Waterless coolant Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Australian RR Forums » General Discussion » Waterless coolant « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

richard george yeaman
Grand Master
Username: richyrich

Post Number: 1074
Registered: 4-2012
Posted on Sunday, 28 April, 2019 - 20:33:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Lately I have been thinking about this subject, what do we know about this alternative, are any of you using it in your classics.


Richard.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ross kowalski
Grand Master
Username: cdfpw

Post Number: 1038
Registered: 11-2015
Posted on Sunday, 28 April, 2019 - 23:57:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Richard,

I am not and I have a bunch of old cars.

I came to the conclusion that if you run your car (s) use water coolant. If they spend a good piece of their time sitting or have a questionable ability to hold pressure, waterless is a good choice.

I also am pretty much using anticavitation coolant on anything with a liner, some kind of OAT for anything with AL and FE and VB for anything that is Nitrogen cooled. (mostly for the driver)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert J. Sprauer
Grand Master
Username: wraithman

Post Number: 358
Registered: 11-2017
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 00:27:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I have investigated this product and came to the conclusion based on my research and company info. Every drop of antifreeze has to be removed and flushed. The product is expensive. Suppose you pop a hose or connection on a trip..what do you do? ..can't fill with water or anti.
Regular coolant changes are healthy because it also drains out debris. Using a anti corrosive product is your best bet. Just my .02
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Alan Dibley
Prolific User
Username: alsdibley

Post Number: 194
Registered: 10-2009
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 03:12:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Ross wrote " some kind of OAT for anything with AL and FE and VB for anything that is Nitrogen cooled. (mostly for the driver)."

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought IAT is intended for old-style engines??? I remembered it because I comes before O in the alphabet.

Alan D.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ross kowalski
Grand Master
Username: cdfpw

Post Number: 1042
Registered: 11-2015
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 07:40:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Alan,

My mistake I meant IAT not OAT, too many acronyms too early in the morning. BTW that's green (IAT) vs Orange (OAT)

The Shadow cooling system is way over done so if waterless coolant has anywhere's near the specific heat of water and coolant and your cooling system is anywhere near operating correctly, it should be fine.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Larry Kavanagh
Grand Master
Username: shadow_11

Post Number: 432
Registered: 5-2016
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 09:38:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I had been toying with the idea of using waterless/pressureless coolant in my Silver Shadow 11 on the basis that it would last indefinitely and would inhibit corrosion given that it contained no water and had a much higher boiling point. I actually purchased a supply of the waterless coolant and pre-treatment formula but it's still sitting on the shelf. The reason I decided against using in in the Silver Shadow 11 has nothing to do with my faith in the product it's simply that it's main quality of having a higher boiling point than traditional anti-freeze/water mixtures would mean that the engine could get hotter without any obvious visual signs (the temperature gauge might rise but that could go unnoticed) so there would be no steam blowing and overheating damage could happen without the driver being aware. At least with a water/anti-freeze mix the symptoms of overheating would be obvious when the pressure causes stream to evaporate and the driver would immediately stop and investigate but with waterless "pressureless" coolant the boiling point would be so much higher that an overheating problem caused by something like a failing water pump or head gasket might go undetected for longer and the engine could be inadvertently damaged as a result. My thinking is that the while the characteristics of being waterless and pressureless are theoretically beneficial properties to have in a coolant the reality is that where an engine malfunction occurs and engine temperature rises as a result the driver will not become as immediately aware because there will be no visible steam. I know that there's an engine overheat buzzer but I think that by the time that emits a warning the damage may have already been done or the buzzer might have a fault. I still plan to use this waterless coolant in a couple of other ordinary cars e.g., a Triumph Spitfire and a Triumph Herald and maybe I'll use it in my compact tractor too but not in the Silver Shadow which has an aluminium head. Having said that I've been assured by the manufacturer that their waterless coolant is suitable for the Silver Shadow and it probably is but I have a slight reservation for the one simple reason as stated above.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert J. Sprauer
Grand Master
Username: wraithman

Post Number: 359
Registered: 11-2017
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 09:55:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I agree Larry about the inhibitor qualities and did not mention the higher temp factor which would bother me and subject the car to a possible problem
that could go unnoticed after damage has occurred.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

richard george yeaman
Grand Master
Username: richyrich

Post Number: 1075
Registered: 4-2012
Posted on Monday, 29 April, 2019 - 19:24:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Larry mentioned in his post above the word (pressureless) which could be more significant than higher (boiling) point what do you think?


Richard
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Larry Kavanagh
Grand Master
Username: shadow_11

Post Number: 434
Registered: 5-2016
Posted on Tuesday, 30 April, 2019 - 05:53:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

I think that the boiling point and pressure are related. Water will boil at 100c but in a sealed pressurised system it will not evaporate until it reaches a much higher temperature (something like 125c, I can't remember the precise figures, it varies depending on the pressure rating of the radiator cap) and then it will turn to steam. Waterless coolant has a higher boiling point than water so in a sealed pressurised system it will tolerate a much higher pressure. So in my opinion an engine with waterless coolant could reach a much higher temperature before it would become obvious that the system was overheating. The advantage with waterless coolant is that it will tolerate higher temperatures and may not evaporate but the disadvantage is that the engine could reach temperatures well above that at which conventional coolant or water would turn to steam so the driver might not be aware that the engine was running excessively hot. In their advertising material Evans show a radiator cap being easily removed from hot engine after a car has been raced and there is no pressure forcing their coolant to gush out whereas with conventional coolant the person removing the rad cap would be likely to get scalded. In both cases the engine would be running at the same temperature but with waterless coolant the steam valve might not open as early to warn the driver of an impending boil over. That's just my theory, I'm no engineer and I could be completely wrong.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

ross kowalski
Grand Master
Username: cdfpw

Post Number: 1046
Registered: 11-2015
Posted on Tuesday, 30 April, 2019 - 09:13:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

Larry,

One of the bad effects of waterless coolant is that it does not have the same specific heat as water so your engine runs hotter with waterless coolant.
I can't say that does much for me either.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert J. Sprauer
Grand Master
Username: wraithman

Post Number: 362
Registered: 11-2017
Posted on Tuesday, 30 April, 2019 - 09:26:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

To date water has been the ideal choice for heat transfer with internal combustion engines.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Brian Crump
Prolific User
Username: brian_crump

Post Number: 180
Registered: 2-2007
Posted on Friday, 03 May, 2019 - 07:10:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IP

You may like to go to https://rroc.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Technical:Phantom_II
Then go to Miscellaneous - Phantom II cylinder head corrosion for a most informative discussion on the merits of water as a coolant.
Regards,
Brian

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: