| Author |
Message |
Marty
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 7:36 am: | |
Question about these products. If they are very efficient counldn't I slow the fan in my MC8 down with a larger pulley ( the opposite of Fred Hobe) save the horesepower and gain miles per gallon? |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 11:34 am: | |
The coolant is just a transfer medium.
It's the mass of air flowing through the radiator that cools the engine. Slowing down the fan would reduce mass flow.
You got to have sufficient mass of air to do the job. The type of coolant (in this way) is not relevant. It's like transporting something by pick up truck or car and trailer. The recipient is only interested in how much gets delivered, not exactly how it got there.
The best way to save fuel is reduce the Aerodynamic quotient i.e. the "Q" to something lower than the .60 reported on the CAT site.
Bob Belter, IIRC, wrote the definitive article on this in maybe Vol 1, #3 of BC magazine.
One of the things Bob did was form custom aluminum caps for his bus. Other tasks would include:
Take the carbunkles off the roof, including A/C, horns, spot light, move mirror mounts away from the corner, reinstall (on some) the full mud flap and a host of other things.
Besides the other hints mentioned in the CAT site
Onward and Upward (with lower fuel consumption) |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 1:38 pm: | |
What Marc says is true, but it should also be noted that, if you run the engine hotter, as these coolants may safely allow, then the balance of distribution of the fuel's energy between coolant, exhaust, and useful work changes. Less energy goes into the coolant; some of that goes into useful work.
Increased temperatures likely will improve raw combustion efficiency, as well, yielding more overall available energy.
Rather than slow down the fan, you just want it to come on at a higher temperature. |
Stan
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 3:30 pm: | |
If this coolant is capable of absorbing more heat in less time than conventional coolants, will it not also give off more heat to the radiator fins?
Will this not give the same temperature drop with less air flow? |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 4:09 pm: | |
The ability to absorb heat faster doesn't necessarily translate into the ability to give it off.
For example, a microwave heats food because the frequency of the EM radiation is "tuned" to excite a specific bond in the water molecule. It'll absorb energy at that frequecy, but this is no guarantee that the water molecule will give off at a different rate.
Again, the coolant is just a transfer device, heat transfer depends on all sorts of other factors. |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 5:11 pm: | |
"
If this coolant is capable of absorbing more heat in less time than conventional coolants...
"
I don't think that anyone has made that representation. |
Stan
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 8:25 pm: | |
I read the evans web page again and their advertising stresses that when other coolants fail at high temperatures, that their product continues to work.
If it doesn't remove heat faster, then I see no practical application for the product but my only knowledge of the product is what I read on their web site. |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 8:55 pm: | |
Condolances on your eyesight, Stan. Thanks for letting us know, so we can keep you in our prayers.
Meanwhile, I can only suggest that you go back, both to the web site and to the other thread, and keep reading. |
David Hartley (Drdave)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 9:18 am: | |
I looked at it and I didn't see anything to indicate that it cooled better than water. What I got was that their coolant does not boil and therefor does not cause vaporization or cavitation of the coolant around the cylinder liners which is the biggest worry.
I would get from that, a situation where if the super coolant is slowed down and allowed to collect more latent heat it technically would be more efficient even though the overall operating temperature of the engine is much higher.
Now on the other hand, If you run your engine at 20 to 30 degrees hotter, your dependency on the oil cooler is higher as well as the transmission where you have engine coolant trying to cool the transmission oil also. A hot transmission and thermally stressed oil is not a good combination, These are things that need to be cooled seriously.
If you want to run things HOT then use 5wt (or less) synthetic oil in the cooling system and treat everything as an oil cooler. Change the pumping system over to a vane or gear type for positive flow.
But then at over $1,700 for a 55 gallon drum of coolant wouldn't it be better to just upgrade your "standard" cooling system for that money and not have to rely on $32 a gallon coolant that you have to special order. If your radiators are in crappy shape anyway what would be the sense of spending more money on coolant than you are willing to spend to fix the problem anyway..... |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 12:16 pm: | |
Still seems like the essential point is being recognized but its significance missed or ignored.
Repeating my point above, the coolant is just a transfer medium. It has a capacity to absorb heat. That capacity is considered by the engineer in designing the rest of the system.
Dr. Dave notes the importantce of controlling vaporization/cavitation about the cylinder, comments on engine running hotter, then suggests total oil cooling with vane or gear pumping.
Cooling is predicated on creating and maintaining a steady state system - AT THE CYLINDERS. You can run the engine hotter if you avoid vaporization/cavitation. If the coolant "runs hotter," if within the capacity of the system, the dwell time (thermostat closed time) is simply increased, if the dwell time is insufficient to obtain enough Delta-T to handle the heat given off by the engine, you may need a larger capacity radiator.
But it's the ability of the cooling system, as a whole, to control vaporization/cavitation at the cylinders that counts -everything else is incidental to that goal.
The Evans coolant, if significantly different viscosity may require a different/better impeller curve than needed with glycol/water, coolant but Evan's tech said it wasnt' necessary.
I didn't know the Evans' coolant was that expensive. |
Ross Carlisle (Rrc62)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 1:14 pm: | |
How about using Red Line Water Wetter. More important that coolants ability to absorb heat is it's ability to shed heat. To shed heat, the coolant needs to come in contact with something that will radiate that heat to the air. What Water Wetter does is it essentially improves the wetting properties of the coolant providing more efficient heat transfer. I used it in a corvette that had continuous overheating issues. It lowered the operating temp by 20 degrees. A friend in Arizona who road races Corvettes turned me on to it. |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 2:07 pm: | |
Water wetter is simply liquid dish soap, dropping the surface tension of the coolant and improving coolant "contact" (and therefore heat transfer) at the cylinders.
There's little need for it in the radiator. You're not "boiling" the coolant in the radiator and reducing contact. Just the opposite.
WW is all about the cylinder-coolant contact and surface tension effects at that point.
Yes, bubbles can be generated in the system, but this is what a header tank is designed to "remove" from the coolant. And, a proper radiator design allows for a certain percentage of bubbles in the system. |
David Hartley (Drdave)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 4:42 pm: | |
I use WW in my Isuzu 4BD1T Diesel which has had a previously rough life of blowing hoses and being driven for miles afterward. (former driver did that! ).
The engine temps dropped about 10 to 20 degrees immediately and now is where I like it to run at midway on the gauge. Previously it would creep up to almost hot at near 200 but now it sits at 190 or less with the 180 degree thermostat no matter how hard I push it in 95 degree weather.
The kicker was that the 70/30 water/antifreeze would still let an occasional bubble through and a bit higher radiator pressure. Now I don't have the high pressure problem and the bubbles vanished. It may not have had anything to do with it but seemed to help.
Marc,
Yes I did see the part about no changes essentially being made to the water pump or radiator system with the evans coolant. But when referencing other things on their site they make modified water pumps that are supposed to be higher efficiency than stock and recommended for use with thier coolants in racing engines.
To expand along the train of thought, If you have an engine and cooling system that is not perfectly clean and free of scale and deposits from other fluids the evans coolant may not work quite as well. The problem is that the scale and mineral deposits don't just flush out easily. So in that regard then if you start with a virgin engine and cooling system the evans stuff might work fine, Like a new vehicle or fresh engine.
As for putting it into a 20 year old cooling system I would probably resist the thought. The price is way out there and I would still worry about changing the temp-stats and operating temperature range of an older engine. It's just asking for trouble.
They also say that thermostats are no longer required... Duh? ( I thought I saw that!!! )
Wasn't it Rolls Royce that had the sealed cooling system years ago? Wonder what they used? |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 5:55 pm: | |
I dont' think a scaled engine will make a difference to the Evans approach.
Proof is in the pudding, WW has everything to do with it if that's the only change you made.
The reason your Isuzu did better on WW is better coolant cylinder contact/transfer. This is the phenomena that I was refererncing in my earlier posts about "misters" not a cure-all. (Forgot ww approach cuz it's automatic, I use it all the time.)
The "modified" pumps have a different scroll on the pump impeller that is tailored to the higher viscosity coolant. This reduces pumping losses and the HP necessary to move the coolant. Important in racing where 5 HP can be night and day difference.
The "contamination" you speak of will interfere with any coolant. Again, it's just a transfer medium.
The first point to be addressed, regardless of whether the system is 20 yrs old, it to bring it up to current specs. FF's cooling system clean out will do an adequate job of removing the detritis. If it's up to spec, I'll bet a 40 yr old system will work fine. |
Jarlaxle
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 10, 2006 - 11:26 pm: | |
Water Wetter WORKS. It makes my Caddy, which has a somewhat marginal cooling system (OEM-spec Service Chassis radiator & HD pump cooling an engine with nearly 3x the factory power) run almost 20 degrees cooler in the summer, and had a similar effect in my wife's Cherokee. |
Ron Walker (Prevost82)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 12:16 pm: | |
I run water wetter in my Prevost with a 8v92 and it works, runs the same temp in the summer as the winter pulling long grades. |
Tim Strommen (Tim_strommen)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 6:37 pm: | |
Snake oil...
Running an engine with the manufacturer's specified cooling mix should be enough to cover the designed operating range of the engine. If your engine is overheating, you've exceeded an operating limit or two - or your engine or cooling system needs service.
As an asside - I changed the cooling system in my rig because I wanted redundancy and accuracy, not more cooling. The original Gillig radiator/hydraulic fan combo was working as designed (just not as efficiently as was possible for the energy being used).
It may be ammusing to some that you >>could<< run your engine hotter without boiling the water in the system - but your block probably has fuse plugs that'll blow and require some good rework (read $$$in-frame$$$). You can cut corners to cheat more power out of your engine, or you can accept the reality of your engine and the condition of the cooling system and have it last for decades. Your choice.
Cheers!
-Tim Strommen
P.S. I've never heard of a race car that had ONLY cooling water addatives to get more power out of an engine. Typically the entire engine (including the intake and exhaust) was totally gutted and reworked away from factory specs to get power out of every ounce of it - all done by people with decades of experience with performance engines. -Tim |
Jarlaxle
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 9:15 pm: | |
Snake oil? Really? I guess that the TWENTY DEGREE COOLANT TEMPERATURE DROP is a figment of my imagination, then? Sorry, but Water Wetter very simply WORKS. |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 9:32 pm: | |
> Snake oil...
Umm, to which products are you referring, and in what respects?
> Running an engine with the manufacturer's specified cooling mix should be enough to cover the designed operating range of the engine. If your engine is overheating, you've exceeded an operating limit or two - or your engine or cooling system needs service.
Agreed in part - I'm amazed at the lengths folks will go to in attempting an increase in cooling capacity, e.g. misters, without first ensuring that the stock system is _completely_ up to snuff.
However, it's not just an issue of engine design, but rather of vehicle design, i.e. gearing, airflow, and intended usage. E.g., a vendor may deem it acceptable to stipulate that the driver must gear down so as to increase flow rates for cooling purposes, even though the engine is not lugging in the higher gear. Folks seeking a broader operating envelope must either improve capacity at like temperature, increase temperature, or both.
Aside from capacity issues, there is also the maintenance advantages asserted for Evans' products - are these not valid reasons for moving away from OEM coolant?
<snip>
> It may be ammusing to some that you >>could<< run your engine hotter without boiling the water in the system - but your block probably has fuse plugs that'll blow and require some good rework (read $$$in-frame$$$).
??? I've heard of freeze plugs, but what exactly would these "fuse plugs" be? Something that melts at high temperatures and lets coolant, oil, or fuel flow out of the engine? I think not! Or would they block a fluid flow? Hmm - naw. So, what exactly are these things?
> You can cut corners to cheat more power out of your engine, or you can accept the reality of your engine and the condition of the cooling system and have it last for decades. Your choice.
Sorry, it is simply not the case that these are the extent of one's choices, and your perjoration ("cheat") is invalid, to say the least.
Also, would accepting the reality of a cooling system that is in a condition of extreme disrepair warrant that it would "last for decades"? I think not. Neither would 'accepting the reality of one's engine'....
<snip>
> P.S. I've never heard of a race car that had ONLY cooling water addatives to get more power out of an engine. Typically the entire engine (including the intake and exhaust) was totally gutted and reworked away from factory specs to get power out of every ounce of it - all done by people with decades of experience with performance engines. -Tim
Yes, so? Was it asserted somewhere that such was practice, common or otherwise? And, the relevance for our purposes? |
Gary Stadler (Boogiethecat)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 6:07 pm: | |
Wow Herman, you can cut, you can paste, and you can say a convey a 5 cent idea with a 5 dollar word.
Chill out dude, don't rag on Tim, he's a very,very smart guy. And yes, the Evans stuff looks very interesting but I'm sure not gonna try it on my newly rebuilt engine thanks.
Just too much of a risk, and I'm all about building busses and having fun with them, not proving points. But it (the Evans stuff OR the wetter water) might just be the neatest stuff in the world. Why don't you put some in your bus and let us know how it worked?
aargh.... |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:39 pm: | |
> Wow Herman, you can cut, you can paste, and you can say a convey a 5 cent idea with a 5 dollar word.
Don't be jealous...
> Chill out dude, don't rag on Tim, he's a very,very smart guy.
I'm plenty chill. Tim may or may not be "smart" whatever that means, but the arguments that he advances are flawed in multiple respects.
> And yes, the Evans stuff looks very interesting but I'm sure not gonna try it on my newly rebuilt engine thanks. Just too much of a risk, and I'm all about building busses and having fun with them, not proving points. But it (the Evans stuff OR the wetter water) might just be the neatest stuff in the world.
As you prefer.
> Why don't you put some in your bus and let us know how it worked?
Maybe I'm going to, maybe I already have. But that's not what you're really speaking to with that sentence, now, is it? Isn't there an omitted suffix to the effect of "... rather than sit around here and exhort others to try it.", "... because I'm sick and tired of knowitall theorists!", or some such? Umm, when did I make any such exhortation? Certainly I have argued its merits and dissected various specious arguments against it. Again, I say, this time to folks generally: use it or not, as you prefer. But, don't go slamming something that you just don't understand; don't advance arguments whose workings you are ignorant of.
All the time here I see anecdotalism - someone will say they did this or that, and that it "works fine", "got N years out of them", or some such. Problem is, it's often the case that such characterizations are overly simplistic and utterly fail to acknowledge the multiple principles and dimensions of the given problem space, the relationships between them, and that the quality of the outcome of a given object / course of action is often critically dependant upon the perspective of the observer.
Oh, sure, it "works" - if only we had an objective definition of what "works" means... - thus my preference for $5 words, rather than $0.05 words such as "works" and its ilk.
> aargh....
Yeah, well, me too; take a number, please. It's interesting to see the knee jerk reactions hereabouts to the new and improved. It kinda mirrors the nation's current spasm of clinging to the old and baselessly reviling the new; a vast and profound expression of fear of swimming in the river of changing times. |
truthhunter@shaw.ca
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:33 pm: | |
I am still interested in the product and will continue to learn more about in in preparation for the right day to decide weather the solutions it may bring are cost effective. It is not always to put questions about the claims in a positive sounding way. Certainly less feeling/belief and more facts/knowledge is always a better way help others reach informed decissions. Can I shed you some reptilian hide herman? Your sounding a little upset or frustrated. Your efforts are apprecitated to educate us about this NPG coolant as that is how we all advanced collectivley. |
Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:40 pm: | |
'Freeze plugs' is a nick name for the plugs used to fill the holes required to remove the sand from the water passages during the casting/ manufacturing process of the engine block. On some engines, if the coolant freezes these will push out before the block cracks. On EVERY engine I have found with them pushed out, the block was also cracked.
If you were able to run a higher coolant temp, the same radiator would dump more heat since the delta T was greater. But, before raising the coolant temp, you need to be sure the seals & rubber can handle it.
WW & similar items do reduce surface boiling. If your engine is prone to this, it will work wonders. When I used it with no benefit, I took the brand new radiator apart to find half the tubes full of solder. I replaced it with a quality radiator & the problem went away.
YMMV
kyle4501 |
Marc Bourget
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 11:18 pm: | |
Kyle,
Is isn't that simple. The first response of the cooling system will be to increase the "dwell" of the coolant in the radiator. You have to consider how and why the radiator operates to before you come to the opinon that the same radiator "will dump more heat since the delta T was greater"
WW or liquid soap doesn't reduce surface boiling, they reduce surface tension.
I have to compliment Herman on his critical thinking skills. Not that you're "wrong" it's just that you're not as accurate as I wish you were. Yes, I can compliment you for your insight. Because of other knowledge you possess, you'll probabaly avoid complications.
At the same time, by less than accurate description, you possbily could start a "domino effect" and somebody (inexeperienced) down the line will end up with a totally wrong conclusion.
Not your fault, of course, but your "fault" or not has no effect on the repair bill that guy will have to pay.
Onward and Upward
Marc Bourget |
herman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 3:57 am: | |
Ok, let's see what we've got here.... *cracks knuckles*
Let's consider the temperature at various points in the system as we diddle various things. We'll idealize the thermostat: it opens completely over a very narrow range of temperatures, and has no hysteresis. We'll also assume that all heat dissipation is in the radiator, i.e. that the engine itself is well insulated.
Let’s look at radiators first: As coolant passes through the flow path of a radiator, it experiences temperature drop due to heat energy being transferred to a 2nd fluid, i.e. the ambient air. The amount of drop across any given small length of this path is directly, and also inversely, proportional to several factors:
Directly proportional factors (where an increase in a factor's value in the amount of N:1 increases performance by a like ratio) are:
- extent of coolant temperature above air (ambient) temperature,
- specific heat of air (humid air will have a much higher specific heat; misters affect both air temperature and specific heat), and
- airflow rate,
Inversely proportional factors (where an N:1 increase in a factor's value decreases performance by a like ratio) are:
- specific heat of coolant, and
- coolant flow rate.
While the coolant specific heat remains nearly constant over temperature (assuming no phase changes, e.g. boiling coolant), air specific heat, as previous noted, varies with humidity, but it can be considered a given with respect to how the vehicle is being run (absent a mister...), as can be ambient temperature. The flow rates are of course variable. Ideally, as per the experiment being conducted by Tri-Met and its electricly powered, variable speed, coolant and air pumps, these factors are independently controllable. In most cases, though, they, along with thermal load, are coupled via various mechanisms, e.g. coolant flow rate with engine speed, and airflow rate with engine speed acting on the fans via a clutch or other control mechanism, with engine speed acting on road speed via the transmission and torque converter gearing, and with head/tail/side winds.
Let's consider the case where only the thermal load and the coolant flow rate vary. Further, let’s look at coolant flowrate as being an otherwise fixed value, were it not for the throttling effect of a thermostat that is not wide open.
Now, because vehicle radiators are crossflow designs (referring to the relative directions of flow of the two fluids (coolant and air) involved, not the direction of coolant flow with respect to "up"; a crossflow design has the flows at right angles, a coflow design has them in the same direction, and a counterflow design has them in opposite directions), the air temperature is at ambient at all points along the coolant flow path. Thus, the radiator is more efficient near the coolant intake end, because the coolant-ambient delta T is higher there. You could scan the length of the coolant flow path (on the downstream side of the airflow) with an infrared thermometer, and you'd see an exponential (or is it hyperbolic?) curve of declining temperatures.
At the thermostat, temperature is held constant across a range of loads by varying coolant flow rate: increased flow increases the quantity of heat absorption within the engine for a given delta T across the engine. As load increases to the point that thermostat temperature rises above its stipulated narrow range, the thermostat, being completely open, ceases to have a regulatory effect upon flow rate, and thus upon coolant delta T within the engine. So, prior to this point the high side T is essentially constant; beyond it, high side T increases with load.
Note that, if the thermostat is a bypass design, then, up to the full open temperature, a portion of the coolant flow is being routed back to the engine inlet. This means that the delta T seen by the engine is much smaller than that seen by the radiator, which is a good thing for reducing differential thermal expansion of the engine. But let's consider non-bypass designs, to keep it a little simple, so that radiator delta T and engine delta T are always equal. The effect is simply to treat the engine as a black box.
At the radiator, we’ve up to now had a variable flow rate at constant inlet temperature. Let’s say that the radiator is large, such that the coolant temperature “closely approaches” ambient at a point well before it arrives at the radiator outlet. Only that part of the radiator upstream of this point is doing anything useful. Increasing coolant flow rate and/or temperature will move this point downstream, towards the outlet. So, as load increases, this point radiator outlet. Let's give the condition where this point occurs right _at_ the outlet a name: "crossover". Prior to this point, low side T is essentially held constant at ambient; beyond it, low side T increases with load.
Between these two devices, there are three possible situations, with respect to increasing thermal load: a) the thermostat fully opens prior to the radiator reaching crossover, b) the opposite, and c) both occuring at the same load.
Going back to the radiator, and considering the range of loads above the thermostat full open point, where flow rate is constant and high side T increases with load; further consider the first small portion of the radiator’s flow path: because inlet coolant temperature is higher, the difference between it and ambient also increases, and thus the drop in coolant temperature over this flow path segment will in turn also increase. So, the radiator becomes more efficient at higher temperatures, and the overall system stabilizes at some higher temperature where the radiator capacity matches the increased load. Further, with flow rate constant and load increasing, delta T must also increase. When crossover is reached, if it hadn’t already occurred prior to or at full thermostat open, low side T begins to increase, but, because delta T is increasing, it does so more slowly than high side T.
Now I'm becoming curious as to whether increases in these 3 temperatures are linear with respect to increases in loads. Anybody want to try to quantize this via some dalliance with Excel? Hint: when dealing with temperatures in percentage terms, your point of reference must be absolute zero, e.g. boiling water is only about (180+32+ circa 425) / (32+425) percent hotter than freezing water. |
Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 1:21 pm: | |
Re Marc's comments,
'Is isn't that simple.'
- Oh yes it is, if you understand heat transfer will not happen if there is no delta T.
'The first response of the cooling system will be to increase the "dwell" of the coolant in the radiator.'
- Yes, the thermostats open more, but we don't notice that. The first thing we notice is the temp rising.
'You have to consider how and why the radiator operates to before you come to the opinon that the same radiator "will dump more heat since the delta T was greater" '
- ????? If the inlet coolant temp rises, AND the outlet coolant temp is above ambient air temp. The radiator will dump more heat, Period. (I have NEVER seen a vehicle that, once up to operating temp, would reduce the outlet coolant temp to ambient.)
OK, I was making a simplification that I thought all would. For your benefit I should not have.
If the cooling system is operating properly, the thermostats throttle the coolant to maintain a nearly constant temp. If the t-stats are wide open, the radiator will dump more heat as the inlet coolant temp climbs. The outlet temp will also climb, but at a slower rate.
In the real world things are different than in a text book. There are things a mere mortal as myself cannot (or to lazy to) measure and there are variables I cannot change or influence. I know they exist & understand how they relate to the 'problem' at hand. I choose to make a simplifications to make the 'problem' easier to wrap my feeble mind around. If I have missled anyone, I'll give them double their money back.
Back to the original question, if the engine operating temp is increased, you could possibly reduce the fan speed, however this will affect many other things.
The thing about coolants is the more stuff they put in them, the poorer conductors of heat they are. (There was a good discussion about this a while ago, I can't find my notes to tell you wher it was though.)
Just an opinion,
kyle4501
(Message edited by kyle4501 on June 15, 2006)
(Message edited by kyle4501 on June 15, 2006) |
|