would appreciate your opinions on this. I personally think the Spal pusher fan is capable of cool ing the engine BUT --- I may have the free flow choked down too far with the plywood restriction --- the plywood blanks off all the radiator excpet the fan area. In the winter (Northern Minnesota) this is probably a perfect configuration but maybe not for an 80 degree day.
Any engineering types out there ??? ---- If the ambient temperature today had been 90 degrees instead of 80 does that mean my engine temp would have been 205 instead of 195 degrees? Is it a straight ling function?
I was getting nervous with the 195 temp.
What is the maximum "safe" temperature for a multifuel? Is 195 Degrees OK????
Where do these engines like to live temp wise?
Also, I hope it doesn't appear that I've hijacked this thread. My opinion is if you can get operating temps up to 180 - 190 "winter" slobbering is reduced.
Ambient temperature today was 80 degrees.
This morning we removed the water pump fan and wired the electric fan For some stupid reason the Spal fan kit didn't include a temperature sensor so we wired the fan with a manual on/off switch.
I took a 20 mile drive to the grocery store in Cook MN --- 20 miles over & 20 miles back. For safety sake (first run) I turned on the fan and left it on. Ambient temperature today was 80 degrees. The truck was empty, (approx 10,700 lbs) GVW and speed was 55 mph or 2100 RPM. Post turbo EGTs ran 650 degrees with a boost range of 2 to 4 lbs.
On the first 20 mile leg (starting from a cold engine) the Spal fan kept the engine temp at 180 degrees.
On the way back, after the truck had sat shut down for approx 20 minutes, the temp increased 195 degrees.
About half way home I switched the fan off to see if the 55 MPH "breeze" blowing through the radiator would be sufficient to keep the temp at 195 or if I need the fan.
Upon switching off the fan the temp started going above 195 so I switched the fan back on. The temp want back down two or three degrees and setteled in at 195 degrees. (I'm running a stock temp gauge)
When I arrived home I let the truck idle for five minutes and the fan took the temp down to 180 degrees which was obviously bumping up against the thermostat.
Engine "cab" noise is GREATLY reduced --- even with the electric fan on.
I would appreciate your opinions on this. I personally think the Spal pusher fan is capable of cool ing the engine BUT --- I may have the free flow choked down too far with the plywood restriction --- the plywood blanks off all the radiator excpet the fan area. In the winter (Northern Minnesota) this is probably a perfect configuration but maybe not for an 80 degree day.
Any engineering types out there ??? ---- If the ambient temperature today had been 90 degrees instead of 80 does that mean my engine temp would have been 205 instead of 195 degrees? Is it a straight ling function?
I was getting nervous with the 195 temp.
What is the maximum "safe" temperature for a multifuel? Is 195 Degrees OK????
Where do these engines like to live temp wise?
Also, I hope it doesn't appear that I've hijacked this thread. My opinion is if you can get operating temps up to 180 - 190 "winter" slobbering is reduced.
Ambient temperature today was 80 degrees.
- 1,046
- 45
- 48
- Location
- Syracuse, New York
Hi Group,
Just some conjecture.
I think the multi -fuel engine design is terribly inefficient especially
when compared to modern commercial diesels.Perhaps the choice was made to
accept smoke and poor fuel economy for the tactical advantage of using
anything that resembles fuel.
My LD465 C1 is a real smoker under load. My neighbor,an MV collector,asked if
I burn leaves in back. Not yet anyways. It runs fine but power is low. It really
screams. Only 5MPG w/trailer.
In contrast my 06' Mack Vision EM7-315 (or any older variants) have twice the
rated power(315HP),at an easy range (1200-1700rpm). It uses half the fuel moving 4 times
the weight. Think about that. It works harder AND uses less fuel AND still
goes faster!
AND it does not smoke.
For sure there are differences. The Mack is 50% bigger,has a turbo, more
boost than even the LDT's/LDS's (plus an air-air intercooler). But I think
there is something else going on. The key here is the fuel usage. I think that
spherical piston chamber may be the villain. You don't see that on new
vehicles. It must be an inefficient design.
Diesels love to be turbocharged. Maybe the multi-fuel piston design can't handle the higher boost pressures commercial trucks use. The LDS is supposed to have stronger ones. Maybe 'that' is the limit. Turbocharged cars typically have flat top pistons. The minimal surface area helps keep the piston temp(and detonation) down.
That LD465 smoke is fuel that did not burned well,if at all. What is left goes into the exhaust system. When mixed with either rain water or water vapor (a
by product of combustion) you get messy black stuff . It may look like oil
but [unless you add a lot of oil to the crankcase] it has to be ,or was ,fuel.
Jimk
FV624
M35A2
M706
The Three Stooges
Just some conjecture.
I think the multi -fuel engine design is terribly inefficient especially
when compared to modern commercial diesels.Perhaps the choice was made to
accept smoke and poor fuel economy for the tactical advantage of using
anything that resembles fuel.
My LD465 C1 is a real smoker under load. My neighbor,an MV collector,asked if
I burn leaves in back. Not yet anyways. It runs fine but power is low. It really
screams. Only 5MPG w/trailer.
In contrast my 06' Mack Vision EM7-315 (or any older variants) have twice the
rated power(315HP),at an easy range (1200-1700rpm). It uses half the fuel moving 4 times
the weight. Think about that. It works harder AND uses less fuel AND still
goes faster!
AND it does not smoke.
For sure there are differences. The Mack is 50% bigger,has a turbo, more
boost than even the LDT's/LDS's (plus an air-air intercooler). But I think
there is something else going on. The key here is the fuel usage. I think that
spherical piston chamber may be the villain. You don't see that on new
vehicles. It must be an inefficient design.
Diesels love to be turbocharged. Maybe the multi-fuel piston design can't handle the higher boost pressures commercial trucks use. The LDS is supposed to have stronger ones. Maybe 'that' is the limit. Turbocharged cars typically have flat top pistons. The minimal surface area helps keep the piston temp(and detonation) down.
That LD465 smoke is fuel that did not burned well,if at all. What is left goes into the exhaust system. When mixed with either rain water or water vapor (a
by product of combustion) you get messy black stuff . It may look like oil
but [unless you add a lot of oil to the crankcase] it has to be ,or was ,fuel.
Jimk
FV624
M35A2
M706
The Three Stooges
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Hello rmqill,
I elected to go with the single fan option because of simplicity of installation and cost. I've got $275.00 invested in the single fan operation. Had I gone with multiple fans it would have been double that amount not to mention much more difficult to install. I wanted to do the modification without having to pull the radiator if at all possible.
The Spal fan controller will activate the single fan both on a 50% and 100% speed and can be programmed for a wide range of temp activation settings.
Being that I'm not a military purist, (not on this truck anyway) I didn't mind having to slightly alter the grill. Previous post pictures didn't clearly show the grill mod. New pics are attached.
I'm not "there" yet with this project. After having had a chance to sleep on the frustrations of yesterdays threatening heating problems I going to go back in and remove some of the blanking over the radiator. I'm obviously restricting free (highway) flow too much for summer driving.
As we all know, sometimes projects like this don't always work on the first attermpt. This is one of the things that make the SS forum so valuable --- so we can profit from others experiences.
Devilman96 is going about this in the right way:
http://www.steelsoldiers.com/index....pic&t=4997&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100
I elected to go with the single fan option because of simplicity of installation and cost. I've got $275.00 invested in the single fan operation. Had I gone with multiple fans it would have been double that amount not to mention much more difficult to install. I wanted to do the modification without having to pull the radiator if at all possible.
The Spal fan controller will activate the single fan both on a 50% and 100% speed and can be programmed for a wide range of temp activation settings.
Being that I'm not a military purist, (not on this truck anyway) I didn't mind having to slightly alter the grill. Previous post pictures didn't clearly show the grill mod. New pics are attached.
I'm not "there" yet with this project. After having had a chance to sleep on the frustrations of yesterdays threatening heating problems I going to go back in and remove some of the blanking over the radiator. I'm obviously restricting free (highway) flow too much for summer driving.
As we all know, sometimes projects like this don't always work on the first attermpt. This is one of the things that make the SS forum so valuable --- so we can profit from others experiences.
Devilman96 is going about this in the right way:
http://www.steelsoldiers.com/index....pic&t=4997&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100
Attachments
clinto
Moderator, wonderful human being & practicing Deuc
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Steel Soldiers Supporter
Supporting Vendor
- 12,596
- 1,123
- 113
- Location
- Athens, Ga.
Nice mod on the grill, Ernie. 
With replacing the mechanical fan with a fan that is not on all the time how do the other parts that rely on that air flow hold up. The air compressor would be one obvious one, but I am sure others drop alot of heat to that air flow. I guess this could be more of a problem at low speed.
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Hello Builder77,
I'm guessing it could be a problem in a hot climate and perhaps even up here in the north country where 80 degrees is considered a hot day.
Having said this, I'm considering installing a by-pass switch that will allow me to manually activate the fan at certain times --- like at shut-down so the shut-down doesn't happen while temps are spiking.
As previously mentioned, I'm also going to open up the free flow (blanked area) tomorrow.
A lot of the loggers up here that have older trucks run without a fan during the winter months. They just won't build heat unless you're running down the road and when they are rolling they don't need a fan. I'm not that brave.
I'm guessing it could be a problem in a hot climate and perhaps even up here in the north country where 80 degrees is considered a hot day.
Having said this, I'm considering installing a by-pass switch that will allow me to manually activate the fan at certain times --- like at shut-down so the shut-down doesn't happen while temps are spiking.
As previously mentioned, I'm also going to open up the free flow (blanked area) tomorrow.
A lot of the loggers up here that have older trucks run without a fan during the winter months. They just won't build heat unless you're running down the road and when they are rolling they don't need a fan. I'm not that brave.
- 2,480
- 24
- 38
- Location
- Houston Texas
Jimk, If your truck is getting only 5mpg, something is wrong. It should easly get at least 10MPG. You mentioned smoke. Mabye the injector nozzles are dirty?
Santa, could you cut holes in the wood to let air through while driving? Or would the wood crack? Since your fan has a shroud i don't think its effency would be effected. And allowing more air through the fins would help drop the water temp.
Santa, could you cut holes in the wood to let air through while driving? Or would the wood crack? Since your fan has a shroud i don't think its effency would be effected. And allowing more air through the fins would help drop the water temp.
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Hello Ken,
Stay tuned tomorrow for new pictures of a trimed (cut) plywood piece and "hopefully" new, more favorable temp results.
Stay tuned tomorrow for new pictures of a trimed (cut) plywood piece and "hopefully" new, more favorable temp results.
Ernie, I think there is more going on here than we understand. As you can see from my avatar, my Arctic grille cover blanks out more of the radiator than your plywood cover, but I am still running the stock fan and my engine temp seldom gets above 180 degrees, even in 85+ degrees ambient. What I supect is happening is that in my case, there still is a lot of air flow through my ENTIRE radiator. I suspect that excess air is driven through the radiator from the "air dam" effect, that is the forward motion of my vehicle creates a high pressure across the front of my truck, forcing air under the front bumper and upwards behind the grille cover. The stock fan is at the same time creating a negative pressure, which pulls the excess air through the entire radiator, so I am still cooling water in the entire radiiator, albiet at a reduced air flow rate.
I think you are correct in your assumption the plywood is blocking too much air flow through the radiator. You are only cooling water in the 16" diameter space directly behind your fan (roughly 200 square inches). Even though my air flow rate is decreased, I am still flowing air (with the aid of my stock fan) across approximately 576 square inches of radiator, so you have effectively reduced your radiator to 1/3 of the original size. I suspect opening up your plywood cover to expose more of the radiator will fix the high temperature problem.
I think you are correct in your assumption the plywood is blocking too much air flow through the radiator. You are only cooling water in the 16" diameter space directly behind your fan (roughly 200 square inches). Even though my air flow rate is decreased, I am still flowing air (with the aid of my stock fan) across approximately 576 square inches of radiator, so you have effectively reduced your radiator to 1/3 of the original size. I suspect opening up your plywood cover to expose more of the radiator will fix the high temperature problem.
- 1,825
- 80
- 48
- Location
- West Tennessee
Jim,
The smoking LD is precisely why the LDT was created, the turbo of the LDT is presently solely to clean the exhaust to meet the then-current EPA mandate. As EPA regulations tightened, the Dept of Army could once or twice got waivers which allowed the Multifuel to remain in production. The last time they asked, EPA turned them down, and did on appeal as well - thus the death of the Multifuel.
The Multifuel family began with the LDS-427 - which was turbosupercharged - and did not have a fuel density compensator. In all the Multifuels it is the spherical chamber in the top of the piston that MAKES it a Multifuel....and the reason that shape piston is not found in other engines.
The other aspect of this is that designers of military vehicles intentionally design them such that the "weak link" is the engine. You won't find many - if any - stock military vehicles from the "golden age of M-series" with broken axles or driveshafts. The engines deliberately don't have enough power for that.....drop in higher horsepower mills, and these problems appear. While most of us drive are vehicles on road most of the time - they were designed to spend 70-80% of their time (I don't have the document stating which in hand) off-road....where the horsepower rating of the truck is not a factor in its speed.
FWIW, by the military's criteria, the M35 cooling system is marginally (it does not cool the engine enough in hot enviroments) - in fact, it did not meet the military's original criteria, and an exception to the specs had to be granted in order for procurement to proceed...something truly amazing by our hobby standards!
Best wishes,
David Doyle
The smoking LD is precisely why the LDT was created, the turbo of the LDT is presently solely to clean the exhaust to meet the then-current EPA mandate. As EPA regulations tightened, the Dept of Army could once or twice got waivers which allowed the Multifuel to remain in production. The last time they asked, EPA turned them down, and did on appeal as well - thus the death of the Multifuel.
The Multifuel family began with the LDS-427 - which was turbosupercharged - and did not have a fuel density compensator. In all the Multifuels it is the spherical chamber in the top of the piston that MAKES it a Multifuel....and the reason that shape piston is not found in other engines.
The other aspect of this is that designers of military vehicles intentionally design them such that the "weak link" is the engine. You won't find many - if any - stock military vehicles from the "golden age of M-series" with broken axles or driveshafts. The engines deliberately don't have enough power for that.....drop in higher horsepower mills, and these problems appear. While most of us drive are vehicles on road most of the time - they were designed to spend 70-80% of their time (I don't have the document stating which in hand) off-road....where the horsepower rating of the truck is not a factor in its speed.
FWIW, by the military's criteria, the M35 cooling system is marginally (it does not cool the engine enough in hot enviroments) - in fact, it did not meet the military's original criteria, and an exception to the specs had to be granted in order for procurement to proceed...something truly amazing by our hobby standards!
Best wishes,
David Doyle
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Hello Lee,
Thanks for your input. I took the Stradivarius (see below) for another run this evening. Ambient temp was 70 degrees. This time I left the fan off to see if free flow air would be sufficient to maintain 180 degree "thermostat" temp. At 55 MPH (2100 RPM) I only pull 650 EGT and 2 lbs of boost. After 12 miles I had to turn on the fan and keep it on until shut-down.
Removing the standard water pump fan is a BIG change to the engine. I was amazed at how sturdy "and heavy" the stock fan was once we got it off the truck and could take a close look at it. I'm sure it makes up for lots of cooling system inefficiency sins. I just hope I can cut away enough plywood blanking to effect the belta-T.
Fun things to know....
Removing the stock fan made a HUGE difference in cab noise and a noticeable improvement in what I call the "scoot factor". I've got a custom stainless steel muffler exhaust system on my truck as well as transmission and transfer case boots. I've also pathched and plugged firewall and floor-board holes. It's unbelievable how quiet the truck is without the stock fan. The truck is very tight with very little to no roll-over gear noise and the new 395/85 Goodyears are quiet. I now hear noises that I couldn't hear earlier. At 2100 RPM engine resonation sounds like a well tuned Stradivarius --- so much so that I decided to adopt the name
Thanks for your input. I took the Stradivarius (see below) for another run this evening. Ambient temp was 70 degrees. This time I left the fan off to see if free flow air would be sufficient to maintain 180 degree "thermostat" temp. At 55 MPH (2100 RPM) I only pull 650 EGT and 2 lbs of boost. After 12 miles I had to turn on the fan and keep it on until shut-down.
Removing the standard water pump fan is a BIG change to the engine. I was amazed at how sturdy "and heavy" the stock fan was once we got it off the truck and could take a close look at it. I'm sure it makes up for lots of cooling system inefficiency sins. I just hope I can cut away enough plywood blanking to effect the belta-T.
Fun things to know....
Removing the stock fan made a HUGE difference in cab noise and a noticeable improvement in what I call the "scoot factor". I've got a custom stainless steel muffler exhaust system on my truck as well as transmission and transfer case boots. I've also pathched and plugged firewall and floor-board holes. It's unbelievable how quiet the truck is without the stock fan. The truck is very tight with very little to no roll-over gear noise and the new 395/85 Goodyears are quiet. I now hear noises that I couldn't hear earlier. At 2100 RPM engine resonation sounds like a well tuned Stradivarius --- so much so that I decided to adopt the name
- 1,046
- 45
- 48
- Location
- Syracuse, New York
Hi David D.,Ken and group,
My fuel economy could be better.Remember I'm pulling 13T(Stalwart).5MPG was on 600 mile road trip for M706(10T/3T empty).Might be the pump.Runs fine and clean up to the point of max output.Any additional throttle causes the smoke.That point varies with speed.The faster I go the closer to WOT the smoke shows .Seems no addition power, just smoke .I'm sure something needs to be changed but since runs so well doubt injectors.Might be smoke cam angle or pump metering?.Not enought time to do all the things I want to do.Bjorn may have got 9.3 - 8.5 w/turbo and 11 inch rubber if memory correct.10MPG may be out my reach.I have always assumed my LD was a smoker from day one.Probable poorest fuel economy of the bunch too.Turbo sits on kitchen countertop.Plumbing in the garage.Bjorn's article here too. I'm not a deuce expert.Maybe when I'm done.Comments welcomed.
David.
Thanks for the info.I knew that the turbos were added to clean up exhaust.Did not know any other details.I can use -any- additional power.Might be able to coax a few more than a LDT .Not going to try for LDS rating without piston change.I'll monitor EGT.All engines have a safety factor.Cars are at least 2.Most are higher.I have always felt if I am careful I can go were the factory was afraid to go.Good maintainence and a gentle hand and foot helps.Got my 90' Ranger to 290,000 towing more than one 6000lb trailers across the country.Still going too.That 2.9 was supposed to be a problem engine.Mine has never been apart.Original clutch and transmission too.
Do you know what the cooling system weak link is?It would be easy to get a bigger(thicker)radiator made.Fan blade pitch and pulley size a useful way to increase air and coolant speed.I had no problems towing 10T up the big hills in PA on a 85*F day.Steady 185*F.
LDS pistons are supposed to be stronger.Anyone know if they are heavier to.Does the crank need to be rebalanced?I see the manual show both solid and hollow pins.States that they can be interchanged .Weight must not be very important if they can claim that.
Jimk
FV624
M35A2
M706
The Three Stooges
My fuel economy could be better.Remember I'm pulling 13T(Stalwart).5MPG was on 600 mile road trip for M706(10T/3T empty).Might be the pump.Runs fine and clean up to the point of max output.Any additional throttle causes the smoke.That point varies with speed.The faster I go the closer to WOT the smoke shows .Seems no addition power, just smoke .I'm sure something needs to be changed but since runs so well doubt injectors.Might be smoke cam angle or pump metering?.Not enought time to do all the things I want to do.Bjorn may have got 9.3 - 8.5 w/turbo and 11 inch rubber if memory correct.10MPG may be out my reach.I have always assumed my LD was a smoker from day one.Probable poorest fuel economy of the bunch too.Turbo sits on kitchen countertop.Plumbing in the garage.Bjorn's article here too. I'm not a deuce expert.Maybe when I'm done.Comments welcomed.
David.
Thanks for the info.I knew that the turbos were added to clean up exhaust.Did not know any other details.I can use -any- additional power.Might be able to coax a few more than a LDT .Not going to try for LDS rating without piston change.I'll monitor EGT.All engines have a safety factor.Cars are at least 2.Most are higher.I have always felt if I am careful I can go were the factory was afraid to go.Good maintainence and a gentle hand and foot helps.Got my 90' Ranger to 290,000 towing more than one 6000lb trailers across the country.Still going too.That 2.9 was supposed to be a problem engine.Mine has never been apart.Original clutch and transmission too.
Do you know what the cooling system weak link is?It would be easy to get a bigger(thicker)radiator made.Fan blade pitch and pulley size a useful way to increase air and coolant speed.I had no problems towing 10T up the big hills in PA on a 85*F day.Steady 185*F.
LDS pistons are supposed to be stronger.Anyone know if they are heavier to.Does the crank need to be rebalanced?I see the manual show both solid and hollow pins.States that they can be interchanged .Weight must not be very important if they can claim that.
Jimk
FV624
M35A2
M706
The Three Stooges
Jimk - Something strange is happening in your engine. The "sweet spot" for fuel economy is 1600-2200 rpm, above 2200 fuel usage climbs drastically. As it happens, most of my driving is rural, generally in the 1600-2200 rpm range, over a 300 mile test period I averaged 12.5 mpg.
Same with the smoke, it should smoke more at LOW rpms, as in going uo through the gears, but should not smoke at all at higher rpms at WOT. The attached chart demonstates what I mean, it is for a LDS engine but close enough to give a good idea for the LDT. Note the chart says LDS engine with two hole injectors, max rpm 2600. The HP is correct, but LDS engines were supposed to have one hole injectors and max out at 2900 rpm!
Sounds like you need a turbo on that engine!
Same with the smoke, it should smoke more at LOW rpms, as in going uo through the gears, but should not smoke at all at higher rpms at WOT. The attached chart demonstates what I mean, it is for a LDS engine but close enough to give a good idea for the LDT. Note the chart says LDS engine with two hole injectors, max rpm 2600. The HP is correct, but LDS engines were supposed to have one hole injectors and max out at 2900 rpm!
Sounds like you need a turbo on that engine!
Attachments
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Update (Success) on Fan Project:
Today I removed the fan and cut away as much of the plywood mounting as I felt I could remove and still have a sturdy/rigid mount for the fan.
Only one picture is attached. I forgot to take me camera along so I could take pictures of the modification in process and had to take pics after everything was back together. By the time I got around to remembering to take pictures it was dark and as you know, digital cameras are hard to aim in the dark.
I was able to remove approx 80% of what was originally blanking off the radiator.
Ambient temp today was 75%. I ran 20 miles at 2100 RPM / 55 MPH / 650 EGT with the fan OFF and the water temp hovered around 190. After stopping and buying some diesel fuel I drove the 20 miles back home. Once again, temps hovered around 190 with the fan off. On a long hill the temp went to 195 but quickly went down to 190. For all I know 190 may be bumping up against the thermostat though I thought I had a 180 degree thermostat.
I noticed when I slowed down to 30 to drive through town the temp quickly started coming up --- on went the fan. It appears that anything under 40 MPH requires the fan.
For the way I use my truck (very light duty) and where I live (the land of blonde hair and blue ears) I'm happy with the results. Were I in a hotter climate and/or hauling anything I "might" have a problem on a hot day. In four months it will be 40 below zero so what the heck.
Not having the water pump fan makes a BIG difference in the truck from a noise standpoint. The stock fan will stay in my side tool box just in case I ever need it. I'm installing the fan's automatic relay system tomorrow
Today I removed the fan and cut away as much of the plywood mounting as I felt I could remove and still have a sturdy/rigid mount for the fan.
Only one picture is attached. I forgot to take me camera along so I could take pictures of the modification in process and had to take pics after everything was back together. By the time I got around to remembering to take pictures it was dark and as you know, digital cameras are hard to aim in the dark.
I was able to remove approx 80% of what was originally blanking off the radiator.
Ambient temp today was 75%. I ran 20 miles at 2100 RPM / 55 MPH / 650 EGT with the fan OFF and the water temp hovered around 190. After stopping and buying some diesel fuel I drove the 20 miles back home. Once again, temps hovered around 190 with the fan off. On a long hill the temp went to 195 but quickly went down to 190. For all I know 190 may be bumping up against the thermostat though I thought I had a 180 degree thermostat.
I noticed when I slowed down to 30 to drive through town the temp quickly started coming up --- on went the fan. It appears that anything under 40 MPH requires the fan.
For the way I use my truck (very light duty) and where I live (the land of blonde hair and blue ears) I'm happy with the results. Were I in a hotter climate and/or hauling anything I "might" have a problem on a hot day. In four months it will be 40 below zero so what the heck.
Not having the water pump fan makes a BIG difference in the truck from a noise standpoint. The stock fan will stay in my side tool box just in case I ever need it. I'm installing the fan's automatic relay system tomorrow
Attachments
- 1,046
- 45
- 48
- Location
- Syracuse, New York
Hi Lee H.
I have a non-whistler and associated plumbing.I wanted to look at a NAPA 21470 muffler today.Might have to wait till tomorrow .I Saw that Mod. here and really like it.I seems like a waste of time to try and tune pump/deal with smoking beforehand .These LD's were "supposed" to be smokers.
That said, I would like to learn as much as possible .Understanding is best tool there is.Having group members with extensive experience is one way to get it.
Prehaps I did not explain my situation clealy.When I go anywhere I am working the engine pretty hard.Top speed ~ 50MPH .40 is comfortable(4th).The slightest grade cuts speed fast.
Lets say on level ground 5th gear/45mph/1600?rpm.If I add a tiny bit of throttle there is some feeble power and smoke,any additional throttle just makes smoke. Now downshift to 4th and rpms go up near 2500.Clean and power about the same ,but throttle is now near the floor.Increase throttle more ,same results.(side note-at 45 torque multiplication from 4th gear/lower output due tot high RPM seems about the same as at best torque output(1600-1800) with less multiplcation(5th).
Runing steady on flat ground nice and clean.Run into a upgrade(even very small) and smoke starts .
Lug it at low speed.Lots of smoke and less power(of course).
Anyways seems to smoke only under load.Like too much fuel.Not much to show for it either.Hard to get all power without going into smake zone.Am I making any sense?
It does run well.
Maybe someone turned the pump up.I was planning on installing the turbo then setting the pump with a boost gage like the LDS troobleshooting manual states. But use a lower peak pressure like 14-16psi.
JimK
I have a non-whistler and associated plumbing.I wanted to look at a NAPA 21470 muffler today.Might have to wait till tomorrow .I Saw that Mod. here and really like it.I seems like a waste of time to try and tune pump/deal with smoking beforehand .These LD's were "supposed" to be smokers.
That said, I would like to learn as much as possible .Understanding is best tool there is.Having group members with extensive experience is one way to get it.
Prehaps I did not explain my situation clealy.When I go anywhere I am working the engine pretty hard.Top speed ~ 50MPH .40 is comfortable(4th).The slightest grade cuts speed fast.
Lets say on level ground 5th gear/45mph/1600?rpm.If I add a tiny bit of throttle there is some feeble power and smoke,any additional throttle just makes smoke. Now downshift to 4th and rpms go up near 2500.Clean and power about the same ,but throttle is now near the floor.Increase throttle more ,same results.(side note-at 45 torque multiplication from 4th gear/lower output due tot high RPM seems about the same as at best torque output(1600-1800) with less multiplcation(5th).
Runing steady on flat ground nice and clean.Run into a upgrade(even very small) and smoke starts .
Lug it at low speed.Lots of smoke and less power(of course).
Anyways seems to smoke only under load.Like too much fuel.Not much to show for it either.Hard to get all power without going into smake zone.Am I making any sense?
It does run well.
Maybe someone turned the pump up.I was planning on installing the turbo then setting the pump with a boost gage like the LDS troobleshooting manual states. But use a lower peak pressure like 14-16psi.
JimK
JimK - I'd suggest to start with the turbo. Don't worry about 12-14 PSI boost, most LDT turbos run 7-8 PSI tops. Install a pyrometer (about $125) and a 15 PSI boost gauge (about $45) then you can work with the fuel adjustment to get you up to a safe power level without melting your turbo. Just make sure you drill and tap your exhaust manifold for the Pyro BEFORE you install the turbo!
SasquatchSanta
New member
- 1,177
- 18
- 0
- Location
- Northern Minnesota
Hello Lee,
I just got off the phone with Spal USA concerning the 24 volt relay. They sent me the wrong controller --- sent a 12 volt versus a 24 volt. In a few days I'll have all the stuff spread out on the table --- I'll post what works.
The 24V system doesn't have as many options as the 12 volt unit they sent by mistake. I chose the 195 degree sensor which I hope wasn't a mistake. It will come on at 195 and trun off at 175. I just hope at 195 the fan's CFM capacity can "rescue" the temp spikes quick enough. Had I chose the 175 degree sensor it would have stayed on till 155 and therefore would have remained on.
I'm trying to figure out if I might have a 190 degree thermostat --- kind of hard to tell after they are installed.
As soon as I get the material I'm going to build a steel fan mount --- to get rid of restrictive plywood. Even with the plywood mount cut down it still creates quite a bit of restriction.
I just got off the phone with Spal USA concerning the 24 volt relay. They sent me the wrong controller --- sent a 12 volt versus a 24 volt. In a few days I'll have all the stuff spread out on the table --- I'll post what works.
The 24V system doesn't have as many options as the 12 volt unit they sent by mistake. I chose the 195 degree sensor which I hope wasn't a mistake. It will come on at 195 and trun off at 175. I just hope at 195 the fan's CFM capacity can "rescue" the temp spikes quick enough. Had I chose the 175 degree sensor it would have stayed on till 155 and therefore would have remained on.
I'm trying to figure out if I might have a 190 degree thermostat --- kind of hard to tell after they are installed.
As soon as I get the material I'm going to build a steel fan mount --- to get rid of restrictive plywood. Even with the plywood mount cut down it still creates quite a bit of restriction.
jwaller
Active member
- 3,724
- 19
- 38
- Location
- Columbia, SC
any idea on a possible increas in milage due to not having to use as much throttle to keep the road speed the same. I would imagine that the loss of the fan would only help. I know on the trucks I used to drive, when the fan would kick on you'd lose 2-3mph on the speedo. when it went off the mpg came back.