Jump to content

Rust protection for our old cooling systems


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

...

1) I basically removed the lower radiator hose on my car in November, installed a hose blowing through the lower water pump inlet and driven by a small fan, and let it run that way all winter. Air blew through the cooling passages for a few months and the cooling system was bone dry by March....


2) Remember that it was initially designed for heavy trucks so they could run their cooling fans less often, thereby improving fuel economy--hundreds of thousands of trucks travelling millions of miles, and, well, a lot of pennies can add up. 


 

Yep, of those two points selected out of your comments, #2 is all I really needed to know, but as to #1 — Matt, you’re the only person I’ve heard of willing to go to that extent (or at least be willing to admit it). I don’t personally know anyone who would do it or have the time to do it.

 

All I know is that when my late-teens non-Ford car was built the maker pretty much expected owners to drain the radiator and block and put the car up on blocks for the winter. The previous owner of my car would drain the radiator every time he was done using it for the 50 years he owned it and judging by the amount of rust in the water jacket I’m pretty sure that wasn’t the way to go....
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2020 at 11:48 AM, Morgan Wright said:

 

You really need to back up your information a little better. The molecules are not smaller, water is a tiny molecule, only H2O which is an oxygen with 2 hydrogens on it, much smaller than any of the glycols. But mainly, the size of the molecules has absolutely NOTHING to do with leaking through gaskets. What makes something leak through gaskets or not is the viscosity.

Show me.

 

Yessir. O.K. But you will have to take my word for it after I present my credentials. But first I must reiterate at the outset here, Morgan my highly esteemed forum friend, that in my book, you walk on water here as far as I am concerned. As long as I live, I will be indebted to you for posting the ancient movie revealing the operation of hub capstans being used to warp a Buick through low traction conditions about 100 years ago. Something I had wondered about for decades, now made perfectly clear by those tough young guys moving the Buick through that mountain pass in California's Sierra. Thank you again, dear friend.

 

Credentials : I made a small fortune by producing Gore-Tex(TM) products. In fact, I made the world's first Gore-Tex(TM) consumer product. A tent called the Light Dimension. A single-walled tent with the properties of being waterproof, (55 psi), while also being water vapor permiable in order to avoid soaking from condensation  inside the closed tent. This miracle material works because of the macro- molecular property of water. So let's talk about this water upon which you walk. The macro molecule, the multi-(H2O) in liquid form, produces the surface tension allowing the apparent gravity defying drops of water to stand in little domes on hard surfaces, rather than smoothing out into a thin film. Add a surfactant, e.g. soap, and the multi-(H2O) macro molecule breaks down losing surface tension, and wet water becomes wetter. Now in the case of water vapor, the gaseous form, the huge macro molecule which was found in liquid state water, becomes simply 2-(H2O). 2-(H2O) is indeed quite small, and thus can pass rather freely through the active member of a Gore-Tex(TM) laminate, that being a very thin layer of Teflon. This laminate must be kept clean, because if there is an accumulated amount of contaminant, that will act as a surfactant, and the fabric will begin to leak. 

 

Things can be somewhat more complex than what mere intuition may lead the philosopher to conclude. One does not have to be a physicist in order to delve the into the mysteries of permiability when it comes to ethylene glycol. Fool around long enough with old liquid cooled cars, and inevitably a truth becomes self evident : antifreeze will make a mess of things due to its ability to leave the confines of a cooling system given the very slightest opportunity to do so. Has nothing to do with viscosity in this case.

 

O.K. Yessir.  I hope I have some credibility in this matter. If I had none, I would not have made the bucks from this knowledge. To quote Louis Armstrong : "I'm wit-choo hot mama, just as long as youuuu - got - de - bucks. Burrukks - bucks - bucks - bucks. I mean MONEY, mamma." 

 

This illuminating counter intuitive offering in no way discharges the the debt I will always owe you, Morgan. You have a standing invitation to be my guest if you ever find yourself in Central Washington state. My accommodations are simple, and humble, but the setting can be stunning at times. Not only that, but I am not too far from Grand Coulee Dam. Franklin Delano Roosevelt lake is impounded by this behemoth, and stretches over 100 miles on up into Canada. That is an astronomical amount of macromolecules of H2O !!! Taking the tour of the third, the newer powerhouse, (sadly the antique 2 powerhouses, still producing electricity, are no longer open to tours, as was the case when I was young), and spending hours in the visitors center and museum, is extremely rewarding to machinery and technology geeks like us. And talk about the awesome capabilities, in the truest sense of an otherwise overused word such as "awesome"  I'm here to tell you that what water did by repeated catastrophic flooding of vast areas of Washington state left from the Ice Ages, will fascinate you.

 

Thanks again, and I hope this pandemic eases off enough for us to meet.      Your forum friend and grateful admirer,    -    Cadillac Carl 

Edited by C Carl
Slight wording change (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, C Carl said:

 

 

Things can be somewhat more complex than what mere intuition may lead the philosopher to conclude. One does not have to be a physicist in order to delve the into the mysteries of permiability when it comes to ethylene glycol. Fool around long enough with old liquid cooled cars, and inevitably a truth becomes self evident : antifreeze will make a mess of things due to its ability to leave the confines of a cooling system given the very slightest opportunity to do so. Has nothing to do with viscosity in this case.

 

 

I don't think the permeability of the gasket is the question. I think a leak would be ->between<- the gasket and the metal. In these cars the "gasket" is graphite packing, which I don't think is permeable to anything. There is no head gasket in my car, it's a jughead. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dave39MD said:

Any thoughts where dehumidifier water would fall on the purified-distilled scale and how it would perform in our cooling systems?

Distilled water is water which has been boiled off to steam which eliminates any salts then it is condensed back to liquid without the salt contaminants so there are 2 changes of state, liquid to gas>gas to liquid.  The distilled water created by refrigeration or other means of dropping the temperature of an air mass below the dew point extracting moisture from the air with one change of state, gas to liquid.  That process does not remove salts or some other contaminants so it is inferior to distilling when it comes to removing contaminants.   

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK here is the result of changing from water/alcohol to Evans. I used an infrared thermometer to measure the temperatures on the top of the head, the radiator, and the crankcase. I measured the head in 4 places: front end, mid front (between 4th and 5th valve cages), mid rear (between 8th and 9th valve cages) and rear end. Measured the radiator in the middle of the front of it, and crankcase right at the serial number.

 

Outdoor temperature was 55 degrees. The car was idling, my car usually boils over if I let it idle for 15 minutes because there is no forward motion of the vehicle, but I had no way to measure all the temperatures when the car was moving.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With plain water:

 

......................front end.......mid front.......mid rear.........rear end .........radiator.........crank case

 

5 minutes.........140................156.................158.................149...................98..................65

10 minute.........193................185.................198.................195..................145..................92

14 minute........222................200................212.................219..................180.................114

 

It boiled over at 14 minutes and I shut it off

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With Evans

 

5 minutes..........174................170.................184..................210..................110.................117

10 minute..........200...............183.................210.................237...................129................137

15 minute..........213................198................221..................242..................152................157

20 minute.........218................203...............223..................250..................156...............163

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I got 4 gallons of Evans NPG and an Evans refractometer.

 

I ran the car until it was fully warmed up, and drained the radiator and pump, leaving the radiator cap off and both hoses off, so the heat of the engine would blow out some of the remaining water.

 

Next day I purged the system, I poured a half gallon of Evans into the upper coolant pipe so it would go into the engine block, with the water pump drain valve open. I collected what came back out the water pump. Then I poured that into the radiator and collected it again from the radiator drain cock.

 

Then I closed the drain valves and put 3 gallons of new Evans into the radiator and ran the car for a while.

 

Refractometer says:

 

New Evans 0% water

Stuff from the half gallon I used to purge system 8% water

What's in the car now 4% water

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I took the half gallon that was 8% water (see above post) and put it into a soup pot.

 

I heated it up on a portable electric hot plate that I took outdoors (Evans is flammable and I didn't want a fire, or to breath the vapors, outdoors would be safer for both reasons). Around 180 to 200 degrees a lot of steam started to come out, by 220 to 230 degrees there was a great deal of visible activity at the bottom of the pot, sort of like boiling water, but smaller bubbles and much less vigorous, more of what I would expect to see if the water in the solution were boiling out of the Evan's. After 5 minutes I let it cool and tested it.....it had gone from 8% water to 3%.

 

Just to see what pure Evans looked like in the same situation, I put a quart of new (pure) Evans in a sauce pan....around 200 there was a small amount of what looked like steam but nothing like before, I figure it was just propylene glycol vapor. But there was NONE of the fizzling/boiling activity I saw in the other experiment. I heated it to 270, still nothing. So now I know what pure Evans looks like when you heat it, and I returned the solution with 3% water (formerly 8% water) into the original pot. I heated it first to 230 until the sizzling from the bottom slowed to almost stopping, about 10 minutes. Then heated it to 270 and waited about 5 more minutes until the activity was almost gone. I cooled it and now it's only 1% water!

 

So it's possible to remove most of the water from Evans by simply heating it to 220 to 270 for 15 or 20 minutes or so. It was 8% water and now only 1%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The water content in it is directly related to its anti corrosive resistance. According to the literature it’s hygroscopic, so if you have a non pressurized system, over time it will have water in it. After all is said and done.......cost, leaks, drying the block, carrying extra in the car in the event you need it. It’s all just too much money, work, and hype. If your on tour and need to service a pump packing, hose issues, ect........your gonna dump 400 dollars of coolant. I work on some of the worlds best cars.........we don’t use it. And none of the people who I have high respect for use it either. To each his own.........just drive your car.....that is why it has wheels.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You shouldn't be "dumping" your coolant to service a packing. Environmentalists will protest and block the road. Use a bucket. 

 

Also, my experiment proves that heat in the 200-250 degree range drives the water out of Evans so the only way it picks up water from the air is if it sits and you never drive it. That's what the wheels are for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grimy said:

Myopic means nearsighted (ask me how I know); do you mean hygroscopic, like brake fluid?


Sorry George......got it filed in my head incorrectly.......your correct that I wanted to use hygroscopic.......and yes, like brake fluid. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, edinmass said:


Sorry George......got it filed in my head incorrectly.......your correct that I wanted to use hygroscopic.......and yes, like brake fluid. 

 

Brake fluid doesn't get hot and drive the water out, coolant does, the same way water (product of combustion) gets driven out of the motor oil by heat. 

 

Also, not $400......$48 x 3 = $144

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Morgan Wright said:

 

Brake fluid doesn't get hot and drive the water out, coolant does, the same way water (product of combustion) gets driven out of the motor oil by heat. 

 

Also, not $400......$48 x 3 = $144


Morgan......I’m not sure the engine will get hot enough to drive off the water........but the system capacity of big cars and trucks  is 7- 11 gallons. My Ford T is small.......fill a Packard 12.........and I was also figuring in the flushing which is probably two gallons on a big car. I have no issues with people running it.........but I just don’t see the value, better driving results, or the time and effort being worth while. For years people ran Slick 50, and all sorts of other additives to their oil.......fine....if you like it run it. What I can tell you is that the only collection of consequence that uses it in pre war cars is Leno’s.  Weather or not it’s a paid endorsement I have no idea, and I have never asked him. Lots of people with post war collections run it in everything. I think the split is an open system VS a closed system. I can see it on closed systems if you like the advantages it offers......if you perceive they are advantages.  

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, edinmass said:


Morgan......I’m not sure the engine will get hot enough to drive off the water...

 

I just proved that it does in my previous posts

 

.....but the system capacity of big cars and trucks  is 7- 11 gallons.

 

this is a prewar Buick forum, my car holds 3.25 gallons

 

....and I was also figuring in the flushing which is probably two gallons on a big car.

 

I used half a gallon and just showed how I removed the water from it to use it again, so I didn't "use" ANY to flush it

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your 1917 Buick runs in the 200-250 degree range? Most early car systems have no thermostats and the 30’s cars usually have them open at 160.......and a proper system never gets to 200. Most brass cars run in the 140-160 range. Hot plates heating a pot in a local area to very high temperatures does not equate to the temperatures seen in early low compression engines. I would also make the argument that not one single new car manufacturer runs waterless coolant......not one, and they make millions of cars per year. If there were a cost benefit analysis that indicated the waterless coolant was better, they would use it.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Your 1917 Buick runs in the 200-250 degree range? Most early car systems have no thermostats and the 30’s cars usually have them open at 160.......and a proper system never gets to 200.

 

All you have to do is look at the above posts, and the head temperatures I measured. Head temperatures are way higher than radiator hose temperatures where thermostats are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your car is overheating with plain water while at idle......the definition of cooling system problems........period. If you 1917 car is making 212 degrees and boiling.....it’s broken, Evans won’t boil.......but the car is still overheating. Thus your masking a problem. A properly running early car just doesn’t run those temperatures........unless they have problems. Can you save the cost of replacing the radiator that’s isn’t flowing correctly? Maybe, but it still means the car isn’t sorted or serviced correctly. We could talk about issues from running over temperatures that the car was designed for........piston ring damage, oil leaks from super heated oil, head gasket issues, thermal expansion.........

 

Is the reason your using Evans to prevent boil over? I can see it as a temporary patch in the short term to drive the car.......I don’t think it’s a reasonable solution (literally) for long term use. 

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Morgan....not trying to be critical.........but it should not over heat.....it must be a circulation issue or a heat transfer issue. Have you flow checked the radiator or checked the impeller to be sure of proper circulation. If you have good flow, you must have a heat transfer issue at the radiator.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Your car is overheating with plain water while at idle......the definition of cooling system problems........period. If you 1917 car is making 212 degrees and boiling.....it’s broken, Evans won’t boil.......but the car is still overheating. Thus your masking a problem. A proper early car just doesn’t run those temperatures........unless they have problems. Can you save the cost of replacing the radiator that’s isn’t flowing correctly? Maybe, but it still means the car isn’t sorted or serviced correctly.

 

One constant problem with parades.....they go too slow for these old cars which need forward motion to cool the radiator because these cars have no pressure cap boil at 212, they got smart later on and added a pressure cap to raise the boiling point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parades can be a problem, but at idle, under no load, the car shouldn’t overheat. If you see the post I have on my White.....I flushed the block and radiator with a rust removing chemical........the radiator is 103 years old, and I can idle a large displacement engine and the car never gets to 150 degrees in the Florida heat of 95 degrees outside. I suspect you have a different problem. Engine timing could also cause it to run hot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forward motion at idle is not needed to cool a car at idle...........NO NEW CAR EVER OVERHEATED WHEN NEW AT IDLE. Have you had your radiator off, flushed, and flow checked? Certainly sounds like a heat transfer issue. Did you check the temperature differential from the top of the radiator to the bottom? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the higher coolant operating temperatures allowed by the Evans I would be concerned with the resultant higher operating temperature of the engine oil and as a result, the reduced oil film operating thicknesses and some high stress/load area failing within the engine .  I would also be concerned with fuel management issues of vapor lock and or fuel boiling in the carburetor or fuel delivery system near the hotter engine. 

 

Mercury boils at 674F ( I had to look that up).  There are applications in research where it is actually used as a coolant is why I mention it.

 

But one I did not have to look up is the boiling point of gasoline at atmospheric pressure.  185F.

 

Good luck.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I expect to have to change the oil more often if the overall temperature is higher. But even with the  higher overall temp, there will be no "hot spots" like there is with plain water, where the temperature is so high in a small area in the head that there can be a spot where the water vaporizes, and vaporized water doesn't cool like liquid water, so that spot gets even hotter still. Since the boiling point of Evans is 375, there will be no hot spots, even if the overall temp is hotter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morgan.......your agreeing with my point......the car is “broken” and your solution is to use a coolant that doesn’t boil shifting the boiling point from 212 to 375, but runs hotter than the car was ever engineered to run. The proper solution is simply to fix the overheating issue. At some point babbitt can delaminate, bushings can fail due to oil failure from lack of heat removal......the list is endless.......your putting the entire power plant at risk....the only option that makes sense is to fix the overheating. Putting a bandaid on a slice through a major artery doesn’t make sense. Raising the temperature of an overheating engine doesn’t make sense. Is the car not worth the investment to repair it properly? Think of the logic......my car is overheating.......so I  am fixing it by making it run hotter.  I would fix the cooling system. Best of luck with the project........Ed

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

We understand that you hate Evans. Your reasons have all been wrong, but you keep on making up new ones as I disprove the old ones. The molecules are too small so it seeps through gaskets. Except the molecules are bigger and the only gasket is graphite packing, which nothing seeps through. And molecule size doesn't matter. It costs $400, except only $146. So, if it were a Packard 12 or a large truck it would hold 11 gallons. But it's 3.25 gallons. You tell how horrible it is to get 3% water in glycol, so the best coolant is 50% water in glycol. C'mon, man.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I don’t hate it at all.....researched it and decided it was snake oil.......the propensity for it to leak is what it is, my choice of words was incorrect in my initial explanation ....but how it was explained to me twenty years ago. Watch Leno’s video......his comment is “it finds ways to leak”. Their web page explains that waterless coolant and water causes it to lose the corrosion protection. C’mon man.........I’m not the one who is driving an overheating car and won’t fix it correctly. In your case, your using the “magic chemical cure” to fix a broken car. What more can be said? It’s a cheap way out that’s damaging an early car......plain and simple fact. If a restoration shop used it in a customers car and sent it out the door and the motor cooked.......they would be liable for damages.......because of incompetence...........I don’t do shoddy work. I don’t cut corners. I don’t ruin cars. It’s your choice how to treat your car. One thing is certain, anyone reading this thread would pass on buying a car treated in such a way......and think twice about any car from a collection who’s owner is always looking for the short cut. My two cents.......good luck with you project. Rolling the dice on a 100 year old engine every time I drive it is not my idea of fun. 

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

On one hand I'm chuckling cause somebody is actually questioning Ed,  but on the other hand he a savant with this stuff and is almost always right.   This is one of those "right" times:

 

1.  Evans is like taking Tylenol.   It masks the real problem but makes you semi functional.

 

2. Ed's idea of filling the system full of evaporust and running it for a few weeks, repeating until you are done draining crap will many times repair a system.   This is fairly cheap and a good first step.

 

3. More expensive fixes include the radiator is junk,  the water pump impeller is Swiss cheese, the timing is wrong, etc there are other things.

 

If you just don't have the money to fix the system correctly,  I guess Evans may be the only choice.   But it really should NOT be the first choice if you can or want to fix it correctly.

 

My advice is from hard miserable experience.   The Evans helped raise the boiling point but the car still ran too hot and eventually a new radiator had to be fabricated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn’t going to say anything, but yeah, this is not a Ford - it should be able to idle for 20 minutes without coming close to overheating.

I have family stories and photographs (which I’m not going to post here) of rural funeral processions near Flint in the late teens-early 1920’s. The hearse was horse drawn. All the Fords were overheating and had to pull off — everyone else just crawled along behind the horse.

My little 4-cyl (which had 3 wrist pins scoring the cyl walls and I didn’t know it) could run 20 minutes at a time and not even come close to boiling over. Now, the FOAM from the green antifreeze and the air being sucked in via the shot water pump shaft - that’s another story.

Wow that foam was something....

Edited by Ben P.
Typo (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This car was designed to run on water and denatured alcohol, which it does very well and never overheats, and I put over 100 miles on the car this summer, many hot days it was over 90, no problem. It only overheats when I let it idle for 15 minutes at car shows for people to watch, so I shut it off after 10 minutes every time. Big whoop. I thoroughly removed all the rust from the water jacket long ago using muriatic acid, and the radiator was flushed professionally long ago by a radiator shop, so all your speculations about that are DEAD WRONG.

 

But water and alcohol offers no rust protection, and the alcohol evaporates out every time I drive it which causes the foaming to happen so I have to add more, and denatured alcohol is $15 a gallon so I was hemorrhaging money, and I have grown sick of the smell of denatured EtOH, so I switched to Evans to save money. Now it runs fine, never overheats, idles for 20 minutes without any problem, and the extra 20 degrees of operating temperature won't hurt a fly, steam engines operate at 300 degrees and it doesn't hurt the metal because locomotive steam engines went 1,000,000 miles.

 

This winter I'm going to machine the water pump shaft to make you all happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody's suggesting what you think they're suggesting, Morgan. Ed is helpful and knowledgeable and has helped me more than a few times and I"m far from the only one. His knowledge of things like this surpasses most hobbyists and many professionals, so don't dismiss him as just a guy with an axe to grind against Evans.

 

As I mentioned earlier in this thread or maybe in your other thread, I'm successfully using Evans Coolant in my 1929 Cadillac--it does run hotter, there's no two ways about it. My car has a healthy cooling system so it didn't affect anything, but it is a mistake to look at the Evans as anything but an alternative to regular coolant--it is NOT a solution to any problem you might have with a hurt cooling system. That's an important distinction to make.


I outlined the advantages I found with using Evans, plus the disadvantages, and my conclusion is that the advantages are so minuscule as to take it out of contention as a collector car coolant, and not just because of the price. And that's on a healthy car--I honestly wouldn't use it again now that I know what I know. I'm not going to take it out of my Cadillac, but it didn't offer any gains that a proper antifreeze/water mix wouldn't have other than it's permanent.

 

Most importantly, it is nowhere near as effective as water at removing heat from an engine. Period.

 

There's a thread somewhere on this message board in which I was making the case for using Evans in our old cars because we had a seminar in our shop from one of their reps. I liked all the things it offered, so I volunteered to be the guinea pig here on the forum and use my 1929 Cadillac, which I did. My results are common knowledge--works as advertised, car runs noticeably hotter but not dangerously so (because it has a healthy cooling system), and it's scary expensive and difficult to use. I'm not against the stuff, but my experience is about as positive as it gets and my opinion is a resounding, "Meh."

 

In your car's case, you're using it as an attempt to stave off problems that aren't related to the type of coolant (foaming, excessive temperatures, hot spots). Yes, the Evans will technically eliminate the foaming and should help with hot spots, but since it is less efficient at transferring heat your car is running hotter overall which is shown in the elevated temperatures in the block itself. That isn't a positive step forward. There are other issues at play that the Evans might only mask, not cure, and that's not a solution. Cleaning the cooling system and making sure your radiator is efficient is the only way to cure overheating. Everything else is temporary at best.

 

I am a big proponent of the "Evapo-Rust as coolant" process if you don't feel like taking the car apart. Ed has recommended that for years and I took his advice and used it to clean out the passages in my Lincoln K V12 engine, the process of which is well-documented here:

 

I also used it in my 1941 Buick when I changed the water pump last winter. I should note that in both cases, I had the radiators re-cored in addition to cleaning out the blocks. The Buick runs about the same as ever, the Lincoln is still an unknown because I haven't driven it yet.

 

This is a reasonable first step--just replace all the coolant with Evapo-Rust and drive the car for a few months. Use filters on both upper and lower hoses so the trash doesn't simply recirculate. See what happens. Sometimes it's a cure, sometimes it's a temporary improvement, and sometimes there is more significant work involved. My guess, based on the condition of the car and its largely original state is that there's A LOT of trash in there and you're working at a reduced capacity. Cell radiators like the Buick's are notorious for clogging and losing efficiency. Note that Evapo-Rust only works on iron, so if there's corrosion on the copper or brass in the radiator, it will have no effect. I suspect you will need a multi-stage process to get it truly clean, but at least start with the Evapo-Rust as coolant and see if things improve.

 

As you mention, the new water pump shaft will probably help with the foaming.

 

This is everyone trying to help, not telling you that you're wrong. Your thinking is correct--as was mine--but in your car's case, there are other issues in play that will affect your final result. It's always a mistake to assume that if you can't see a problem, it's not there. The car is telling you there's a problem with those elevated temperatures. Listen to it and give it the medicine this particular sickness needs.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have elevated temperatures. I'm sure if you measured your car with an IR thermometer you will find that the heads are 20 degrees hotter than the coolant temperature, and the radiator temp is probably 20 degrees cooler than the coolant. That's how it works. It takes heat from the heads and transfers it to the radiator. So everybody saying my car is overheating just never measured their head temperatures. I was just as surprised as anybody when the car boiled over when the radiator was only 180, the boiling water was coming in from the heads and shooting out the upper radiator hose when the crank case was only 114 degrees. Assuming the entire engine is one uniform temperature is an error I never thought of before but I'm sure engineers know all about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your coolant temps going into the radiator and coming out? You should probably see about a 20-degree drop if the radiator is healthy (maybe a little less since it's primitive and the fan isn't all that efficient). But either way, there should be a significant and noticeable drop there.

 

Understood that the metal temperatures will be hotter than the coolant--there's only so much thermal transfer that can happen given the surface area. But the idea is to stabilize the metal at operating temperature. A cooling system should be pulling out X amount of heat from the cast iron as combustion adds Y amount of heat. The metal will obviously be at a temperature higher than the coolant, but it should be fairly consistent and show that the cooling system is working by removing heat energy from the coolant.

 

The fact is, coolant temperature is the most reliable indicator of cooling system health because it's the part of the system that is seeing the most thermal transfer--heating up and cooling down continuously. Air-cooled cars like Corvairs measure cylinder head temperature because there's no coolant to measure, but on a liquid-cooled car where you want to determine whether your cooling system is working properly, it's the only way to measure. I think the other problems you're having are all related to the higher than expected temperatures you're seeing in the engine and the Evans Coolant is masking it because it doesn't boil and it doesn't foam. The heat to make the coolant as hot as it is must be coming from somewhere and the Evans isn't rejecting it fast enough to stabilize the temperatures at a lower level. There's too much heat and it has nowhere to go.

We're just trying to help, we're not indicting you or the car or your process. We're just spitballing because we're not there. But a car of that vintage never ran at 200 degrees and wasn't designed to even get close to that temperature. The engines are low RPM, low stress, low compression, and the cars they're in are designed to move slowly, so they don't generate much heat anyway. The engineers understood how they would be used and designed accordingly. I think these temperatures would concern them.

 

 

Edited by Matt Harwood (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...