Date:         Sun, 24 Aug 2003 21:17:29 -0600
Reply-To:     tom ring <taring@TARING.ORG>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         tom ring <taring@TARING.ORG>
Organization: Tippen Ringware
Subject:      Re: A coolant question
Comments: To: David Brodbeck <gull@gull.us>
In-Reply-To:  <20030824215645.K32930@gull.us>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Yes, it doesn't seem to mention water heat capacity in the comparison.  I'd
like to see a real test with numbers.

I used to race an 84 GTI, so I know how important cooling is when you really
push it.  Of course, on an 84 GTI, cooling the oil was more important than
pretty much anything else.  People without addon oil coolers were advised to
cover the oil temperature gauge with black tape, so as not to be horrified.
And that is no BS.  The gauges were always pinned when you raced one.

tom

On 24 Aug 2003 at 21:59, David Brodbeck wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, tom ring wrote:
>
> > Anyone know anything about this stuff?
> >
> > http://www.evanscooling.com/html/npgPls2.htm
>
> One issue may be heat transfer capability, which they don't really talk
> about except to say that NPG+ is 32% better than NPG.  The main reason you
> use water/glycol mix in a cooling system is that water has a lot of heat
> carrying capability, much more than glycol alone would.  Race cars run
> straight water, sometimes with a little bit of wetting agent added, for
> exactly this reason.
>
>
> David Brodbeck, N8SRE
> '82 Diesel Westfalia
> '94 Honda Civic Si
>


------
Tom Ring K0TAR, ex-WA2PHW  EN34hx
85 Westphalia GL Albert
96 Jetta GL The Intimidator
taring@taring.org

"It is better to go into a turn slow, and come out fast, than to go into a turn fast
and come out dead." Stirling Moss