MTBeni

96capricemgr has posted a great deal at ls1tech about this. Apparently, the elect pumps are rated with no resistance (actually moving coolant through the block) whereas the stock type unit is. My stock pump (62k miles) cant keep my car temp low at idle. I can actually watch it creep up the temp gauge as Im sitting at a light. I have flushed the system about a year ago and also put in a 180 stat. a yeay ago it seemed to work fine. Think my pump is going out? BTW, I lost a little coolant over the past couple months, butt the weep hole is bone dry and I see no leaks. Any suggestions. Sorry to hijack

DougsZ28Camaro

Alright sounds like i'll go after either the meziere or the CSR! Thanks for the help guys!

96capricemgr

Those of you who believe the electrics can move more water at peak and use less power need a elementary lesson in science. That or to do the world a huge favor and apply all your knowledge and build a perpetual motion machine to solve all our energy problems.

They do move more at idle and are rated free flow if you bother to read the descriptions. According to SAE the stock mechanical pump moves 65gpm or there abouts at 6000rpms, if you think you have better info than them POST IT.

The reason I get in so many arguments on these baods is I am among the minority that bothers to understand the science of things.

BTC

Aren't there dyno results documenting up to a 10 horsepower gain at the wheels? Doesn't the fact it's powered by the cars electrical system eliminate some of the mechanical drag on the engine?

96capricemgr

Yes it frees up power but does so by moving less water.
You seem to not understand that the electrical system is powered by the engine so you can not use it to do free work.

I am not saying electrics are bad just that most of you fail to understand anything surrounding them.

BTC

I understand that the electrical system is being powered by the engine, but isn't the alternator doing the same amount of work whether its amperage is being utilized or not? It's not like you're creating energy, just taking advantage of the potential energy that's already there. If that's true it wouldn't necessarily have to move less water to free up horsepower. Maybe I'm wrong. I haven't taken any type of science class in 20 years.

96capricemgr

Yes you are wrong.
By changing rotation to electricity and then back to rotation again you lose some energy, no way around that whatsoever, VERY elementary science.

The more amperage you demand of the alternator it DOES place more load on the belt BUT 140amps which is the rated peak output of the stock alternator is only about 2.5hp at 13.5 volts so it can not place signifigant load on the belt. At the same time though it is not capable of powering anything capable of much output HP wise.

Thread on the subject. page 4 in particular has some good info.

Take the time to reason through things and understand the science and you will understand my frustration with the missinformation on this subject.

BTC

It sounds like you're saying it's harder to turn the alternator a given rpm when it's under load than when it isn't under load? Based on my rudimentary understanding of an alternator, that doesn't make sense to me. What causes that? I was a physics major for a while, but like I said I haven't studied any science in over 20 years.