Waterless Coolant

[FellowTraveler]

WHY WATERLESS COOLANT, WHY NOT?

I have no interest in nor am I affiliated with and commercial entity mentioned herein and only use their products without compensation.

I see very few using waterless coolant and most others are sticking to old school theory’s “ethaline glycol & water” (EGW) is less a hassle to justify not switching, or OAT’s coolant is what GM™ recommends.

I did the switch to waterless coolant years ago and I’m confident it was the right thing to do.

Take EVANS™ “which is what I use” waterless coolant as an example; it virtually eliminates corrosion, steaming, cavitation and electrolysis it has lifetime service and can be run at zero cap pressure to eliminate cooling system pressure load.

If perhaps something happens to compromise the cooling system and in worst case water has to be added to get going the waterless coolant will not work as well as designed so drive accordingly however this added water can be boiled off the waterless coolant so it’s not all wasted. Water boils at 212 +- deg. f waterless coolant somewhere near 400 deg. f without pressure cap.

Using a zero pressure cap the only pressure the system sees is pump head pressure slightly compounded by inline coolant restrictors (heater hose & bypass) which quickly falls as coolant exits motor so hoses, radiator and heater cores never get exposed to pressure that expands and that can even blow a hole in an older hose and in some cases blow the hose clear off or burst a radiator tank. A pressure cap can be used with waterless coolant to raise its boiling point however un-necessary in most applications as it has a boiling temp of just less than 400 deg. F without pressure cap and without engine damaging steaming can your EGW claim that?

FACT; waterless coolant and zero pressure cap the radiator, hoses and heater cores never see high pressures then factor in no more corrosion, steaming, cavitation or electrolysis all leading to much longer service life of all cooling components and the engine itself.

EGW always requires a pressure cap to prevent water from boiling at various temps however “steaming” is a common problem which is not controlled by the EGW this is why GM™ designed steam lines in the 6.5td motors and on the later LS series motors that uses an accumulator tank. EGW related steam develops around valves and cylinders exponentially so temps rise at those components even though your engine coolant temp gauge may show normal temps. The EGW has proven track record that it cannot remove this heat around the valves and cylinders resulting in cracks and other heat related issues commonly seen in the 6.5td. There is a legitimate argument about the substandard metals used in various 6.5 castings and IMHO EGW and the resulting steaming just exacerbated the problem.

Yes, IMHO distilled water with water wetting products is just as bad simply because there is still water in the mix and it steams always around the valves and cylinders no matter what your temp gauge may show as normal temps.

Add to the EGW mix any turbocharger and things get worse when exhaust gas temps (EGT) are not kept under control resulting in even more damaging steam around valves and cylinders when using EGW mixtures. Major advances in more efficient turbochargers available for the 6.5td reduce the heat load too. When waterless coolant replaces the EGW in this turbocharged environment steaming and the resulting damage simply cannot happen in good engine/head castings however there is not enough data on older castings using waterless coolant. Top engine rebuilders are adamant about using only GM™ enhanced blocks (May 1999+) the NAVISTAR™ cast optimizer and newer P400™ for any rebuild I’ll add waterless coolant will ensure proper cooling under all conditions.

Another argument is about GM™ max temp recommendation for the 6.5td being lower than the military 250 deg. f limit perhaps the HMMWV cooling stack being more efficient is why. So IMHO anything to enhance the GMT400 w/6.5td cooling is a plus and will allow safer higher and more efficient operating temps using waterless coolants without worry of steam heat related engine damage.

In the time since waterless coolant was introduced the trucking and aviation industry using waterless coolant has proven this higher operating temp efficiency as a matter of fact.

I’ve have successfully converted an GM™ enhanced 6.5td a NAVISTAR™ cast 6.5td a 500+ HP AMG™ Mercedes™ and will not ever go back to EGW.

 

[Burning oil]

I've been interested in this. One thing, does it actualy reduce running temp compaired to EGW? I have a hard time getting mine up to temp even with a 195* tstat as it is.
Ive really been thinking of adding this to the new P400 build list. I like that there is no corrosion.
I'm sure there is info out there, but how do you prep the engine, as in how do you get rid of any trace water?

 

[FellowTraveler]

I've been interested in this. One thing, does it actualy reduce running temp compaired to EGW? I have a hard time getting mine up to temp even with a 195* tstat as it is.
Ive really been thinking of adding this to the new P400 build list. I like that there is no corrosion.
I'm sure there is info out there, but how do you prep the engine, as in how do you get rid of any trace water?

Internally around the valves and cylinders waterless coolant reduces temps because there is no water thus no steam so it makes full contact with metal surfaces thus the coolant pulls more heat from the heads and block.

Running temp is a bit tricky hotter stat's "perhaps 205 deg. f" and a temp controlled hydraulic or electric fan clutch would be the final part of the perfect conversion if we look at the advances in over the road trucks being able to safely run higher temps using EVANS waterless coolant, however, while it is hard to keep above the 195 deg. f operating mark at times a weather cover over grill is a cheaper fix.

Conversion instructions are on EVANS site as well as all the answers to questions that have come up over the many years sine it hit the market. With engine removed I've found you can even flush the cooling lines & heater cores w/EVANS then boil off the water, I have an old email from EVANS tech stating boiling off the water is ok!

If all the water is not removed the temp will rise and not cool as designed until all the remaining water boils off, a refractometer is used to determine water % simple and effective.

 

[Twisted Steel Performance]

One other thing to add here is that with a 0psi system there is nearly no chance the coolant will get past head studs with no psi pushing coolant past the threads....

 

[Will L.]

With the Evans, is there any direct comparison of temperature you can tell us? Something like: on a particular road/hill you always drive it would climb to 215, but now it does "x".

My other thought is for my off roading- my windshield washer tank has a tiny breather hole and leaks out when I go at angles. I know your supposed to drill a hole in the radiator cap for Evans, and I'm gonna leak out there like the windshield fluid. I am trying to figure a double p trap set up to solve that, but nothing came to mind I like.

sctrailrider mentioned a different radiator cap, but I don't understand -wearing my dunce cap today?

Also: re: hummer/hmmwv cooling stacks being better? NO - NO WAY IN @%##! Unless you mean while fording a river that completely covers the hood. I know gmt 400 and gmt 800 from fleet experience as well as owning them with 6.5. I own a Hummer, and know multiple owners of hummers, hmmwvs, and friends in the military that work on them as their 9-5 as it were.
If you look at the newer hmmwvs they have a different front end than the older ones in a failed attempt to fix it, and all the older ones that get used at hiway speed in high heat areas (like mine) you'll notice a hood scoop for added air floe through the stack. It is a bigger & better stack than the pickups, but at a horrible angle for airflow. I did mine in an air tunnel, and after a few changes to the "best of both worlds" I shared my design with a friend in the USMC, and they somehow now can run them at 65-70 mph instead of 55 mph on interstates. hmm.

The military says run them up to 250, but they eat them up like candy-you do the math.

 

[Twisted Steel Performance]

I used a cap that was for a pressurized over flow system ?? there was no spring, only a bare cap.. the over flow tube is below the top of the cap so coolant is able to flow as needed ..

I don't have a before & after, was evans from the start..

 

[FellowTraveler]

With the Evans, is there any direct comparison of temperature you can tell us? Something like: on a particular road/hill you always drive it would climb to 215, but now it does "x".

My other thought is for my off roading- my windshield washer tank has a tiny breather hole and leaks out when I go at angles. I know your supposed to drill a hole in the radiator cap for Evans, and I'm gonna leak out there like the windshield fluid. I am trying to figure a double p trap set up to solve that, but nothing came to mind I like.

sctrailrider mentioned a different radiator cap, but I don't understand -wearing my dunce cap today?

Also: re: hummer/hmmwv cooling stacks being better? NO - NO WAY IN @%##! Unless you mean while fording a river that completely covers the hood. I know gmt 400 and gmt 800 from fleet experience as well as owning them with 6.5. I own a Hummer, and know multiple owners of hummers, hmmwvs, and friends in the military that work on them as their 9-5 as it were.
If you look at the newer hmmwvs they have a different front end than the older ones in a failed attempt to fix it, and all the older ones that get used at hiway speed in high heat areas (like mine) you'll notice a hood scoop for added air floe through the stack. It is a bigger & better stack than the pickups, but at a horrible angle for airflow. I did mine in an air tunnel, and after a few changes to the "best of both worlds" I shared my design with a friend in the USMC, and they somehow now can run them at 65-70 mph instead of 55 mph on interstates. hmm.

The military says run them up to 250, but they eat them up like candy-you do the math.

Ok so now we have hands on data the HMMWV cooling stack is not better and the 6.5 fails frequently perhaps its because they don't care about the expense of repowering them.

Some systems have two caps one on the radiator and another on the recovery tank systems w/accumulator have one cap at the accumulator tank.

Eliminate the steam and cavitation and more heat gets pulled from the heads and block.

 

[FellowTraveler]

The link below will explain in tech terms what I refer to steaming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleate_boiling

 

[JayTheCPA]

Have not data logged temperatures since conversion on my rigs, but am not noticing any difference since conversion. The car's temp gauge still acts like it it did under glycol and the tow rig does not deviate from its normal temp. Warm-up times remain the same as when they were on glycol.

Cannot make an assertion about EVANS' effect on the Burb as I modified the fan, put in 195* F T-stats, and installed a P-400 at the same time. Under daily driving, this configuration is tough to get above 180F where I commonly observe the dash gauge at 180F and the ECM indicating 170F during the Winter; the gap is wider while the motor is warming-up in the morning. Only time I got the ECM to show over 195F was when the outside temps were ~100F while using the A/C this past Summer.

. . . off roading- my windshield washer tank has a tiny breather hole and leaks out when I go at angles. I know your supposed to drill a hole in the radiator cap for Evans, and I'm gonna leak out there like the windshield fluid. I am trying to figure a double p trap set up to solve that, but nothing came to mind I like.

For the Burb I found a cap with a pressure-relief valve and keep the valve in the 'Up' position to relieve the pressure. This might take care of the off-road loss by simply closing the valve and letting the system pressurize for a while.


Toward the commentary of OTR rigs running hotter temperatures and saving fuel with waterless, IIRC the narrative states to let the truck's system handle the fan engagement versus manually triggering it and stop losing HP to moving air & heating the motor. Typical scenario is the trash truck where the drivers leave the fan engaged all the time; by letting the ECM / PCM / Computer do the work, it saved fuel by not running the fan so much and not lowering the temp to cooler than operating temp. So, kind-of a marketing gimmick on the claim that this is only possible under waterless versus glycol coolant.


From what I am seeing, there are two big reasons why waterless (in this case, EVANS) does not have mainstream use which are a simple lack of marketing in the automotive sector and up-front cost. Like many upgrades, waterless coolant is a tougher sell in the automotive market as potential savings are way down the road and most people will not keep their vehicle long enough to realize the benefit over glycol.

 

[FellowTraveler]

Have not data logged temperatures since conversion on my rigs, but am not noticing any difference since conversion. The car's temp gauge still acts like it it did under glycol and the tow rig does not deviate from its normal temp. Warm-up times remain the same as when they were on glycol.

Cannot make an assertion about EVANS' effect on the Burb as I modified the fan, put in 195* F T-stats, and installed a P-400 at the same time. Under daily driving, this configuration is tough to get above 180F where I commonly observe the dash gauge at 180F and the ECM indicating 170F during the Winter; the gap is wider while the motor is warming-up in the morning. Only time I got the ECM to show over 195F was when the outside temps were ~100F while using the A/C this past Summer.




For the Burb I found a cap with a pressure-relief valve and keep the valve in the 'Up' position to relieve the pressure. This might take care of the off-road loss by simply closing the valve and letting the system pressurize for a while.


Toward the commentary of OTR rigs running hotter temperatures and saving fuel with waterless, IIRC the narrative states to let the truck's system handle the fan engagement versus manually triggering it and stop losing HP to moving air & heating the motor. Typical scenario is the trash truck where the drivers leave the fan engaged all the time; by letting the ECM / PCM / Computer do the work, it saved fuel by not running the fan so much and not lowering the temp to cooler than operating temp. So, kind-of a marketing gimmick on the claim that this is only possible under waterless versus glycol coolant.


From what I am seeing, there are two big reasons why waterless (in this case, EVANS) does not have mainstream use which are a simple lack of marketing in the automotive sector and up-front cost. Like many upgrades, waterless coolant is a tougher sell in the automotive market as potential savings are way down the road and most people will not keep their vehicle long enough to realize the benefit over glycol.

I find myself using a weather cover on grill at times think 205 deg. f stats will be the fix, yes if its not a keeper many find it hard to make the switch.

There is a big diesel performance group here in Citrus County Florida that only uses EVANS because it out-performs EGW under all conditions.

 

[WarWagon]

I was under the impression that EVANS had less heat capacity that regular coolant. Thus making it a bad idea for an engine that already has low coolant flow volume (GPM) issues. The entire engine was redesigned for the military due to cooling and cracking issues.

Another reason "long life" coolant gets "tossed" from older cars is how often the cooling system gets opened and drained after the first 5 years. From simple water pump failures (hoses and other stuff may live longer with zero pressure so we set that aside) to major engine overhauls - the coolant isn't left in the engine very long. Maybe it can be reused maybe it's all over the road. Don't forget punctures from road debris or wrecks.

I ruin engine oil. (Look up oil sludge and see other modern engines that also run the ragged edge of oil temps.) Way too often to even think about running an engine "hotter". What oil doesn't boil off, 500 miles to a quart in 6.5's, thickens a grade higher to 50 weight and at the same time has low PSI at idle. Going with that I also ruin oil cooler hoses from the same excessive temperatures. I need to run synthetic from time to time because conventional can't take it.

Cost is a huge factor to fleets. It has to have a payback somewhere to be considered.

 

[FellowTraveler]

I was under the impression that EVANS had less heat capacity that regular coolant. Thus making it a bad idea for an engine that already has low coolant flow volume (GPM) issues. The entire engine was redesigned for the military due to cooling and cracking issues.

Another reason "long life" coolant gets "tossed" from older cars is how often the cooling system gets opened and drained after the first 5 years. From simple water pump failures (hoses and other stuff may live longer with zero pressure so we set that aside) to major engine overhauls - the coolant isn't left in the engine very long. Maybe it can be reused maybe it's all over the road. Don't forget punctures from road debris or wrecks.

I ruin engine oil. (Look up oil sludge and see other modern engines that also run the ragged edge of oil temps.) Way too often to even think about running an engine "hotter". What oil doesn't boil off, 500 miles to a quart in 6.5's, thickens a grade higher to 50 weight and at the same time has low PSI at idle. Going with that I also ruin oil cooler hoses from the same excessive temperatures. I need to run synthetic from time to time because conventional can't take it.

Cost is a huge factor to fleets. It has to have a payback somewhere to be considered.

Less cooling capacity or is it that it pulls more heat from the heads and block because there is no steaming going on?

IMHO as oil goes synthetic is much better at higher temps and a oil centrifuge is best for removal of soot in any IDI diesel.

 

[WarWagon]

EVANS is thicker so it requires more energy to pump it and it will not circulate as quickly. This is usually noticed by the lack of heater heat output in colder climates. Also BTU removed for the same coolant flow rate: less heat is carried away from the engine. If the cooling system is running close to its heat capacity with water based coolant, it might overheat on Evans.

It's like comparing the BTU's in 200 degree water vs. 200 degree oil.

Thus "run hotter" may occur without any additional effort. Due to slower flow rate and less BTU capacity in a identical system.

The last thing I need it to run a Arizona hot-rod 6.5 any hotter and with a HO water pump I am already near capacity of the cooling system with only dual t-stats left as an upgrade. And for a DB2 this may not be an option. So this is concern #1 I have with it.

 

[FellowTraveler]

EVANS is thicker so it requires more energy to pump it and it will not circulate as quickly. This is usually noticed by the lack of heater heat output in colder climates. Also BTU removed for the same coolant flow rate: less heat is carried away from the engine. If the cooling system is running close to its heat capacity with water based coolant, it might overheat on Evans.

It's like comparing the BTU's in 200 degree water vs. 200 degree oil.

Thus "run hotter" may occur without any additional effort. Due to slower flow rate and less BTU capacity in a identical system.

The last thing I need it to run a Arizona hot-rod 6.5 any hotter and with a HO water pump I am already near capacity of the cooling system with only dual t-stats left as an upgrade. And for a DB2 this may not be an option. So this is concern #1 I have with it.

Ok, now I'm on the same page as you. Curious as to how much more effort to pump the EVANS coolant over EGW and how to determine BTU pulling rate between the EGW at normal flow and the EVANS at the slower flow. I did notice w/bypass fully open it ran a little warmer since I installed the bypass restrictor runs cooler as most all coolant is now entering radiator in/side and a little flow from heater hose and steam line is entering hot/side of radiator. I've been in scorching high humidity triple digit temps w/ac but no hills to load it to see if there is an issue.

 

[FellowTraveler]

I run dual stats which allows more flow, then there is the fact that both heater cores in my Burb flow coolant always I suspect this was GM's attempt to increase cooling system capacity and dumping into the hot side of the radiator. My radiator core is 1" x 2 and has no problem rejecting heat there are larger cores available aftermarket.

I'm thinking now to monitor coolant/oil temps then reroute the heater hose outlet from hot side of radiator to cold side to see if there is any difference temp wise..

 

[FellowTraveler]

EVANS is thicker so it requires more energy to pump it and it will not circulate as quickly. This is usually noticed by the lack of heater heat output in colder climates. Also BTU removed for the same coolant flow rate: less heat is carried away from the engine. If the cooling system is running close to its heat capacity with water based coolant, it might overheat on Evans.

It's like comparing the BTU's in 200 degree water vs. 200 degree oil.

Thus "run hotter" may occur without any additional effort. Due to slower flow rate and less BTU capacity in a identical system.

The last thing I need it to run a Arizona hot-rod 6.5 any hotter and with a HO water pump I am already near capacity of the cooling system with only dual t-stats left as an upgrade. And for a DB2 this may not be an option. So this is concern #1 I have with it.

WW, I just reread your statement that you have a HO water pump but a single thermostat which restricts coolant flow w/HO pump and curious how you prevent water pump cavitation using a single thermostat on your application..

 

[Burning oil]

I think and IMO the flow difference is negligible between the two. The rest of the system would need to be larger also. Kind of like putting a big muffler on a stock exhaust. Then with the single you get a bypass blocker to so hot water does not rturn to engine.

 

[WarWagon]

WW, I just reread your statement that you have a HO water pump but a single thermostat which restricts coolant flow w/HO pump and curious how you prevent water pump cavitation using a single thermostat on your application..

I never noticed a problem with HO water pumps and single T-Stats. The original concern I read about, aside of reduced GPM, was extra block pressure pushing out the freeze plugs. The only temp excursions I would get to 210 was sneaking up on a hill in OD, but, not enough throttle to drop to 3rd. Better turbo reduced ECT's for me so I may have room now to run it without concern. The setup also had 180 T-Stats and a KD low temp fan clutch with the 21" steel or Duramax fan. Funny, but my 95 dual heat suburban always ran hotter than the pickup even with different turbo's. Maybe because the AC was always on...

 

[bowtiebutler956]

WW, I just reread your statement that you have a HO water pump but a single thermostat which restricts coolant flow w/HO pump and curious how you prevent water pump cavitation using a single thermostat on your application..

I too am running a 97+ HO pump with a single stat, and my cooling system works very well. The single stats on our 6.5's are much larger than a standard stat, like the duals used in the later models. While the one large stat may not flow as much as two standard ones, its still a high volume stat. I'm running a Delco 190 in mine.
Its funny, after going through my engine awhile back, I installed a Robert Shaw stat in it, and it continually ran about 210, and I didn't know why. Thats when I got to reading about the bypass blocker used on these 6.5 truck engine. The stat I installed was for a 6.5 Van engine that didn't use a bypass blocker, so the stat didn't have one. I swapped it for an OEM 190 with the blocker, and now my truck almost never leaves 190, even on hot 100* days. Now when I'm towing I sometimes see 200.

Matt

 

[FellowTraveler]

I think and IMO the flow difference is negligible between the two. The rest of the system would need to be larger also. Kind of like putting a big muffler on a stock exhaust. Then with the single you get a bypass blocker to so hot water does not rturn to engine.

Advertised as pump flow was 90 gpm early and 130 gpm later however there are various cross-over thermostat housings with the later one being having about a 1" diameter pump bypass then bypass blocking thermostat.