ive never had a water pump fail before 100,000 miles...or about 10 years for the average driver. $15 every 10 years is perfectly reasonable.
You're kind of missing the point I was trying to make... it isn't whether you personally have or haven't had a water pump fail before 100,000 mi (and you're blessed that you haven't... but many others have), it's the fact that there's the potential that the water pump will live a bit longer without a heavy fan and fan clutch attached to it.
the serpentine belt turns the water pump whether there is a fan there or not. it doesnt know or care if theres a mechanical fan attached to it. and running an e-fan rather than an m-fan only moves any "wear" the belt would see from the water pump pulley to the alternator pulley.
I disagree... there are no free lunches in this world, and even when declutched a mechanical fan still spins (they never fully declutch), and it takes energy to make the fan spin - both in a steady state, and to accelerate and deaccelerate it. That energy comes from the engine's crank pulley, and the energy is transfered through the serp belt to the fan. Remove the fan from the water pump and the serp belt then won't see the additional load of the fan on it, and you'll save some wear and tear on the serp belt.
my escorts both have e-fans. when they kick on you can hear them running over the roar of the surrounding traffic.
Rangers aren't Escorts, and on the boards Ranger owners have repeatedly reported that although they can faintly hear their e-fans running with their vehicles stopped, out on the road they can't hear them at all. This has been my own personal experience as well.
even while towing, my mechanical fan is quieter than a sufficiently sized e-fan.
Ranger mechanical fans are notoriously noisy, and you're the only one that I've ever heard make the claim that their Ranger's mechanical fan was quieter than their electric fan... which brand and size of e-fan did you have on your Ranger? And why did you take it off and put your mechanical fan back on?
you dont get better mileage from an e-fan either. look into the law of conservation of energy if you dont believe me.
Sorry, I'm not all that smart that I'm going to be looking into the law of conservation energy, but my common sense tells me that if my mechanical fan is always running and my e-fan is not, then it's going to take more engine energy to run my mechanical fan than it will my e-fan. The saving of engine energy equals better gas mileage, and my before e-fan and after e-fan gas mileage readings confirm that in the real world I am in fact getting better mileage... it's not a huge jump, but in today's day and age I'll take anything I can get. In addition to my own personal findings, other Ranger e-fan users have posted on the forums that they too are getting better gas mileage after converting to an e-fan.
when mechanical fans fail, 90% of the time they fail in such a way that they are locked in the full on position. this will not cause perminent damage/overheating/stranding the driver as will a failing e-fan:
The vast majority of vehicles sold in the last ten years or so have come equipped with electric fans, and seeing as the roadsides aren't littered with vehicles that have had their e-fans fail, perhaps e-fan failure isn't quite the issue that you think it is. And believe me, a mechanical fan failing and going through your radiator is going strand you every bit as much as an e-fan failure will.
Apologies for the dead horse beating and the length of this post.