Just seen this on wheeler dealers looks to be fantastic stuff.

http://www.evanscoolants.co.uk/power-cool-180-for-performance-cars.html

 

Does anyone use it? What do you all think?

 

If it does what it says it would solve a lot of issues that zeds suffer from..

just seen this also wondered how good it is

looked into about 6 times more expensive than water based products

looked into about 6 times more expensive than water based products

 

Yeah, but look at it this way. You don't have to change it every year, it doesn't cause rust that can block the galleys, no radiator rust, no heater matrix holes, no pressure build up in the block and rad, less (if any) scale build up. etc..etc... it's worth the extra outlay.

im not dissing this but it will have a life span before it stops working properly I would of thought

im not dissing this but it will have a life span before it stops working properly I would of thought

 

I know your not mate lol. It lasts the life of the engine they claim, also the prep stuff you need can be filtered and reused.

I'm gonna give it a bash.

I can see the knock affects no need for the massive tt rads lol reverting back to smaller

I'm gonna give it a bash.

 

me too.. Report back on your findings mate :thumbup1:

 

I can see the knock affects no need for the massive tt rads lol reverting back to smaller

 

spot on mate :lol:

made me think if a reservoir would do the trick like big washer bottle

Well it looks ideal for people who believe that "Water contains Oxygen which encourages corrosion". Glycol (as used in Sptfires dontchaknow old bean) also contains oxygen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol

Plus I have trouble in reconciling "non-toxic liquids blended with a non-aqueous proprietary inhibitor package." and "patented DeTox™ additive" and "has been classified as Non-Toxic by an EPA certified laboratory" and " However as with all chemicals, do not consume. Keep away from children. Avoid contact with eyes and skin. Rinse hands and eyes with water after incedental contact." I don't know of any non-oxygen containing chemicals which can be turned into non-toxic just by adding a patented additive.

It looks as if they're using a mix of glycol-ish type stuff to up the boiling point. These engines get hot enough as it is so why would you want to increase the running temp under your bonnet.

If it really did work, they could explain it with far fewer buzzwords. If it sounds like bullshit, if it smells like bullshit and if it reads like bullshit, it's probably bullshit. I'm in marketing, I should know :D

Well it looks ideal for people who believe that "Water contains Oxygen which encourages corrosion". Glycol (as used in Sptfires dontchaknow old bean) also contains oxygen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol

Plus I have trouble in reconciling "non-toxic liquids blended with a non-aqueous proprietary inhibitor package." and "patented DeTox™ additive" and "has been classified as Non-Toxic by an EPA certified laboratory" and " However as with all chemicals, do not consume. Keep away from children. Avoid contact with eyes and skin. Rinse hands and eyes with water after incedental contact." I don't know of any non-oxygen containing chemicals which can be turned into non-toxic just by adding a patented additive.

It looks as if they're using a mix of glycol-ish type stuff to up the boiling point. These engines get hot enough as it is so why would you want to increase the running temp under your bonnet.

If it really did work, they could explain it with far fewer buzzwords. If it sounds like bullshit, if it smells like bullshit and if it reads like bullshit, it's probably bullshit. I'm in marketing, I should know :D

 

err. water does have dissolved oxygen in it, that's how fish breath :laugh:

 

It's not about running the engine hotter though, it's about removing the downsides of water based cooling in the entire system. I do agree that it sounds to good to be true, but if it does do what they say..and I can't see how it wouldn't, then surely its got to be a good thing? and if it's good enough for a Merlin then it's good enough for my zed.lol

Aha, here we go. Sounds familiar?

The patented DeTox™ additive used to render EG non-toxic

s from a Welsh company claiming EPA approval. Nice one lads, EPA is US and has no applicability over here. You can not "render" Ethylene Glycol non-toxic. Drink a few litres and call me a liar. (No, don't. Please really don't.) Ethylene Glycol is, to quote Wikipedia

moderately toxic with an oral LDLO = 786 mg/kg for humans. Upon ingestion, ethylene glycol is oxidized to glycolic acid which is, in turn, oxidized to oxalic acid, which is toxic. It and its toxic byproducts first affect the central nervous system, then the heart, and finally the kidneys. Ingestion of sufficient amounts can be fatal if untreated.

So if their publicity material is that accurate when talking about toxicity, what do you think about the rest of it?

Aha, here we go. Sounds familiar? s from a Welsh company claiming EPA approval. Nice one lads, EPA is US and has no applicability over here. You can not "render" Ethylene Glycol non-toxic. Drink a few litres and call me a liar. (No, don't. Please really don't.) Ethylene Glycol is, to quote Wikipedia

So if their publicity material is that accurate when talking about toxicity, what do you think about the rest of it?

 

I put that down to marketing mate, but does it matter if it's toxic? I'd be sticking it my car not my mouth. lol

 

would be good to read a few testimonials from people that have tried it out..

Glycol may be great for Merlins but ask any ground crew or pilot who caught a faceful. Nasty stuff. Let's get a bit of reality in here. Any country who made aeroplanes in 39/45 knows about the benefits of glycol in internal combustion cooling. I suspect that may have included Japan. Had it been a good thing to use in normal use, do you not think Nissan might have used it themselves? Or Rolls-Royce, or whoever it was made the P-45 Mustang etc etc?

Anyway, point being that anyone who claims adding anything to glycol will take away its toxicity is either stupid or deliberately lying and I would measure their other claims on the same scales.

Glycol may be great for Merlins but ask any ground crew or pilot who caught a faceful. Nasty stuff. Let's get a bit of reality in here. Any country who made aeroplanes in 39/45 knows about the benefits of glycol in internal combustion cooling. I suspect that may have included Japan. Had it been a good thing to use in normal use, do you not think Nissan might have used it themselves? Or Rolls-Royce, or whoever it was made the P-45 Mustang etc etc?

Anyway, point being that anyone who claims adding anything to glycol will take away its toxicity is either stupid or deliberately lying and I would measure their other claims on the same scales.

 

point understood mate, something to ponder. I know that glycol is nasty stuff, but and I might be being naive here, wouldn't they have to say if it's that dangerous?

getting a heated thread pmsl

getting a heated thread pmsl

 

good one!!:lol:

Glycol may be great for Merlins but ask any ground crew or pilot who caught a faceful. Nasty stuff. Let's get a bit of reality in here. Any country who made aeroplanes in 39/45 knows about the benefits of glycol in internal combustion cooling. I suspect that may have included Japan. Had it been a good thing to use in normal use, do you not think Nissan might have used it themselves? Or Rolls-Royce, or whoever it was made the P-45 Mustang etc etc?

Anyway, point being that anyone who claims adding anything to glycol will take away its toxicity is either stupid or deliberately lying and I would measure their other claims on the same scales.

 

Its a chemical anything can be added / removed to take away the toxicity levels when it is being made.

 

Id say its most likely Propylene glycol not Ethylene glycol, there is a big difference to the toxicity levels upon ingestion between the two, Ethylene breaks down into dangerous acids (glycolic acid and oxalic acid) that the body can not deal with and is highly toxic.

 

Where as propylene glycol breaks down in to what the body naturally produces (pyruvic acid, acetic acid, lactic acid with propionaldehyde being the one that is potentially dangerous) though you would need to ingest a very large quantity of propylene glycol to be "poisoned" by it.

 

Not that id recommend drinking it, but Propylene glycol is much safer not only for humans, but for the environment than ethylene glycol, and both can be used in the cooling systems of motor vehicles.

 

Oh and the reason car manufacturers do not make vehicles that utilise it, its because it actually needs a higher flow rate to be effective in cooling compared to its water / coolent counter part, and in some cases can actually make things hotter rather than cooler.

Edited October 17, 201213 yr by vodkashots

Sorry but made me laugh.......

 

Subject.... Waterless cooling

Member...... Steams

 

Maybe a warning there somewhere ! Lol lol

Lol,

 

Well you do need water to even get steam !

Sorry but made me laugh.......

 

Subject.... Waterless cooling

Member...... Steams

 

Maybe a warning there somewhere ! Lol lol

So ignoring all the toxicity stuff, does it actually work better ? They go on about the benefits of reduced or non-existent cavitation, which has to help, (but the system is under pressure and the boiling point will been raised a bit by that anyway), but what I'm interested in, is does this liquid transfer heat better than water ? I'm sure that'll be called a coefficient of something or other ... would be interested in knowing whether that is higher than water or water with 20% antifreeze etc. We have talked in the past about the benefits, or not, of running on pure anti-freeze (and of using Water Wetter) - how does this compare with that ? Given all the glycol (whatever) discussion, it sounds like it's pretty similar to me.

Sorry but made me laugh.......

 

Subject.... Waterless cooling

Member...... Steams

 

Maybe a warning there somewhere ! Lol lol

 

:tongue:

That wasn't intended to be a thread killer !