Evanscooling
- Thread starter Da Game
- Start date
- Status
Don't recall seeing a light duty aircraft engine with liquid cooling.
I think it would be a waste of money.
I think it would be a waste of money.
Quote:
Don't recall seeing a light duty aircraft engine with liquid cooling.
Yep, Teledyne Continental had one. Here is a Wiki on it:
IO-550 Teledyne
Don't recall seeing a light duty aircraft engine with liquid cooling.
Yep, Teledyne Continental had one. Here is a Wiki on it:
IO-550 Teledyne
Evans NPG is primarily for those who:
- don't want to worry about changing coolant
- tune for maximum power
- want increased reliability
- operate engines in high-output for extended periods
- reduce / eliminate pressure or cavitation in the cooling system
The only engines that require or recommend it, that I've heard of, are the Rotax aircraft engines and the Koenigsegg supercar. Most of the bad-mouthing about the product come from those who do not understand engine cooling very well, or who have not implemented it properly.
- don't want to worry about changing coolant
- tune for maximum power
- want increased reliability
- operate engines in high-output for extended periods
- reduce / eliminate pressure or cavitation in the cooling system
The only engines that require or recommend it, that I've heard of, are the Rotax aircraft engines and the Koenigsegg supercar. Most of the bad-mouthing about the product come from those who do not understand engine cooling very well, or who have not implemented it properly.
Well I tried to implement it on a stock vehicle which was not listed as a problem on their site. Needless to say it did not allow me to have decent heater output. After calling I was told that it does not work on a heater that is too restrictive.
So I went back to Amsoil antifreeze which is a propylene glycol long life antifreeze. So in other words I had to go back to conventional antifreeze. This was the NPG +
I really wanted it to work. I wonder if it would work in a light duty gas engined truck?
So I went back to Amsoil antifreeze which is a propylene glycol long life antifreeze. So in other words I had to go back to conventional antifreeze. This was the NPG +
I really wanted it to work. I wonder if it would work in a light duty gas engined truck?
It should work for any engine but I can see how a heater might be affected. The coolant loop might need to be modified to increase the pressure drop across the heater-core but each situation is different.
The NPG+ has recently been replaced with a newer product that is supposed to replace both NPG+ and NPG-R. I don't see any significant changes to the coolant properties so its more of a formula tweak than a new product.
There's a good chunk of info on NPG is this book as well as some test results:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=06TgJ1j119IC&printsec=frontcover&printsec=frontcover#v=one
http://www.amazon.com/Engine-Cooling-Systems-HP1425-Performance/dp/1557884250
The NPG+ has recently been replaced with a newer product that is supposed to replace both NPG+ and NPG-R. I don't see any significant changes to the coolant properties so its more of a formula tweak than a new product.
There's a good chunk of info on NPG is this book as well as some test results:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=06TgJ1j119IC&printsec=frontcover&printsec=frontcover#v=one
http://www.amazon.com/Engine-Cooling-Systems-HP1425-Performance/dp/1557884250
Last edited:
Most of the essential info is here:
http://www.evanscooling.com/how-it-works/frequently-asked-questions/
http://www.evanscooling.com/how-it-works/frequently-asked-questions/
That's a good question. The answer is 'yes' but it's won't work as well as an aqueous solution (typical 50/50 mix). If your heater / cooling circuit is open enough then it might not make a difference. If it's 'too small' or 'low pressure' then it might need modification.
Try it and see but if winter heat is your primary concern then stick with the norm. If you don't mind doing work & research then have at it and post the results.
Try it and see but if winter heat is your primary concern then stick with the norm. If you don't mind doing work & research then have at it and post the results.
I think what it comes down to is the Evans has a higher viscosity property. Ethylene, or propylene glycol antifreeze is mixed with water which gives it a thinner property. The NPG+ was supposed to solve that problem when it came out, and it's what I used.
My cooling system has a strange coolant routing involving the heater core. Which I know probably contributed to the insufficient cooling in my car.
My cooling system has a strange coolant routing involving the heater core. Which I know probably contributed to the insufficient cooling in my car.
I run NPG+ in my Coule de Ville. It flat out WORKS. It won't boil, it won't freeze, it won't corrode. How do I know it works? Simple: I am cooling a massive (542ci) stroker engine with easily 3x the factory power with a STOCK cooling system! The cooling system is factory Caddy (albeit, Cadillac Service Chassis), and it will idle in traffic or run 85+MPH uphill in 100-degree heat with the A/C on!
This is a 60s-70s Cad you own. I really wanted it to work for my application. I'm thinking that it would maybe work really well in a 92 Dodge D250 5.9 gas engine truck I have.
I was told by Evans tech that some of the newer cars don't work well with the Evans products. Something about the heaters maybe being too restrictive. So I'm thinking that the truck would be OK?
I was told by Evans tech that some of the newer cars don't work well with the Evans products. Something about the heaters maybe being too restrictive. So I'm thinking that the truck would be OK?
A good bit of research on Evans productcs:
http://www.norosion.com/evanstest.htm
I would personally never want 100% glycol in my cooling system, for all the reasons mentioned in this article and more.
http://www.norosion.com/evanstest.htm
I would personally never want 100% glycol in my cooling system, for all the reasons mentioned in this article and more.
There's definitely some bad/mis-information on that page but any info is good info as long as it can be backed up. I'm going to look it over and see if I can sort it out.
Interesting info
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
Interesting info
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
Agreed. But as long as they have the data to back their findings, it doesn't matter whether they are biased or not. Facts are facts. Hot heads are hot heads. Not even bias can change that.
Interesting info
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
Agreed. But as long as they have the data to back their findings, it doesn't matter whether they are biased or not. Facts are facts. Hot heads are hot heads. Not even bias can change that.
Not quite sure how facts are facts just because you posted the link..., but whatever...........
Originally Posted By: Eiligeins
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
Interesting info
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
Agreed. But as long as they have the data to back their findings, it doesn't matter whether they are biased or not. Facts are facts. Hot heads are hot heads. Not even bias can change that.
Originally Posted By: Eiligeins
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
Interesting info
But they are selling their product. So hard to say how unbiased they are?
http://www.norosion.com/
Agreed. But as long as they have the data to back their findings, it doesn't matter whether they are biased or not. Facts are facts. Hot heads are hot heads. Not even bias can change that.
It's obvious to me that whoever wrote that article on No-Rosion vs Evans is biased and trying to make one product look bad, and one product look good. This might be a bit random but I'll post the info as I find it.
1. "There is speculation that, when OEM water pumps are used with viscous Evans waterless products, water pump life span could be reduced, and result in a greater frequency of water pump failures. Additional testing would be necessary in order to validate this."
Where does this speculation come from and why would anyone bother adding this to the article? Why would a pump fail? The only pump failures I've seen were from worn / damaged seals or worn / cheap bearings. How would a no-pressure, lifetime coolant cause pump failure?
1. "There is speculation that, when OEM water pumps are used with viscous Evans waterless products, water pump life span could be reduced, and result in a greater frequency of water pump failures. Additional testing would be necessary in order to validate this."
Where does this speculation come from and why would anyone bother adding this to the article? Why would a pump fail? The only pump failures I've seen were from worn / damaged seals or worn / cheap bearings. How would a no-pressure, lifetime coolant cause pump failure?
2. "Because Evans waterless products are 100% glycol, they are slippery when spilled or leaked onto pavement."
No kidding. Also, because virtually all engine coolants in use contain glycol they are, 'slippery when spilled or leaked onto pavement'. There is nothing unusual about this so why bring it up?
No kidding. Also, because virtually all engine coolants in use contain glycol they are, 'slippery when spilled or leaked onto pavement'. There is nothing unusual about this so why bring it up?
3. "Race tracks now ban the use of engine coolant that contains ANY glycol. Instead, they require engines to run straight water coolant. This is one of the reasons why the Evans products can not be used in the engines of vehicles that are operated on a race track."
Right, but this does not apply to all tracks or to all forms of racing. But stop and think about this for a second ... WHY would you have coolant on the track to begin with? From personal experience I have seen several cars spring leaks and blow hoses due to a number of things but there was one element common to all of these failures, water-based coolant.
My guess is that if all track cars were REQUIRED to use Evans (or non-water coolant) then we wouldn't have any issues with coolant on the track, or coolant related failures, to begin with. It's the water-based coolant issues that's the source of the problem, not the glycol.
Right, but this does not apply to all tracks or to all forms of racing. But stop and think about this for a second ... WHY would you have coolant on the track to begin with? From personal experience I have seen several cars spring leaks and blow hoses due to a number of things but there was one element common to all of these failures, water-based coolant.
My guess is that if all track cars were REQUIRED to use Evans (or non-water coolant) then we wouldn't have any issues with coolant on the track, or coolant related failures, to begin with. It's the water-based coolant issues that's the source of the problem, not the glycol.
- Status
