engine cool additives

[CDIGuy]

does anyone have any thoughts on the use of cooling additives.

I am wondering if I can get a long term benefit to the life of my engine if I use Red Line Water Wetter and a product by Lubrication Dynamics called Diesel Cool.. ( http://www.lubricationdynamics.com/techcool.html ).

It can be 120 degrees on the street surface and in stop and go traffic, I just feel sorry for that poor engine.. Seems like if I can offset the negative effects of anti-freeze and water vaporization, achieving even a 20 degree drop, it has to be good.

I have no low temp fears out here, as a cold day in winter is only 50 degrees.

any thoughts?

[Duke2.6]

This subject has been beat to death.

If you use proper fluids, you DON'T need any additives!!!

This applies to coolant, motor oil, transmission oil, axle oil, brake fluid, refrigerant, P/S fluid, any other hydraulic system fluids, and windshield washer fluid.

Duke

[Lenny Lipscomb]

I strongly agree with Duke. A good auto antifreeze is properly formulated for good heat exchange and corrosion protection properies for this application. Change it every 3 years.

[JimF]

Originally Posted by CDIGuy

does anyone have any thoughts on the use of cooling additives.

I am wondering if I can get a long term benefit to the life of my engine if I use Red Line Water Wetter and a product by Lubrication Dynamics called Diesel Cool.. ( http://www.lubricationdynamics.com/techcool.html ).

It can be 120 degrees on the street surface and in stop and go traffic, I just feel sorry for that poor engine.. Seems like if I can offset the negative effects of anti-freeze and water vaporization, achieving even a 20 degree drop, it has to be good.

I have no low temp fears out here, as a cold day in winter is only 50 degrees.

any thoughts?

. . Redline's WW and currently using Royal Purple's Purple Ice. A comparison can be seen in MENU#17 on my page fyi.

[230/8]

With all due respect to Duke and others of the no-additives-are-necessary school, I beleive the correct answer is "it depends." What is your car?

In general, a fresh anti-freeze mixture will provide all the heat transfer and corrosion protection you need. That said, MB has had several recommendations over the years which even today seem to make sense. To my uncertain knowledge, they have never recommended the Water-Wetter additives. But, if one checks the maintenance sheets for earlier cars, for example my 117-engined 1972 SL, you will see their recommendation is to change anti-freeze at 30,000 miles and add an anti-corrosion oil to the mix. These are the water-soluble oils that are still readily available at the Checker/Autozone/Napas of the world.

Some of these recommendations were developed back when our cars were all metal, no plastic radiators, etc. Most were good then and are still good today.

230/8

[Duke2.6]

If you use Zerex G-05 antifreeze, which is the same formulation as MB brand in 50-70 percent concentration you don't need any supplemental additives.

Zerex G-05 is a carefully blended HOAT ethylene glycol based antifreeze that has all the anti-corrosion and other chemicals necessary for cooling system performance and longevity. It's OE on all current Ford and DC products and is the generally accepted/recommended replacement for "green" antifreeze for those cars that had green antifreeze as OE.

Water wetter an other additives may have value when running straight water, which many race cars do, but the solution is usually drained after every race.

Unless you are a chemist or cooling system engineer or know same and can be absolutely positive that some additive is chemically compatible with your antifreeze inhibitor package, then I recommend avoiding them just as I recommend avoiding additives to any other proper specification automomotive fluid.

As far as vintage models are concerned, most fluids have been upgraded over the years and current specification fluids are superior to 30+ years ago. I would not use a 30 year old antifreeze/additive specfication any more than I would use a 30-year old API SD spec motor oil.

Duke

[CDIGuy]

My problem isn't that I don't think OEM fluids are good.. but how can one anti-freeze solution be good enough for -20 degree climates, and yet also for 120 degree climates.. Water Wetter allows for better heat transfer (though much less effective when used with mix vs straight water) and so I can't help but think it's benefits are good in this climate.

Bottom line, I've never heard of any car having a problem using it.. so I was curious if anyone here had experience with it. My car is brand new, but that doesn't mean it's happy in this heat.

Anyway.. I enjoyed reading your thoughts, thanks.

[CDIGuy]

Originally Posted by JimF

. . Redline's WW and currently using Royal Purple's Purple Ice. A comparison can be seen in MENU#17 on my page fyi.

Jim, very nice page.. I book marked it.

This is the kind of info I was looking for, data, and experience.. not just general no or yes.. I need info, as to why? That's just the way I am wired.

but let me be clear on what you said.. WW is now using the same formula as Purple Ice? So does this mean no oil film?

thanks

[JimF]

Originally Posted by CDIGuy

Jim, very nice page.. I book marked it.

This is the kind of info I was looking for, data, and experience.. not just general no or yes.. I need info, as to why? That's just the way I am wired.

but let me be clear on what you said.. WW is now using the same formula as Purple Ice? So does this mean no oil film?

thanks

. . say that?? I discontinued use of WW in favor of PI. There's no 'oil-film' problem w/ PI and there IS with WW.

[CDIGuy]

Originally Posted by JimF

. . say that?? I discontinued use of WW in favor of PI. There's no 'oil-film' problem w/ PI and there IS with WW.

Ok, I get it..

[Duke2.6]

I've never seen any rigorous scientific tests that show Water Wetter or any other cooling system additive either reduce coolant temperature or boundary temperatures in systems that run an OEM recommended antifreeze within the OEM recommended concentration range.

For race cars that don't run antifreeze, some kind of corrosion preventative/water pump seal lubricant additive is called for, but that's a completely different application than a street legal car that sees either regular or occasional use and uses the OEM recommmended antifreeze and mixing ratio.

OEMs design cooling systems for the heat capacity and convective heat transfer characterisitcs of a 50/50 blend of ethylene glycol and water, which provides freeze protection down to -34F and boiling protection to 265F with a 15 psi cap. Then they test everywhere between the arctic and Death Valley.

Freeze protection down to -84F is available with a 70 percent glycol solution, but this concentration is usually not recommended unless you anticipate temperatures this low, and if it gets that cold you won't have to worry about the lower heat capacity than a 50/50 blend.

The vast majority of anecdotal evidence I've seen from those who have reported using cooling system additives is basically - "made no difference" and like I said, I've never seen any rigorous scientific tests that back up any of the performance claims by manufacturers or some users or these products.

Duke

[JimF]

Originally Posted by Duke2.6

I've never seen any rigorous scientific tests that show Water Wetter or any other cooling system additive either reduce coolant temperature or boundary temperatures in systems that run an OEM recommended antifreeze within the OEM recommended concentration range.

The vast majority of anecdotal evidence I've seen from those who have reported using cooling system additives is basically - "made no difference" and like I said, I've never seen any rigorous scientific tests that back up any of the performance claims by manufacturers or some users or these products.
Duke

. . you don't believe the chart(s) posted by WW showing the improvement in cooling. I guess they are 'lying' according to you. It clearly shows the difference using it vs various ratios of af and water.

I've used both WW and am currently using PI. As sort of an 'anecdotal' experiment, I purposely added distilled water (always use that) and MB af at a ratio of 65/35% (w/af) without any additive. The next day (the temps were the same; HOT!), I added PI (1-1/2 oz/ gallon) and you could immediately see the difference as reflected on the temp gauge in the IC. Of course that, to you, is anecdotal but that's what I call a 'real' world test! Kinda makes you believe the charts they have published.

BTW, what makes anybody think that you are an expert in af, coolant additives or anything else for that matter. For fact, the PH of MB af is designed to be neutral which is not true for Zerex. And where does it say that it's recommended for MB?

Does one need to use WW or PI?? I guess that decision is up to each individual but the fact is that both do work as advertised.

[Duke2.6]

I view vendor supplied "tests" with a jaundiced eye.

Zerex G-05 labeling states that it is the same chemistry as used in "all Mercedes vehicles". This I am willing to believe at face value. If it were not true, Valvoline would have heard from the DB legal department by now, and a name brand like Valvoline would not want their good name compromised by legal action from a major OEM - doesn't make for good PR or vendor relations, so labels from well known brands that such and such meets OEM specs can usually be counted on to be true.

All OEMs have specifications that various fluids must meet. They are usually very comprehensive and include a number of industry standard tests from organizations such as ASTM, and in the case of antifreeze, specific tests that each OEM develops.

Once you pass the OEM test suite, which is usually conducted and certified by an independent test lab, you can claim your product meets the OEM spec. This is a lot different than a fluid vendor coming up with their own test and posting the results on their web site.

Duke

[joselu43]

Maybe there is a benefit from the WW/PI additive, if so, it cannot be seen in the charts. The 9 sec. difference shown is for water with WW vs. a 50/50 mixture of water and glycol. If you compare apples with apples, that is water with water + WW there is practically no difference. The same is true if you compare 50/50 mixtures with and without WW. Clearly the 9 sec. difference is due to the presence of glycol. Since there is so little difference due to the WW you might as well use water alone. I think.

JL

[JimF]

Originally Posted by joselu43

Maybe there is a benefit from the WW/PI additive, if so, it cannot be seen in the charts. The 9 sec. difference shown is for water with WW vs. a 50/50 mixture of water and glycol. If you compare apples with apples, that is water with water + WW there is practically no difference. The same is true if you compare 50/50 mixtures with and without WW. Clearly the 9 sec. difference is due to the presence of glycol. Since there is so little difference due to the WW you might as well use water alone. I think.
JL

. . water that's the 'magic' ingredient in the 'cooling' formula. But you would be very unhappy with a failed radiator if you just used water only. Someplace (maybe it's here) there's post showing pics of just using water w/o some additive to prevent corrosion. It ain't pretty!

As you now see, that's why I use 35/65% ratio: it's the "water" plus PI that makes a big difference.

Most problems that I've seen is the af/w ratio is around 75/25; great for Alaska but not too good for So Cal. Adding WW or PI to that mixture would indeed get the comment ". . . made no difference".