Originally Posted by trader4

"Somewhere along the line you did not accept the input that 'complete' and documented has nothing to do with accurate"

I never claimed it was 100% accurate, only that it was the most complete
test setup, with actual pics of it and actual dyno curves of many fans.
It looks like valid data can in fact be extracted from it.
And I find it incredible that you openly accept and don't question the words
of an electric fan salesman, while you completely reject an actual test.

If the clutch fan data is wrong, what we are comparing an electric fan to, there is no data to extract

"Somewhere along the line you ignored that leaders in a market like Flex-a-lite, who depend on the performance minded, must sell products that meet or exceed customer expectations or they go away."

I don't reject that at all. That they satisfied you and how it actually
performs for a typical driver, is it worth it for them, etc, are
different things.

This thread is only about performance, time it takes to get from point a to point B, I think I mentioned that before if I'm not mistaken.

"Somewhere along the line you ignored input that the HP benefit of an electric fan varies by each particular application"

Never said any such thing.
Of course it was not in those exact words


" If you want to know the additional HP available by an application the conservative answer will come from Company techs. They are well aware, racers measure the results of performance enhancements."

Then they should have pics of the test setup they used, the dyno
graphs, etc. Still waiting for those

Dyno results vary by Dyno, temp, humidity, how much air they blow into the radiator. They also vary by each individual application. Flex-A-Lite is wise not to print any results due to liability.
"Somewhere along the line you ignored input that it is clearly a wilda%$ guess that old or junk parts perform worse or better than new parts. It is also an assumption that the BMW clutch fan performs better or worse than old junk technology."

I would say it's a reasonable assumption that 40 year old junk
parts generally perform worse than brand new, modern design
ones. That's been my experience.

Key word is assumption and in my experience--paraphrased---I don't know but it sounds good

"You have just ignored clear input that the individual doing the test stated he did not understand the way a clutch fan worked "

Haven't ignored it at all. I said even with the old steel fixed fan, the
test graph showed no measurable difference in power below 3500
versus *no fan* at alland that a hydraulic clutch fan is clearly going
to do better than that. That's why they went to the more complicated
and costly hydraulic clutches to begin with.

It doesn't matter what the report says about anything it bogus. If one part is inaccurate the whole study is bogus, even relative differences. The test parameters are not consistent and it is not a professional study. Being the only dyno information contributed does not make it right.

And finally, just last year you said:

"I am only guessing it increases HP on and X5."

Certainly there was a time that I did not know how much horsepower would be available. It was not until I spoke with techs about my particular application, did some research and spoke with some of guys in the BMW club that I am in that I felt comfortable posting and estimated range.

So, seems like it's OK for you to question what's going on, but when
I do it and actually provide a relevant test setup, you have a problem
with that. And it was the *only* well documented test setup that anyone
has posted.
Well documented doesn't mean squat. It's a redneck engineering cobbled together, damned if I know but I'm a guessn' somebody out there is gonna claim it is the gospel. yuk yuk

And again, I note that while calling for censorship and calling
me a troll, you're the one that continues to call me stupid, ignorant,
etc. I've refrained from doing that to you or anyone else.