Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Performance Upgrades - Maintenance - Modifications - Problem Solving - Off-Road - Street Trucks. Covering the Explorer, ST, Sport, Lincoln Aviator, Sport Trac, Mercury Mountaineer, Mazda Navajo, Ford Ranger, Mazda Pickups, and the Aerostar. Featuring H.I. - Human Intelligence.
I'd really love to learn what's required to do this.
Turning on the knock sensor on the Explorer v8's would be another feature I'd love to enable and work with.
Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year. Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,. Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!.
CDAN4 has knock control that can be enabled/disabled, so I would imagine that the Ex/Mounty strategy does as well. I've found that pulling timing when ACT gets too high is very effective at reducing knock on a forced induction application, though.
Sorry for going so off topic here.
It doesn't appear that SCT supports it in my strategy then.
I think once I get my truck running, I'd like to pursue the tuning side of things further. Very interesting. The quarterhorse looks like it would be very interesting to work with.
I evaluated Tweecer back in Feb, 2014 when I started looking for a tuning package. I was concerned about the reliability of the EEPROM being mounted to the J3 port. I was also concerned about the capability to monitor and log to a file engine pids and analog signals such as AFR. However, since Tweecer doesn't tie up the OBD port, now that I have an X3 I can datalog with it. I guess the only remaining issue is the extent of the calibration constants supported. Tweecer claims my catch code is supported but I've never seen a list of the calibration constants. Another concern is processor data access speeds to the EEPROM via the J3 port vs access to the internal memory. I don't know how the processor determines where to access the various locations storing the calibration constants. However, after looking thru the source code for an old Mustang strategy, it looks likes the processor reads all of the calibration constants during initialization and then stores them in RAM. If that's correct then if there's a time penalty for accessing constants via the J3 port it would only matter during initialization. Tweecer also claims to be able to change calibration constants in real time. I'm curious how that works.
Getting back to the advantages/disadvantages of an electric cooling fan I think Aviator had a good implementation. The viscous coupling mechanical fan basically "free wheels" at cruise when the air flowing across the "clutch" is cool so an electric fan that is not energized would not result in any less engine load or increase in fuel economy. In city driving when a vehicle is stopped the temperature of the engine compartment rapidly increases even if the engine coolant temperature is still normal. At some temperature increase the clutch will partially engage even when cooling of the engine coolant is not necessary resulting in reduced fuel economy. An efficient electric fan that is energized based on engine coolant temperature will be more economical in city driving. I agree with Mesozoic that the shroud design is critical to fan efficiency. Also, blower fans are less efficient than suction fans. For off road driving (low speed, high load) a typical electric fan does not provide adequate cooling. If it is adequate it represents a significant electrical load when the alternator speed may be too low to keep up. The electrical fan may also be less reliable than the mechanical fan which is important in remote locations.
I prefer a functional viscous fan supplemented with an electric fan energized on a settable engine coolant temperature. The typical aftermarket electric fan is energized on radiator temperature. If I add a supplemental electric fan I'll either use a voltage settable enabled relay (I have two purchased for just such an application) that monitors the ECT sensor voltage or a pulse width modulated motor controller that increases fan speed as the delta between turn on and actual ECT temperature increases.
I have to admit, while I do have computer controlled fans in all of my Mustangs and my old Bronco, I wasn't planning to touch the fan in the Mounty until there was a genuine need.
As for reliability of the EEPROM, I've been using a Tweecer since 2004 and haven't had any issues with it in daily driving. The Quarterhorse on the otherhand, has a battery that will eventually discharge and leave you stranded. While I do like the QH hardware better and it does provide more features and speed, you will want to replace it with an F3 chip once you've achieved your final tune. I've been using the QH since 2010.
One annoying thing about the Tweecer is that my tuning software (BE, mainly) doesn't do patch updates to the tune in realtime like the QH does. It reflashes the entire binary and is therefore slower and more annoying to deal with. Additionally, the Tweecer can only datalog a fixed payload which is a very small subset of the what the QH is able to (no limit, I think).
I think the main reason people shy away from the QH/Tweecer route is that the tuning software isn't particularly user friendly. Most people who are serious about tuning reference leaked FoMoCo technical documents about specific engine strategies, some of which are thousands of pages long. There are several expert forums to lean on however, like eectuning.org and http://forum.efidynotuning.com/.
The viscous coupling mechanical fan basically "free wheels" at cruise when the air flowing across the "clutch" is cool so an electric fan that is not energized would not result in any less engine load or increase in fuel economy
Those (at least all the one's I have used) viscous clutches do not actually freewheel. They still spin at 20% of the shaft speed, give or take.. That's still a load. An electric fan when not running has no load since it's not running.
When I converted my Van from a mechanical fan to an electric fan there were 2 things I noticed right away.. First of course was no noise, 2nd was the responsiveness of the engine. It definitely made a difference. My fan clutch was tight and was a hayden Severe Duty (pretty much the only thing to use in Southern Az)..
As to mileage, well it really depends.. Out where I am, most of my driving is 50 mph+ so my electric fan is almost never on. If I lived in a place where most of my driving was city driving then no, it wouldn't have made near as much difference, if any..
As an example, I just drove 400 miles home (7.5 hours) and out of all that driving the only time the fan turned on was After I stopped for fuel/bio breaks and at the light I stopped at as I got off the freeway in Yuma. That means for those 7.5 hours I had practically 0 engine load on the engine caused by the fan (Yes, I know the alternator had to put the power back in the battery).
I am by all means NOT saying the electric fan conversion is the end all.. I have thought about it on my X but the X is used primarily as a wheeling rig with an occasional trip into town etc.. It wouldn't be worthwhile for me to convert it since most of the time the fan would be needed..
Here is the 2002 Mercury Cougar Fan Set up. It is very hard to get a good picture since it is tucked in there. I don't like how I mounted it on top. I think I am going to get some flat metal and secure it to the alternate locations on the side so it looks much cleaner.
The bottom of the fan shroud sits in the plastic radiator shield.
As you can see, I used weather stripping meant for a Seadoo Jet Ski around the outer edge first. Then I put another piece around the edge that mounts to the radiator.
It has worked well for me even in the Georgia summer heat.
