Jorn mentioned that he's been running this in his and I've been considering installing it for a while.
You have to drain the present coolant as thoroughly as possible and refill with a flushing fluid, which you then run in the engine for a few hundred miles. You then drain THAT out and refill with the actual waterless coolant. Upsides are that it's supposedly filled for life, the fluid hardly expands when hot so system pressure is nearly atmospheric (making leaks and splits less likely) and the ironwork no longer dissolves from the inside out.
But what are the disadvantages (aside from the initial cost outlay)? Does anyone have experience of it that they'd care to share here?
Evans waterless coolant
-
erictharg
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:50 pm
Re: Evans waterless coolant
As you point out the disadvantage is cost. And the fact that no engines were developed to run with this "waterless" coolant so only time will tell if it really proves to have any adverse effects on any part of the system. As long as you run the specified coolant additive at the right concentration you won't have any problem with conventional glycol coolants. They even prove to be effective at eliminating corrosion with both iron and aluminium materials. Don't waste your money. Stick with what is specified by the manufacturer. Waterless coolant won't fix the root cause of any perceived problem other than lack of maintenance. If you have high temp issues due to a modified engine exceeding the capacity of the cooling system try using "water wetter" - it usually does give a 3 to 5 deg C reduction in running temperature.
-
Westfield 129
- Posts: 867
- Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:20 am
Re: Evans waterless coolant
This coolant has been around for more than a decade, and no problems have been reported, other than the price...
The advantage is that it runs without a pressure cap (there is no cooling system pressure necessary to inhibit boiling), so it is easier on head gaskets, doesn't have the problem of "steam pockets", localized heating in the cylinder head. Also, there is no corrosion, and it lasts for ever. It works, but is it better than regular coolant?
I have run the stuff in my Noble(s), and have found no real difference between the Evans and the identical car running water based coolant.
As for the prep necessary, well, occasionally you need to flush the cooling system anyway to get rid of the corruption, so doing this prior to installing the permanent coolant is not much of a big deal. If you can afford it, whey not... However, if you do spring a leak on the road... you will be back to water, unless you hae a bunch of Evans with you.
The real downside:
I like stuff that is easily serviced on the road, so I stick to over the counter antifreeze coolant, usually G-05 for Mercedes/Chrysler cars. That way, I can just add water, or BarsLeaks if I hole or crack a radiator (it works, and is installed by just about every manufacturer (dirty little secret).
This also goes for easily purchased Facet fuel pumps, and having all of the fasteners match so that I only have to carry a couple of wrenches.
As far as "water wetter" goes, some race teams don't use it due to the evidence of precipitants left in the cooling system on tear down. The word is that long term use will reduce cooling system efficiency due to a coating inside the radiator from the water wetter. I am not sue that I believe any of this, as I saw some bottles of the stuff at the race shop...
I run Water Wetter, but I also use efficient radiators with properly configured fans and cooling ducts, and don't have problems with cooling. Water, half coolant, coolant additives or Evans coolant.
If you don't have any leaks, and have a good cooling system, you can run whatever you wish, taking care to inhibit corrosion.
The advantage is that it runs without a pressure cap (there is no cooling system pressure necessary to inhibit boiling), so it is easier on head gaskets, doesn't have the problem of "steam pockets", localized heating in the cylinder head. Also, there is no corrosion, and it lasts for ever. It works, but is it better than regular coolant?
I have run the stuff in my Noble(s), and have found no real difference between the Evans and the identical car running water based coolant.
As for the prep necessary, well, occasionally you need to flush the cooling system anyway to get rid of the corruption, so doing this prior to installing the permanent coolant is not much of a big deal. If you can afford it, whey not... However, if you do spring a leak on the road... you will be back to water, unless you hae a bunch of Evans with you.
The real downside:
I like stuff that is easily serviced on the road, so I stick to over the counter antifreeze coolant, usually G-05 for Mercedes/Chrysler cars. That way, I can just add water, or BarsLeaks if I hole or crack a radiator (it works, and is installed by just about every manufacturer (dirty little secret).
This also goes for easily purchased Facet fuel pumps, and having all of the fasteners match so that I only have to carry a couple of wrenches.
As far as "water wetter" goes, some race teams don't use it due to the evidence of precipitants left in the cooling system on tear down. The word is that long term use will reduce cooling system efficiency due to a coating inside the radiator from the water wetter. I am not sue that I believe any of this, as I saw some bottles of the stuff at the race shop...
I run Water Wetter, but I also use efficient radiators with properly configured fans and cooling ducts, and don't have problems with cooling. Water, half coolant, coolant additives or Evans coolant.
If you don't have any leaks, and have a good cooling system, you can run whatever you wish, taking care to inhibit corrosion.