Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 20:53:02 -0400
Reply-To: pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Low Temp Radiator Thermo Switch "Better"?
In-Reply-To: <4fbeb956.4cb5e00a.6ae8.39ae@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I'm a firm believer in replacing radiators and using the correct 87 degree
thermostat.
But I admit I've been contemplating a low-temp or manual override fan
switch. My thought process is that yes, the van's cooling capacity is
plenty larger for its engine. But on the other hand, maybe having the fan
come on more could be good in situations where you are stuck in traffic a
lot, and the coolant isn't doing much circulating. I figure the
temperature at which the radiator fan comes on might be based on
assumptions of coolant flow levels below that which is happening at idle.
But I don't really know that this is better. It's not like I have
overheating problems or anything. I guess I would need to get a precise
sense of my coolant temperature under these running conditions to decide
whether or not this is warranted.
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:42 PM, David Beierl <dbeierl@attglobal.net> wrote:
> At 05:10 PM 5/24/2012, neil n wrote:
>
>> Van-cafe appears to sell only the "low temp" switch (judging by colour of
>> plastic):
>>
>> http://www.van-cafe.com/home/**van/page_552_670/fan_switch.**html<http://www.van-cafe.com/home/van/page_552_670/fan_switch.html>
>>
>
> The part number they reference is for the stock switch for later
> model Vanagons, same as Bus Depot is calling the stock
> switch. There's an earlier switch with a completely different p/n
> that initially triggers "on" at 95C instead of 87C.
>
>
>
> Is it the general opinion that the lower temp switch is better? I don't
>> have AC.
>>
>
> It's going to run the fan more in traffic. I personally don't
> *think* it makes a great difference in the cooling capacity of the
> system (whereas changing out an old radiator might make a very large
> difference). However there are at least two points of view on
> this. Unlike the cooler thermostat which I think can be actively
> harmful to the engine, I believe any issue with this one would be the
> nuisance value of having the fan run more often.
>
> The cooling system has quirks and way too many hoses, but it seems
> massively overbuilt. The radiator (to me) seems sized for a much
> larger engine than it is actually cooling. I don't think the people
> putting in 3-litre Subaru engines or turbo Bostigs have problems with
> cooling capacity. I really think that most cooling issues arise from
> gummed-up radiators that are overdue for replacement.
>
> All that said I don't drive in the Western mountains with enormous
> long grades...but I still think so.
>
> Yours,
> David
>
| 
