Water Wetter?

[TownsendsFJR1300]

I looked but couldn't find anything on it (but I know its been posted here).

Reading the Water Wetter site, it seems your only adding several ounces
to the cooling system...

It's rare it gets below 32F down here and I'd like to try the WW.
I think the "track guys" are running either that or 100% water.

For normal operation on the street, for hot temps and still chemical protection/lubrication, etc,
what seems to be the best mix, amount, etc for best results?

Also, what kind of temp drop are you guys seeing compared to no WW?

Thanks ahead of time..

 

[KHarper4289]

I switched to Engine Ice which is AMA/CCS approved and allowed in most tracks. Also enviro-friendly, non-toxic, etc.

My temps dropped 10 degrees AT LEAST and takes much longer to reach the infamous 210 mark where the fan kicks on.

 

[zixaq]

Glycol-based coolants have significant corrosion inhibiting properties in addition to raising the boiling point (and lowering melting point).

Yes, pure water is more efficient in terms of heat transfer due to the much higher specific heat of water, but unless you've modified your bike to run much hotter or you flog the **** out of it (racing), it shouldn't matter. The cooling efficiency gains are probably meaningless and you give up the benefits of coolant. There's a reason people mostly use a 50/50 mix. (Except on the track, where glycol spills would be very, very bad.)

Water Wetter's literature suggests that it works with a 50/50 mix as well.

 

[FinalImpact]

Unless you are boiling over, why forgo anti-corrosion protection? Do you want to dump the coolant every 9mo?

Just because its reporting 210F, so be it. Think of it as the happy spot. It runs well, less engine wear, less engine oil sludge building... I'm just saying 195 to 205 is good place!
The only downside is the fan sucking off the battery while stuck at low speeds....

If it's pushing coolant into the reservoir on hot days, YES , consider this as an option. If its not throwing up - leave it be!

JM2C!

 

[TownsendsFJR1300]

Unless you are boiling over, why forgo anti-corrosion protection? Do you want to dump the coolant every 9mo?

Just because its reporting 210F, so be it. Think of it as the happy spot. It runs well, less engine wear, less engine oil sludge building... I'm just saying 195 to 205 is good place!
The only downside is the fan sucking off the battery while stuck at low speeds....

If it's pushing coolant into the reservoir on hot days, YES , consider this as an option. If its not throwing up - leave it be!

JM2C!

Tks... No, its not boiling over or even close to it.

Around town, generally moving, is about 180F (summer temps), Super heavy traffic, maybe 190..

My fan never comes on for usual riding (and does work as it kicked on doing a TB sync)

Just considered treating for it for better engine performance, cooling, but apparently I'm better off with my 50/50 mix..

Thanks guys...

 

[FinalImpact]

Fair enough...
Everyone keep in mind the engine is more efficient in that window of 195 to 205°F (90 - 96°C) and there is no harm in having it there.

If your cage had gauge that told the truth you would notice it's always up there too. Fact is most modern cars normalize and average the gauge so it just stays in the middle unless its just started or is actually on the verge of overheating. You don't want people having a panic attack watching it swing all over the place...

Here is race bike who went lsong on water wetter flush intervals... Notice the impeller is ball of rust and took out the seal???

Click --> R6 tear down

 

[IanHoots]

I know it's different, but a good example just the same. All the vehicles I look after at work run 50/50 Type A glycol anti-freeze anti-boil (non-organic). These engines have lots of mixed metal components and both corrosion and thermal shock is are serious problems. Fire truck engine are commonly full throttle, cold start and then 100 precent throttle for extended period of time whilst stationary. The coolant and engine oil cops a pounding.

After much testing of various products including wetting agents, we have found the type A coolant was compatible all out fleet engines: Mercedes, Scania and Isuzu OEM products. We tried CAT, GM, Nulon, Penrite and Castrol. Various type were tried, long life etc and the Nulon or Castrol is the current product in use.

My S1 FZ6 barn find got a coolant flush a few weeks ago, for the first time ever I suspect. The crap that came out during flushing was nasty, it took forever to wash out clean. Out of curiosity I tested the old coolant on the refractometer at work, the 2005 Yamaha coolant (probably, just bought the bike) just passed. So the old FZ got filled up with Nulon type A which should be more than adequate protection for me.

 

[Motogiro]

Just for thought and the possibility of use in our bikes. I am in no way affiliated with this product but I was intrigued when I saw it on Jay Leno's Garage. It may be my next coolant.

There is a coolant called Evans waterless engine coolant. Pretty expensive stuff that requires a pricey prep fluid to flush any water out of the system before you fill it with the actual coolant. The boiling point is so high there is very little or no expansion which leads to very little if any internal pressure within the cooling system. This reduces boil-over and keeps a maximum density of coolant volume in the circulatory system. A few things may be experienced when using a product like this. I've seen reports that temp gauge runs higher than with conventional 50/50 glycol/water based coolant. I don't know if this is a legit claim. This may actually be do to seeing truer temps reflected using the Evans coolant because of higher efficiency heat transfer. If a coolant has a higher rate of transfer it will take heat away quicker more efficiently and this will also be reflected at the temperature sensor. So the higher temperature reports may not in fact be inefficiency but in fact higher efficiency of the coolant.

One of the critical scenarios of an engine over heat is the boil out of the coolant. When the engine goes over the boiling point of the coolant and past the pressure limit of the radiator cap the fluid gets pushed out. as this happens the coolant volume has been reduce and the cooling system efficiency has been reduced even more. The higher the temp the more pushing out of coolant and the cycle of failure increases rapidly.
The Evans coolant has a boiling point of 191°C (375°F) I imagine this leaves less stress on hoses and component that might commonly fail sooner with the help of these added pressures.

When I think of using it the price keeps me at bay because I think if I need to drain it it will cost more to refill. Then I remember this is life of the vehicle coolant. It is waterless and prevents corrosion and as long as it's kept clean why wouldn't I be able to just pour it back it as long as it's kept clean. If it is life of the vehicle and has the other positive attributes is it more expensive?

Jay Leno uses it in some of his vehicles.
Here's a link to some videos regarding this coolant. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=evans+waterless+engine+coolant

Here is a spec sheet on the Evans powersports waterless coolant. http://www.evanscoolant.com/Custome...ets/download-files/powersports-spec-sheet.pdf

 

[zixaq]

Just for thought and the possibility of use in our bikes. I am in no way affiliated with this product but I was intrigued when I saw it on Jay Leno's Garage. It may be my next coolant.

There is a coolant called Evans waterless engine coolant. Pretty expensive stuff that requires a pricey prep fluid to flush any water out of the system before you fill it with the actual coolant. The boiling point is so high there is very little or no expansion which leads to very little if any internal pressure within the cooling system. This reduces boil-over and keeps a maximum density of coolant volume in the circulatory system. A few things may be experienced when using a product like this. I've seen reports that temp gauge runs higher than with conventional 50/50 glycol/water based coolant. I don't know if this is a legit claim. This may actually be do to seeing truer temps reflected using the Evans coolant because of higher efficiency heat transfer. If a coolant has a higher rate of transfer it will take heat away quicker more efficiently and this will also be reflected at the temperature sensor. So the higher temperature reports may not in fact be inefficiency but in fact higher efficiency of the coolant.

One of the critical scenarios of an engine over heat is the boil out of the coolant. When the engine goes over the boiling point of the coolant and past the pressure limit of the radiator cap the fluid gets pushed out. as this happens the coolant volume has been reduce and the cooling system efficiency has been reduced even more. The higher the temp the more pushing out of coolant and the cycle of failure increases rapidly.
The Evans coolant has a boiling point of 191°C (375°F) I imagine this leaves less stress on hoses and component that might commonly fail sooner with the help of these added pressures.

When I think of using it the price keeps me at bay because I think if I need to drain it it will cost more to refill. Then I remember this is life of the vehicle coolant. It is waterless and prevents corrosion and as long as it's kept clean why wouldn't I be able to just pour it back it as long as it's kept clean. If it is life of the vehicle and has the other positive attributes is it more expensive?

Jay Leno uses it in some of his vehicles.
Here's a link to some videos regarding this coolant. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=evans+waterless+engine+coolant

Here is a spec sheet on the Evans powersports waterless coolant. http://www.evanscoolant.com/Custome...ets/download-files/powersports-spec-sheet.pdf

Sounds like snake oil. At a glance, some of their claims on the website don't hold water (ba-dum ching).

Almost nothing is better at absorbing heat than water (water is very near the theoretical maximum heat capacity). Their description of water vaporizing on the hottest engine components would actually cool BETTER due to an extremely high enthalpy of vaporization (translation: takes lots and lots of energy to make water into a gas). Their assertion that water "contains oxygen, which causes corrosion" indicates that they either have no idea what they're talking about, or they're completely willing to lie to customers. Unless you're applying an electrical current somewhere to separate the individual water molecules, that oxygen is bound up in the water and doesn't react the way molecular oxygen does.

I am extremely skeptical. I'd need to see some empirical tests proving it was "better" somehow, and even then, 50/50 works extremely well. How can this stuff possibly be worth the price premium?

 

[Motogiro]

Sounds like snake oil. At a glance, some of their claims on the website don't hold water (ba-dum ching).

Almost nothing is better at absorbing heat than water (water is very near the theoretical maximum heat capacity). Their description of water vaporizing on the hottest engine components would actually cool BETTER due to an extremely high enthalpy of vaporization (translation: takes lots and lots of energy to make water into a gas). Their assertion that water "contains oxygen, which causes corrosion" indicates that they either have no idea what they're talking about, or they're completely willing to lie to customers. Unless you're applying an electrical current somewhere to separate the individual water molecules, that oxygen is bound up in the water and doesn't react the way molecular oxygen does.

I am extremely skeptical. I'd need to see some empirical tests proving it was "better" somehow, and even then, 50/50 works extremely well. How can this stuff possibly be worth the price premium?

Actually the temps in the cylinder head water jacket may be well over the boiling point of the water even when pressurized at 1 atmosphere (about 15psi) The temps you see on your readout are averaged.
No doubt 50/50 works well as long as you change it at recommended intervals. These intervals are recommended because of the property breakdown over time and like the Evans, any of these coolant marketing companies are trying to sell their product. This means at least we should look at the 50/50 coolant, monitoring it's chemical properties and change it out when it's time has come. If you've got a coolant that's life of the vehicle, has a no freezing and a boiling point of 375 deg. It's not more expensive than the standard given you must change standard coolant at intervals over the life of the vehicle.
Technologies and chemistry are rapidly changing our lives and not all of it is snake oil or bad. Some of it may be worth a look and be beneficial as an alternative Another link ... Waterless vs traditional coolants| Public Works Magazine | Heavy Equipment, Evans Cooling Systems Inc., Auburn University’s PAVE Research Center
Again here is a link with some data they provide on their product. http://www.evanscoolant.com/Custome...ets/download-files/powersports-spec-sheet.pdf

 

[IanHoots]

Yes, I have tried it. The cost 5 years ago was outlandish, that was the main deterrent.

I was worried about using a cooling system in a very different way to its original design. I was also sceptical of the long term maintenance, if the Evans people were wrong, I have to replace most of the major engine and cooling system components if corrosion damaged. As far as I know the F250 that got converted to the PG coolant is still running it without incident.

At the time the cost to convert the F250 was several hundred doolars vs. 50 for type A every 3-4 years. There is no way in 15-20 year life span that it would become cost effective. If the cost has gotten closer and its more proven I would look at it again. I would still have concerns as to how do you remove ALL of the water from the system with out a lot of dis-assembly. It was a pain in the a55 to make certain that the F250 had drained the block out completely.

The question still begs to be asked, if it never needs changing why don't manufacturers put it in there from factory?

 

[FinalImpact]

I have not read the links but if a manufacturers warranty is 5 or even 10 years and the cost is ridiculous, it doesn't make sense for them to use it. The vehicle is no longer their concern.

Now add in the fact that one quicky lube stop tops it off with h2o or glycol and its ruined, one can asses that the risk is not worth the reward!