Doctor Mudge,
Can you point me to the thread that that was copied from. I'd like to read up on it.

Thanks,
Karl Ellwein
dang I wish camaroz28.com would encourage name signatures so I could address everyone by their names).

 

Evans NPG required specialized cooling system components (radiator, pump, etc.). Evans NPG+ does not, to the best of my knowledge. And the Evans web site.

NPG+ is new coolant providing dramatic improvements in heat transfer and viscosity that make the new fluid a "pour-in," not requiring changes to cooling system components.

According to Chuck (in the other Evans thread I started), the higher temperatures indicated by the water temperature gauge (not lower, as the second paragraph quoted by Dr. Mudge states) indicates the Evans coolant's ability to absorb more heat from the components it comes into contact with, carrying away heat from the engine (to the radiator) more efficiently than water or a water/glycol mixture. You're more than welcome to ask Chuck directly or read the other thread if you have any doubts.

It's also interesting that someone should call Evans NPG+ is snake oil while espousing Redline Water Wetter, a product which I've used myself for its purported "magical" qualities, but have never seen any tangible benefits from.

Evans NPG+ coolant was specifically recommended to me by Mark Montalvo, and I value his opinion (and Chuck's) slightly more than that of the "ex-chemistry major", oddly enough.

 

Quick, I thought it was from the LT1Edit list but it turned out to be from a local email list that I'm on, which your welcome to sign up for if you like, I can point you too it. Its a Yahoo list currently, so you actually dont have to recieve email, you can read it all via the web. There was not alot more info I dont think, but there was some more talk going back and forth about it before the topic was dropped.

It would of course be interesting to know the facts here, but without seeing things for myself all I can do is look at 2 very knowlegable people who seem to have differing viewpoints on the matter. Mark Montalvo is on our email list as well, but has not been seen much lately, and I dont remember any feedback from him but it was awhile back.

I assume this post started either, out of curiosity, or someone who is making alot of horsepower and has an honest cooling problem, which I can understand.

 

It was suggested to use your favorite search engine (Google, etc) and lookup "Terminal Molar Heat", the only exact matches all reference quotes by Jack Evans about NPG coolant. If you search for Heat Capacity, you'll get around 88k results. If you look up engine cooling, guess who shows up at the top (payed).

 

Doc,
That's a good idea, (the google search).
I'm going to do that tonight, (working a night shift with browser access). I have read Evans stuff a few months ago and never have I seen him mention 100% water. He always talks about regular antifreeze vs NPG+
And
I'm going to throw this terminal molar thing at my shift chemistry partner, (who may not know anything about it since he's just a chemist), and maybe one or two fluid system engineers will be still in their office. I've never heard of the term but of course I'm not a heat transfer and fluid flow college grad. That term is exactly what got my curiosity going and thinking that there might be something I'm missing about Evans.
If it turns out that terminal molar heat is a property that can relate to cylinder head cooling, and that NPG+ does in fact have a better TMH properties than water, then that would interest me enough to give Evans a try.
I have a hunch that TMH in relation to cylinder head cooling will have different property at different operating conditions, (ie boiling and not boiling or nucleate boiling, non nucleate boiling).
I'm predicting right now that I'll find that water will tranfer heat greatly better than NPG, up until the departure from nucleate boiling, in which case water will work best for me....because my engine is not operated in a manner that would let the cylinder heads form a steam pocket at the metal surface.
Will report back later if I find the time or learn anything.
Karl

 

More feedback from those in the field would definately be good.

Anti freeze actually hurts the ability to dissipate heat, its there to raise the boiling poing (not needed by me), and provide some anti corrosion protection, and of course it has pump lube in the mix, which can be bought seperately as well.

I do get pretty heated up on a road course with the Camaro, but I know that the Griffin does quite acceptably in the Silver State Classic in an unlimited MPH class, so for me the problem can be solved. With someone in a turbo/blower situation making 700 HP then I'm sure there is an issue...

 

Go away for a few days and look what happens.

Very interesting thread. As I stated in the other thread, I refuse to debate the issue. I honestly see no reason to do so.... NPG is for some people and not for others. For me, the real benefits come in the way of testing and being able to push the limits of what is possible with conventional thinking. Unless you are willing to invest a small fortune in test equipment, you aren't going to see the results I've seen, it's really that simple. If you think that is a cop out of some sort then I'd encourage you to read the other posts I've made about engines, engineering subjects, etc., and tell me if I don't know a little bit about the stuff. Or maybe I'm just fibbing to everyone? That's what some of this response (Doc) would have me believe.

"More feedback from those in the field would definitely be good"

Well that would be nice wouldn't it. The problem is... what would you actually believe? Do you understand the thermodynamics well enough to make an educated decision? You'll find that those "in the field" don't want to tell everything they know. The marketplace is simply too competetive and some of us (myself) do not want to come to a message board to debate and write papers on things for less than 1% of the members (who may genuinely be interested) to read. The other 99+% just read the first couple sentences and loses interest. I would rather teach or inform. That's just me though.

You've made a real discovery in the term "terminal molar heat" William. First of all, look at the root terminology, that being "Molar heat". Ever heard that term before? Perhaps from a chapter in your high-school chemistry books? Now figure out what "terminal" has to do with it. Read into Newton's laws of convection and tell me that you can't figure out what the "terminal molar heat" of a fluid (coolant) might possible imply. Did I get the term from the Evans website? I've spent about 5 minutes of my online life at the Evans website, so you tell me. I do however remember the term from one of my college Chemistry books.... then again, maybe I just get off on endorsing a product that I get absolutely no monetary gains from.

Believe it or not but I do a little bit of engine testing here and there. Judd, Coventry, Nissan, Cosworth, I could go on. This is not to say that we simply throw engines on a dyno and run them til failure, we actually look for ways of improving them and that's not an easy task with engines designed by some of the best engineers in the world. You don't get to work on this type of equipment without knowing how to think a little differently. Some of my ideas about things would have you think me insane but I will tell you this.... alot of what people think they know is completely wrong! The late Jim Feuling is the perfect example of an individual who made people think a little differently about most everything high-performance. So what does any of this ramble have to do with this subject? Well, not much except to say that some things you don't understand are not necessarily inferior to your conventional thinking. Conventional thinking builds and engineers mediocrity not innovation.
I personally have never met Jack Evans. I have however talked with quite a few people at Evans and have submitted a non-bias paper to the SAE on the effectiveness of NPG. I know quite a few others who have done the same... McNeil Engineering comes to mind. I do not know of even one of these papers (maybe 8 in all) that have been published and this has been 2 years. I honestly do not know what to say about that. Maybe it's a conspiracy that Will can unfold for us. I personally could care less, I could also care less whether or not anyone uses the product. I offer my advice freely and as I've always stated, you can take it or leave it. I don't know what to think of some of this other than the fact that you should have made your debate in the other thread. Senseless as it seems because I don't think you've spent 100+ hours machining and installing sensors in an engine to test the stuff. I would rather you just said thanks idiot under your breath and go on your way cause the truth is... time spent here is time spent away from my family and guess what... I like them alot better than any of you. Although, I would like nothing more than to meet many of this boards members.

Wanna use NPG? Use it... if not, don't. It's really as simple as that. Like someone stated in another response, "Everyone's an expert" these days.... thank you internet.

Karl,
Your last response is very close to pay dirt. As I've mentioned before, it's not about the actual coolant temperature. It's about the temperature of critical surfaces that counts.

Spent all my time with this one.... maybe I can lend some response to the other interesting threads next trip.

Best of luck.

 

Chuck, without having your brain inside my head, or having a probably very lengthy and convincing explanation, all I can do is listen to two very car oriented people with two totally different opinions. I completely agree on conventional thinking, obviously someone who follows the person in front of them all thier life isn't going to create anything new until someone tries something different.

I've never looked into it much myself since I never needed better cooling, just yet.

I keep hearing of this "other thread" and all I did was respond to a CURRENT thread, I have no idea what this other thread is, or when it was posted, so forgive me.

I have a theory, it involves Area 51, 3 rolls of toilet paper, and a Russian named Vladimir.

 

This is the "other thread" that people (myself included) have been referring to...

http://www.camaross.com/forums/showt...threadid=74129

Chuck, thanks for taking the time to post.

 

Thanks Jim, I'll paruse it

 

I see now, you've just been leading me on this whole time, well then...

Thanks again Chuck for enlightening us on this subject along with many others, we appreciate it!

 

I researched Evans about 1 year and 1/2 ago and went to their website to see how it compared against water.

Now, I'm not taking any sides but I did hit the books a little on the thermodynamics of water when I did the research and it appeared to me that Evans never did a NPG vs. H2O. Apparantly Evens tried to be slick and put on their website only water/antifreeze mixtures vs. NPG. I was specifically looking for NPG vs. water on their website and I concluded, due to lack of info on their website (and the laws of thermodymamics), that straight water flat out beat NPG. Evans just didn't want to post it on their website.

I'll stick with water since there is no research to prove otherwise.

 

That seems to be what some others believe as well, but, looking at coolant temp is apperantly not the way to determine things in this situation.

With that said, its pretty obvious Chuck was peeved at anyone speaking otherwise, and I had NOT intended to tick someone off by posting an OPINION, this is an open forum after all. I also never knew about this other thread, although in the back of my mind I seem to recall something about the year or so old thread from before. Both people with disagreeing opinions are much more car involved than I probably will ever be in my life, so being the middle man you can listen to both sides and either shake the head or try to make some pennies out of thier dollar of understanding. I sent Chuck a PM to let him know I was sorry and that my intentions were never, and are never, to put someone down via an opinion other than thier own.

Based on what Chuck's research shows and the couple of other cases said, it would appear that this is awesome for pump gas guys, so it does look interesting, and I know someone who may try it so I'll follow what I can right along with the rest of you.

 

Ok... I'm glad I came back to this to read my comments from yesterday... hindsight is 20-20 right. I guess I sounded a little heated huh? Well I was, but I'm not holding any grudges or anything lke that... that's just silly. I hope that most of you who don't know me will not judge me as bitter from those comments. I'm anything but that.

I got your message Will, and I appreciate it. There's no intolerance on my part and I apologize if it came out that way. If anything, this stands as nothing more than a little "irritation". My day only compounded the problem but I'm not going to complain... I know you guys work and stress just like I do.

The problem I have here is a simple one. It is possible to debate an issue without the negativity and outright slander of a product. Being a business owner, I know what word of mouth can do. It's a dangerous thing and we should all try to be a little more careful of what we say and write. If a company lies and cheats its customers and the general consensus confirms this, then it's a different matter but how many people on this board have actually used Evans NPG? How many can honestly say the product has absolutely no value? That it's "snake-oil" or marketing "BS"? I know of two people on this board using NPG.... one being myself and the other being Mark Montalvo. I doubt either of us, seeing all the junk products we see, would recommend something that we didn't feel strongly about.
I apologize, but I will usually take a defensive posture if I don't see enough factual data to negate a claim by a manufacturer or business in general. That may just be a fault of mine but I've seen a lot of product bashes on the web.... some deserve it and many others do not.

On another note.
I have not seen Evans jump through any hoops to sell their product, nor have I seen any evidence in the mainstream magazine advertisements where Evans has made outlandish claims.... actually I hardy ever see anything at all on NPG. In other words... I haven't seen an attempt on their part of cramming their product down anyone's throat. Most of what I have read about NPG was research related. Builders and engineers experimenting with coolant systems, trying to push boundaries etc.. Lean burn engines, low octane/high compression engines, high thermal efficiency endurance engines with fuel consumption issues, the list goes on guys. Like I've mentioned before, everyone is out for something a little different. Some of you just want to go fast in a straight line and in that case, your approach is going to be different than let's say, an engineer building a high compression, high torque engine with low emissions and 87 octane fuel. Those are on two different ends of the spectrum and I'm just attempting to paint a picture here. Sometimes I get wrapped up in the "efficiency" side of things... as an engineer your goal is always to build a machine to the highest degree of efficiency possible. On the other end of that... sometimes a little less efficiency yields a higher output. Confused yet? Well, just think about that sometime and you'll see where I'm coming from.
I can only take a little latitude in explaining my research. But let me say this......
The use of Evans NPG allowed me engineer an engine with dynamic compression ratio of 10.6:1 on 93 octane with zero pre-ignition. Mind you there were many tricks to building the engine mentioned, one of which included water injection and a carefully designed cooling system. The engine in mention also made over 14.8 bar BMEP which is almost unheard of with large 2-valve V8 small blocks. I honestly can tell you that this would not have been possible with water as a coolant. How do I know? Because I've tried it before with no success. I cannot get into specefics of this engine but this may be of some interest to some of you. I only say this so you might understand why I take my stance as a proponent of Evans NPG. Not to confuse matters but to let you know where I'm coming from.

In the real world.
I would only use water and a lubricant additive in an engine that will see very regular coolant replacement. If it ever freezes where you live, then you might want to look elsewhere for your coolant needs. If you live in a place where there are distinct seasons then you might be able to make changes... ie, running water in the summer and a 50/50 mix in the winter. Or, you could just use Dexcool. Dexcool by the way is an excellent product and I'd recommend it over any other H2O coolant on the market. Either way, keep a check on your coolant and watch alkalinity levels... especially with straight water.

Have a great weekend gentlemen.

 

Check it again I dont know about a year and a half ago but now there is a table there comparing the properties of water, water/antifreeze, NPG, and NPG+.