I recently saw Johnemms reply to the Polo rad bracketing post where he suggests using Evans waterless coolant. I had personally never heard of it before but with a boiling point of 180c and a freezing point of -40c, no corrosive effect, everlasting and at reasonable cost why aren't all car makers, including ourselves using it. I cannot see a downside has anyone got any opinions on this product before I purchase some.?

( Could someone add a linky thing to their website for me please as it won't work for me)

/Evans Waterless Coolant

I did think about this and didn't do it. The only reasons against I could think about where

Cost
Can't fill with water if you have a leak/need to empty the system etc

It just seemed to be complicating a simple water/anti-freeze mixture.


Some of these waterless coolants are flammable (not the Evans one as far as I'm aware).

[Edited on 25/3/16 by jeffw]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeffw
/Evans Waterless Coolant

I did think about this and didn't do it. The only reasons against I could think about where

Cost
Can't fill with water if you have a leak/need to empty the system etc

It just seemed to be complicating a simple water/anti-freeze mixture.


Some of these waterless coolants are flammable (not the Evans one as far as I'm aware).

[Edited on 25/3/16 by jeffw]

---

It's not as efficient for heat transfer, the car may run a little hotter which costs HP and you get no clear warning if the temperatures start going through the roof apart from a gauge.

It's expensive as well, I,m staying with water.

Looking into this some more this research is very interesting Evans test. This company appears to be a competitor but the findings are still enough to put me off.



SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Conversion costs of $259 if you do it yourself, or over $400 if you pay a shop to do it.

97%+ removal of all previous coolant is mandatory in order to prevent corrosion.

Inhibitor deposition occurs on aluminum surfaces, which could cause issues in some radiators.

Engines run 115-140oF hotter (at the cylinder heads) with Evans products.

Stabilized coolant temps are increased by 31-48oF, versus straight water with No-Rosion.

Reprogramming ECU fan temp settings is mandatory to prevent the fan from running continuously.

Specific heat capacity of Evans waterless products ranges from 0.64 to 0.68, or about half that of water.

Engine octane requirement is increased by 5-7 numbers.

Computerized ignition must retard engine timing by 8-10o to prevent trace knock.

Engine horsepower is reduced by 4-5%.

Accelerated recession of non-hardened valve seats in older engines is possible, due to brinelling.

Viscosity is 3-4 times higher than what OEM water pumps are rated to accommodate.

Coolant flow rate through radiator tubes is reduced by 20-25% due to the higher viscosity.

Race tracks prohibit Evans products because they are flammable and slippery when spilled.

It's hard to beat glycol/water mix... Cheap and widely available, and engines are designed to use it.

There are many commercial alternatives (search for Heat Transfer Fluids) but the better ones are not cheap.

Specific heat capacity of the alternatives is not be great, fluid loss, cost, different thermal properties and physical properties would put me off; the pump in an engine is specified for water, with the alternatives it would need probably need a higher flow rate. Likely out come is a hotter running engine, radiator not sized correctly etc etc...

Why re-invent the wheel?

Might consider it for specific applications (historic vehicle preservation, where long term storage and corrosion may be the main issue).

Dan

Evens coolants are concentrated glycol mixes -- !!!!!! Evans make coolants based on ethylene and propylene glycol with concentrations between 70 and 100 perecent.
The boiling point of either glycols is higher than water BUT it is not as good a heat transfer fluid so engine internal hot spots will not be as efficiently cooled.
Although generally similar of the two tyoes of glycols the ethylene glycol is the most suitable for use in engines.


Back in the run up to WW2 cooling the new high performance aero engines was causing Rolls Royce major problems. On the Merlin they had major cooling problems that were partly solved by switching to using 100% glycol. Although it solved the coolant boiling issues glycol alone wasn't the complete answe and the Merlin's power and engine life limmited by overheating problems, Just before the Battle of Britain the power Migher merlin XII was introduced designed to run on 100 octane fuel it was cooled with a 70-30 water glycol mix.
Modern engines are designed to use 50 percent antifreeze mixture, this concentration was chosen because it gives the best combination of boiling point heat transfer, viscosity, flamibility and freeze protection.



[Edited on 25/3/16 by britishtrident]

quote:

---

Originally posted by britishtrident

Back in the run up to WW2 cooling the new high performance aero engines was causing Rolls Royce major problems. On the Merlin they had major cooling problems that were partly solved by switching to using 100% glycol. Although it solved the coolant boiling issues glycol alone wasn't the complete answe and the Merlin's power and engine life limmited by overheating problems, Just before the Battle of Britain the power Migher merlin XII was introduced designed to run on 100 octane fuel it was cooled with a 70-30 water glycol mix.
[Edited on 25/3/16 by britishtrident]

---

Did some searching and came up with from Wikipedia on the Hyper Engine program :-

"Liquid cooling systems at that time used plain water, which limited operating temperatures to about 180 °F (82 °C). The engineers proposed using ethylene glycol, which would allow temperatures up to 280 °F. At first they proposed using 100% glycol, but there was little improvement due to the lower specific heat of the glycol (about 2/3 that of water). They eventually determined that a 50/50 mixture (by volume) of water and glycol provided optimal heat removal.[6]"

The reference [6] is "Balzer, Gerald H. (2008). American Secret Pusher Fighters of World War II."

The higher temperature allows faster heat removal but the lower specific heat counters this. Interesting that "modern" motor cars use 50/50 but this was determined in 1930's

Nothing new under the sun.

Cheers!

My chum, Peter Burgess, who has been building Championship winning engines for 30 years will not give a warranty if waterless coolants are used.

was going to use this too in the landy, but was soon put off with the over all cost of doing it and the risk to overheated valves on older engines

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeffw

Race tracks prohibit Evans products because they are flammable and slippery when spilled.

---

I did like the sound of 'no system pressure or pipe expansion' - therefore 'no leaks' - even at full hot you can take the expansion bottle cap off with no hospitalization - also it lasts forever - seemed a good idea for a limited use car being kept and stored a lot of the time

However I sorn & garage my car over winter - so i'm tempted to forget about antifreeze & just use distilled water with a dose of water wetter with anti corrosion I believe this should do a very good job of cooling..

The waterless offers seems to offer benefits for long storage - limited use..
The water wetter offers better performance for track and blatting ...

Ahh well ...

Modern engines ae designed to use 50 perecent ethylene glycol coolanture not 100 percent glycol and not 100 percent water.
The 50 perecent figure is chosen not because of the frost protection properties. A 50 percent solution boils at 107.3 c at atmospheric prssuren when the system is fully pressurised boiling will be in the 120 to 130 c range

The two disadavantages to using strong concentrations of glycol are specific heat capacity and viscosity. The reduction in specific heat capcity by mass is partially offset by increased density and as result the specific heat capacity by volume is roughly 0.88 that of water but this again to an extent offset by the increase in boiling point and the wetting characteristics of the mixed coolant.

Excess Glycol content increases the viscosity of the coolant at low temperatures and this can be a problem, particularly for engines with plastic water pump impellers as it can over load the water pump when cold and can cause the impeller to spin on the shaft.



[Edited on 25/3/16 by britishtrident]

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnemms
I did like the sound of 'no system pressure or pipe expansion' - therefore 'no leaks' - even at full hot you can take the expansion bottle cap off with no hospitalization - also it lasts forever - seemed a good idea for a limited use car being kept and stored a lot of the time

However I sorn & garage my car over winter - so i'm tempted to forget about antifreeze & just use distilled water with a dose of water wetter with anti corrosion I believe this should do a very good job of cooling..

The waterless offers seems to offer benefits for long storage - limited use..
The water wetter offers better performance for track and blatting ...

Ahh well ...

---

I sat through a very long video lecture on cooling systems last year from it ISTR f the percentage of antifreeze concentrate is below about 15 percent the anti-corosion inhibitors rapidly become ineffective.

I'll give Evans waterless coolant a miss then.

The disadvantages of Evans far outweigh the minimal advantages IMO. It's not something I would ever consider using after a friends rally car melted a piston the very first event after he switched to Evans.

Anti-freeze contains the necessary additives and most auto manufacturers have pretty specific requirements on the types of coolant you can use.

So, it’s a good idea to put some of the recommended coolant into the system, however, if done at a lower ratio, the cooling capabilities of the car will improve.

If you live in a warm climate, it’s not a bad idea to drop the coolant: water ratio down to 25 or so percent to gain cooling capacity without losing the anti-corrosion and lubrication properties..

(although it will be necessary to change the coolant more often if you do this because anti-freeze degrades over time).

In conclusion, only use as much anti-freeze as is necessary for your climate and operating conditions, and coolant “wetting” additives are generally a good thing to use.

The anti-corrosion additives in OAT coolant work a bit differently from those in older coolants, essentially they form a coating on the engine internals, older style coolants depended on buffering the corrosive properties of the coolant mixture. Because of this the anti-corrosive properties of OAT coolant don't fall off with time.
Coolant changes aren't required unless coolant becomes contaminated all that is required is keep the concentration sufficiently high.

a

quote:

---

Originally posted by MikeRJ
The disadvantages of Evans far outweigh the minimal advantages IMO. It's not something I would ever consider using after a friends rally car melted a piston the very first event after he switched to Evans.

---

Being a bit geeky I did some research on modern heat transfer fluids that may be suitable for car cooling. A bit of lateral thinking came up with supercomputer cooling where they use a cool (pun you laugh here) liquid called fluorinert. It has the same viscosity as water but twice the specific heat so it pumps round just as easily but cools twice as much.
It is made by replacing the hydrogen in hydrocarbons with fluorene so is imissible with water and may be a bit oily if spilled but hey you can't have everything.

It usefall for other stuff as well so I wouldn't mind getting my hands on some


Cheers!

If it was more efficient manufacturers would be using it....

Or cheap?

Manufactures for example could use stainless steel hose clips instead of mild steel so they dont rust seize and either strip or sheer off when the time comes to undo them

Also environmental protectionfactors, normal anti-freeze will eventually change over to Propylene Glycol for the same reason.