<VV> Corvair Fan

[Ron]

No, not just a better fan, but better finning with maybe more room between 
the cylinders.  A less restricted head design would obviate the need for 
more fan performance.
RonH

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <JVHRoberts at aol.com>
To: <crawfordrose at msn.com>; <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: <VV> Corvair Fan


>
> Given that ALL turbo Corvairs overheat if you keep your foot into it long
> enough, AC Corvairs seem to struggle in hot weather, and 140 HP Corvairs 
> run
> better cold than hot, I'd say it's inadequate, and Chevy opted for a one 
> size
> fits all solution that only works on the lowest HP models. The more 
> powerful
> engines simply need better cooling than Chevy gave them. And regardless of 
> your
> reverse logic, the market demand for air conditioning and more power was
> clearly  there. No need for water cooling, just a better fan.
> Parts cost over the counter will ALWAYS be a LOT higher than the
> manufacturing costs. By a BUNCH. The revision to the 1961 cooling system 
> was  done to
> accomodate the Direct Air heater, a cost savings over the gasoline fired 
> unit.
> So, why is the stock cooling system marginal on the high output and AC
> engines? Simple, Chevy never designed the right cooling system parts for 
> these
> engines.
>
> In a message dated 7/10/2005 4:41:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> crawfordrose at msn.com writes:
>
> I recall  that Chevrolet stated that the fan redesign was to eliminate 
> belt
> retention  problems arising from heavy steel fans only, not to enhance 
> cooling.
> I am not  aware of any publication that claims that the fan was redesigned 
> to
> improve  cooling only to reduce inertia on changes of engine speed. The
> design of the  original fan was conventional to the Porsche and VW fans in 
> use at
> that time.  Therefore, the supposition that the fan as designed (or even 
> as
> redesigned) is  inadequate is not a well founded premise.  Is it not more 
> correct
> to  state that burdensome air conditioning condensers, turbochargers and
> large  valve heads are inadequate for the small Corvair engine? Why fuss 
> with
> designing a new fan when a "better" cooling system of air and water 
> jackets  for
> liquid cooling could easily be designed but then, it is no longer the 
> Corvair
> cooling system. I never had a problem with my 64 Spyder's cooling  system
> which worked as designed, at speeds of up to 90 mph, for 124,000  miles.
>
> Finally, what was so cheap about the cooling system? The total  cost of 
> all
> shrouds, seals, parts, and fan (itself $6.25 when minimum wage was  less 
> than
> $1.00) was $85.56 in 1960. The engine in a crate was 450.00. The  cooling
> system was simplified thereafter to include bilateral thermostats  damper 
> doors,
> probably for no significant cost  savings.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are 
> the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
> mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, 
> http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
> Change your options: 
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
> _______________________________________________
>