I understand what Fat Kid is saying, and it makes sense - Your engine is going to run at the same temp (all other variable being the same - timing, a:f, etc). That heat has to go somewhere, and it has no preference.

Bottom line - Hotter oil is worse than hotter coolant - true or false?

Fat Kid: Why would WW + Coolant be bad, but WW + straight water be ok? If you are correct the WW has the same effect on straight water, doesn't it? this is my only fuzzy part of what you've posted.

However...if the fast guys are using WW, there might be something to it .

Ryan

 

What Fat Kid says makes sense, the whole H-bond thing. But what is the final heat capacity of the final coolant mixture. I don't know but probably somewhere between 1 cal/g °C (pure water) and 0.5 cal/g °C (approx. for Ethylene Glycol) with a 50/50 mix it is approx. 0.8 cal/g °C. If you mix your coolant the way I do, you don't end up with the "ideal" 50/50 mix. With that in mind I am guessing that water wetter won't lower the heat capacity of the coolant enough to offset the positive benefits of lowering the surface tension and less air bubble surface area....etc. etc.

On a side note lower engine temperature is good for horsepwer but bad on engine wear. I read an article once and the difference in bearing clearance between an engine ran at 160°C and one ran at 210°C was rather surprising. That is why I will stick with a 180°C thermostat, decent comprimise between HP and engine wear.

 

I'll agree that there is no substitute for a properly maintained cooling system, but I have had no ill effects from water wetter, nor has anyone I have known.

 

it hasn't done anything for me

 

Well damn....
I'm willing to try some in my Z28.....It's been over 103 here for over 3 weeks, and the car is running quite hot. I looked @ Pep Boys, and Kragen, no luck. Anyone else know a place around here in CA that carries it? A guy on ebay is selling it, I might just get it there.....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=2425403825

 

I got mine at pep boys in my area. are you sure they dont carry it?

 

Yep fatkid has a good point. i think that this is a good topic even though it is kind of an argument. but also guys if one person would just try what fat kid said, it would solve the argument. im not going to so dont even ask lol! its just a suggestion! but it would either prove fat kid correct or everyone else right!! have fun guys!

 

Even though the proof was already posted, Fat Kid is still not seeing it. I think you are stuck on that funny term, "heat holding ability".
Just know that you don't want your water-engine coolant to hold heat. You want your water-engine coolant to TRANSFER heat.

That whole argument about hotter oil due to less heat holding ability of the water is upsidedown.

And take note. I have real observed engine oil temp data for you from my 383 LT1 engine and my 350 LT1 engine.
In all cases, when water temp is low, oil temp is low. When water temp raises, oil temp rises. Oil temp seems to run about 30 degrees F higher than water temp generally in my engine.
That is direct proof contrary to Fat Kid's theory that oil temp raises as water temp lowers due to Water Wetter.

I run 100% water with WW in the summer and then in the winter I add some Dexcool, but not a lot.

So you said you wanted someone to look at oil temp. Well here is one report. It's contrary to your theory.
But really, it's just plain heat transfer sceince. You don't want your water to hold heat. you want it to transfer heat. Reducing the water's ability to "hold heat" is a GOOD thing in this case.

Did this help debunk that artical you read Fat kid??

karl Ellwein

 

Real quick, I always thought it was better to have a higher oil temp than water temp. I mean not to extreme but a small variable. Also water wetter works and has been proven, it also claims that it give corroision protection and helps lubricate your pump. The only thing it doesn't do is help freeze protection which I don't have to worry about. For those who can't find w.w. try the purple ice. basicly the same thing but easier to find and has worked the same as ww for my applications. But it costs a little more.

 

this is so stupid either use it or dont but 1 thing i know is fat-kid
likes SLIPKNOT me too

 

ok, my statements were based on the ASSUMPTION that you added water wetter to ANTIFREEZE. but, when you run 100 percent water wetter/water, thats when **** starts happening (ie everything gets cooler).

 

A lot of people jumped on fat kid, but both sides here have presented valid arguements. The question is which phenomenon occurs on the higher order of magnitude, aka which is dominant.

Were the water wetter tests completed with reasonable heat transfer rates that simulated the amount of localized boiling that actually take place? Or did they elevate the heat transfer rate to favor their products bubble shedding effect.

Fat kid didn't provide us with any actuall tests, but his reasoning had a basis as well. The temperature difference is the driving force for heat transfer and as the delta grows smaller the rate decays/approaches zero. If the cooling mixture has less heat capacity it will approach the temperature of the hot sink faster and heat transfer will cease. This could result in higher block temperature and lower coolant temps.

Obviously a car can operate under either condition, we aren't talking about anything too extreme here. It's quite possible that depending on the car, it's design, and cooling system capacity WW would be SLIGHTLY beneficial in some and SLIGHTLy harmful in other. Either way it's not going to work miracles.

If we could accurately predict things 100% of the time in the natural world we would theorize everything and never have to perform a single scientifc test. Obviously thats not the way mother nature operates. Don't trust every test result you see, it's surprisingly easy to manipulate data or design a test to favor a particular result.

It is peculiar that this post is the only one that Fat Kid has chosen to participate in. Maybe this is just the first time he felt he had something to add.

Since noone here is going to do a real indepent scientifically sound test and post the results, if it ain't broke, don't fix it (unless there is lots of HP to be found and by the way i am broke, haha). My car is just fine the way it is. I'm not saying that when used properly WW doesn't provide a MINOR benefit, but my car always stays between 170-185 so no worries here

 

 

Now, didn't somebody bet their car on whether they were right or not? Regardless, this has been a fun post, fun hi-jacked post that is. What I am missing here (and maybe I missed it earlier in the discussion, but I dont wanna re-read 3 pages again) is if Fat Kid actually has a oil temp sensor and has tried and verified this, or its just something he has read and feels strongly about?

 

I think maybe he didn't see my recent post above.
I have oil temp and water temp gauges. I don't want your car Fat Kid but I've done the test you mention and it's opposite of what you expected.
Water temp goes down, oil temp goes down.
And that is with 50-505- Dexcool-water and water wetter.
And that is with 100% water and water wetter.
And that is with 20-80% Dexcool and water wetter.

Regular old LT1 stroker and LT1 350 with heads cam mods.

Karl