Waterless coolant

[PuntoHowTo]

waterless coolant has anyone used this?

it's apparently good down to -40C and +180C preventing engine freezing and apparently overheating problems, stops engine corrosion completely and lasts the life of the engine.

To good to be true? well its not cheap about £65 for the coolant and £33 for the special flush you have to use to get rid of all traces of water.

would be interesting to try out maybe if it was a little cheaper

 

[Freebo]

I'm sure there was a thread not so long back about this. Cant remember what the outcome was.

 

[Wist]

This may be a bit naïve, but if it did all that, wouldn't manufacturers put it in to start with?

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

I'm sure there was a thread not so long back about this. Cant remember what the outcome was.

Was in classic panda section Dragon Man was talking about it. Conclusion is its pointless as you should still change it every few years.

One top of this, spring a small leak and it suddenly becomes one very expensive leak

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

This may be a bit naïve, but if it did all that, wouldn't manufacturers put it in to start with?

No, not when they can use existing stuff and save £50 a car.

 

[PuntoHowTo]

This may be a bit naïve, but if it did all that, wouldn't manufacturers put it in to start with?

all well and good till someone tops their new car up from the kitchen tap, in truth its more specialist for motor sport and car enthusiasts apparently Mosler use it in all their motor sports cars which is a pretty good advert

 

[homeward]

I'm sure there was a thread not so long back about this. Cant remember what the outcome was.

See this post, and following.... IIRC, there weren't any real conclusions....

 

[homeward]

Was in classic panda section Dragon Man was talking about it.

Beat me to it...!

 

[PuntoHowTo]

Conclusion is its pointless as you should still change it every few years.

from what I understand it is a life time product, you can reuse and filter the flush which is hydrophilic so removes any water that gets back into the system, and refill with the filtered coolant so there really is no need to change it.

it is also classified as non-toxic unlike most antifreeze which is pretty dangerous

 

[SeanW]

I think I saw something similar on Passion Ford. One chap didn't notice any real differences other than a slightly cooler engine temperature.

Also, they system didn't pressurise as much...no water to expand.

General consesus appeared to be "if it was cheaper, might be worth a shot..."

Interestingly, my handbook says that so long as the Ford anti-freeze/coolant is used, it never needs changing...

 

[custard]

This may be a bit naïve, but if it did all that, wouldn't manufacturers put it in to start with?

put something in that cuts down on servicing and extends the life of the car?
I think you are naive to a manufacturers end game

 

[Adrian Bravo]

Just this week I watch a video on youtube. Jay Leno did a little promo on it. Check out Jay's other videos too, he seems like a really good guy.



Id like to try it but clearing out the sytem 100% of any water cant be easy or at least id never be conviced i got all the water out . If I rebuilt a car I would try it.

 

[Ziggy122]

they used it on wheeler dealers

it removes pressure form the cooling system too!
So there isn't as much of risk of springing a leak due to a weak seal and pressure build up

ziggy

 

[Honeymonster]

It's junk, pretty much just neat antifreeze. It will make your engine run hotter because it's not as efficient as water, here's the data sheet to prove it...

http://contrails.free.fr/temp/NPG+_MSDS.PDF

I guess none of you read Dragon Mans thread.

 

[PuntoHowTo]

. It will make your engine run hotter because it's not as efficient as water, here's the data sheet to prove it...

http://contrails.free.fr/temp/NPG+_MSDS.PDF

How does that data sheet prove that it will make your engine run hotter? In truth yes it will run hotter in some cases by as much as 2 degrees celcius !!!! I don't think you car will explode?

I think rather than posting a data sheet and making derogatory claims some further research and appreciation of the science involve wouldn't have gone amiss.?

The only down side I can see is how unbelievably expensive it is, for what it is.

 

[Honeymonster]

Research provided a general conscensous that the stuff your manufacturer recomends (water and glycol) is better in a road car.

http://www.jcna.com/library/tech/tech0011.html

The fact it doesn't boil might be great but there's certainly no need for it in a standard Punto. Water cools better at lower temperatures and by more than a few degrees, fact.

 

[PuntoHowTo]

Summary of Results. Water does not cool best. But water with a surfactant is an excellent coolant. Pure ethylene glycol gives the best boilover protection, but should never be used in non aqueous solutions because it's inflammable. Given that most drivers are concerned with freeze protection as well as cooling, a 50/50 mix, plus a surfactant is the best choice.

As this doesn't cover waterless option its not exactly a fair piece of research to post?
being a denser liquid, with lower surface tension and higher boiling point would in effect make a non water coolant a better option than water however the author acknowledges that but also states that using using a water surfactant mix is better for flammability reasons than using any single glycol as a coolant??

 

[Honeymonster]

Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Water... (Mostly due to it being hydroscopic I expect)
And <2% of some anti corrosion product.
So unless that 2% is magic beans I think the article is very relevant however this might be more appropriate:

http://www.norosion.com/evanstest.htm

Of course it has been done by another manufacturer so who can guarantee it's accuracy but it certainly Seems legit to me.
I've read lots of good and bad about it, the marketing was handled by another company, not unusual but apparently it's hard to get any technical and sometime definitive answers from them. A lot of the well known people using it will also no doubt not be paying for it, or getting paid for it. Pretty common too, how many race drivers actually drink Monster...
Not to say it's completely useless/junk maybe that was a little harsh, however what you gain in it's resistance to boiling at hot spots is also lost in efficiency to remove heat at the radiator, not a 'cool' thing at all. I think overall its performance would be very cooling system dependant. This especially true if a car has a radiator sized on the barely adequate side (like a Cento ), it would almost certainly cause issues.
I would say ultimately your cooling system will run best on what it's designed to run on. Maybe if it's designed to run on Evans you would see a decent improvement, otherwise I'd leave well alone. I notice a few of the Aeroplane manufacturers specified it in some of their new engines for warranty. I also read chaps who tried to run it with their older engines had worrying temperature issues and soon went back to the standard mix.

Also lets not get on to the price now we actually know what 98% of the ingredients are...

For practical reasons not being able to top up for loses with water would be a pain, also getting burnt by it would be like comparing water to jam (neither pleasant but give me water every time).

I'm not convinced myself and will be staying well clear, at least until we have systems designed specifically for a relatively pure/concentrated Glycol product to be used from the factory.

 

[PuntoHowTo]

Ethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol
Water... (Mostly due to it being hydroscopic I expect)
And <2% of some anti corrosion product.
So unless that 2% is magic beans I think the article is very relevant however this might be more appropriate:

http://www.norosion.com/evanstest.htm

Of course it has been done by another manufacturer so who can guarantee it's accuracy but it certainly Seems legit to me.

having had a look though I can't see any part of that 'research' to be objective every test is used to draw a direct comparison to their own product at one point they state

(No-Rosion does not alter the specific heat capacity of water.)

which is clever wording as waterless coolant doesn't alter the heat capacity of water the however anything other than water, i,e a mix of water and coolant will have a different heat carrying capacity.

they've used multiple vehicles and have been very quick to point out the pit falls when one vehicles performance is altered but obviously ignoring when competitions product out performs their own. then they use there most extreme findings to form their final conclusions.

I'm not defending it having seen the ingredients I'm not sure how they can justify the price or how it can be patented? however I can't rubbish it either, the main point being quoted time and time again is the heat carrying capacity is lower than water however thats based on BTU which is based of not volume of water (or coolant) but weight so 1Lb of water will carry more heat than waterless coolant but, weight for weigh you will get more as in a heavier quantity and thus a higher ability to carry heat than it given credit

Its swings and round abouts, its certainly not snake oil but you can't objectively dismiss it without having tested it, "I read on the internet" doesn't mean anything as with hundreds of millions of cars in the world there will always be some one with a story which contradicts the norm

 

[Honeymonster]

Its swings and round abouts, its certainly not snake oil but you can't objectively dismiss it without having tested it, "I read on the internet" doesn't mean anything as with hundreds of millions of cars in the world there will always be some one with a story which contradicts the norm

Indeed but since water/glycol does a pretty decent job and is easy to replace every few oil changes this doesn't seem worth considering, that is until firstly the price is reduced to a reasonable amount, and secondly some independent tests or car manufacturer recommendations show with out a shadow of a doubt it's worth while.

There doesn't seem to be enough convincing evidence from either party (at least not that I've seen) and until there is I personally believe better the devil you know...