As I'm slowly getting my Land Rover Series 3 project together, I've
realised that there's very little clearance between the fan and the
radiator. It has a Perkins 4.203 (3.3 litre) engine out of a 6-cylinder
109 where it had been mounted further back taking advantage of the
recessed bulkhead. This one's a 4-cyl so that's not an option.
So, I have the choice of risking half of inch between fan and radiator,
which in something as bouncy as a leaf sprung Land Rover, may result in
tears; or fitting an electric fan in front and removing the mechanical
fan altogether. I have a powerful Spal fan that would fit.

Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a very
bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

Anyone know why?

"Willy Eckerslyke" wrote in message
...
As I'm slowly getting my Land Rover Series 3 project together, I've
realised that there's very little clearance between the fan and the
radiator. It has a Perkins 4.203 (3.3 litre) engine out of a 6-cylinder
109 where it had been mounted further back taking advantage of the
recessed bulkhead. This one's a 4-cyl so that's not an option.
So, I have the choice of risking half of inch between fan and radiator,
which in something as bouncy as a leaf sprung Land Rover, may result in
tears; or fitting an electric fan in front and removing the mechanical fan
altogether. I have a powerful Spal fan that would fit.

Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a very
bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

Anyone know why?

Willy, I'm not sure if this is helpful, as I don't have specific knowledge
of old, big diesels.

But looking at the problem logically, the object of the exercise is to get
air through the radiator core quickly and efficiently. So I can't see what
difference it makes if you "blow" (fan in front) or "suck" (fan behind).
But I do agree that the risk of fan meeting rad is not a good idea - been
there, done that, heard the noise, got the bill. I can only think that
there is a possibility that the physical presence of a front-mounted fan
unit might interfere with airflow under some circumstances.

As I'm sure you know from my previous ramblings I'm best on XK engines - not
as irrelevant as it may sound, as it's basically a bloody big lump, ancient
design and often fitted in compartments with inadequate airflow so known for
overheating. On my E I have a Kenlowe behind the rad; a friend with an
XK150S (basically same engine) has a Kenlowe in front of the rad - no room
behind - and neither of us has overheating problems, even under the worst
possible conditions (think traffic jam, London, heatwave).

I can't see why the fact that it's diesel should make any difference at all;
all internal combustion engines need cooling no matter what you pour into
the tank.

OK, I'm being an armchair mechanic, but my thought would be to fit the fan
you have in front of the rad, definitely remove the original as it will only
cause drag/mechanical loss and keep a careful eye on the temperature gauge
(it does have one? If not, lash one up soon as poss!).

Good luck,

Geoff MacK

Geoff Mackenzie wrote:

"Willy Eckerslyke" wrote in message
...
As I'm slowly getting my Land Rover Series 3 project together, I've
realised that there's very little clearance between the fan and the
radiator. It has a Perkins 4.203 (3.3 litre) engine out of a
6-cylinder 109 where it had been mounted further back taking advantage
of the recessed bulkhead. This one's a 4-cyl so that's not an option.
So, I have the choice of risking half of inch between fan and
radiator, which in something as bouncy as a leaf sprung Land Rover,
may result in tears; or fitting an electric fan in front and removing
the mechanical fan altogether. I have a powerful Spal fan that would fit.

Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a
very bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

Anyone know why?

Willy, I'm not sure if this is helpful, as I don't have specific
knowledge of old, big diesels.

But looking at the problem logically, the object of the exercise is to
get air through the radiator core quickly and efficiently. So I can't
see what difference it makes if you "blow" (fan in front) or "suck" (fan
behind). But I do agree that the risk of fan meeting rad is not a good
idea - been there, done that, heard the noise, got the bill. I can only
think that there is a possibility that the physical presence of a
front-mounted fan unit might interfere with airflow under some
circumstances.

As I'm sure you know from my previous ramblings I'm best on XK engines -
not as irrelevant as it may sound, as it's basically a bloody big lump,
ancient design and often fitted in compartments with inadequate airflow
so known for overheating. On my E I have a Kenlowe behind the rad; a
friend with an XK150S (basically same engine) has a Kenlowe in front of
the rad - no room behind - and neither of us has overheating problems,
even under the worst possible conditions (think traffic jam, London,
heatwave).

I can't see why the fact that it's diesel should make any difference at
all; all internal combustion engines need cooling no matter what you
pour into the tank.

OK, I'm being an armchair mechanic, but my thought would be to fit the
fan you have in front of the rad, definitely remove the original as it
will only cause drag/mechanical loss and keep a careful eye on the
temperature gauge (it does have one? If not, lash one up soon as poss!).

Good luck,

Geoff MacK

Likewise, my Triumph PI is a big lump with a need for adequate airflow.
I bought it with the fan removed and in a cardboard box in the boot,
and rather than fit it back, I put an Austin Maestro fan in front of the
radiator. Under most circumstances the forward momentum of the car is
sufficient to keep the engine at normal running temperature (the Maestro
fan has relatively narrow blades, so it doesn't obstruct the airflow
much), and only when I am stationary or crawling in traffic do I need to
put the fan on (when it creates quite a gale - much more powerful than a
Kenlowe).

Diesels are more efficient than petrol engines (hence more mpg), so I
would have thought that the heat you need to remove would be less than
for a petrol engine of equivalent size. I can't see any reason why you
should need the engine driven fan - unless it is integral with the
pulley that the fan belt goes round.

Jim

Jim Warren wrote:
Geoff Mackenzie wrote:

Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a
very bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

OK, I'm being an armchair mechanic, but my thought would be to fit the
fan you have in front of the rad, definitely remove the original as it
will only cause drag/mechanical loss and keep a careful eye on the
temperature gauge (it does have one? If not, lash one up soon as poss!).

Thanks Geoff, a very useful answer as always!

Likewise, my Triumph PI is a big lump with a need for adequate airflow.
I bought it with the fan removed and in a cardboard box in the boot,
and rather than fit it back, I put an Austin Maestro fan in front of the
radiator. Under most circumstances the forward momentum of the car is
sufficient to keep the engine at normal running temperature (the Maestro
fan has relatively narrow blades, so it doesn't obstruct the airflow
much), and only when I am stationary or crawling in traffic do I need to
put the fan on (when it creates quite a gale - much more powerful than a
Kenlowe).

.... which has reminded me that I'd fitted a Kenlowe to my Vitesse after
the fan was pulled through the radiator in a flood. And I never had any
problems with that either.

Diesels are more efficient than petrol engines (hence more mpg), so I
would have thought that the heat you need to remove would be less than
for a petrol engine of equivalent size.

That makes sense.
Thinking about it a bit, I have a feeling this engine originally came
out of a forklift truck or something similar, so would probably have had
more restricted airflow than it will in the Land Rover.

I can't see any reason why you
should need the engine driven fan - unless it is integral with the
pulley that the fan belt goes round.

No, it just unbolts, leaving the pulley behind.

I'll give it a go...

In article ,
Willy Eckerslyke wrote:
Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a very
bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

I've not much experience of diesels - but the small amount I do have says
they take longer to reach operating temperature than an equivalent petrol
so produce less waste heat?

--
*Bigamy is having one wife too many - monogamy is the same

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Willy Eckerslyke wrote:
Trouble is, I'm sure I've read somewhere that doing the latter is a very
bad idea on old fashioned diesel engines.

I've not much experience of diesels - but the small amount I do have says
they take longer to reach operating temperature than an equivalent petrol
so produce less waste heat?

Again this makes sense.
I'm starting to think that what I'd read may have been more of a general
"don't alter the cooling system from standard" kind of advice, perhaps
because diesel engines are more likely to be seriously damaged by
overheating. Higher compression and all that.
As Geoff suggests, I'll make sure there's a working temperature gauge
and take care with the fan's switching system.

I'd guess that the shear weight of this engine will soak up a fair bit
of heat too.

I had a 1969 109 S2a with this engine in, it only had an electric fan,
it ran with no problems, even offroad.

You do need an overdrive for normal road driving, excelent engine
though, I remember getting stuck in a big muddy hole and for some
reason got confused about which lever did what and tried to drive out
in 4 wheel drive high range, after breaking all the teeth off first
and reverse gears I then released what I had done and drove out in
second low. Parts where very cheap for the engine, from the main
agent.

Steve

wrote:
I had a 1969 109 S2a with this engine in, it only had an electric fan,
it ran with no problems, even offroad.

Excellent, just what I needed to know! Thanks Steve.

You do need an overdrive for normal road driving,

Got one ready for it. There was one fitted to the Land Rover I took it
out of, but it was in a pretty worn state. I've since read that you have
to be careful not to pull away with overdrive in 1st or 2nd with such a
torquey engine or exactly that kind of wear can occur. Seems the
previous owner hadn't been told.

excelent engine
though, I remember getting stuck in a big muddy hole and for some
reason got confused about which lever did what and tried to drive out
in 4 wheel drive high range, after breaking all the teeth off first
and reverse gears I then released what I had done and drove out in
second low.

Crumbs!
One reason I like it, is the way the donor vehicle would fire up so
easily even after standing for a month or two, without the flame-start
device connected up and with half an inch of water sloshing around in
the glass bulb thing. That's the kind of bomb-proof reliability I want
in a Landie.

In article ,
Willy Eckerslyke wrote:
Got one ready for it. There was one fitted to the Land Rover I took it
out of, but it was in a pretty worn state. I've since read that you have
to be careful not to pull away with overdrive in 1st or 2nd with such a
torquey engine or exactly that kind of wear can occur. Seems the
previous owner hadn't been told.

Applies to any overdrive. To avoid over specifying one - and therefore
adding cost and weight - most makers fitted an inhibitor so it would only
work in top gear - or perhaps third and top. As like any gearbox it has a
torque limit.

--
*I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.