Bongo Fury

mikeonb4c wrote: >
>
1) The device is a hydrometer whose measuring scale is based on the assumption that a material of SG 1.125 approx is used as antifreeze in the coolant mix.....
2) ..............It does not measure pH for example, but merely tells you what % of ethylene glycol you may have present in your coolant, assuming you have only ethylene glycol in the mix. If you happen to have used OAT, or if you've added Motormax, its readings may lead you to believe your degree of protection is low when it isn't.....
>
>

If Comma Xtralife red is a typical OAT coolant, then the presence of OAT corrosion inhibitors should not invalidate hydrometer measurements of anti-freeze strength, as the Comma product, at least, still uses ethylene glycol as its anti-freeze agent/main constituent, with a specific gravity of 1.125. Presumably, red/orange anti-freezes, with OAT addiitives, will all tell you whether or not they are ethylene glycol based, and how to measure their strength in solution.

Similarly, as MotorMax has a specific gravity very close to that of water, and is ph neutral/chemically non-reactive, its presence in your coolant mix should not invalidate the use of ethylene glycol strength-detecting hydrometers, in the usual way. As I said, if MotorMax is added as part of a full coolant replacement job, then all you have to do is make sure it replaces some of the water in the mix, not anti-freeze, and you'll still have a full anti-freeze strength coolant mix, anyway.

Ron Miel wrote: if MotorMax is added as part of a full coolant replacement job, then all you have to do is make sure it replaces some of the water in the mix, not anti-freeze, and you'll still have a full anti-freeze strength coolant mix, anyway.

My observation is based on what you and Andy have actually been doing, which is removing 50/50 mix and substituting Motormax.

As you say, the OAT issue would only be relevant if these new products resulted in an antifreeze whose SG was very different from the old products.

Overall, I would advise being circumspect about the device in question. Better to put in stuff you know to be good and to top up with suitable 50/50 mix.

I think what could do with further investigation though is whether owners should panic because they just topped using some OAT based antifreeze. It would be nice to be able to relax a bit over that one if possible!

mikeonb4c wrote:

Ron Miel wrote: if MotorMax is added as part of a full coolant replacement job, then all you have to do is make sure it replaces some of the water in the mix, not anti-freeze, and you'll still have a full anti-freeze strength coolant mix, anyway.

My observation is based on what you and Andy have actually been doing, which is removing 50/50 mix and substituting Motormax.

As you say, the OAT issue would only be relevant if these new products resulted in an antifreeze whose SG was very different from the old products.

Overall, I would advise being circumspect about the device in question. Better to put in stuff you know to be good and to top up with suitable 50/50 mix.

I think what could do with further investigation though is whether owners should panic because they just topped using some OAT based antifreeze. It would be nice to be able to relax a bit over that one if possible!

No, Andy's was done as part of a full coolant change, although I don't know whether he maintained the anti-freeze component at 50%. Mine was done as a syphon and top up job, and it reduced the measured anti-freeze strength to minus 29C protection. My point was that, because the MotorMax s.g. is close to that of water, I see no reason not to trust that measurement,

Re your closing point, my impression was that relaxation is in order, as long as reduced corrosion protection life is factored into your reckoning. Would be good to hear if other peeps draw the same conclusion from reading the web pages I referenced earlier.

Here's another web page with a lot of relevant info: http://www.eetcorp.com/antifreeze/antifreeze-faq.htm#q6

Interesting that some major vehicle and engine manufacturers have decided against using OAT-only inhibitors, and instead use hybrid, inorganic (IAT) and organic (OAT) acid technology, mixes - trying to get the best of both worlds, avoiding the pitfalls of either type on its own and, in the process, confirming their intrinsic ability to be mixed without mishap (i.e., no reactive sludge, directly caused by mixing)..

Well you've got me stumped.

I thought OATS was what you gave to horses.

Alternatively getting your oats could keep you warm so I suppose filling the bongo with oats could have similar effects...but of course you don't want her getting overheated or you might end up with wild oats.

Whatever you stick in just remember that unless you are just topping up you MUST carry out a full bleed. One of the near terminal overheats I had was as a result of changing the coolant with BDC outside Wheelquick. Even with Wheelquicks expertise I got one airlock after another resulting in the engine boiling 4 times in three hours before a final burp normalised everything.

Personally I wouldn't get too hung up on the issue. My reliable bongo specialist garage says that as long as the coolant has been changed since arrival in the UK it is unlikely that there will be any adverse reaction to mixing coolant types supplied within the last 5 years. Garages tend to use 'pink' cos it is cheaply commercially available. Halfrauds and other retailers/garages tend to sell blue coolant cos there is a good retail profit on prepackaged goods (not commonly available for pink).

Just top up with undiluted coolant on a regular basis, not forgetting to stick some 'boiled' water in between times... strength isn't that critical either.

H

Ron Miel wrote:Here's another web page with a lot of relevant info: http://www.eetcorp.com/antifreeze/antifreeze-faq.htm#q6

Interesting that some major vehicle and engine manufacturers have decided against using OAT-only inhibitors, and instead use hybrid, inorganic (IAT) and organic (OAT) acid technology, mixes - trying to get the best of both worlds, avoiding the pitfalls of either type on its own and, in the process, confirming their intrinsic ability to be mixed without mishap (i.e., no reactive sludge, directly caused by mixing)..

All generally available antifreezes of all types are ethylene glycol based except
when you need to comply with HSE regulations in the food industry where you
have to use propylene glycol which is far less toxic but a lot more expensive.

Some vehicle manufacturers are recommending using hybrid (HOAT) antifreeze
because of cavitation problems with water pumps and incompatibility with
seals on older designed engines. Since 1999 when Ford had major problems
with the Cougar and had to replace most of the water pumps due to their
factory fill of OAT without realising the problems, new engines have been
designed to improve the centrifugal pumps and reduce cavitation effects.

Using OAT antifreeze in older engines not designed for it is simply asking for
trouble sometime in the future, there is a posting on this forum a week or so
ago about a collapsed water pump and the owner was using red (OAT)
antifreeze, and it did make me think that it may be caused by the use of
OAT. I think you will find that Mazda do not recommend using OAT antifreeze
in the Bongo engines despite what it may say in the owners manual, this
says "Long Life" but means conventional antifreeze with modern inorganic
corrosion inhibitors which deplete slower than they used to.

IMHO, you should always use conventional blue antifreeze with a 50:50
ratio to water and change it every 2 years, it may be inconveniant but
it will ensure that the WL-T and V6 engines will be properly protected
against cavitation and pump seal problems and God knows what else.

The vast majority of garages are only capable of measuring the SG of
antifreeze and have no idea whether the corrosion inhibitors are up to
strength or not, they do what you tell them, to check the Anti freeze
properties and that's all.

Ben.

Superb - where have you been all my life PatnBen

Arghhhhhhh

H

patnben wrote:

Ron Miel wrote:Here's another web page with a lot of relevant info: http://www.eetcorp.com/antifreeze/antifreeze-faq.htm#q6

Interesting that some major vehicle and engine manufacturers have decided against using OAT-only inhibitors, and instead use hybrid, inorganic (IAT) and organic (OAT) acid technology, mixes - trying to get the best of both worlds, avoiding the pitfalls of either type on its own and, in the process, confirming their intrinsic ability to be mixed without mishap (i.e., no reactive sludge, directly caused by mixing)..

>
>
Some vehicle manufacturers are recommending using hybrid (HOAT) antifreeze
because of cavitation problems with water pumps and incompatibility with
seals on older designed engines. Since 1999 when Ford had major problems
with the Cougar and had to replace most of the water pumps due to their
factory fill of OAT without realising the problems, new engines have been
designed to improve the centrifugal pumps and reduce cavitation effects.

Using OAT antifreeze in older engines not designed for it is simply asking for
trouble sometime in the future, there is a posting on this forum a week or so
ago about a collapsed water pump and the owner was using red (OAT)
antifreeze, and it did make me think that it may be caused by the use of
OAT. I think you will find that Mazda do not recommend using OAT antifreeze
in the Bongo engines despite what it may say in the owners manual, this
says "Long Life" but means conventional antifreeze with modern inorganic
corrosion inhibitors which deplete slower than they used to.

IMHO, you should always use conventional blue antifreeze with a 50:50
ratio to water and change it every 2 years, it may be inconveniant but
it will ensure that the WL-T and V6 engines will be properly protected
against cavitation and pump seal problems and God knows what else.
>
>
>

Spot on Ben, relative to all the stuff I had found online - although I assume you rule out hybrid OAT (HOAT) in Bongo engines, in order to err on the side of caution, rather than based on empirical data(?).

However, agreeing with you, and even though I didn't say so in my last post - after reading about pump cavitation and other OAT-related problems in that latest web document I had unearthed, I had after all decided to not touch pure OAT anti-freeze with a bargepole, at my next coolant change. I thought that I would instead continue to use extended (3 years) life "conventional" IAT based anti-freeze.

I had not spelled that out though, because there's more than enough info in the documents I've given web links to, for peeps to make up their own minds if they read them - and I reckon they should do, rather than just accept opinions from other peeps, you and I included.

Harry, for example IMHO, is off the mark in suggesting that anti-freeze strength is unimportant. Unless you actually want engine corrosion and sludge, then to get adequate corrosion inhibition the anti-freeze/water ratio should be kept in the range 40/60 to 60/40 - anywhere in that range, also providing adequate anti-freeze protection in the UK. He's correct though, in saying that (immediate) adverse reaction is unlikely as a direct result of inter-mixing different modern anti-freezes although, again IMHO, that disregards the potential adverse effect on each of their corrosion protection service lives, caused by their mutual dilutions, as suggested earlier.

Lastly, whether 3 years extended life conventional IAT anti-freeze will in fact still be available when I need a coolant change is perhaps now uncertain. I've just noticed that, although it's still in stock at some trade outlets, Comma no longer offer it on their own website - they appear to have now reduced their anti-freeze range to 2 years life "conventional" IAT-based, and 5 years life OAT-based. As I said, I will not use the latter, although I might take a punt on HOAT, subject to more data meanwhile.

Ron Miel wrote: Spot on Ben, relative to all the stuff I had found online - although I assume you rule out hybrid OAT (HOAT) in Bongo engines, in order to err on the side of caution, rather than based on empirical data(?).

I have to admit that I don't find HOAT products an attractive alternative as far as the
Bongo is concerned. If I was not retired, I would have had cause to fully investigate
the properties of HOAT products and not rely on empirical data. Now I am only interested
in my Bongos and see no reason to use anything other than the antifreeze which suits
them best.

I have always used "Comma Super Coldmaster" - or is that "Coolmaster" - which I buy in
30 litre drums, I don't see a lack of availability, I would guess that in 10 years time it will
still be available although I doubt I will still be around to prove it. Many Asian countries
still refuse to use OAT products and Japan in particular still use conventional antifreeze
in some of their home market only cars and commercial vehicles. While most of Europe
and America seem to be driven by the urge to use OAT products, I would be interested
to see factual reports on the production and usage of conventional antifreeze for the
rest of the world at the present time, and in the future.

I believe that full OAT antifreeze provide no better corrosion protection than traditional
antifreezes, in some cases they can be worse without adequate maintenance, if you
run long hours with HGV and heavy plant you would probably have to use SCAs to
supplement the corrosion protection long before the claimed 5 year life has elapsed
although the down time for coolant changes would be far less in these cases.
As most European car manufacturers have been factory filling cars with full OAT
antifreezes for the past 5 or 6 years it should by now be evident whether or not they
have performed in the anti corrosion race as expected. Time will tell.

I have always suspected that many of the head gasket failures have been caused by
lack of antifreeze - and associated inhibitors - maintenance and the head gasket has
been eaten away by highly corrosive coolant. Many members who suffer this also complain
that the expansion tank is so stained they can't see the coolant levels. This is usually
caused by iron oxides in the coolant and a sure sign of heavy corrosion. If it were me
I would think twice before buying a Bongo with an iron oxide stained expansion tank.
But there again I am a complete cynic.

Ben.

patnben wrote:

Ron Miel wrote: Spot on Ben, relative to all the stuff I had found online - although I assume you rule out hybrid OAT (HOAT) in Bongo engines, in order to err on the side of caution, rather than based on empirical data(?).

I have to admit that I don't find HOAT products an attractive alternative as far as the
Bongo is concerned. If I was not retired, I would have had cause to fully investigate
the properties of HOAT products and not rely on empirical data. Now I am only interested
in my Bongos and see no reason to use anything other than the antifreeze which suits
them best.
>
>
I have always suspected that many of the head gasket failures have been caused by
lack of antifreeze - and associated inhibitors - maintenance and the head gasket has
been eaten away by highly corrosive coolant. Many members who suffer this also complain
that the expansion tank is so stained they can't see the coolant levels. This is usually
caused by iron oxides in the coolant and a sure sign of heavy corrosion. If it were me
I would think twice before buying a Bongo with an iron oxide stained expansion tank.
But there again I am a complete cynic.

Ben.

Well, you might be a cynic Ben (welcome to the club) but there's important and invaluable advice there. How about you summarise some of the pertinent stuff from this thread, and write us a fact sheet?

Ian?

Re your first para, HOAT would clearly be worthwhile from two standpoints - reduced cost and pollution, over time - if we could be confident about it in our Bongo engines. The evidence I would want to hear first would be that it has not caused the same cavitation and other adverse effects in older engines, without the benefit of engine re-design a la Ford and others.

Comma Super Coldmaster it is, and that's indeed their standard, 2 years life, ethylene glycol/IAT anti-freeze, still offered and likely to remain so - but it does need two-yearly changes, with cost and pollution implications. It's available either as anti-freeze concentrate or in pre-mixed coolant solution - the latter, presumably, with more suitable water than we get from our domestic taps.

Cheers, and respect for your obvious expertise,

David

Ron Miel wrote:Harry, for example IMHO, is off the mark in suggesting that anti-freeze strength is unimportant. Unless you actually want engine corrosion and sludge, then to get adequate corrosion inhibition the anti-freeze/water ratio should be kept in the range 40/60 to 60/40 - anywhere in that range, also providing adequate anti-freeze protection in the UK.

Harry wrote:... strength isn't that critical either

He didn't actually say it was unimportant . A 20% acceptable variation would amount to it being 'not that critical' IMHO. There have been several on BF who have suggested that 50/50 is a recommended figure based on climatic conditions in Japan, which may be harsher than UK.

Might PatnBen have a view?

mikeonb4c wrote:

Ron Miel wrote:Harry, for example IMHO, is off the mark in suggesting that anti-freeze strength is unimportant. Unless you actually want engine corrosion and sludge, then to get adequate corrosion inhibition the anti-freeze/water ratio should be kept in the range 40/60 to 60/40 - anywhere in that range, also providing adequate anti-freeze protection in the UK.

Harry wrote:... strength isn't that critical either

He didn't actually say it was unimportant . A 20% acceptable variation would amount to it being 'not that critical' IMHO. There have been several on BF who have suggested that 50/50 is a recommended figure based on climatic conditions in Japan, which may be harsher than UK.

Might PatnBen have a view?

That may have been the intention Mike but it was semantically imprecise, and could just as easily have been read by some peeps as meaning that anything between 10% and 90% anti-freeze in solution would be OK - that's why I challenged it. For example, one of us who has recently added MotorMax, had coolant which measured only minus 17C anti-freeze protection - at only the half way stage in diluting with MotorMax. That may be fine in terms of anti-freeze protection in the UK but it suggests an already reduced anti-freeze concentration of only 33% or so remaining in the coolant - with which (and with hindsight now), I wouldn't want to rely on its corrosion protection for much more than a few months.

Whatever may have been suggested on BF, 50/50 is the ratio required to obtain the specified corrosion protection life - any variation from that, and adjustment is required. If that also exceeds likely UK low temperature anti-freeze needs, that's incidental.

So, I repeat that IMHO Harry was, inadvertently if you like, wide of the mark. It also adds to the many reasons why thrashing all this out, once and for all, is important to BF members.

Maybe it is best summarised thus:

"As Harry has said, the proportions of antifreeze to water are not that critical. As long you keep within the 40/60 and 60/40 range, you ought to be OK, especially as climate conditions in UK are generally less extreme than they can be in Japan. However, Mazdas recommended figure is 50/50"

Writing it thus might clarify what (I suspect) he is trying to say to readers not interested in the more esoteric points i.e. that their Bongo will not die if they wander even slightly from the prescribed line.

mikeonb4c wrote:Maybe it is best summarised thus:

"As Harry has said, the proportions of antifreeze to water are not that critical. As long you keep within the 40/60 and 60/40 range, you ought to be OK, especially as climate conditions in UK are generally less extreme than they can be in Japan. However, Mazdas recommended figure is 50/50"

Writing it thus might clarify what (I suspect) he is trying to say to readers not interested in the more esoteric points i.e. that their Bongo will not die if they wander even slightly from the prescribed line.

Agreed but please also look at the editing to my last post, written while you posted that.