Hello all,

I'm about ready to do a thermostat/water pump/radiator hose replacement in my 2002 XK8 with 91k. I was just reading and watching some youtube.com stuff on waterless coolants and was wondering if anyone has tried them in their XK8/R yet? They seem like a great idea, especially since they are designed to keep corrosion to a minimum and you never have to replace the fluid again. I did a quick search on this forum and didn't find much. Does anyone have any experience with these.

Thanks!

 

Ed,

I'll fightthem off so you have a chance to get your Flame Suit on.

This one could get some strong reaction from both sides of the argument.

Graham

 

like to see the video when he starts it up...

 

OOooooo- can I watch?

The waterless coolants have been debated on other car forums since the day they came out. Evans Home » Engine Cooling Systems seems to be the most commonly mentioned manufacturer and their claims certainly do sound convincing- as long as a person doesn't actually think too hard or long about them.

Once again, some enterprising soul has come out with a great solution to problems that don't exist.

 

I know one that drives with it in a XKR, and I can see the advantages, not just for tuned cars, I also like to 0 pressure in the system.

I would have done it myself, but I have my reservations, as the fluid is a little thicker which reduces flow. This as such shouldn’t be a problem as you can run hotter it seems, so maybe not an issue. Another thing is that the coolant circuit also needs to cool the transmission oil, so you might need to get separate oil cooling there, or it might not be needed, I don’t know.

You would also need to separate the intercooler circuit (on R cars of course), as there you want actually a coolant that transfers heat faster, so probably better to keep the 50/50 mix.

I still have interest, but it is too much work to do, so will probably never do it.

 

Edd China used it in wheeler dealers on a Triumph TR6.

He said it doesn't freeze till -40c and doesn't boil till 140c (instead of the 100c for water based products), so the stuff is suitable for both the desert and the Arctic.

Then with the engine warmed up he removed the radiator cap, with his bare hands, while explaining you couldn't do that with a water based coolant without scalding yourself.
As already mentioned, he also stated it doesn't need changing.
And of course, no water content means no corrosion.

It was on tv just last week, he seemed quite enthusiastic about it.

 

I just watched that episode last week and was really impressed. Jay Leno's garage featured a segment on it too. Jay is using it in his Dusenbergs now I guess. That's what got me interested.

 

Did that TR6 have aluminium heads ED C?

I seem to remember him saying that the TR6 was more susceptable to excessive heat damage than many engines, so it would make sense if it had aluminium heads.
The old Triumph Stag's had the same problem.

It's no good having a higher boiling point if it doesn't help the engine run cooler, to reduce heat build up in the first place.

So i would assume it does (reduce heat).

I guess that would tie in with his demonstration of removing the rad cap bare handed on a warmed up engine.

I should have taped that episode for more accurate info. . .tut.

I'm going to have to flush and refill my engine when it's fixed, and still don't know what was in it, or what to replace it with.

 

Let's review-

-Do the stock engines have a corrosion problem that somehow affects the longevity of the engine or components or theri operation (No)

-Is there some durability problem with running a pressurized system (No)

-Would a modification be required to PREVENT the system from pressurizing and could this interfere with other functions? (Yes)

-Does a conventional coolant/water mix pressurized to the factory setting provide adequate protection from freezing and boil over between -55*C and +138*C (Yes)

-Is there disadvantage to overriding the factory settings and attempting to run the engine at a hotter temp (Big yes)


I'm trying to understand what problem(s) this stuff fixes.

 

Like most things, the right answer depends on the application. I see a place for these except for the never change it part, that smells like the sealed for life transmission and other bunk marketing ploys.

Most of these are more or less 100% propylene glycol, give or take a few percent of proprietary additives and red die #5.

Compared to water, PG has a higher viscosity so it's harder to pump, especially at colder temperatures. Bear in mind the plot is log scale:
https://dow-answer.custhelp.com/app/...7472/related/1

PG also has a lower heat capacity than water, almost 25% lower for 100% PG vs 50% mix with water:
https://dow-answer.custhelp.com/app/...VSeWNhbA%3D%3D

PG also wets the surface better than water so heat transfer is higher.

So, PG takes on heat faster but holds less and is harder to pump.

Like avos said, in an application where the fluid is free to move and exchanges quickly because of big pumps and wide hoses, it has advantages.

Is a system like the intercooler where the flow is slow because of the little pump and relatively small tubes, then heat capacity will be more important than heat transfer.

 

I'm not in a position to make an argument for, or against waterless coolants in detail, as i just don't have the knowledge of engine systems to do so.

As such i'm simply repeating what i saw on wheeler dealers, and like ED C, i was impressed.

If it causes the engine to run so cool as to prevent it from warming up to operating temperatures required to (perhaps) trigger failsafe systems or correct operation of functions/components, then it could be unsuitable, and as for it's suitability for superchargers and/or gearboxes, i have no idea, but since excessive heat is the enemy of all components, if it IS suitable, it may extend the service life of some of them.

I'll leave any detailed analysis of suitability for these cars to those more qualified to comment.

 

The coolant does not set the running temperature of the engine- the thermostat does. If a 'better' fluid ever was invented- the thermostat would simply do it's job and regulate things back to square one. Nothing gained.

It's actually pretty difficult to find a better fluid for heat transfer than pure water- just a shame that water has other drawbacks that limit it's suitability in a conventional engine. That's where standard coolants like Dexcool or Prestone step in to fill the gap.

 

I thought that if the coolant resisted heating better, then it would take a little longer to warm up the engine, but the engine would run at a lower average temperature when warmed and take longer to reach a temperature that would cause warping of the aluminium, and/or the failure of items like hoses.

In that event a thermostat with a lower opening temperature could be used so that it opened earlier.

I read (i think in the JTIS) that our low volume pressurized systems allow the engine to warm up in just 4 minutes.

Apparently lower running temperature is not the case, and the waterless stuff attains a similar temperature to water.

It's main theoretical advantages are that it doesn't need to be changed, is not toxic, freeze/boil range is -40c to 180c (not the 140c i mistakenly said earlier), and the waterless factor reducing corrosion.

What i didn't know, was that systems are pressuized in order to raise the boiling point of the water, and that every pound of pressure increases the boiling point by 3c.

That's a ditto for my memory banks

A healthy cooling system should never cause overheating, so when that happens, it's either component failure, blockage, or the water achieving boiling point and evaporating.

The latter is usually caused by one of the former.

The waterless stuff can stop the latter, but that's not much good if the cause is component failure, especially one where you end up losing the coolant.

So personally i'm no wiser as to whether this stuff is better or not, except perhaps for the environment.

One question if i may.

Are the cooling fans set to operate dependent on water temperature or oil temperature?
I'm guessing it's water temperature, although for the engines sake i'd say the oil temperature was the critical measure. perhaps i can just Google the question.

 

Sorry, don't follow what you're trying to say at all. The purpose of the cooling system is to efficiently reject excess heat generated by combustion and mechanical friction. The thermostat causes the engine to rise to a preset temperature and then maintain it. The coolant is simply the 'conveyor belt' carrying this heat from the engine to the radiator where it is dumped.

If a coolant could resist heating, (ie. was less absorbent) then the engine would heat up faster, not slower, and be more prone to overheating.

The fans sense coolant temperature, not oil.

 

I meant if the coolant could absorb the heat while raising it's own temperature more slowly than water.

Sorry, poor choice of words.

To the fans, if the coolant runs at a similar temperature to water, and the fans activate on the coolant temperature, i don't understand the claim made by Evans that the coolant causes the fans to operate less often, resulting in fuel saving.

 

That defies the laws of physics.

I was hoping somebody would spot their mumbo-jumbo. If you dig deeper, they achieve this by raising the sensor set point temperature at which the fans turn on, a vehicle modification that got nothing to do with what's being used a coolant.

From their site:

"A feature of Evans Heavy Duty Coolant is its higher boiling point of 375 degrees F, significantly higher than water-based coolants — allowing the engine to safely operate at slightly higher temperatures. The huge separation of the boiling point from the operating temperature enables raising the fan-on temperature to 230° F, resulting in less fan-on time. The fans on heavy duty diesel engines draw a considerable amount of horsepower, using significant amounts of fuel."

They've conveniently overlooked the fact that possibly the engine and vehicle were not designed to operate at the increased temperature, never mind also exaggerating the amount of energy the fan takes to operate and how often it actually operates.

In normal driving of our beloved Jags, the fans rarely if ever turn on while the vehicle is in motion. When they do operate, it takes maybe 1-2 horsepower to turn them- that's it.

 

Maybe at the moment, but with the right combination of elements in a fluid it may be possible at some point in the future to make a coolant that will absorb heat as well as ( or better than) water, and transfer it to elements that will retain heat, without passing it back in to the metal components, for longer than water.
Such a fluid will probably need more cooling than conventional radiators provide, so if it's ever successfully developed, it will likely be closely followed by more efficient radiators, such as twin stage, or a second pass through them before returning the cooled fluid for re-use.

Pie in the sky at the moment, but i wouldn't bet against it at some point in the future.

From the bumph it appears they want us to think this is it.

230f is 110c, already above boiling point for water, ( i know antifreeze will raise the boiling point, as will pressurization) and since aluminium heads and hoses will be closer to warping and splitting by then, i think raising the sensor set point temperature is a dangerous thing to do.

I guess at least the waterless coolant won't boil and evaporate, but that doesn't mean you won't end up damaging anything.

So the trade for fuel consumption is higher running temperature.

Not so good

 

It's not said you will run higher temps, at least I haven't seen this in the XKR that runs it, but I also don't know all the driving conditions of that car.

As in Milkey's post, the higher "Fan on" setting was only targeted at trucks, not cars.

 

My bad.

Didn't take in the bit about heavy duty diesel engines.

And if you are changing the fluid yourself you needn't change the sensor temperature settings unless you want to.

 

Now you've got me curious. Let's say that such a fluid could be developed and made suitable for cars- what would be the benefit? Keeping in mind that the cooling systems on today's production cars last the life of the vehicle with little or no maintenance, what problems would it cure?