Originally Posted by paul 74

I don't know why you people go on-and-on about anti-freeze. Just use Prestone 50/50. It has worked for decades!

Originally Posted by paul 74

I don't know why you people go on-and-on about anti-freeze. Just use Prestone 50/50. It has worked for decades!

Originally Posted by The13Bats

This was NEVER A sales pitch....sorry to took it that way or feel that I (we) are trying to PUSH it on everyone. IT IS AN OPTION...and you wonder why it is NOT in the mainstream. I KNOW you have more than likely heard of SONY...Have you heard of NAKAMICHI???? Just because it is NOT in the mainstream DOES NOT make it NOT WORTHY.....sometimes...quite the opposite.

Ah, but we are talking about engine coolant not stereos...apples and oranges. the way you guys will not let it go is like a sales pitch from apushy used car salesman... if you are really okay with me running what 99.9% of your customers run, lets let it go at that.

I am sorry that to totally missed the example...you totally missed it entirely...enough on that,


They can recommend what they choose. And in many of their radiators that I have installed...I used green coolant and distilled water.

I am happy you allow them to recommend what they want to in their product at the moment they recommend good old OTC pre mix....great bang for the buck, easy and such a value.
[COLOR="blue"]REALLY...like I 'allow them' to recommend a product. You are still stuck in the belief that I only use ONE type of coolant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The13Bats View Post

Why do 99.9% of the corvettes you service NOT run evans?

COME ON....you ALREADY know the answer. MONEY! Most of them do not feel that it matters for them...much like some here do.....most of them do not care about the benefits....mainly because it is something that can not be seen like chrome valve covers.....much like some others also do. They just want to do what is needed to keep it so they can drive it and that is it. A few RARE customers take their Corvette to the NEXT LEVEL. Kinda like the oil filter that is re-usable...costs more but has much better filtration and magnets in it so you can see what it is catching...UNLIKE a normal paper filter. BUT..people get all caught up in how much it costs and say that it will take me 'X' years to pay this off if I were to buy regular filters...but yet...they spent 5K on an engine. GO FIGURE. And yet they will buy all the 'glitz and glam' to make it LOOK pretty but NOT worry about what matters the most. Like I have written...I DO NOT JUDGE what people choose to do with their money. I offer suggestions and that is all.

Cost of course plays a part however, the bigger reason 99.9% of the cars do not want evans is because it simply isn't all that better over the premix to justify all the hassle and costs, the 1% who does pay extra are not really taking it to the next level, rather they are using another option if they are happy to do so and I respect that.

I am not getting into a 'school yard discussion' on this....and honestly can not comment on any of it....so I am going to be nice and let your unsubstantiated comments go.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The13Bats View Post
It was kind that Dub did the labor for free.

Seriously...adding coolant to a new system that was dry...who wouldn't do that for free. The labor to install components and such is enough....opening up a few gallons of liquid is really not a big deal for me....maybe others may differ.

in almost every post you make telling someone how they way they are doing it is a time/cost waster you talk about how valuable and costly your time is so I would assume that you would charge for everything, no offense was meant just the impression you give over and over.

The KEY WORD in your reply is 'ASSUME'...that is where the problem begins. When you assume something...as you know...is like trying to solve a JEOPARDY puzzle with only three squares turned over. You do not know me well enough...so your 'assumptions' have no merit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The13Bats View Post
You started with a clean system, the costs and hassles are far higher and results vary when converting.

YES...this is OBVIOUS. BUT...I have cleaned and flush out so many cooling systems over the years is is not that big of a deal. It takes time...but it is not open heart surgery. AND this is the same reason WHY 99.9% of my customers do not want to convert....and you wondered why.

Because the 99.9% of your customers and non customers for that matter do not in any way justify the costs to run Evans in a virgin system much less spending a lot extra to hire a shop to convert a used system or convert it themselves....You are correct it's far from heart surgery....

I do have some customers who prefer to invest into their Corvette in ways that is/are not always cost influenced. How a person 'justifies' the cost of a repair is often times is decided by cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The13Bats View Post
Most car manufacturers recommend that you change the radiator fluid in your vehicle every 24,000 to 36,000 miles, or every 24 to 36 months. However, your personal driving habits will also determine the frequency of needed radiator fluid changes. If you drive your vehicle in extreme extremely hot temperatures often, you may want to consider changing the fluid once a year or every 12,000 to 15,000 miles.

In my case once a year would not be necessary.

And do you know how many people ACTUALLY do not do what is recommended....mainly because ..'if it aint broke...don't fix it'....and if the cooling system is not overheating....WHY do anything. WELL....TRUST ME...these decisions can come back and haunt a person when repairs effect other parts.

not the point at all, I can't comment on what others do, I am big on maintenance....evans savings are not all that great calling it "life time" next some evans worshipper will say a system with evans never ever leaks.

[COLOR="blue"]NO...honestly...I feel you missed the point...and the point is that many people do not do service UNTIL there is a problem....and by that time...often times it is too late.

"Evans worshiper"...another 'school yard comment' not worth getting into. Just because you do not like it...which is OBVIOUS....reminds me of how 'getting the last word in' is what people need to have in order to feel like the 'winner'...OK...so you won.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The13Bats View Post
Did you read about the racer who had Evans spray on his hot header and burst into flames.

If you get a leak it's an expensive leak.

SERIOUSLY...like other fluids used in an engine or transmission can not catch fire if hot enough.....and at a collector of a header...its pretty darn HOT.

Why add yet another flammable fluid when the good old premix doesn't blaze up

WELL...that must be the ONE of many THINGS that confirms that EWC is not good for you. Like I wrote...your decison is just that....it works for YOU. I doubt you read the other info...but the system is a low pressure system. IF this racer chose to use a high pressure cap (we will NEVER KNOW)...and if there was also 'something else' that caused the fire..,..then the highly atomized coolant could cause this....or at least was stated in the info you posted from their competitor.

Correct, flammable engine coolant is one of MANY reasons I do not want to use Evans...even Evans says their fluid burns...like sterno I believe they compared it to.


SO....make sure you take out all of the corn starch/flour in your house due to the grain silo explosions that have occurred in the past. And how powdered coffee creamer when atomized...can be set off with a flame. Engine oil can catch fire....I have had it happen to me on wrapped headers....so DONT USE OIL in your engine any longer.

You are going way off base here...none of that has anything to do with Evans being flamable...Other coolant options do not burst into flames.

I knew when I wrote that that some may not get the connection...I KNOW they have nothing to do with Evans coolant...but if you are worried about engine liquids that can catch fire....engine oil can in some situations.

Obviously you did not watch this....not that you will.

http://www.evanscooling.com/videos/jay-lenos-garage/

what's better is the long list of comments people posted blowing holes in all kinds of points evans was trying to make, of course they edited those comments out in your version.


I have seen excessive pitting in aluminum on NEGLECTED cooling systems. So this video does not surprise me at all.

I am sure you have...but a well maintained system no matter what coolant was used would have been okay...so moot point.

YES...but do you know how many coolant system I come across that have NEVER had the block drain plugs removed???? So...once again....'maintained' is all in the owners eyes in what they feel is maintained.


And I called it a sales pitch,
After all that you really feel like you are not trying to push this on people...

Like I said before if a person wants to go into higher costs more hassles for a flammable engine coolant that to me is no better than pre mix I fully support that
You claim you support me running what I desire what you said 99.9% of your customers run...yet you will not let it go, so I will, we have beat this dead horse enough...

Originally Posted by DUB

We are on completely different wavelengths...that is without a doubt.

NO...I have no interests in if people buy EWC or not....it is just commenting on a product....and how it worked for a customer and it being an option.

Do you honestly feel that you have fully supported the choice of others who may choose to use EWC.????

Sure I have over and over saying if a person wants to use evans go for it but the added costs and hassles and shortcoming do not make it worth it to me.

The odd thing here is I am not telling you in any way what you are doing is NOT right. And YET...you have to make jabs at EWC to suit your beliefs. You also some reason felt this was a 'sales pitch'...and it was not...that is where the differences between us began. The ONLY comments I made against ethlyene glycol coolant are from EXPERIENCE when they have been NEGLECTED and the damage that can occur if they are neglected. The reason I responded to your comments is because you were 'sales pitching' your views...by linking data..regardless if it is correct or not was biased.

DUB

Originally Posted by Tom DeWitt

I just posted my thoughts on this on our facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/DeWittsRadiator

Originally Posted by LeMans Pete

Propylene glycol does boil.

In the context of my reference, it doesn't really boil in an engine. At least not until 370F, which is a heck of a lot higher than traditional mixes of antifreeze.

Heat transfer varies on the materials doing the transfer, in this case iron to fluid. You're talking about thermal conductivity. Yes, a water/EG mixture has greater thermal conductivity. What you are not considering is that it takes more energy (in this case heat) to increase a volume of water 1 degree than it does to increase the same volume of PG 1 degree. You overestimate the amount of steam in a system running at 180F that is designed to boil at 250F. If your engine is operating at much higher temperatures than designed, you need to fix a cooling issue you have as clearances are designed with expansion of components at the operating temperature. Be aware with higher compression motors that you may run into detonation issues due to the higher operating temperatures associated with using Evans.

How are you determining the temperature in the cooling system? Why, with a temperature probe inserted in the front of the intake manifold! The question is, what is the temperature of the coolant surrounding the exhaust valve? And of course, the boiling point of 250F is only true at sea level, under proper pressure. And the point you make is exactly what Evans reduces, that is spontaneous combustion in other parts of the cylinder as cylinder pressure rises following the initial rise of cylinder pressures produced by the initial ignition of the mixture via the spark plug, caused by hot spots in the cylinder head!


If your radiator cap is faulty, you'll see the symptoms (overheating/foaming). Again, I would not condone using Evans because people may be lazy to maintain their cooling system. Nothing wrong with pressurized systems.

Not necessarily. See Powerstrokediesel.com, and their video on how to prevent trashing an engine by changing the radiator cap. I hate pressurized systems, have caused a lot of steam burns. I do not know why you think a no maintenance coolant is "lazy"? Why do extra work for nothing?


Nothing wrong with this, and this is a benefit of Evans. If your cooling system is operating efficiently and are tired of the flushes, go ahead and change it out. Do not use it as a band-aid to solve possible overheating issues, because your coolant is not the problem.

I've never claimed it will solve overheating issues, so I don't know why you bring this up.

Anti-corrosion addives poor compromise, at best, due to water? That's snake oil at it's finest.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Umm, there are ASTM standards that all antifreezes must comply with regarding solder, aluminum and copper corrosion rates. Also, there are maximum voltages generated that are acceptable in the cooling system. You cooling system, under the best situations, is a battery causing corrosion. I've had my vette for 18 years, changed the coolant once, will have it for another 18 years, will never change it again, and according to DeWitts, he recommends changing it every three years. That's 12 times for you, for an inferior product. Technology moves forward in spite of the intellectually lazy, and those who do the work to study it enjoy the benefits. It always amazes me that the ones on the forum who have a chemistry background agree with me. FYI, I have my nose stuck in chemistry books for 4 years, that ought to be worth some respect. The snake oil comments are the last retort for the intellectually lazy.

Originally Posted by LeMans Pete

Well, I try to be informative on this forum. My goal is to interject in a positive manner and contribute to the topic, so that those who discover this thread will leave with maybe a bit more knowledge than before they found it. Those hell bent on using a specific product are not going to be convinced otherwise. I have no issues with others using Evans, but like any product, it has its positives and negatives. Every company uses snake oil - its called salesmanship. It is up to every consumer to do their research and make the best decision with the information at hand. If I have not provided you with enough information to at least question the abilities or Evans, then I put you in the category as someone hell bent on using the product.

I have a chemical engineering degree with 7 years of heat exchanger and cooling system design at engineering firms and practiced these in the field at top notch pharmaceutical companies. What the hell do I know?

Originally Posted by DUB

I am PAYING ATTENTION ...keep the intellectual discussion going...if needed.

Having Forum members that are in fields that I am not in on the levels that you both are is a BLESSING. Where else can questions be answered and discussed in a technical manner that can allow people to make a decision...regardless what current practices dictate to us. And REGARDLESS of the information provided ( if any more is provided)....hopefully this discussion can answer some 'thoughts' I have.

QUESTION after this statement: In many coolant systems over the years I come across some engines that when I drain the system and remove thermostat, hoses, etc. There is a slime coating on the surfaces. It appeared to be an oil based product of some kind. SO...after thorough flushing using coolant flush products...the slime is still there. I have gone as far as removing engine block freeze plugs on the side of the block to look inside and this coating is on the casting. I have used laundry detergent and that seems to get it out....and then thoroughly flush the system NUMEROUS times and get I clean.

SO...my question is. On coolant systems that have a layer of rust, crud or this slimy crap on the surfaces on the coolant system....would that not effect cooling due to a layer of material is on the casting of the engine block and radiator cooling fins and effect the ability of ANY coolant do its job???? I 'feel' that it does...but any feeedback that can aid is greatly appreciated.

DUB

Originally Posted by lurch59

We have the same goal. We are having a vigorous intellectual debate, that all.....

The upsides of Evans outweigh the downsides, especially in cars that we hope will be around for 100 years. Also in diesels, where SCA's must be monitored, in certain types of engines. Why have water in an antifreeze that has a low vapor pressure, cavitates and pits the cylinder liner? The whole SCA forming a sacrificial layer to protect from cavitation erosion seem like a very difficult way to compensate for the inherent weakness of water in the coolant.

I always laugh at the cost argument, I mean we're driving vettes here, they guzzle gas. If you can't afford the coolant, sell the car. The "hell bent" thing is amusing; let me know where I am wrong on any of the points I made.

Knowing your background, why bring up the point that Evans boils? It's irrelevant in the context we are discussing. Kind of, thats a hint.....

Originally Posted by LeMans Pete

It's very relevant. Exhaust valve temperatures can exceed 1000°F, well above propylene glycol BP.

Your radiator and cooling system is designed around the use of a water/EG mixture. The sizing of that radiator is based of their physical properties, a fouling factor, flow rate (air and coolant), and inlet/outlet temperatures. If 100% propylene glycol was used as a coolant, you would need a larger radiator. As I have intimated, 100% coolant is a worse coolant than water.

So no, water is not an inferior product when it comes to the main goal of your coolant: to remove heat from the engine. In fact, it is far superior. But, with it comes the issues with corrosion and the need to pressurize the system to raise the BP.

Evans is better at preventing corrosion and operating at atmospheric pressure, as well as minimizing changes (I would still change it at some interval because all coolant systems need flushes).

I prefer that my coolant maximizes my systems efficiency, and a water/EG mixture is the best fluid for this goal.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Let's talk about what Evans will, and will not do. Radiators that have a large temperature difference between the ambient air and the radiator will be more efficient at shedding heat. So, what is the ideal operating temp of a gasoline engine? Evans claim to fame is eliminating hot spots in the cylinder head because it doesn't boil. As has been stated, a mix of standard antifreeze and water transfers heat more readily than pure propylene glycol: however, we are talking apples and oranges because you must factor in steam, which is likely present around the exhaust seats, and propylene glycol is far more efficient at transferring heat than steam.

Come on everybody, when was the last time you checked your radiator cap to see if it holds proper pressure? Even if it is holding pressure, some steam forms hence the anti foams in antifreeze.

Your radiator has to be appropriately sized, Evans will not overcome that. But, it's nice not to have to rely on pressure to prevent boiling.

Waterless coolant stops corrosion, eliminates electrolysis, and prevents cavitation. It's not snake oil, it's physics. I run Evans in everything I own, but I keep my stuff for a long time and I tired of flushes and radiator maintenance, and replacing heater cores. The anti corrosion additives are a poor compromise at best, due to the water in the system.

Originally Posted by REELAV8R

Pretty sound logic. How long have you been running it?

Originally Posted by lurch59

You are telling part of the story, and drawing conclusions. You very well know that a hotter radiator sheds heat better to the ambient air and therefore becomes more efficient. Therefore, we are back to the argument that we are dangerously close to, or above, the boiling point of traditional coolant, which is one of it's greatest weaknesses.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Any argument for high temperatures at the exhaust valve certainly sustains the need for higher boiling coolants. Don't forget you can pressurize Evans coolant also should you so desire. You do not, however, indicate what the temperature is at the exhaust seat/coolant interface where boiling occurs.

Originally Posted by lurch59

The prejudice out there is everyone wants their car to run cooler. We must, at some point, talk about what is the ideal operating temperature of the ICE. It must be lower for a traditional coolant because the limiting factor is spontaneous combustion caused by hot spots in the combustion chamber, caused by boiling coolant. So it's circular logic. Most everyone here, at least if they have owned a hot rod, have had the unpleasant experience of shutting off their engine on a hot summer day, and due to heat soak causing boiling coolant, exceeding the pressure rating of their cap and puking coolant all over the ground.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Next, you say that all systems need flushing, but don't say why, or how often. Assuming the use of a coolant filter, why would you need to change and flush the system? Propane refrigerators have sealed "coolant" systems that have been fine for 50 years!

Originally Posted by lurch59

BTW, diesel engines run more efficient at HIGHER temperatures than what has traditionally been recommended. Using Evans coolant allows diesels to increase horsepower and fuel efficiency by increasing the safety margin of the boiling point of coolant and allowing radiator fans to run significantly less.

Originally Posted by REELAV8R

Pretty sound logic. How long have you been running it?

Originally Posted by LeMans Pete

You'll have to explain that one to me. In all my years, my heat exchangers never became more efficient with increased inlet tubeside temperatures. You have a defined heat transfer area - the only way to increase cooling capacity while maintaining your tubeside/sheetside fluids is to increase area. The thermostat sets your tubeside inlet temperature and you design your heat exchanger side based off of this value and your desired outlet value (to eliminate a certain amount of BTUs) coupled with your flowrate. I've never heard anyone in the engineering world recommend increasing my coolant temperature to become more efficient. This makes no sense.

Your response does not address my premise. I'll give an example, a radiator at 250 degrees F will shed more BTU's than one at 200 degrees F. In that sense the radiator becomes more efficient. And engineers do recommend increasing coolant temperatures of diesels to increase combustion efficiency, and they do this by keeping the same radiator, running the fan less, and increasing the thermostat opening temps, and this can all be done by using a coolant with increased boiling temperatures. It's all about even temperatures in the cylinder head, not only about temperatures at the front of the intake manifold.



I believe I said greater than 1000°F. A worse heat capacity and a lower thermal conductivity helps negate the increased boiling point that you receive with Evans. I'm not saying it's a wash, but I think this point is severely overstated considering you're WELL above a boiling temperature of either substance.

Well, it's the steam formed that is the issue. You would have to evaluate the difference in steam bubble formation between the coolants. We are starting to see improved hp/torque from engines switching to Evans, and the theory is improved flame front travel due to more even cylinder head temps.


Your thermostat is used to set your operating temperature in conjunction with your cooling system capacity. GM designed our operating temperatures for multiple reasons (expansion coefficients, engine efficiency, emissions, control combustion). No need to try and redesign a system that GM has been operating for decades.

Well, I'm going to disagree because this statement doesn't apply to me. Most of us here have made some "improvements" to our engines, therefore we have been "redesigning" our stuff with headers, etc. And the fact that something was designed decades ago, suggest there may be improvements to be had.....



I don't deal with propane refrigerators and will not speak to their operation. Scale and sludge build up in many systems that should be cleaned out to maintain optimal performance.

Scale is rust from water in the system, sludge is worn out anti corrosion additives precipitating out:there is manufacturing scarf but I run coolant filter so that takes care of that. Tell us how often and why we should clean out our system if we use Evans.


Diesel engines and gasoline engines are two completely different animals. I don't know of a diesel engine C3 corvette.

Originally Posted by LeMans Pete

Lurch, I am not sure what your objective is here. I suggest that you go learn about heat exchangers, thermodynamics, fluid flow and properties. You seem fixated on trying to poke holes in my ability to explain these systems to you. If you consider yourself an expert, then let's ride off into the sunset and call this a day. I have given you my professional opinion: water/EG is the best coolant to maintain proper operating temperatures as it is, by far, the best fluid to do so. If your system has enough cooling capacity that you can use Evans and it is not upset by it (as Jim's has), then proceed. You gain the corrosion protection and the ability to change coolant less frequently.

Use the information you have and make the best decision.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Your response does not address my premise. I'll give an example, a radiator at 250 degrees F will shed more BTU's than one at 200 degrees F. In that sense the radiator becomes more efficient. And engineers do recommend increasing coolant temperatures of diesels to increase combustion efficiency, and they do this by keeping the same radiator, running the fan less, and increasing the thermostat opening temps, and this can all be done by using a coolant with increased boiling temperatures. It's all about even temperatures in the cylinder head, not only about temperatures at the front of the intake manifold.

Originally Posted by lurch59

Well, I'm going to disagree because this statement doesn't apply to me. Most of us here have made some "improvements" to our engines, therefore we have been "redesigning" our stuff with headers, etc. And the fact that something was designed decades ago, suggest there may be improvements to be had.....

Originally Posted by lurch59

Come on Pete, don't get sore, we're having a little fun here. It's a coolant discussion, not a cure for cancer. Consider my remarks a tutorial on your debate skills...

Your appeal to authority is a weak argument as you do not know my level of knowledge regarding thermodynamics etc. Let's stick to the parameters at hand, some of which can be measured by the average car enthusiast. My opinion is if your car is running within normal operating temperatures, switching to Evans coolant will not significantly alter the operating characteristics of your car, but could improve power and combustion efficiency by evening cylinder head temperatures, all while being less costly in labor and materials, over time, and will eliminate corrosion of solder joints, copper, aluminum and cast iron.

Finally, my personal experience. I have a 69 vette with a 690 hp big block, running a 2 row aluminum radiator and Evans coolant. So far, so good. I've spent a lot on this engine, so I want the best coolant money can buy. And for me, that's Evans.