Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum

Go Back   Pajero 4WD Club of Victoria Public Forum > General Information > General Info

General Info Pros and cons of different makes and models (incl. international)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13-01-19
old Jack's Avatar
old Jack old Jack is online now
Valued Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 6,379

I have been thinking of a way to do further testing in real life conditions but my problem is the wiring length between the wind vane and the digital display unit of my anemometer is only about 600mm long and I need about 3 metres!

I had another thought on what bench test I could carry out to see the effects of insect screens and their placement in regard to restricting airflow. I have the factory grille insert out of the lower section of the front bumper cover that was left over from when I fitted the Smartbar. So I set up the leaf blower and the anemometer 300mm from each other, I then measured the airflow with no restriction, then again with the factory grille in between, then with the factory grille with fly wire attached on the rear side of the grille and finally the fly wire attached across the front of the factory grille. The results below really surprised me but also reinforced what I believed was happening.

Test 1. No restriction between the leaf blower and the anemometer, 60kph, 100% airflow.
Test 2. The factory grille between the leaf blower and the anemometer, 56kph, 97% airflow.
Test 3. The factory grille, with fly wire attached to the rear side of the grille, and located in the same position between the leaf blower and the anemometer, 46kph, 77% airflow.
Test 4. The factory grille, with fly wire attached to the front side of the grille,and located in the same position between the leaf blower and the anemometer, 32kph, 53% airflow.

This is a closer test to real life than the first test I did the other day and the results indicate that the loss in airflow are much more than I indicated in the first test.

So based on these test having a fly wire bug screen fitted externally to the grille will reduce your airflow by 47% whereas the same fly wire fitted to the rear of the grille you only reduce your airflow by 23%.

Fitting shade cloth will surely be much worse even if it is the 50% shade grade.

2011 PB Base White Auto, Smartbar, Cooper STMaxx LT235/85R-16,TPMS, HR TB, 3 x Bushskinz, front +40mm Dobinson , rear +50mm EHDVR Lovells, Dobinson MT struts and shockers, Peddars 5899 cone springs, Windcheater rack, GME UHF, Custom alloy drawer system inc. 30lt Engel & 2 x 30 AH LiFePo batteries + elec controls, Tailgate hi-lift/long struts, Nightbreaker +130LB & Phillips +100 HB, Lightforce 20" single row driving beam LED lightbar, Scanguage II.
MM4x4 Auto Mate, Serial No 1 .
Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-19
erad erad is offline
Valued Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Cooma NSW
Posts: 2,440

Although not 100% scientific testing, your tests certainly are better than anything I have seen so far. Well done. I guess that 23% seems about what I would expect because flywire has a fairly large blockage ratio, and having the bars of the grille to catch incoming air and help to ram it through, I would expect better airflow than with the wire in front of the grille. By having the wire directly behind the grille, you have probably double the area of the radiator core, so overall, the net loss of airflow will be minimal, certainly compared to having the cores of the A/C and radiator blocked up by locusts etc. I would never use shadecloth because the blockage ratio is fr too high. The quoted figures for shadecloth are talking about sunlight transmission, not airflows.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +10. The time now is 11:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.