Will an SR20 fan fit a 300ZX?

Just found this ...
http://www.gktech.com/index.php/s13-s14-s15-replacement-engine-fan-60-more-air-flow.html
Wondering how it compares, fitment wise and dimensions wise

 

Fan is driven by a clutch

Clutch will only provide a given amount of torque

To move more air you will need more torque (ignoring the minor improvements in efficiency)

Therefore claim of 60% more air flow is BS unless the fan clutch is capable of providing more torque than the current fan can use - we can be sure it can't/doesn't as when the clutch fails and locks up you can clearly hear the fan doing a lot more work than normal.

My opinion at this stage is the product is BS.
My advice at this stage - let someone else try it out

 

If you want more airflow, why don't you just buy one of those calibre electric fans from supercheap auto and mount it to the front of your radiator.
They supply a relay switch, but you could also hard wire to your ignition.
It pushes air into your radiator while the fan clutch pulls the air through.
It would be a fairly cheap mod.

 

Unfortunately we haven't test fitted on a Z32 so can't confirm. We are however making an adapter to suit the RB's and if there's enough interest we could make/test on the VG's.

 

Thanks for your opinion however this is an engineered product. We didn't just take a shape and make up the numbers. Put your clutch fan on an aeroplane and tell me if it still flies, put an aeroplane prop on any motor and watch the amount of air it pulls/pushes. The "minor efficiency" that you talk of is actually quite a drastic improvement. This design in-particular has been designed around many basics from prop design with great results.

We are open to any tests and guarantee an increase of 60% over the standard SR clutch fan.

 

I'm interested, any test results that show the 60% increase in air flow?

 

The data was recorded on a independently calibrated anemometer.

Some info from the engineers report:

The design of the new fan blade uses a smaller blade area with an aerofoil section that is configured for lower drag and a wider aoa range.
The pitch angle of the new blade produces a constant aoa over the entire span with a profilethat creates an idea pressure map for a fan. This ensures minimal cross flow losses. The profile of the blade is configured such that at the higher rpm range the induced lift on the blades will cause the tip to flex in rotation, reduce the aoa and hence reduce the power draw. This will further improve its performance.

and

The lift profile for the baseline fan has a high lift component at a radius of 158 mm and a large drop in the tip section around the protrusion. This creates a high degree of cross flow and induced drag. The second profile is for the improved design. This profile was optimized through the plan form
profile. The units are in newtons per 4 mm slice against the blade radius. Notice also that the improved blade has both a lower chord and a lower chamber section yet still produces a higher lift value. Still is because the improved blade is operating in a wider idea aoa range.

 

Any pictures on the complete unit ? Do you use a stock clutch with your own fan design ?

 

Thanks for that, do you have any back to back tests actually showing results?

For example, standard SR20 setup, ran on a 25° day, record temps, then swap the fan with your unit and record temps. How much cooler does it run?

 

The fan was run on my S15 on a dyno back to back and pulled 60% more air than the standard SR fan measuring from the same location, distance, same car etc.

The time to heat up on the dyno from operating temp to 90 degrees took just over twice as long with the new fan installed.

 

On the Silvias the stock clutch is used with our fan.

More photos can be seen on our website at www.gktech.com.au

 

The Titanic was "engineered" as well and we know how that ended.

I have no idea who you are and what you think you know but you should know there are more than a couple of people on here with enough experience in the aircraft industry to be well qualified in laughing their asses off at your 60% claim.
It's nothing short of ridiculous and fraudulent, you testing on the dyno is nothing short of laughable - do you not run a thermostat on your car? :rofl:

20% I would consider plausible
60% is BS
In your defence you may be oblivious to this, I'd be more than happy to put one to the test and pay the full cost of the fan if I am wrong.

EDIT: had a look at the web page for more info on the fan, a couple of things you should know:

Blade angle change as you go from the root to the tip: the tip travels faster than the root therefore the root requires more pitch than the tip, the factory fan has this yet yours apparently does not (if I'm reading what you have written correctly).
One of the main reasons for including this angle change is for efficiency so seeing as you have omitted this it makes the 60% claim look even more unbelievable.
Without this angle change you get more noise - your web page notes more noise - backs up the conclusion that you have omitted the angle change (there is a term for this but ICBFd using it and confusing people).

Less area on each blade but more blades so overall surface area is probably fairly similar, longer thinner blades are more efficient so this is good, aerofoil profile claimed to be used so this is also good BUT the angle of attack is high, this will stall the blades and cause a lot of noise at slow vehicle speed - backed up by your note of more noise on your web page.

Yip the product was engineered - poorly

60% = BS

 

Mungyz thanks for all that.
60% improvement does sound too much.

The blade design tapers significantly at the ends, which is where the blade cuts the air at the highest speed. The blade would experience the most drag at the farthest point from the centre, so their tapered design would significantly reduce drag and also allow the blade to spin faster because less torque is being sucked out of the clutch.

But a faster fan doesn't mean it will be more efficient because the edges of the blade have the potential to suck more air because the blade moves fastest. If the fan can maximize surface area at the edges and still ll move at its highest speed then it is pulling more air more efficiently.

I would have thought the way to improve efficiency was to maximize blade area at the edges and minimise blade area in the centre so overall mass is kept low. The ideal design would try to encourage a vortex to create a low pressure zone that acts like a funnel and sucks air more efficiently.

I would check into Bernoulli principle applied to vortex rather than Bernoulli applied to aerofoils. Speeding up the air at the edges to create a Hilsch vortex?

 

Wow, what a response.

Do you know what it costs to make plastic injection moulds for something like a fan? Around 20k (even in China) and with a minimum order quantity of 1,000pcs it gets really expensive, really fast (especially for a 26 year old that has put all his money and time since the age of 17 into growing a business)

Do you think that anyone in their right mind would spend 20k+ on a product that was rubbish and actually expect them to sell?

My business has grown strongly based on word of mouth, to the point where in the past month we literally sold 1,442 individual items all based around the Nissan S and R chassis to countries all over the world. I'm fortunate in that I have another business which I take a wage from and it has meant that not 1 cent in the past 3 years has been taken out of GKTECH and all profits have been reinvested back into product development.

I personally use one of these fans (and have for 2-3 months now on my S15 and they work INCREDIBLY well and anyone that has one installed will tell you the same thing, 100% guaranteed.

What has a thermostat got to do with a temperature test? If you read what I wrote my "operating temp" was at the point at which the thermostat opens. That was my base line but that's entirely different to the fan physically pulling 60% more air through it. Again, this was tested in the same environment on the same car, back to back using a calibrated device.

The copy and paste that I provided in my previous post is from the engineers report from a Melbourne based engineering firm from one of their lead engineers who worked on this project for me (at a cost in excess of 5k on top of the 20k).

I myself don't need to know anything about the aircraft industry and I'm not sure who you are or who you're trying to impress but you really come across as a bit of a know it all.

You say the product was poorly engineered, really? What is your opinion based on? Would it stand up in a court if you were sued for defamation?

In the past month we've sold in excess of 300 units via our Facebook page with orders shipping from last Thursday. Be sure to keep an eye out for feedback. It's www.facebook.com/gktech

cheers,
Greg Kruse - GKTECH

ex owner of an RNN14 GTi-R, RB25 powered R32 Skyline, SR20 powered R32 4 door Skyline, 3x R32 GTR's, SR20 S13 Silvia, SR20 180sx, SR20 powered onevia and current owner of an S14 and an S15 200sx.

 

I want this tested on a Z32, because there is more going on here to make this fan design achieve results better than the oem design.

Having more blade surface area closer to the centre might be explained by this experiment.

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/bernoullis-windbags

You might even be able to improve the efficiency by removing (and rebalancing) one of the blades and leaving just one larger gap to allow pulsing of the airflow which might improve the suck through the radiator.

 

Thanks for your constructive comment.

If you own a Z32 (I presume you do) and are willing to test fit one, send me through a PM and I'll get one in the post at no cost. I have no doubt that you will be very happy with the result (assuming it fits a Z32).

Greg

 

Greg ive send you a pm

Abraham

 

Or you could take in to account that the prop that the Wright brothers designed over 100yrs ago is only 5% less efficient than similar props used today.

100yrs of R&D, millions of dollars and all they have achieved is 5% improvement.

Now Nissan didn't use the Wright brothers prop but they aren't morons either and there is no way in hell they would give away even 30% efficiency for the sake of anything.

The claim that this fan is 60% more efficient is flat out BS, the fan clutch will only ever deliver a given amount of torque and RPM (assuming you extract 100% torque from it) therefore you have a maximum amount of power to work with, to claim you can get 60% more airflow from that is BS.

Nothing to do with the size of my dick ryzan, my customer asked a question about a product on a public forum and I gave an opinion, if GKTECH wants to try and sue me he can try - but he's going to have to prove he can shift 60% more air with his fan than the stock set up can.

He might be better off taking his far superior technology to Nissan or Cessna and make billions from it :rofl::rofl::rofl:

 

^ makes me wonder if a certain Canadian parts manufacturer will be releasing fan blades any time soon lol.

On topic:
Product looks good, but if some more information becomes available I'd be interested in this.