Evans Coolant??

Talk to F-chat sponsor Nick' Forza Ferrari. The Evans coolant is used on the big overbore 308 projects he does.

 

If you do a seach there have been a number of threads over the year and the verdict is mixed.

When something is brand new it's always hard to say for sure, but this stuff has been out a while ( maybe 15 years?) and hasn't made any real dent in the market. To me that says there isn't any real benefit to the stuff. If it actually cooled the engine better hotrodders would be all over the stuff because they never have big enough radiators, but they don't use. What they use is water with water wetter if they are having a cooling problem because it does work.

The biggest proponents of evans coolant mostly talk about more even cooling in the engine and that might be true. If you have enough radiator it might do a better jobs than other coolants, but I don't see any reason to believe that. It does have a lower surface tension than water which means it makes better contact with the metal than water, but all coolants have additives to do the same thing. The fact that the Evans tech data very specifically compares to itself mixtures without the standard additives I think is very telling. Evans claims hp gains but I find no proof, water wetter on the other hand published very clear dyno charts and well as engine temp, heat conduction rates and all sorts of other stuff to prove their claims.....which might be why 99% of racers run water wetter even when the rules allow other coolants.


Evans also has a MUCH lower specific heat (0.7 vs 1.0 for water) so you need more of it. To get enough more you have to pump it 50% faster, but its 10 time thicker than water at operating temperature so it take 15 times more power to pump the enough of the stuff.

I don't think it's a bad product, but I don't think it's a particularly good coolant. It is very good at corrosion prevention, but other than that, I'd stick to more conventional options.

 

Best bet, is give Nick a call. I talked to him last year about changing my 308 to Evans coolant, he said you need to make sure all the old coolant is flushed out. Also send the manufacture an e-mail they will e-mail you back on what steps you need to do. Hope this helps.

 

I've used Red line Water Wetter in our FF2000 car and my hopped up T-bird turbo coupe, both run cooler with this added. The Formula Ford always filled the over flow tank before the water wetter now it doesn't

 

I'm with Mark (above) on liking Red Line's Water Wetter added to your standard coolant mixture of any type (50/50, all water, orange, green, you name it).

That stuff works!

 

Wow!

Learn something new every day.

 

Royal Purple makes an additive called 'Ice'......it's an alternative to water wetter, if you want to give it a try......it goes in with a 50/50 mix also...

 

For cooling you want 100% water with water wetter or similar product like Purple Ice.

A 50/50 mixture is for areas where the car will be out in very cold temps (canada and very far north US), a 70/30 mix is about the best for most places and was what I used even in upstate NY with no issues.

 

Nothing can carry more heat than plain water. With additives as Water Wetter the corrosive properties are diminished. But I always worry about the other function of the coolant - lubricating the water pump bearing. If you talk to the OEM people about coolant they will tell you that there is an optimum concentration of cooling, lubrication and anti-corrosion. For example, the Mercedes Benz coolant, a G5 re-label, states to use it in only a single specific concentration. The "ready made" coolants also give you the calculated best dilution. Of course there may need to be compromises, especially for racing. Here the intermittent use of plain water based coolants may be needed, but I would always change back to the fully formulated stuff after the race event. The actual type of glycol is probably not important so long as you always use the same one.

aehaas

 

It (evans) shouldn’t work as well as straight water with water wetter and I’d expect to see about a 15-20F temperature increase when you make the switch. I’ll be waiting to see how close (or wrong) I was.

 

I'll be interested in the results. It doesn't seem like it could possibly cool any better than what you were using.

It's primary advantage IMO is that it is non-reactive with the cooling system materials (less corrosion) and has a higher boiling temp.

 

OMG....I agree with you on something....I think the world is ending

 

Mr. G,

You might want to try this http://www.valvoline.com/products/Zerex%20Racing%20Super%20Coolant.pdf

Used at 10% for engines not requiring freeze protection.

 

What kind of cooling system does Mk IV-V have in comparison with Mk II [same 427 [Galaxie] engine?] or street version Mk III? Is forced air induction doable?

 

The follow up is want has it got for a radiator and fans?

Is it already up graded to a modern aluminum radiator as they work more better than brass radiators, particularly old brass radiators.

Is the radiator core area as big as it can be and the core area minimized?

How about the fan coverage area and flow?

Is there a shroud to ensure the entire core area or at least most of the core area gets air flow from the fan? This is very often the main issue if it's a sitting in traffic only issue. Normally a racecar won't have any fan, but proper fan design is critical to low speed cooling. I would want to see at least 2500cfm air flow and through at least 70% of the core area and more of both would better.

 

Since you are close...you might consider doing what Ferrari did on the 348: use long aluminum tubes instead of long rubber hoses.

Aluminum dissipates heat better than rubber, after all. Heck, you could add heat-sink fins to such tubes for even better cooling capacity, if desired.

I bought a $5 aluminum heat sink contraption from JC Whitney, of all places, that wraps around my oil filter to dissipate heat from there (every little bit counts). I could dissipate even more heat if I added heat sink compound paste between the oil filter and external aluminum heat-sink fins, as well.

Anyway, the point is that you can use the oil/water plumbing for further cooling capacity; you aren't just limited to the radiator area.

 

I gave Evans Coolant a two year long test in my '84 Chevy Silverado with a 4-row heavy duty radiator and had zero problems till this summer. I was on a desolate stretch of highway in southern Colorado and the air temp was 104F. The engine temp said 210F and I was having an engine problem I thought was vapor lock that turned out to be fuel pump failure. I dumped the Evans and put in regular antifreeze and water and my engine temp dropped to 180F.
Not actually a problem with Evans coolant but it did, in high heat conditions, cause my engine to run very hot. Caused by '64 Buick to run hot (idiot light stayed on) even though the ambient time was 80F. It had a two-row radiator. I called Evans from the road and they said I would have to get a bigger radiator if I wanted to use their coolant in the Buick. I think it is a good product, just works well in some vehicles and not so well in others.

 

Interesting indeed.

Evans coolant only has 70% the heat capacity of water but had a similar density. That means that by definition that the coolant temperature of the fluid entering the radiator vs existing the radiator must be would need to be 1.4 times higher with Evans coolant than with water for it simply to be removing as much heat. And it would actually be a bit more than 1.4 times because the higher viscosity of evans coolant means the coolant flow rate is lower (cars use a centrifugal coolant pump so flow rate is a function of viscosity)

The evans people appear to be intentionally misrepresenting their product……