Will an SR20 fan fit a 300ZX?

hmmm nup not this one:
http://www.rhdjapan.com/gp-sports-megatech-cooling-fan-nissan-180sx-silvia-r-ps13-s14-s15-67307

And looking at that design I'd be inclined to believe it will more than the stock - at least as far as the clutch will let it and certainly FAR more than the GKtech version.

Show me the advert that says just the fan by itself will shift 89% more air.

I would 100% believe it with a clutch as well but just the fan not a chance.

 

Nowhere in the linked advertisement does it say anything or show anything about the clutch being included as IT IS NOT. I know this as I've got one here and I had my engineering firm analyze the design prior to making our own design.

3D scan was performed.

Do you think that this other company that has claimed (via the previously shown magazine article) an 89% increase in air flow is BS fraudulent marketing? Or is it possible that you're wrong?

 

.

 

Take a look at your precious little fan and have a look at the fan blades, the size and shape of them and compare them to what is on a stock fan.

You would have to make such a massive efficiency increase to make up for the lack of shear size that you would be struggling to even break even never mind go 60% better.

You say you car actually made more power on the dyno with the new fan on there and then you claim it was because everything was so much cooler.
You don't think that there might be just a slim chance that because you have less blade area you might actually have less thrust from the fan and therefore less load on the clutch and therefore the engine?

You can't understand that to shift more air you need more power aside from any improvements in fan efficiency, you completely ignore the hint about how little there is to be had from efficiency changes and you rant on at me as if I'm full of crap & actually like a comment from one of you customers on FB who says I'm full of it.
You then delete my comment explaining the clutch situation to everyone.

Bad luck buddy the cold hard facts are you wasted $25K on a fan that doesn't have a hope in hell of living up to your insane claims and you don't have a shit show in hell of ever proving it does using REAL facts, figures and numbers because if it was tested it would NOT EVER live up to your hype.

Hell I should just get in touch with good ole mighty car mods so they can myth bust your sorry ass.

Do you REALLY HONESTLY believe your engineer has used blades i would guess to be 50% the size of stock to create 60% more air flow?

That's over 100% better than a multi billion dollar company came up with for what was one of their high profile sports cars, sure a few years ago but go back to the hint about the Wright brothers prop.

 

Just to clarify, you think that it would be hard pressed for this fan to even move as much air as the factory unit. Correct?

Then anyone that is installing this fan (including myself) must be out of their minds because it sure as hell fells like it's pulling in a lot more air.

For the 5th time now (good work on that), you have avoided the previously mentioned question of the GP Sports fan. You're proving more and more with each post that you're not quite as smart as you think you are.

Here's a little something from an engineer, an engineer that designed the fan. I got him to dumb it down a little (originally for me as I'm not an engineer, but I think it's best you read this version also)

The Baseline fan:
In order for a fan blade to operate at its optimal L/D ratio the angle of attack of the entire blade must be within the optimal sectional pitch angle. This fan has avariance on the aoa of 10.5 degrees (stalled) in the mid section to a -10.4 degrees (negativestalled) at the tip. This configuration creates a large amount of drag and a very high degree of radial flow. The other observation is the very high chamber profile of the blades creates both a very highdrag value and a high degree of induced rotational flow. This produces an increase in power over and above the values presented. The blade profile on the baseline is not a well defined aerofoil section and this will contribute an increase in power as well. For the BEM an aerofoil section with a higher performance was used to predict the LD curves and hence shows a better performance than the baseline fan will produce.

Design Improvements
The design of the new fan blade uses a smaller blade area with an aerofoil section that isconfigured 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 profile that 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 theblades will cause the tip to flex in rotation, reduce the aoa and hence reduce the power draw.This will further improve its performance.

Lift profile:
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.

AOA:
On the baseline the addition of the protrusion drastically alters the angle of attack profile of the blade across the span. The mid section is in a stalled state while the tip is negative stalled. This creates a very high radial flow pattern that reduces the flow rate and increase the drag. The improved design has a near constant aoa with the angle reducing towards the tip to offset the increased pressure due to the higher relative velocity. This reduces the tip losses and produces a uniform axial flow pattern.

 

Yes any improvement has got to be a good thing, plus the fact there cheaper than oem if i read correctly.
Send one to Rob260 for evaluation please :zlove:

 

So if GP sports fan is at 89% and correct, why should I buy yours? Are they discontinued, horrendously expensive or?
And how could your engineer 3-D scan and analyze that fan and still fall 29% short of target?

I want to see data on this, not because I'm a internet troll, but rather a scientist who likes to know meaningful data over sales pitches. Data measurement of 1 independent variable and 'feel' of airflow might not be the best at getting the point across. You can measure everything (including Hype) but valid measurements are what sets the two apart. Likewise, being engineer designed at great cost is not a precursor to being an effective product.

 

Hi Mitch,

They're not discontinued but they are around the $200-$250 mark new and I don't believe anyone in Australia stocks them so there's always a wait for them from Japan (plus shipping costs).

We personally don't believe that the number given by GP Sports of 89% is accurate, hence the 60% increase as opposed to 89%. Given that we'd already done a 3D scan of the fan it would have been just an email for us to just send that to China and not spend any money on design, as there's already great feedback on the GP Sports fan over the SR20 fan.

The engineers report has a whole bunch of graphs but the basis of it is as previously posted based on the standard SR20 fan Vs our new design. We don't know what the primary goal from Nissan was for the standard fan however it certainly wasn't for maximum air flow which is what our goal was.


The Baseline fan:
In order for a fan blade to operate at its optimal L/D ratio the angle of attack of the entire blade must be within the optimal sectional pitch angle. This fan has avariance on the aoa of 10.5 degrees (stalled) in the mid section to a -10.4 degrees (negativestalled) at the tip. This configuration creates a large amount of drag and a very high degree of radial flow. The other observation is the very high chamber profile of the blades creates both a very highdrag value and a high degree of induced rotational flow. This produces an increase in power over and above the values presented. The blade profile on the baseline is not a well defined aerofoil section and this will contribute an increase in power as well. For the BEM an aerofoil section with a higher performance was used to predict the LD curves and hence shows a better performance than the baseline fan will produce.

Design Improvements
The design of the new fan blade uses a smaller blade area with an aerofoil section that isconfigured 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 profile that 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 theblades will cause the tip to flex in rotation, reduce the aoa and hence reduce the power draw.This will further improve its performance.

Lift profile:
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.

AOA:
On the baseline the addition of the protrusion drastically alters the angle of attack profile of the blade across the span. The mid section is in a stalled state while the tip is negative stalled. This creates a very high radial flow pattern that reduces the flow rate and increase the drag. The improved design has a near constant aoa with the angle reducing towards the tip to offset the increased pressure due to the higher relative velocity. This reduces the tip losses and produces a uniform axial flow pattern.

 

I've posted the numbers and test conditions from the back to back tests that were conducted.

I think that the summary from the engineer is quite relevant to all munghyz posts as it destroys quite a few of his attempts to defame me and all my hard work with nothing but false information and assumptions.

 

What does your engineer specialise in?

I'm an aircraft engineer and I'm telling you right now in public me and my mates from the trade are laughing at you - does that not ring alarm bells for you?

Do you not think for one minute you have screwed up just a tiny tiny bit?

I've read your crap from your "engineer" and just from the terminology alone I can tell he has no clue when it comes to extracting high efficiency from aerodynamic profiles.
When I read further and pay attention it only gets worse, his pile of BS has fooled you in to thinking the OEM fan was a disaster with serious design flaws.

This kind of reminds me of that kids story - the kings new clothes.

EDIT: oh and I have answered your silly little question, you just can't see it that's all.

 

I will not be responding to any more posts. I have tests results and I saw a drastic improvement with my own eyes. Again, why would I proceed to spend 25k of my own money on something that you say is only possible to have a maximum increase of 5%. Once again, testimonials are already flying in with customers saying exactly the same thing. One customer described having a whirlwind in front of his car now. Yet you say this is impossible.

I have been very open about under what conditions and how the fans were tested. If you don't think the way the tests or the range of tests are not broad enough then I strongly suggest that you don't buy this fan.

Again, not happy then do not buy this fan.