<<I do agree catastrophic boil-over is something to
be avoided. But, IF the problem is your system can't keep up with your
heat dissipation needs, then the system needs to be fixed, substituting a
coolant with less heat carrying capacity and raising the operating
temperature just does not seem the right course of action - in my
opinion.
>>
When I first looked into Evans years ago, saw the specific heat value, then
I too discounted it. I too thought it was a crutch for a bad cooling
design. At the time I reasoned that it would have to increase drag. And it
does...... if you assume all of the other factors are the same. However, if the
user just operated at a temperature 10 or 15F higher than normal, then there is
no drag increase. So as time has passed, I realized it can be a significant
safety advantage. Now I think it's worthy of consideration. Tracy makes
excellent point regarding nucleation.
That said, I too am resistant to using it. I never have, and prefer to do
everything I can to use conventional coolant and standard temperatures. But if
I'm unable to obtain the safety margin conventionally, then I will definitely
try it.
Racing Beat article is interesting. But I try to keep in mind that that's
just some guy writing the article. So I always seek other evidence. If
the author included facts that supported logic, then I'd be much less
skeptical. I am familiar with Asian design practices. They put a great deal of
effort into reducing sensitivity to things like coolant and oil temp. They know
that increasing that margin by 5 or 10F, they dramatically reduce warranty
issues and improve customer satisfaction. So if the engine was temperature
sensitive in the past, they would put lot's of effort into reducing that.
Of course, I'm not encouraging running engine hotter. But I do encourage
skepticism.
|