Waterless coolant

[A.N.Other]

I don’t see it as a fit and forget solution. I would still want to follow the manufacturers guide lines and drain the system every couple of years anyway. (Even though, it is reusable most people would renew anyway).
The other thing is why not fix any problems rather than try to get round them.

[Rolf B.]

My Daimler 15 is the only one of nine cars which is filled with Evans coolant liquid. The reason for using it was the engine was completely reconditioned as well as the radiator. So no water was inside of the cooling system. Before rebuilding the engine the engine block has had round about 1" thick hardend silt at the bottom of the water jacket, which was the result of 8 decades of chalky deposit caused by water, rust and remaining sand of the casting mould. This was the reason for having high temperatures when driving the car in summer, because the silt was a kind of isolation against transporting the heat of the coolant out of the engine block. The space of the silt deposit also took place of filling maximum of coolant in the cooling system of the engine.

The 1933 Daimler 15 has an unpressurised cooling system and so the expansion tank has no pressurised cap too. The use of Evans cooling liquid should not protect against overheating of the engine but against new chalky deposit and new building of rust in the water jackets.

Rolf

[Brian-H]

^ I'm convinced by that explanation.

[marchesmark]

Rolf,

I understand your point, but to my mind you are now using waterless coolant to protect against something which is no longer a problem. You did what I suggested in my earlier post - you rectified the issue that was causing the overheating by removing the silt. Yes the waterless coolant may now protect against rust and further silting up, but so would using normal antifreeze and regular flushing, without any of the drawbacks of waterless coolant, not to mention the cost. I mean no personal criticism of you at all, it is your car and what you do with it is your affair, but to me it does look like a solution looking for a problem. I guess neither of us will be around in another eighty years to see what state the engine is in by then!!

Mark

[JT7196]

It’s true, always fix the problem rather that smoothing it over ! The engine in my Lanchester used to occasionally suffer from over heating, especially whilst negotiating steep hills.
I did initially fit an electric fan which helped enormously, but again it did not cure the problem!
Last year, I stripped the engine ( many of you would have probably read the prolonged and sorry tale) , well during the process of having the engine rebored and re sleeved,the company I had entrusted the work to also chemically cleansed the cylinder block .
Since then, I have never had the need to switch on the electric fan even in hot weather, and the engine runs much cooler even in normal day to day traffic .
So in conclusion, instead of “fire fighting” a problem, it’s always better to try and solve it !

Cheers,and a Very Happy New Year to you all , Al

[Brian-H]

A few problems that I can think of regarding regular flushing
1. if you're going to obey pollution control laws, there's the hassle of collecting it and taking it somewhere to be properly disposed
2. if the cost of the waterless coolant is N times the cost of distilled water plus the traditional coolant, then after N flushes, you're now losing money
3. if you're spending a lot of time and money on getting an engine fully and properly descaled and rebuilt, why go cheap on the coolant - it's a bit like making a very good wedding cake and then skimping on the icing

I don't see it as "a solution looking for a problem", I see regular flushing as a hassle - not meaning to digress but flushing is one of many reasons why I'm contemplating (still undecided) fitting an electric motor instead - they're a lot less hassle all round when the car has the space for the batteries, and old RWD cars with big inefficient engines do have the space. Maybe this is a good solution to at least one hassle of old IC engines.

[Chris_R]

I think the reply from Evans in that blog glosses over a couple of points. In my opinion they rely on the confusion by most people of overheating and boiling and more than once refer to water (vapour) being inferior, which is true. Overheating and boiling are two different things. In a pressurised system the pressure elevates the boiling point of water or a water/antifreeze mix. Depending on the pressure and mixture concentration this can be as high as 123°C. The thermostat also has a restrictive effect increasing the pressure inside the engine and further increasing the boiling point of the coolant to perhaps 127°C or 128°C. Normal operating temperature should be around 87°C to 90°C. Oil viscosity is designed based on a normal operating temperature of up to around 100°C. The ideal temperature for combustion is also around there as well. Much cooler and it requires an enriched mixture, much hotter and pre-detonation can occur. The ideal temperature is quite a narrow band. It almost as if someone actually designed these things to be optimal at about the same temperature!
Overheating occurs long before boiling will occur. If it gets to the point of boiling in a pressurised system there is something really seriously wrong. Evans main claim is that boiling will not occur. That's great, you can overheat as much as you like so long as it doesn't boil all is well. Or not as the case may be.
They are quite correct that it's not as straightforward as an equation that relates to heat capacity. Many cooling systems have a margin of spare capacity. In normal running you are not using the full capacity of the cooling system and if you substitute a coolant with a much lower capacity to hold and transfer heat, but do not exceed the capacity of the system then you will not notice much difference. If the capacity of the system is reduced, e.g. by furring up in the radiator, or if the spare capacity in the system is not so great then substituting something like Evans for water will inevitably increase operating temperatures. Similarly if you place a significant extra load on the system, either in a hot climate or perhaps climbing mountain passes and the cooling demand exceeds the capacity then temperatures will rise. It may be overheating, or running too hot, but it won't be boiling.
For systems that are unpressurised, Evans operates in a unpressurised environment as it doesn't boil until something like 180°C so the DB18 can use it unpressurised. This is another claim from Evans in that an unpressurised system places less strain in the pump. Whether the engine will run hotter or not will depend on the overall capacity of the cooling system versus the amount of heat generated from within the engine and the capability to remove that heat.

[Flinty]

Just out of interest, the well known MG Tuner Peter Burgess will not cover any warranty on his work if waterless coolant has been used in the engine.

Steve.

[Brian-H]

The gist of this thread seems to be saying it's worth considering for use in an unpressurised engine.
But as I say, I'm considering a completely different solution anyway.

[marchesmark]

Really? I don't think that's what this thread is saying at all.