BC-
Could you clarify this a bit? If the cooling passageways, cylinder walls, head, etc. are designed such that they can withstand coolant at 150C, why would MB and so many other companies specify ~50/50 water/coolant? While Evans coolant is expensive, using 100% generic EG would be pretty cheap in the grand scheme of things. So if your statement is true, I don't follow the logic of the folks who engineered our cars.

Using 100% EG would seem to me to be a no brainer if our cars could easily handle these higher temps. Higher temps might even allow smaller cooling systems since the DeltaT between the coolant and air would be greater. Once you include water into the mix, it really opens up a huge number of disadvantages (boiling, rust, etc.), so why is this the specified coolant? Thanks for clarifying.

__________________
1968 220D, w115, /8, OM615, Automatic transmission.
My 1987 300TD wagon was sold and my 2003 W210 E320 wagon was totaled (sheds tear).

NPG is not ethylene glycol. It is Non-Aqueous Propylene Glycol, IOW, it is waterless. Cooling systems run around 200* now because that is the practical limit of currently used coolants under a small amount of pressure. I don't know why it isn't more widely used as an OEM coolant. Remember the 48-72 volt electrical systems we were supposed to start seeing a few years ago? What happened to them?

__________________
'83 300D, 126K miles.

They probably have many products. I just remembered reading about Evans NPG+C, which is referred to as their Ethylene Glycol formula. The MSDS is here:
Evans NPG+C WATERLESS Super Engine Coolant

__________________
1968 220D, w115, /8, OM615, Automatic transmission.
My 1987 300TD wagon was sold and my 2003 W210 E320 wagon was totaled (sheds tear).

I am currently borrowing a very good friends F-350, he runs Coolants » Engine Cooling Systems this stuff in it. I'm VERY impressed with it. when I went to see Daw_two we made a disaster out of his parking lot when we blew a lower hose (Still mortified this happened) We lost the bulk of the coolant from the truck. we pulled a VERY large trailer home and carried a 617 home and the truck did not overheat at all. if you ever switch to a waterless coolant, I'd reccomend it.

__________________
hum.....
1987 300TD 311,000M Stolen. Presumed destroyed

Would the fact that the waterless can cool at much higher temperatures and operate with no pressure, help reduce incidents of blown headgaskets on engines that have a reputation to blow them when overheated like the 6.2 or 6.5 GM?

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

The problem with 100% EG is the fact that it has a specific heat of 50% of the specific heat of water. The second problem is that pure EG has a freezing point of about 10°F.

The waterless coolant doesn't suffer either of these limitations.

I would refer you to the CRC Handbook of Chem & Physics or publications by The Dow Chemical co. for data on glycol viscosity. It is also interesting to note that Shell stopped using Propylene glycol in their coolant formulations because of its higher viscosity than ethylene glycol. It is the start of old wifes tails when some one looks at some fluid & makes a decision about physical properties without doing proper testing. The viscosity of Evans coolant is more than 3 X that of some water based coolants.
One should also note that over 10 years ago a number of US car manufacturers including the one that one of the supporters of this fluid on here worked for (Chrysler) did tests with these type of fluids & concluded that it was not suitable for use in their motors. They state the non suitability in their coolant recommendations.
Any one who believes that a significant increase (say 50deg) in coolant temp will not have an adverse effect on the operation of a motor needs to be questioned. It is more than likely that at such elevated temperatures in the coolant one may see much larger localized temp increases throughout the motor under steady state conditions. There is much more than just metal in a motor.

__________________
Grumpy Old Diesel Owners Club group

I no longer question authority, I annoy authority. More effect, less effort....

1967 230-6 auto parts car. rust bucket.
1980 300D now parts car 800k miles
1984 300D 500k miles
1987 250td 160k miles English import
2001 jeep turbo diesel 130k miles
1998 jeep tdi ~ followed me home. Needs a turbo.
1968 Ford F750 truck. 6-354 diesel conversion.
Other toys ~J.D.,Cat & GM ~ mainly earth moving

Just because you raise the temp at which your cooling fluid turns to gas, does not eliminate the problems associated with temperature, mainly the engine oil would break down.

If you remember that the whole purpose is to remove heat from your engine, why would you pick a fluid that has a much worse ability to do that than a typical anti-freeze mixture? If the pressure in the system is a problem, that is a plus in NPG favor. Ditto corrosion. Seems like NPG would be better in a few circumstances, but I would say they are a minority.

__________________
MB-less

When engine manufacturers such as Caterpillar and Cummins recommend it, then I'll consider looking into it.

Can you point me to some test data by either of those major diesel engine manufacturers. regards this coolant?

You may not realize that Mobil makes a "synthetic" oil called "Mobil-1".

Said oil can survive at extremely elevated temperatures............close 900°C. in a turbocharger:

Synthetic Oil | Heat Protection


You might be able to conclude from this video clip that 250°C. will never present a problem to this oil and it will never "break down" at that temperature.

Ha ha, I knew that in general, a greater fraction of EG is recommended in a EG/water mixture in cold climates, but it never occurred to me that it had a minimum freeze point at 70% EG. I naively assumed that the freezing temperature would keep going down as you use a greater fraction of EG. I am reminded once again that hydrogen bonding is never something I understood terribly well.

Thank you for answering my question.

__________________
1968 220D, w115, /8, OM615, Automatic transmission.
My 1987 300TD wagon was sold and my 2003 W210 E320 wagon was totaled (sheds tear).

I dont know of any test data. all I know is how I've seen the stuff perform. I seriously considered putting this in my car when I had the Rad and waterpump replaced. Pulling a 18' trailer through mountain grades 2G shy of what should be in a truck and it still not overheat is amazing to me.

__________________
hum.....
1987 300TD 311,000M Stolen. Presumed destroyed

Think of the stress that is removed from the radiator, hoses, and heater core by running at zero pressure and the absence of constant pressure cycles as the engine heats and cools every time the car is used. That could be a substantial saving right there.

__________________
'83 300D, 126K miles.

If it transfers heat less effeciently you'd have to make your radiator bigger to accomodate it. I'd be reluctant to be a pioneer with it. I tend to think that a 5050 mix of standard antifreeze and h2o seems to work fairly well. Engine designers would have to increase coolant passages too, I'd think if it is more viscous than h2o. Increasing the size of any component in the current fuel economy climate is a big negative to any engine designer, I'd think.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

Well, when Kenworth, Peterbilt, Caterpillar, Cummins, Isuzu, Mercedes-Benz/BMW use it as OE, I'll get on-board too.